Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 9 AUGUST 1900

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

272 Question without Notice. [A.SSEivLBLY.] Lost Policies Bill.

Tnun~DAY, 9 ""-.uGusT, 1900.

The SPEAKER (Hon. AriJmr ]\Iorg.m, TVarwick), took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE CoRRESPO~DENOE WITH CALLIIlE CoAL

SY~DICATE.

Mr. BROWNE (Croydon): I wish to ask the Premier, without notice, whether he is willing to lay on the table o£ the House copies of the

correspondence which has passed between the Government and the Callide Coal Syndicate with reg·ard to the proposed railway from Glad­stone to Calli de Ureek?

The PREMIEJt (Hon. R. l'hilp, ToFns1·illc): There is no objection to that.

QUJ~STIONS. FEDERAL :Er.EcTOHATES BILL.

Mr. BROWNE asked the Premier-'Vas the information re the Federal J.Jlectorates Bill,

published in the B1~18b£i'ue Coutier aud 'l'eteu,·a]Jit of 6th instant, snppliod by the Government or any member of it; and are the eh;ctoral divisi.ons of the colony tor the ]?ederal House of R"pre,,eutatiYCS mentioned by those llilpers the divisions decided to be inserted in forthcoming Bill?

The PREMIER replied-'rhc information referred to was supplied by the l-Ion

the Homo :Secretary, aucl is approximately correet.

LETTING TENDE!l TO A CHINAii!AN. Mr. BEOVvNE, for Mr. Kidston (Rockhamp­

ton), aBked the Premier-Is it true, as stated in the Sydn, Bnlletin of 28th

.Tuly last, that the 'l'e1e~.:;raph Department recently let a tender for the erection of telegraph pole\ to a China­man at a price utHlcr that nsnnlly paid to whites r

The PREMI:ER replied-'fhc Post and Telegraph Department has not let any

tender for the ereetion of telegraph poles to a China­man; bnt a r' ·,pousible otficer in the -'-'\'orth, without reference to tlw depP .. rlmeut, employed }1 Chinaman to replace three poles near Port DoughL'' at a cost of 90s. ne was jurormed on the ll th of July that tllc :Minister strongly <li- '1Pl'roveti of tllc em1)loyrnent of Chinese or coloured lnbcur if anv other was avail:tble, and that sneh action "\Yatj not tO be taken without the express approYal of the dcpartmeut.

P_\STORAL I,~~ASES AC'r O:F lSmJ .\iYIEKDMENT BILL.

THIRD RE.,DING.

On the motion of the SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LAKDS (Hon. W. 13. H. O'Cnnnell, 1li US[JTrn.·e), this Bill was read a third time, passed, and ordered to be transmitt.•d to the Legislative Council for their concurrence.

LOST POLICIES BILL. Il''l'l\ODGm'ION.

On the following Order of the Day being read, Consir1cration in committee of the desirableness of

introducing a Bill to remedy the loss or clestrucliou of life assnraucc polici.c~,

Mr. AKKEAR ("11a1'!fUOJ'OU[Jh) said: I received a te1egran1 this :morning frorr1 the hon. n1ember for l)ulb~v, 1\il'. Bell, requesting me to undertake thi" Bill for him at tlw present stage.

Mr. Ccn ENS: \Vhy isn't he here bimself? 1\lr. ANN.i'JAR: i beg to move, Mr. i::1pe:>J{er,

that you do now leave the oh air. Question pnt and passed.

CmniTT'i'J,cE. Mr. ANNEAR moved-That it is clctj:rablc th:1t a B1ll be introduced to

reme:dY tbe lor-. or destruction of life a~surance polieiis.

Mr. TURLBY (Bri.1uanc South) wished to know the action the Govemment intellded to take upon the n1ea~ure. }for somp, yearr:; there had been Governor's Speeches one after another informir g the community that the GoYernment intended to take up the whole question of life assurance.

Hon. D. H. DALRE[PLE: Not the same Government.

Mr. TURLEY: It had been practicDlly the same old Government since lil88. He wiohed to know from the Premier whether this Bill was interfering with Government business, or whether

Lost PoliaiM Bill. [9 AtrGD'ST.] Lost Policies Bill. 273

it was to be brought in as part of a scheme which the Government intended to introduce later on. He was given to understand that the Government Bill had been drafted two or three years, and as far as he knew it wmtld cover practically the same ground as the Bill to be introduced bv the hon. member for Dalby. It was no use' dividing legislation of tltis sort into three or four different mea><ures ; it would be far better to deal with the whole question in one measure.

The PREMIER said he did not think it was well to oppose the introduction of any 13Jll.

Mr. Tt:RLEY: I am not opposing the intro­duction.

The PREMIER: The Government Bill was going to be introduced in the Council, and after they h:.td seen the Bill to be introduc:Jd by the hon. member for Dalby they would see whether the ground was covered by the Government Bill or not. He thought the Gevernment Bill would be found comprehensive enongh for all reqnire­ments.

Mr. McDONALD (Flinde1·s): Seeing that the Government Bill was comprehensive enoug·h to cover all the ground there was no use wasting time by di;cns,;ing this matter now, and he hoped the Government would vote it right off at once.

The PHEMI!i:R : I don't believe in opposing the introduction of a Bill.

Mr. McDONALD: If the hon. g•ntleman had not done it, it had been done by the late Premier, Mr. Byrne>'. The objection he (Mr. McDon>tld) had to carrying on business in this way was that alter taking up half-an-hour or an hour this afternoon the Bill would occupy a further period of private members' time when it came on again, although they had it from the Premier th&t the Government Bill covered the whole "gronnd. He asked the Committee to vote against this motion on division.

Mr. ANNEAR trusted that the Committee would not treat this Bill in a different manner from the way they treated tbe Bill introduced the other day by the hon. member forGymr•ie.

Mr. TUHLEY: The Government had not pro­mised to legislate in that direction.

Mr. ANNEAR intended to support that Bill because he considered it necessary ; and he trusted that hon. members would see the advis­ableness of not blocking the int"roduction of a Bill by a private member.

Mr. GLASSEY (BunrlauPrg) certainly thought it would be discourteous to oppose the intro­duction of this Bill or of any Bill, and he did not share the opinion that this was a waste of time. The whole history of parliamentary govern­ment showed that the bulk of the legi,Iation which found its way on the statute-book was generally first introduced by private meml.ers and discussed for ye.ns and ultimately taken up by the Government and passed into law. He hoped the Committee would allow the Bill to be introduced, notwithstanding the absence of the hon. member in charge of the measure. By all0wing this Bill to be introduc.,d they might save time afterwards when dealing with a measure of a more comprehE>n!':ive character.

The HOME SECRETAI~Y (Hon. J. F. G. ]'uxton, Carnar~·on): This opposition to the motion was extraordinary, seeing that it came from hon. men\bers who were constantly crying out about the ungracionsness of members on the Government side in dealing with private mem­bers' business-it was extr·1ordinary that an objection of that sort should be made becansP an hon. member on the Government side presumed, from their point of view, to introduce a Bill. He had arrived at the conclusion many ye11rs ago that a large proportion of the time occupied with the business brought forward by private

1900-T

members was waste of time, and he was glad to find that the hon. member for Flinders had also arrived at that conclusion; but the member8 who wasted most time in that direction were the hon. member's associates on the other side.

Mr. }fcDoNALD: No. The HOME SECRETARY: According to the

hon. member's idea it was not waste of time to introduce the Bill brought forward by the hon. member for Gym pie, but the hon. member ob­jected to the introduction of this Bill. The objection had been made that this measure might overlnp some portion of the legislation intended to be introduced by the Government in connec­tion with life assurance. It might or might not; they would be able to ascertain that when the Bill was before them. But he took it for granted, on the implied assumnce of the hon. member for Dalby, who formulated the Bill, that there was a necessity for an amendment of the law in connection with the loss or destruction of life assun.nce policies-he presumed in a similar way to that in which the loss of promissory notes or bills of exchange was now dealt with. He only &ssumed that; he did not know any more than the hon. member knew until he had seen the l3ill. Bnt when any hon. member had suffi­cient public spirit to interest himself in a matter of that sort, which was not in the nature of a private Bill--it was a public Bill, though in the hands of a private member-and went to the trouble of h.,.ving the Bill printed and of submitting it to the House, it would be a most ungenerouR a.ct on the part of the Committee to throw the Bill out b8fore they had an opportunity of seeing what the prupused amendment of the htw was. 'I'he hon. member for Dalby had not, so far, shown himself suc'1 a thoroughly incompetent man as to bring forward a Bill unless there were really some good grounds, at least in his opinion, for an amendment of the law in that particular branch he proposed to deal with. He looked upon it as a distinct slight and snub to the hon. member submitting a Bill in this wav to throw it out at that stage, unless tht'Y knew \V hat its principles were. Of course if that were so, and the House was clearly a/ninst it, it would lJ~ a f'"ir t~ing to dispose of it at that stage, but nut otnerwl~e.

Mr. McDONALD: If the hon. gentleman hfLd been in the Chamber when his chief was speaking he would have understood his (Mr. 1IcDonald's) objection. The hon. member for South Brisbane, :VIr. Turley, &sked what was the position of the Government in the matter, the Government having- repeatedly promised that they were going to introduce a Bill which would cover the whole matter. The Premier explained that the Government did intend to introduce a l3ill, which would come down from the other Chambl'r, which would be sufuciently broad to cover the ground the,t that Bill was based on. His content.ion was that if that was so, what they were doing now was simply a waste of time, and he still maintained he was right.

The PHE}IIER : At the same time, I would not oppose the introduction of the Bill.

Mr. MoDONALD: That was so, but his con· tention was that if the Government intended to bring in a l3ill sufficiently broad to cover the gronnd of the Bill now proposed to be intro­duced, it would be an absolute waste of time of private members to discuss the Bill at the pre;ent time. At the same time if there seemed to be a general feeling th;ct the Bill should be i11· traduced, he would raii'e the objection he had to the introduction of it. It would be far better to di.,cuss the subject on an abstract motion than in the form of a concrete Bill. Often when private members had attempted to deal with matters in a concrete form, members like the hon. member for Mackay, Mr. Dalryrnple, wonld get

274 Lost Policies Bill. lASSEMBLY.] Lost Policies Bill.

up and reply at length to one little detail of the Bill, while the main principle was left on one side altogether. 'fhat was another way of wasting the time of private members.

Mr. SMITH (Bowcn): There was no ocnsion to waste much time over the introduction of the Bill. At the same time he would express his opinion that if the Government were going to bring in a comprehensive Bill dealing with life assurance, it would have he"n the pr~per course for the hon. member for Dalby to have asked the Government whether their Bill would include such a provision as he proposed in his Bill. It was not worth while wasting time, and it would be an ungracious act not to allow the hon. member to introduce his Bill. At the same time he saw some re:tson in the objection that had been raised.

HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE (Mackay): The hon. member for Flinders stated that his objec· tion to allowing the Bill to come forward was thn.t the Government wonld probably introduce some Bill of n, similar nature, and therefore time would be wasted. The hon. member stated aho that private members' business was a waste of time. If the hon. member held that opinion he did not see !low he could possibly object to the time being wasted in that particular instance, unless he wanted to prevent all private members' business coming on in any shape or form. If ever there was a challenge to wn.ste tin1e, it \-t'as: when the hon. member said that when he (l\Ir. Dalrymple) had occasion to deal with matters before the House he was in the habit of dealing with details and not with genern,l principles. He did nut wonder at the hon. member saying he preferred debates in the abstract and not in the concrete. He conld not imagine anything mnre inconvenient to the hem. member than to make that statement at any time when they had n,ny definite work to do, for he should very frequently, he hoped, be able to prove to the House the,t the hon. member's staternents were quite inaccurate. \Vhether there was going to be a policy this ses-

sion of preventing the introduction [4 p.m.] of Bills, and having divisions on

them before they were introduced, he did 11ot know, but they had something of the sort lately in connection with n, Government pro­posal, and now it was done again when a private member brought forwn.rd n, resolution for the introrluction of n, Bill. In the one case ha could understand that theru might he some political motive, but in the present case-unless this was a new system directed at n, privn.te member, who, as a rule, obtn.ined some sympathy but very little assistance from the other side-it wa~ rather surprising to find that hon. members, so far from assisting 01 private m em her, had actually the discourtesy to refuse to entertain the motion. It seemed to him that the hon. member desired to waste time, First of all, the hon. member for Flinders showed that, under n,ny circumstances, the discussion of private members' business was always a waste of time, and that argued against pri,,ate members' business altogether. lt a private m em her who brought lorward a Bill, in which they might assume he took some interest, was going tote put on one side and run off the rails the moment the Government, or some member of the Government, said the Go­vernment contemplated bringing in a Bill deal­ing with thesame subject, it was quite evident that private members might never have an opportunity of bringing forward any Bills. At any rate, a very slight pretext would prevent those Bills being read at all. On almost every occasion when it suited them-and it suited them very frequently-ban. members opposite said the Government were insincere, and they disbelieved even their most solemn protestations, but now they professed to have su<;:h faith in the

Government, and the a~curacy of their forecast of the future, that they were prepared to refuse leave to introduce that Bill.

l'vlr. 1h:m : Are you sincere in what you are saying now?

HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE: He was merely repeating what was the position hon. members opposite were in the ha hit of taking up, and if it was possible f.,r them to blush they "ould do so when he reminded them of the position they had habitually occupied. The moment one member of the Government in this c11se said it was possible that the Government might be able to deal cdth the subject of the proposed Bill, hon. members on the other side would not even look at the Bill which a private member, who was a member of the legal profession, and a very capable member of the House, desired to intro­duce. Apparently the whole of private mem· h,r,' business w:<s futile, if they were to take the opinion of the hon. member for :B'linders, because he said all such business was a waste of tint€'. ..A .. s there was nwre private n1e1nber~' business to come on, and the hon. member would not concede what wn,s cu,,tomary-namely, leave to introduce n, Bill-he could only suppose that the hon. member dEsired to postpone the considemtion of the next motion which· was on the pn.per. There was no other possible explana­tion of his action than that he had a etrong hostility to the next measure, n.nd not liking to object to it in a str2ightforward manner and nuke n, front attack, he was making the oblique mo,ement on the flank, and endeavouring to bring other hem. member~ who were guiltless of an v such intention into his toils. Therefore he had brought him (l\Ir. Dalrymple) forward to talk on the que3tion. If he had taken up any time on the matter, the blame lay entirely with the hon. member for :B'linders.

lYfr. HIGGS (Fortitude Val/ep) thought the question of the stn.tus and practice of life assur­ance companies was one that demanded the early attention of the Government. It was stn.ted in the Governor's Opening Speech that the Government desired to introduce a Bill den.l­ing with that subject, and the hon. member for Dalby was in a slightly different posiLion from hon. members on that side, inasmuch as being n, strong m rpnrter of the Government they would take him into their confidence, and let him know whether they were going to introduce a Bill dealing with life assurance companies. There was no necessity for the multiplication of Acts of Parliament, and the Government might as well de;<] with the question of the destruction of life assurance policie8 in their men.sure as have it dealt with in a separate Bill. The title of the hon. gentleman's Bill showed that it was a very necessary one. The practice of life assurance compn.nies in bringing about the destruction of policies bad become almost a fine art. They sent their canyassers round the country, and imposed on the credulity of honest working people, got them to insure, and then by a system of non-collection of the pre­miums those policies lapsed; so that such a measure as that proposed was very necessary. At the same time it should be embodied in a comprehensive Bill de>1ling with life as.sur­ance companies. It was possible for a little group of men, who were not worth anythinr:;, but were merely men of straw,* to start a life nssurance company in Brisbane or Queens­land, and they might not be able to meet their obligations. \Vhen he sn,w that the hon. mem­ber for Dn.lby was to introduce a Bill dealing with the destruction of life assumnce policies he was under the im[Jression that the Government were going to abandon the Bill dealing with life assurance companies. He thought it was a pity that the Government did not propose at an early

Lost Policies Bill. [9 At:Gl:rST.l Lost Policies Bill. 275

date to introduce such a measure, for he was satisfied that it would receive support from all Hides of the House, and they would not have the very contentious debate which had t>1ken place on that motion, which concerned only a small section of the people.

Mr. ANN EAR was sorry that the hrm. mem­ber for Dalby was not present to ddend his position, because hon. members all knew how much more able he was to do it than hiwself (Mr. Ann ear). He rose on this occ~sion to answer a remark made by the hon. memlJer for l<'ortitncle Valley, Mr. Hi~:gB. The hon. member stated that he considet·ed the hon. mem­ber for Dalby would know wh,.t measures the Govern1nent were going to introduce, because he was such a strong supporter of theirs. He wnuld like the hnn. member to be consistent. The bon. member the other night congratulated him upon throwing off the yoke of tyranny and despotism under whieh he had hboured for a long time.

lvlEMBERS of the Opposition: Hear, hear ! Mr. ANN EAR felt sure the hon. member fllr

Dalby knew no more about the intention' of the Government than he did. Why should he? The hon. member for Dalby sat on the cross brencbes, where it was supposed ind0pendent members so.t.

Mr. SMITH: \Vobblers. Mr. ANN EAR: He> had been in that House

for sixteen Y<'~trs on the lGtb July last, and he challenged any hrm. member to give him one instance in which he had acted a3 a wobbler. He had never had an angry word wi~h the hon. member for :Fortitude Valley or his If ad er, though they mt on the other siJe of the House, and he did not intend to have. He believed, indeed, that the time was not far distant when a great many of them would be closer friends than they were at the present time.

Mr. REm: Hear, hear! Come over to this side. Mr. AN NEAR : He trnsted he should be

allowed to reply for the hon. member for Dalby in his absence, though he was not the educated gentleman that hon. member was. Tt1e hon. member's speeches were always listened to with pleasure by other hon. member,, no matter on what side they sat. That discus,ion, after all, might turn out to be very profitable, and he would like to have the views of the junior member for Gympie, JYir. Ryland, on the ques­tion. (Laughter.) He doubted if there was any hon. member in the House who was so qualifiPd to give an address upon life assur~ .nee as that hon. member. He trusted hon. members w<Juld allow the motion to go through. Hon. members were always chaffing him. He did not know why they did so, but he was plused to occupy a position analogous to that of his hon. friend the member for Bundaberg. (Laughter.)

Mr. REm: You did not resign, though. :\[r. ANNEAR: His c»nslituents would not

allow him to resign. (Oh, oh, and laught8r.) He had recently addressed 1,100 of them, and at the conclusion of the meeting not one hand was held up against him. He was pkased to see that the hon. member for BundatJerg harl been returned to that House. Ht~ might sa.y he was present during the Bundaberg election, and to the credit of hon. member,, be it s;<id that there was not one personal remark or reflection during that election. He hoped hon. members would allow the motion of the hon. member for Dalby to pass. There was no member more respected than that gentleman. He (Mr. Annear) had not only known, but had worked for, the hon. mem­ber's father before he was born.

Mr. DUNSFORD (Charters To weTs) thought it a great shame that hon. members should raiRe any objection to the introduction of the Bill. Such matters should go as formal in their initiatory stages.

1Ir. R1'rn: Are you rerious? :Mr. llUNSFORD: He was serious. He did

not think time should be wasted on the intro­duction of any measure. Already a third of the time allotted to private members bad been taken up in a useless discussion, and be entered hid protest a.gaiost any hon. member ·wasting time by objecting to the intrc>duction of a Bill. He wanted to see every Bill that it was proposed to introduce. It might be a good or a bad Bill, but he wanteJ to see it so that he might be able to judge for himself.

Mr. ARYISTRONG (Lockyer) : It was quite a revnlation to him to hear any bon. member from the other side speak as the hon. member for Charters Towers had spoken. As a rule their desire was to block business. He should not have risen but for a remnrk made by the hem. member for Fortitude Valley, Mr. Higgs. He wished to point out to the hon. member that his exp<lrience of the way affairs were conducted on his side was tota,lly different to the way in which they were conducted on the Government side. The gentlemen 1\'ho conducted the business of the country c•mtrolled legishtion altogether outside of caucns meetings. Prob~bly everything that was decided hy hon. members of the Opposition was decided in cftucus, and every individual member knew everything that transpired. They, on th••t side, knew nothing of the legislation which it was proposed to introduce. There was not one of the rank and file on the Government side who had any idea what the Bills which were prorni-ed in the Governor's Speech contained.

MEJ!BE!lS of the Opposition : Hear, hear! Mr. McDo:--ALD: You support them all the

sarne. 1\Ir. AR::VfSTHONG: The hon. member knew

very well that the really straightforward criti­cisrn of Government measures ca.n1e from the Government side, but from the Opposition side there was simply facti<Jus opposition, simply becmse the Governme.nt we,re the G,wernment.

:VIr. McDoKALll: You oppose the measures and then vote for them afterwards.

Mr. AR:\ISTRO::-JG: The bon. member h2d never seen him in that pooition. Government supporters were not aware of what the Govern­ment measures were until they saw them, and then they were prepared to criticis" them advendy or favourably, according to their views. That was the nto,ition which he knew the hon. member for IJ'alby and many other hon. members on that side took up, and he had no hesitation in saying that on hie behalf. The hon. member for Fortitude Y «lley, Mr. Higgs, had made a very rash assertion for a man in his po~ition. He had pointed out that the destruction of life assunnce policies by assurance corn panies in Qneen.sland was becoming a fine art. It was an assertion which, when the hon. mem­ber studied the full import of it, he would con­sider a very peculiar one to make as a public man. He (Mr. Arm strong) had always been one of those who had given the insurance companies in Q<Jecnsland credit for honesty. The hon. gentleman said, h•nvever, that it had become a fine art with Rome of them to encourege the destruction of life assurttnce policies, and if that were so he ought to have given some facts which would support that statement, or why did he make the assertion? The as~ertion was a wrong one to make, and it did not do him, or anyom> in the House, much credit.

The HOME SECRETARY: He was not in the Chamber when the hon. member for Forti­tude Valley spoke, but he undemtood that the charge that he levelled generally at life assur­ance companies was that thPy got proposals for life assurance, and that it had become a fine art with them to encourage the loss of those policies

Mr. HrGGs: They allow them to lapse,

276 Lost Puliries Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Workmen's Compensation Bill.

The HO::\fE SECRETARY: He understood the hon. member to mean that they encouraged the non-payment of premium:> by not giving notice when the premiums fell due.

Mr. HIGGS: They don't collect them regularly. The HOME SECRETARY: What did the

hon. gentleman mean? Surely he meant that the people who ought to pay tbe premiums did not pay them regularly! If that was what the hon. member said, and he thought it would be a benefit or a gain to the societies to do that, he (the Home Secretary) wao bound to point out to him-and he believed the hon. member for Gym pie, Mr. Ryland, would bear him out, because he was engaged in the business-that for almost every new policy that was issued, a very large com­mission had to be paid, amounting in some ca>es to a very large proportion of the first year's pre­mium-sometimes over 50 per cent. How cuuld it be a gain to a society to have to con­stantly rep:ty that large commission on the first year's premium, over and over t1gain? \Vhen a man forfeited his policy, usually he was a man who had a desire that his life should be assured, and the probability was that after he found that the policy had been forfeited, he would go in for a new one. On one occasion the saine th]ng happened to him. By some oversight a policy which he had was forfeited, and he did not find it out for ne,.rly two years, and then it paid him better -he did not think it paid the society better­to insure again, which he did, and they had to pay a very considerable commif·~ion on it. If he were informed correctly as to the large commis­sions th~t were paid for new policies, surely it mu't be patent to the hon. member th>~t he had done these life assurance sccieties a great injustice, because what he said they did would certainly not be to their interest to do. Besirles, was it not a fact that in the Australian Mntual Provi­dent Society-which he believed was the first to adopt the practice-and almost all the insurance companies-and especially the mutual societies carrying on business in Anstralia-the surrender value maintained the policy in force for a con­siderable time after the premiums had ceased to be paid?

Mr. KERR : Bonuses. The HOME SECRETARY: The surrender

value or the bonuses, as the hon. member 'aid, kept the policy in force. He knew a policy w hi eh had been kept in force for years and years out of the sm·render value.

Mr. FISHER: An everyday occurrence. The HOME SEOllETARY: Taking these

things into consideration, it seemed to him that the hon. gentlem"n had overstepped the mark in the diatribe which he had indulged in with reg:ud to insurance enn1panies.

Mr. FITZGERALD (11fitchell) did not agree with the attitude which had been taken up with regard to this Bill. He really thought that hon. members should see this Bill. He agreed with what the Home Secretary had said in regard to life insumnce societies. He had had considerable experience in connection with those societies out West, and he would give a case in point. Only a short while ago a shearer died; he bud been insured in the Victorian Branch of the Australian Mutual Provi<1ent Scciety for years, but for about four years he had not paid any premiums; yet the surrender value of that policy had kept that policy alive. This man might have ihom(ht the poliey was no good, and torn 'it up or thrown it away. \Vhen be died he left a young widow very badly in want of money. He was only insured for £100. He (Mr. Fitgzemld) wrote to the Australi"n Mutual Provident Society in llockhampton, and they had inquiries made in Victoria, with the result that it was found that the surrender value had kept the policy alive all those years,

and the widow got £lOG clear. So he did not think there could be anything in this charge that the companies encouraged people to lose their policies. He thought, after reading the title or heading of the Bill, that it was a ques­tion which ought to be discussed. If it were anything like its name he would welcome it, because he knew, from instances that had come under his know ledge, that great delay and incon­venience was occasioned by the loss of policies. In the instance to which he had referred the widow had to wait and was put to a lot of expense owing to the loss of her hu;;band's policy.

Mr. HIGGS: He had no intention whatever to reflect upon assurance societies such as the Australian ;\futunl Provident Society; and it appeared to him from the rem<wks of the Home Secretary that the Government had not given very much attention to the question of life assmance corn panies, otherwise he would have seen that his (Mr. Higgs's) remarks were directed againRt 1nushroorn con1panies, started by men without C':tpital, men of straw, who, by using phrases which were calculated to appeal to the feelings of the people-to appeal to one of the very best sentiments which actuated humanity, that of making provision for those who come after us-they were able to get money out of them, and when the time came they availed themselves of all kinds of devices tu get the policies to lapse, and get hold of the money of the unfortunate3 who believed in them. The Australian J\llntn"l Provident Society was a wonderful institution, as everybody knew who knew anything about life assurance societies, and he only wi,hed that all a.;surance societies were c<>rricd on in the same admirable manner.

Mr. ANNllA!l: \Vhat about the Australian :Mutual Life?

Question put and pas'~•ed. 'fhe Hou,,e resumed ; and the 0HAIR1\!AN re­

ported that the Committee had come to a reso­lution.

WORKMEN'S COMPEXSATION BILL. SECOND HlUDING.

Mr. FISHER (O!tmpie): This Bill, as hon. members will see, is practically the

[4·30 p.m.] .same as one submitted by me during the previous session, and it will be

unnecessary for me to go over the same ground which I traversed in introducing the second re>tding of the Bill last session. Hon. members will remember that last year they were gond enough to pass the second reading of the Bill rather early in the session, and without a divi­sion. I trust the same trmtment will be accorded to the mm.sure this session. I do not think it desirable that we should do without discussing the principles of the measure, but I think that bon. members generally have come to the conclusion that such a measure is necessary, and that it is advisable that it should be brought into operation at the earliest possible time. 'rhe reason the Bill is in my hands this session is this : Last year the hon. member for Herbert moved a resolution to send the Bill to a select committee to report Ul•on it. 'l'hat resolution was carried nearly at the close of last session, but the committee to which it was sent was never once convened, and we were left in the same position as if the motion had never been moved. Yesterday, hon. mem­bers will remember, the hon. member for Herbert gave notice of a contingent motion to again send it to a select committee, a notice which he after­wards witbdrew. I wish further to state that when the motion was discussed last session I asked the Premier, by way of interjection, whether he would take the Bill up this session,

Workmen's [9 AuGusT.] Compensation Bill. 277

and make it part of his programme. He waB good enough to say that he hardly thought he could. Therefore, believing strongly as I do that this is a very necessary measure for the protec­tion of those who most need nur protection, I have again brought it before the House and the country. It contains a principle different fmm the Liability Act, under which payment may be derived b~· the representatives of persons who have lost their lives or been injured during their employment. As hem. members who have studied the questic•n know well, the usu~l remedies are ftt common lftw and under the Employers Liability Act, and they are slightly varied under the Mines Act. The law of common employment prevents any workman getting any dmnages or cmnpensation whate\-er, unless he can show that the cause of his injnry was directly the work of the employer himself. Under the Employers Liability Act it is alw absolutely necessary to prove that there was negligence on the part of the employer, or of an employee working under him. As a matter of fact I may as well state that I do not think there is more than 1 per cent. of the accidents happening throughout the working hours of the colony that would carry damages on account of negligence. It is so difficult to ]Jrove that there has been negligence, and therefore the only effect of the :B~mployers Liability Act has been that it compels employers to be as careful as possible to do everything possible to prevent damages being secured against. them; but in my opinion it helps the injured party very little indeed. Perhaps the Right Hon. J\lr. Asquith, of the Hou'c of Commons, has put the matter of a n:easure of this kind very plainly in practically a smgle sentence, when he said-

VVhen a person on his own responsibility and for his own profit sets in motion agencies which create risks for others, he ought. to be civilly responsible for the consequences of ~is mvn act.

That is, that when an employer goes into a busi­ness for his own profit ftnd employs workmen for the same pm·po,e, if those workmen enguged in a profitable industry for the employer suffer injury in the course of that employment, they are entitled to some compensation fur the injury they have euffered. That, I think, is a per­fectly sound principle, anrl one that I am happy to say now is accepted in ne~rly all th" civilised countries of the world. In Germany we have a Workmen's Compensation Act, or its equivalent, which awards every person injured in the course

·of his employment a certain stated sum, not less thttn two-tbirds of the wages he was e,1rning during a period previous to the accident. In Great Britain thie Act is in force at the present time, and although a great deal of discussion has taken plac~ upon it, and a great outcry has been made arrout the disastrous effect it would have upon the industries of the country, as a rnattnr of fact, since the Act came into operation, the industries of Great Britain have flourished with greater vigour than in ·any previous year. I do not argne that that pros­perity is due to the passing of this Act, but I mention it as a ~et-off against the argument that the passing of such a measure would injure the industries of the country. It is not advisable that these colonies should be behind Great Britain in legislation of this kind. We pride ourselves that in social legislation we o,re some­what in advance of :European c•mntries, but, unfortunately, in this particular line of legisla­ti<m we are a great deal behind them. I trust it will not be long before we are up in line, if not Rlightly in ftdvance, in this respect. I may sfty that Bills of this kind have been intrnduced into all the Australian Parliaments. 'l'hey were twice introduced into the Parliaments of New Zealand, Victorift, and South Austra]i,. In

one or two instances I think it has been passed by one House, and in one case I think it has been passed by both Houses. Both in South Australift and in New Zealand the principle nf the English Act had been extended to industries not included in this Bill. It is as well to state that it is quite impossible at the outset to start with a perfect measure-a measur~ that we entirely "'gree with, a measure that would cover the whole of the industries of the country so that provision would Le made in all cases fur the dependents of persons injured or killed receiving something. I know that the hon. member for Oxley, Mr. lhimes, does nut agree with that principle-at least, he did not last session. I hope that rluring the interval he has come to a different conclusion, and that he will see not only the advisableness, but the necessity of employers providing an insurance fund out of which certain payments shall be made to the clependents or representfttives of persons injured or killed while in their employ. I know that it is not advisable, seeing that private members' time is lim1ted, to speak at any grea,t length, and I will just summarise the principles of the Bill as nearly as I can without going into detail. I wish to direct the attention of hon. members specially to the fact that this is a compensation measure o,nd not a punitive measure. It is a measure that attempts to secure the payment of a stated sum of money, simply because the accident takes place while the injured person is on duty. There are not many accidents c'used by the neglect of the employer or his ag-ents. Take that most disastrous acci­dent at Torbanle"' early this year. Two in­quiries have taken place, and the verdict of both bodies is that there was no negligence, and that there was no evidence to show the cause of the accident. Notwithstanding that, the whole of the men who were employed in that mine might hftve been killed on the spot, and there would not be a penny to be paid to their widows or dependents. Is that a re~sonable thing? I think not. I think it is a most unde-;irable thing; I think it is a most inhuman thing. I think the high principle we should go upon is this: As we have declared that those who fight the battles of the Clmntry, if they suffer injury, should be compensated because they have suffered, surely when those who fight the indu>trial battles of the country are injured, their dependents should not receive worse treat­ment than the dependc>nts of those who are injured while fi((hting the military battles of the country. I think it is most desirable that a fund should.be provided for that purpose. Surely hon. members will agree that whatever way it is paid there must be some fund, either a charitable fund or a fund of this kind, from which to compensate the relatives or dupendents of those who are injured. Is there any more pitiflll thing than to see an able- bodied man cut off in the prime of life leaving a large number of dependents who are helpless and hopeless, who have eimply to appeal to the cold charity of the world? And when I tell vou that I am able to prove that in those conntl:ies where this rr1easnre has become law o,nd provieion hfts been made for such a fund from which these payments nre made-when I tell you that the industries in those countries are still prosperir1g, and that the operation of the Act has not in the least affected their suc­cess I think the measure should be acceptable to hon: membero. Of course I don't anticipate a great deal of opposition to the measure ; I think a lo.rge majority of hon. members are favourable to the principle, but what I wish is that the expression of opinion will be such as to compel this Government or some other Government at an early date to make it law, and protect those persons for whom it is desirable to legi,late in

2i8 Workmen's [ASSEMBLY.] Compensation Bill.

this direction. You will see that the Bill is not a lengthy one. It is based as closely as pos~ible on the English statute-the \Vorkmen's Com­pensation Act of 18U7. There are some omissions, because we have not the machinery here in my opinion, to deal with some matters: but taken altogether it is exceedingly simple in its character and its proposed operation. I need not refer hon. members to the definition clause. Clause 3 relates t? the application of the Act ; and I may be perm1tted to read a portion of it, as follows:-

This Act shall .apply only to employment by the undertakers ?nor 111 or about a raihva.y, factory, mine, t1tutrr.r, shearmg shed. or engineel'iug work, and to em­pl~yn:ent b~r the undertakers on, in, or about any bu.1ld1ng wlnch exceeds thirty feet in lwigllt, and is bemg constructed or tuprtired lJy me_,ns of a seaifold­ing, or being demolished, or on Which maelrinerv driven !JY f'l.ectrical, steam, water, or othm~ mechanie~tl power IS being used for the purpose ot' the construction repair, or demolition the1·eor. '

le is further proYided in the clause that in the C"-Se of a shipbuilding ywd the workman shall not be exclu.ded from the Act by reason only that !·he ace1dent aro_'e outs1de the yard while working Ot?- a VL:Jsel 111 any dock or river ne tr the yard; I~ has been laid do_wn by the decisi•ms of the J<,ng!rsh courts that m snch "' C\1oe the workman is st!ll employed in th<tt shipbuilding yard. You Wlll see that clause 4 deals with the liability of the employer in the case of accidents which are not fatal, and providec; that no pay­ment shall be made for the first two weeks after the accident. That. will prevent malingering, because no person 1s hkely to malinger two weeks for t~e sake of getting 50 per cent. of his weekly earnmgs, the maximum being £1 a week. :"her~ would be no great ad vantage to any man 111 tlns.colony at least to malinger for the sake of gettmg that paltry payment.

Mr. GLASSEY: It is not a very strong induce­ment.

Mr_ FISHER: But the hon. member will agre~ ~ith me that it is necessary to have some proV!SIOn to keep the wolf from the door under most unfortuuate circumstances.

Mr. GLASSEY: Yes.

. Mr. J!'.ISHER : Hon. members will see that it 1s provrded by snbsection (c) that if it is proved that the injury to a workman is attribut­able to the serious and wilful misconduct ?f that workman, any compens:<.tion claimed m respect of that injury shall be disallowed. That provision, I may say, is milder than the provrs1on whJCh went up from the House of Commons to the House of Lords in the Bill that subsequently became the Act of 1t>D7. ThPre the word "wholly" was used-" unless it was wholly Clue to his serious and wilful misconduct " That, I think, is one of the most clesirabie things, if it is to be in at all· but mv view is th:.t this clause should be elimi~ated alto"ether because it is the thin end of an effort to g;, back to the common law of common employment--

The H01IE SECHETARY: What is that?

Mr. FISHER: )\'[Y re.ading is to the effect that common law firot la1d down common em­ployment law, and that it is only of recent years that statute law intBrfered, and defined what the law of commo'! employment was; and it has been altered twrce. At any rate, I am n<)t here to. drs?us.s mce legal quibbles. 'Ehe object of th1s B1ll IS t<; do away with nice legal quibbles, a'!~ to estabhsh a ~ourt or a body of persona who wrh see that there IS a payment of money in some way t? comp~ns.tte for the injurie'> suffered. That 1s the 1dea, It is further provided in a later clause that if nn action is brought, say, under the common law or under th~ .Employers Li,.,bility Act, o;, under the Mmmg Act, and that action fails in law, if the

court thir,ks th1tt the persons who brought that action httd ~• good action under this Act they may still proceed to assess the compensation as if the action had been bronf'ht under this Act. I think that is a Yery fair principle. That is, that if they have brought the wrong action, and are still entitled, instead of compelling them to bring another action nnder this Act, the court may proceed to assess compensation as if it had been properly brought ttt first. It is further provided, and quite necess<trily provided, that notice must be given as t:won as practicable after an accident has happe·1ed. It is desirable that should be done beeaus·, of !he nature of the compensation, and there sLould be no difficulty in notifying an employer or his repre"entative that an accident had taken place. It is clearly laid down that it is to be giYen in ordinary language, and how it is to be delivered is a'so provided for. It i' further proYided that the principle con­tractor shall be responsible for his sub-contrac­tors ; that there shall be no such thing as-what has given so much trou hle in this and other colonies-contractors sub-letting their contracts, and those sub-contractors again sub-letting them, and subsequelltly getting out of all their liabilities. The principal contractor will be responsible for the payment of compem ation except in the case of what is called ancillary work-work that is really not directly that for which the contract was originally taken, but is ancillary thereto. It is provided also that com­pensation shall be a first charge on in sol ,-ent est,ctcs. I think the legal gentlemen will agree with me that if this m< a,nr·<· should become law, and if compensation is to be paid under it, it is most de,irable that the compensation should be secured by every possible means ; and it is provided here that it shall be a first charge on the estate of insolvent employers, and, further, that the money awarded by the court or the arbitrator ''s compensation to the dependents of tbe person injured or killed shall not be attachable in any way by any court order, hut shall be paid to the person to "horn it was awarrled. That, I think, is a very sound principle too. It is provided also that an action cannot be brought against two parties for the same thing. That is cleitrly laid clown in clause 8. It is also provided that ex­isting contracts, as between employer and em­ployee, shall be determined as if notice were gi,·en at the commencement of this Act. If any special agreement has been m a de it shall ter­minate as if notice had been given when this Act became law. The payment, it will be seen, in case of death where a man leaves persons directly depend<mt upon him, is to be three years' wages, or, if three years' wages is less than £300, it will be £300; and that if the three }ears' wages were £600, only £500 shall be paid. That is, the limit is between £300 and £500-not less than £300 nor more than £500. If a workman who is injurecl or killed leav'•··s no direct dependents, but others who are partly dependent upon him, the amount of com­pensationshall be determined by arbitration or by agreement, and, failing that, by the court; and in cases where no dependents are left, the fair medical and funeral expemes are to be paid. Th>tt seems to be a fair and statesm>tnlike way of dealing vith the question. In cases where there is ptutial incapacity fur work, it is pro­vided that 50 per cent. of the wages are to be paid, and tht average wages will be discovered ],y taking the average earnings during the previons twelve months. In those cases, 50 per cent. of the "ages wiil be paid, provided tbat 50 per cent. does not exceed £], and, in any case, no amount shall be paid in excess of that £1 per week.

J'.Ir. GrYENS: J!'or how long?

Workmen's [9 AuGusT.] Compensation Bill. 279

_Mr. I<'ISHER: That is not provided, but it Will be fur a.,; long as the person requires it, as far as the Bill is concerned. I made a statement during the introduction of the Bill last year that I was prepared to accept an amendment which would mnke the payment of the half wage, say £1 P"r week, up to the same sum as the maximum amount, which in the case of a person killed is .£300. I wish hon. members not to misunderstand

me ; I am not wedded to that, but I [!) p.m.] think thttt a workman who i, en·

titled to compensation should be paid that compensation as long as he requires it. That is the exact position in Germany. The Ger":mn <iovemment con,pel the employers to prov1de the total fund, and the money has to be deposited in a Government post office and paid out by (iovernment officials. The police do a great deal of the inquiry work, and they ~ee that the matter is properly·carried out. Hon. members will easily see that there may be such a thing as a person being so severely injured that he may not be able to follow his usu"l employment, but that he may be able to follow some otha employment which is not so remunerative as ~he. work h~ had previuusly done. In th«t case 1t 1s provHled that the amount he earns in his new employment shall be taken into con· sideration in fixing the amount of the weekly paynwnt, which, as I have said, is not to exceed 30 per cent. of his average ,., eekly earnings durmgthe previous twelve months, if he has been so long employed, but if not, then for any less period during which he has been in the employ· ment of the same employer the amount is not to exceed £1 per week. It is fur-ther provided who are dependents. Provision is also made for the safe investment of the funds, it being shtted that they shall be invested in the Government Sav­ings Bank by the Regi,trar of the District Court in his n3me as Registrar. It is further provided that wh.ere the employer's doctor and the doctor appomted by the workman differ in their opinion as to the nature of the in­j uriee sustained, the Government medical officer shall be called in as referee, and that hi< deci,ion in the case shall be final; and that upon his decision shall rest the payment of further com· pensation. Then, any weekly payment may be reviewed from time to time at 'the requ st of either the employer or the workman and the payment n:ay be diminished or increa.s~d, subject to the maxmmm prov1ded. If the parties ~o not agree on the matter, it may be settled by arbitra· tion. An employer may otier a lump sum to clear off hi" liability. The sec md 'chedule pro· vides for arbitration. The arbitrator may be a person ag-reed on by the parties, or, in the absence of such an agreement, a person appointed by a District Court judge accordin:~· to the procedure prescribed by rules of conrt, under the Di 'trict Court Act. The powers are very large. If a;:t arbitrator i~ dealing with a matter, and a questwn of law anses, the arbitrator may submit that question to a District Conrt judge, who will give a decision on the subject. The costs of arbitration are limited by the schedule i~ b.eing provided that they shall not exceed th~ hm1t pr~.Rcribed by the rules of the District Court, and that they shall be taxed in the manner prescribed by those rules. There is also a provision for the regiotration of the award of the arbitrator, which is a very desirable one. There is also a provision to prevent cas .. ·, being tried out of the district where the accident occurred. It is stated that a case shall he tried as near a, possible to the place where the persons injured by an acci· dent were ernployerl. The duties of the judge o.re also defined, and there is a pro· vision to the effect that no fee shall be demanded or be payable l'rinr to the award.

This brings me to a point which I should like to impress upon hon. members. I know, and many of my colleagues and hon. members on the other sicle~especially those connected with mining~ know, that in nineteen cases out of twenty where a person is killed, the widow or friends of that person are not in a position to bring an action for damages under .any of the laws we have at the present time, unless some outside friend or representative body assists them in the matter, so that the whole loss is suffered by the widow or representatives, even if there has been negli­gence. I have not the slightest hesitation,i.n say· ing that they have suffered such loss, notwith· standing that they had a good case to bring hef ore the court. That is my experience, and I believe it is the experience of all the members here. It is evident to anyone who has had any connection with any case that has been brought under the l<Jmployers Liability Act, that, unless it is obvious that they will be defeated, the insurance companies invariably take the case from court to court. ·what individual can afford to do that ? What woman or child can by herself or himse If carry a case from court to court ? They cannot do it.. Therefore, it is laid down here that no fee shall be payable in respect of any proceeding under thiR Bill prior to the award. This schedule also provides that the Governor in Council may appoint legally qualified mediccol practitioners to look after the interest of the State, and that any arbitrator or judge may appoint a medical man to report on any matter material to any question ad,ing in the arbitration, and injured per· sons are required to submit themselves for examination at reasonable times. That is intended to prevent malingering. It has been said that this kind of legislation will lead to a greater number of accidents. I do not believe it; and there is no real evidence to support duch a contention. The same sort of argument has been us 3d against every nH' 1sure. of this character, and it will be repeated, I suppose, until the end of time by those who h",ve conservative instincts so largely developed that they really think and believe that industries are going to be ruined by every legislative enactment that is of a radio 1l tendency. I do not wish to take up the time of the House any further. I must admit that I labour under disabilities in bringing forward a measure of this kind, which has invariably been in the hands of able men in the various colonies and in Great Britain ; but I can assure you of this, that whereas there are plenty of abler men who take up the matter, there are none who are more sincere. Very few of them have seen more of the painful circum­stances arising through the want of such a m(·,rsure than I have. The hon. member for Cairns will be able to tell you of a terrible disaster in his di~trict, in connection with which possibly some relief may be given, but in any case the relief which can be afforded under our present laws is tedious and expensive, and totally unsatisfactory. I believe a large number of employers are of opinion that if they had some specific scheme such as this, under which the employer would know his liability and could insure against it, and under which the workmen would know what position they were in and what compensation they were likely to receive in the event of injury, both sides would be a great deal happier, a g-reat deal more contented, and the country would be largely benefited thereby. I have much pleasure in moving the second reading of the Bill. HoNouu~BLE Mln!BERS: Hear, hear! The HO:\iE SECRETARY (Hon. J. F. G.

I<'oxton, Ca?·nxrt'on): I think the hon. member is to be congratulated upon attempting legisla· tiun which, at all events from his point of view,

280 Workmen's [ASSEMBLY.] Compensation Bill.

and that of a number of persons who think with him, including a large number of members of this House, is of a beneficial character, and also upon introducing it at so early a period of the session; but I think it is to he ngrttted that so short a time has elapsed between the first and second readings.

Mr. FISHEH: I was not to blame. The HOME SECRETARY: I think the hc.n.

member might, when he was selecting a day for the second reading-seeing that it was only the day before yest81 day that the Bill was intro­duced-;-have H!'ed a later day for the next stage. The Bill, practJCally, has only been put in our hands to-day. It was, I believe, sent round with the papers yesterd:<y; but that being a holiday, I did not, for some reason, receive my papers.

lV1r.JhsHER: The same as last year. 'l'he HOME SECRl,TARY: l~xactly; but

two wrongs do not make a right. The hon. mnmber rather should have taken warning by last year.

Mr. KERR: It is the same Bill as introduced last session.

The HOME SECRETARY: I believe so; but we can only discover that by reading the Bill and comparing it with that of last year.

The SECRE'l'ARY J;'OR AGRICCLTURR: There are some members who were not in the House last session.

The HOME SECRETARY: I think the hon. member might in justice, if not in courtesy, to other hon. members, have selected a date which would have allowed a week or fortnight to have elapsed between the Hrst and second readings.

Mr. G!VENS: \Ve have very little tiuw, a.nd we must take it when we can. \Vllen we bring business in you only talk it out.

The HOME Sll:CJ.lETARY: The memberfor Cairns appears to be of opinion t!Jat he has a license to insult members on this side of the House.

Mr. G!VRNS:. It would take a lot to insult yon. 'fhe HOME SECRETARY: Perhaps I feel

it quite as keenly as some other hon. members; I do not pretend to be as pachydermatous a.s t.he hon. member for Cairns. I think a little occa­sional admonition to that hon. member woulrl not do him much harm. He interjected jnst now an imputation that I was only making the suggestion I have made in order that the Bill might he talked out, and that if we did not take the second reading to-day we wonld have no opportunity on any other occasion.

Mr. FISHER : I was stopped waiting for the necessary appropriation for " fortnight.

The HOME S:ECllETARY: Bnt the Bill was only made an Orcler of the Day for to-day two days ago, and I think the hon. member might have selected Thnr,day, the loth of August, or Thursday, the 2Jrd, in preference to to-day. I can understand his not caring to select next Thursday, because notices of motion take precedence, and already the m em her for Flinders has a notice of motion for that dccy, but there is nothing on the paper for the following Thursday.

Mr. KERR : But the session might be over before then.

'fhe HOM]j~ SECilETARY: That is the sort of interjection that one expects from the hon. member for Barcoo. I mention this matter be­cause I know that some hon. members have been put to considerable inconvenience in c<,ns~q"ence of the shortness of the time which has elapsed since the Bill was Hrst introduced. There are members who take a r~eep interest in the matter, perhaps not from the exact point of view of the hon member, bot who, notwithstanding·, are anxious that a fair and equitable meann·e of this nature should find a place on our statute-book.

Now, undou·btedly the hou. member has adopted a ri1le which is a popular one, and he is able to quote Acts similar to this Bill which are in force in various countries throughout the world. I am not quite sure now in how many of the Austra­lian colonies it is in force.

Mr. FISHER: I do not think it is actually in force in any of them. New Zealand has a kind of one, but not the same. They are all struggling with similar Acts. TheHOM1<~8ECRETARY: vVedonotlmow

exactly where they haYe got to. They are in a state of transition, like ourselves, in this matter.

J\.fr. Jj'JSHlm: The Uovernments have taken the Bills up in the other colonies.

The H01iE SECRETARY: The Govern­ments do all sorts of thin~s which this Govern­ment does not do, and this Government does a lot of things that the other Governments are not game t<> do. If hon. members will permit me to say so, I think this Government usually follows the right course, and the other Governments are wrong. I am not one of those-let me say it straight out here-who believe that because a thing exists in New South \V ales, Victoria, New Zealand, or South Australia, and does not exist here, it is therefore "reasonable and right thing. 'l'bere are some people who are continnally decrying our own institutions and laws, and ad~ ministration, and everything that belongs to Queensland, and who at:e at the same time con­tinually crying up everything that exists outside the borders of Queensland.

Mr. LEKlXA: 'IV e heord the Secretary for Railways do that last night about State rail­w .. ys. He den•mnced our system and advocated private rail way con>truction by syndicates be cause it was pupular in the old country.

The HO::\IE SJW.HETARY: I do not say that everything in f..lueenslaml is right and every­thing outside of Queensland is wrong, but there are 'some people who alJ[Jear to imagine that everything inside Queensland is wrong and every· thing outside is right. Now, neither of those two cl'l>,es of people is ce-rrect. I must say, hon·eyer, that it appuus to be the argutnent of a weak man when he says such and such a thing doe' not exist here, it does exi't elsewhere, therPfore we onght to adopt it. I say, we are just as well able to manage our business in this colony as any other colony is. .

:Mr. G!VENK: \Ve can always pay 20s. m the £1, and some. times they C1llnot.

The HOJVH~ SECRETARY: Perhaps that is their misfortune. I say the hon. member, in taking up this Bill, has adopted a popular ,·/)le, and I think we may attribute the same state of thinJs to everv other member who has taken it up elsewhel'8; whether in Australia or in the old country, or in any foreign country, because it does .cppear to Inil that Mr. Pickwick was one of the wi"'"st men th2.t ever lived-if he ever did live, and I suppo"e his 1•rototype did live some­where-when he gave the advice, "Always shout with thela.rgestcrowd." He uttered then the wisest thing that was ever said in the :B~nglish language.

Hon. D. H. DALHDll'LE: J''rom a politica point of \iew.

The HO;vlJ~ S.ECRJ~TARY: From a political point of view, as my hem. friend says, and from every other point of view. It is always~ popular thing- to shout with the largest crowd.

1v1r. LESDiA: You did that with federation, <>nd nver the war.

The HOJ\IE SECRgTARY: I was one of the crowd in that.

JUr. ClLASSEY: The voice of the people is the \'oiee of (i-nd.

ThA HOME SECRETARY: I am not so irre,·erent as the hon. member is. This is popu­lar, because the largest crowd unquestinnably is the employees. Now, the question is: \Vhy

Workmen's [9 AUGUST.] Compensation Bill. 281

should this principle be adopted? The hon. member for Gympie says very properly, no doubt, that some fund ought to be established for the cempEmation of workmen. I grant that that is a deeirable end at which to aim, Lut why should that fund be provided by the ern players ?

Mr. GrvENS : Because the employees work for the profit of the employers. ·

The HOlVlE SECRETARY: Do they? I thought that they worked for their own profit. In many cases I know industries have been conducted at a loss for years and years in order that the employees should not be thrown out of employment. I know instances of that sort have happened.

Mr. GIVENS: How many? The HOME SlWRETARY: lVIany. The SPEAKER: Order! The HOME SECRETARY: :Even within the

necessarily small compass of my experience­because one .man's experience is a mere bagRtelle compared wrth that of the whole world-I know of many such instances where men have gone on from bad to worst>, and have carried on largely because thereby those who were working for them should not be thrown out of employment.

Mr. GLASSEY: Yes, there are suuh employers. The HOME SECRETARY: Iasl< why there­

fore sh(Juld the employer be compelled to find this fund? Why practically the employer does find it under this it may be said, because it will bB a measure which will cornDel the employers to insure the lives of their en;ployees. That is to say, a very la.rge number. lt must be borne in mind that this relates to all factories and occupiers of factories.

Mr, FISHER : Section 3. The HOi\lE SECRETARY: It reLtes to

anything which is a factory, and that is a very wide interpretation, because there are factories and f.tctones. There are factories which every­one understands to be factories, and there are also places where per.sons are engaged in a very small way ; and they would be very much as­tomshed to learn that they were factorie9.

Mr. KimR: Those will not come under this Bill.

The HOME SECRETARY: Yes, they are factories i!l t):le eyes of the btw, though they may not be wrthm tne popular· notion. But every person engaged in a large way of business, who understan?s wh.at.the law is as applied to them, whoge busmess rt rs to be up to date, I can quite understand that those persons will protect them­selves in regard to this measure by insuring the lives of their employees. As to the smaller people who, without knowing it, come under the definition-are working under conditions which bring their workshops or establishments within the definition of a factory under the J<'actories and Shops Act-I say it would Le very hard indeed to them. It may be absolutely ruinous to them if they are rendered liable to pay compensation such as is provided for in this Bill, when such a thing has never entered into their heads at all­they n:ay have been in business for twenty years and shll not know anything of such a liability­ignorant people. That is why I think son1e other method of arriving at the conclusion which the Iron. member aims at should be adopted-that is to say, the ccmpulsory in8urance by the work­men themselves, rather than making the em­ployer the compulsory agent for the insurance of their lives.

Mr. JTrsHER : Is that ymn remedy? The HOME S~C1U~TARY: It seems to be

a very much more just one than the hon, mem­ber's.

Mr. LESINA : Adopt it-a system of old age pensions.

The HO:\lE SECRETARY: It would be practically that, but that certainly is not the system of old age pensions that is described. U ncruestionably it would lead to a system of old age pensione, but that is not the idea. Old age pensions and compulsory insurance are two diffe­rent things. Of course, I know there are many schemes of old age pensions, but that fact does not necessitate the adoption of such a scheme. That seems to be a more equitable way of arriving at what the hon. member desires, than by practically compelling the employer, if he wants to avoid the possibility of absolute ruin, to insure the lives of his workmen. It is provided in clause 4 of this Bill that the amount payable in this way shall in no way affect the right of the representatives of the deceased employee to receive further damages in the event of there being any personal negligence. I do not see anything about the wilful act of the employee, but for any wilful act of the employer leading up to death there is a double liability. :!<;,en admitting that that principle is correot, which I do not, let us go further down-I am speaking now of sub-clau8e or paragraph (b). Let us turn to paragraph (c) ot the sarJ<e sub-clause 2, at pag' 3, and what do we find there ? 'I' hat, while under (u) the employer, in addition to the liabilit:v uuder this Act-that is to say, under any in"1fance on which the prewiums have been paid by him-if there is any personal neg­ligence on his part leading up to death, there is a further respm:sibility in damages. If we turn to (c) we find that notwithstanding

that, in order to negative that in [5·30 p.m.] fact, it is necessary, not that there

should be mere personal negligence on the part of the employer, but that the injury to the workman must be attributable to the serious and wilful misconduct of the employee.

J\:Ir. FINHER: You know, as a lawyer, that he would fail in the iirst effort, if guilty of negli­gence.

The HO::YIE SECRETARY: Who would fail?

l\Ir. }'ISHlm : The injured person, 'l'he HO:\IE SECHETARY: Exactly. Why

shoulcl the law be different in this case from wlmt it is in the case of a man injured while tra veiling by an omnibus?

Mr. FISHER: Because this is a Compensation Act.

The HOME SECRE'£ARY: But why should the employer compem.ate his workman any more th:m the 'bus-driver should compent,ate a passenger injured in his 'bus?

JYir. LESINA : The owner of the 'bns may be compelled by law to do ',o.

The HOME SEORETAUY: Quite so. He llHty be compelled by law to do so, but not if there has been any contributory negligence on the part of the person injurerl. In that case the proprietor of the 'bns is relieved of any necessity to give compensation.

Mr. LESINA: 'l'he English Act goes further than that.

An HoNOURABLE lVIEii!BEI\ : He is JlOt a work­man.

The HOME SECI·tETARY: That is it­because he is not one of the larger crowd. I say that if that clause 4 and those two sub-paragraphs enacted what was a fair thing, the same degree of negligence on the part of the employee would negative his right to compensation, af:; is required by the Bill to render the employer liable. Even granting for 3; 1nornent that it iR a fair thing to ask an employer to imure the lives of his workmen if he is not to run the risk of ruin, it certainly does seem to me a fair and equitable thing to provide that the same degree of negligence

282 Workmen's [ASSEMBLY.] Compensation Bill.

on the part of the employee should negative his right of action, as the degree of negligence which creates that right as against the em­ployer.

Mr. :FrsHER: Experience teaches differently­that is the point.

The HU:\1E SECRETARY: Very well; perhaps experience is right. I admit that experience has taught the world that the workm:m is unable, as the law exiflts at present, to recover anything from his employer if the injury is dne to his own clefanlt. Now is not that right? Is not that fair and equitable? I do not say there should be no compensation at all, but, failing neg·ligence on the part of the employer, is it a fair thing to charge the employer with compensation for injuries done to his workman, even though that workman be in default himself?

JVlr. FISHEI<: Yes. I will deal with that in my reply.

The HOME SECRJ<~TARY: Then it seems to me the world is upside down. It does not matter whether the employer is guilty of negligence or not-he is the employer and the other man works. That, apparently, is the argument-one man works for the other, and therefore the employer should pay compensation. \Vhy should that, if it is right, be confined to particular trades and callings?

An HONOCRABLm ji,;JE1IBER ; \Vhy not apply it to the ploughman?

The HOME SECRETARY: Why should not every employer throughout the length and breadth of the land be liable in the same way?

Mr. LESINA : Hear, hear ! J3ut we must pro­ceed a step at a time.

The HOME SECllETARY: Oh, I see. As one hon. meinber has interjected, why is not this principle good for the ploughman?

JVIr. DAWSON: There is nothing to stop you bringing in a, Bill to provide for the ploughman.

The HOME SECRKfARY: The hon. mem­ber does not undel'8tand that I am arguing against thcl principle. Is that the best answer I can get? That we are only proceeding a step at a time, and that ultimately everybody will be brought into it?

Mr. FISHER: You know it is disorderly t.o nterject.

The HOME SECRETARY: I know that one hon. member has interjected that.

JVlr. LESINA : I believe that is the correct reason.

The HOME SECRETARY: It probably is, but if so it is a very poor reason. If the thing is right for tbe man in the factory, if it is right for employees, if the relation of employer and employee is the one ground upon which this principle is to be applied, why is it to be applied to the workman as distinct from the passenger in a 'bus, cited by me just now? }<~very interjection I get appears to indicate t.hat that is the principle upon which this measure proceeds-that it is merely because one man is the employer and the other is the employee. It is not a qne&tion of danger, because I know many dangerous callings which do not come under this at all.

l\1r. 1lAWSON: Then move an amendment. The HOME SECRRTARY: The hon. mem­

ber will assume that I am arguing that the principle is right, when I am merely endeavour­ing to show the inconsistency of the measure itself. I do not know that I have much more to say, and I have been delayed by the interjec­tions from the other side. I have spoken with a desire to point out what appeared to me to be the weak points in the principle attempted to be enforced in this measure. I believe that instead of making the employer the compnlsory agent for the insumnce of the lives of his workmen it would be very much more equitable to apply it

to all employees and compel them to insnre. That means simply taxation. The means to be adop~ed to compel the payment of premiums on life policies out of wages would, perhaps, be diffi­cult to arrange, but it would be by no means an insuperable difficulty. It could be made a first charge upon the wages of the workmen, and be made payable by the employer before the wages were payable to the workman himself.

JYlr. TUHLEY: Can you show any examples where any such thing has been tried ?

The HO:YIE SECRETARY: Has tl1P. hon. n1en1ber no originr .. lity, or can he irr1agine no originality? Is it necw•sary that before a thing can be tried it must have been tried somewhere else?

l\1r. Tunu~y : I do not accuse you of having any originality.

The HOJ\IJ<; SI~CRETARY: What sort of legisbtion should we have under those circum­st•nces ? If the hon. member bad been here he would have heard that that is just what I com­plained of in the earlier portion of my speech, that hon. members merely set up what has been done in other places as a reason why the same thing should he done here.

JYlr. TunLEY: \Ve know the Government always adopt what has failed somewhere else.

The HOME SECRB~TARY: The Govern­ment fref[neutly avoid adopting experiments which result in failures elbewhere. \Vhat will be the effect of this Bill on the Commissioner for Railwavs if it becomes law?

Mr. J<'rsiiEH: He will be liable to compensate all h1s workmen.

The HOME S.ECRI~TARY: Exactly. I wonder if the hon. member has calculated what amount of arlditional t:uation will be required in order to pay the premiums on the lives of 3,000 or 4,000 employees in the Railway Depart­ment? It will aJl't>Unt to a considemble sum.

Mr. RYLAND : Very small. The HOME SECRETARY: Can the hon.

member tell how much. J\.fr. Rn.AXJJ : Yes. The HO:\lE SECRETARY: Will he do so?

I have not calculated. Mr. ]'rsHJm: Four shillings per cent. That is

the amount stated by authorit.y in New Zealand. The PREl\IIEI<: Under this Bill? Mr. FISHER: Yes. The HO:\IE SECRETARY: It is an appre­

ciable item; but why should not that small sum be paid out nf the wages of the men themselves?

Mr. GrYENS : Their wages are too small already.

The HOME SECRETARY : Of course every­body thinks he i' receiving too small a Halary. Of comse the £300 a year the hon. member gets is far too small for his abilitv. I never knew a man yet who was of opinion· that he got enough wages.

Mr. DAwsox: I knew one. Hon. D. H. DALHYMPL"~: He died young. l'vfr. DAWSON: I saw him in a mirror one

nwrning. The HOlVIE SECRETARY: If the Bill gets

into committee, as I presume it will, I shall have an opportunity of dtaling with it then. I do not object to the principle of con,pensation to workmen who are injured in the course of their employment, but I do take exception to the manner in which that fund is constituted, prin­cipally because there are numbers of emp)oy~rs who never wiil know the extent of thmr lia­bility merely as employers, and who, from their sm>dl way of business and their distance from centres of population, and their want of infor­mation, will never !mow their !iahilitifs, aHd will never take the precaution of insuring the lives of their worknwn. I have fieen shearing going on with two or three men under a bough shed.

1Vm·kmen's Compensation Bill. [9 AuGUST.] Tramwa!J Bill. 283

Perhaps a strug_gling selector may get two or three men to aesrst hnn shear his sheep. If one of them is injured through no J>Ossible fault of the selector-suppose he is intoxicated and tumbles on his shears, and they stab him and cause serious injury-even th'en tl1e unfortunate selector will be responsible, and will have to compensate that man.

Mr. FISHER: No. It has been decided in com·cs of law that intoxication is serious and wilful misconduct.

The HOME SECRETARY: I believe the hon. member is correct; but that is the only instance in which I have overstated the case. And then it would have to be proved that the man was intoxicated; and it is a very difficult matter to prove intoxica.tion, unlGs;::; a n1an is very drunk indeed. A man may injure himself through his own serious negligence, and yet that unfortunate selector would be liable to corn· pensate him under this Bill, because he would never have dreamed uf insuring the man.

Mr. GLASSEY: The insurance agents will look after that.

The HOME SECRETARY: I know that insumnce agents ara pretty smart ; but I don't think they will find out everybody who would come under the }~ill ; and I believe that g-reat injustice and ruin will be brought about in some instanc, s if this Bill becomes law.

l\1r. GIVENS : How many workmen are ruined now bec"nse the Bill is not law?

'rhe HOJ\lE 8ECRETARY: I don't think there are any.

l\fr. GIVENS: There are dozens. The HOME 8ECRETARY : I don't agree

with the hon. member. Mr. Gr.ASSEY: Take the case of the men who

lost their lives at 'forhanlea. The HOME SFCRETARY: The hon.member

who introduced the mea,ure told us that nothing could be found to indicate that anybody was at fault in connection with thn,,e accidents and injuries; then why should tbe employer, who was not at fault, pay for those widows and orphans, and perhaps leave his own widow and orphans, when he dies, without anything at all?

Mr. Grn;Ns: \Vhy should the unfortunate labourer be ruined ?

The HOME SECRET_\RY: Why shnnld the employer be ruined? I say that you may com­pensate, but do it in an honest way, and get your fund in a proper way, in an honest way, by asking the man who is to be benefited by the fund--

Mr. GIVENS: It is no benefit to him. It would be better for him not to be hurt in the first instance.

The HOME SECRE'l'ARY : I suppose that if a man has any regard and love for his wife and children it is some benefit to him to know that there will be something for them if he is injured. The hon. member must have a perverted and twisted conscience to talk like that.

Mr. DAWSON: He is qualifying for a Minis-terial seat. ·

The HOME SECRETARY: I have nothing more to say. I don't think the good object endeavoured to be attained is being attained in the right wa'· by a mea'lire such as this. I say it should be in the nature of insurance; and the principles of the English bw, which obtained until a similar measure became law in England, were fair and equitable, and were the result of centuries of experience. It would be better if insurance were made compulsory, and the work­man whose family are to be benefited were to pay the premium, just as I have to pay the premium if I want to m>eke provision for my family in case any injury may happen to me. I have no P.mployer· against whose finances thi~ charge can be Jnadf', therefore I have to pay the premium myself; but, forsooth,

though I may perhaps be better off, if I am earning wage3, my employer has to pay the premium as well as provide me with wages.

Mr. Km~TON : If all the employers contributed to the fund the industry would bear tbe charge, not the individual em player.

The HOME SECRETARY: Yes, but it comes out of the employer's pocket all the same. The insura.nce prerr1iun1 is money, and if A pays it certainly B does not. It is a verJ different thing to take it out of a man's wagPs, and make him re,ponsib!e for the payment rather than to take it out of the profits of the employer, and make him n -;ponsible for the payment. If the hon. member tells me that those are one and the same thing all I c>n say is that he is just the man to become Treasurer c)£ this colony again some day. The prupos1tion coming from a Scotchman seerns to rne to be a rernarkable one. However, I will not detain the House longer, nR I shall have more to say in committee if the Bill gets into committee.

Mr. DUNSFORD (Chartc1'S Towers): I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

Question put and passed ; and the resumption of the debate made an Order of the Day for Thursday, the 23rd instant.

PORT NORMAN TO CLONCUHRY RAIL­WAY BILI,.

INTR011UOTION. The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS

(Hon. J. l\lurray, No?'lfWnDy) moved-That lr,tve be given to introduce a Bill to authorise

the constrnction and maintenance of a line of railway from Port ~orman, by \V::ty of Xormanton. to Cloncurry, and for other purposes.

Question put and passed.

Fmsi' RK4-DING. At a later hour, The Bill was read a first time, and the second

reading made an Order of the Day for Tuesday next.

HALPIN'S CREEK TO MOUNT GARNET TRAMWAY BILL.

INTRODUCTION. The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS

moved-That leave be given to introduce a Bill to anthorise

the ::\Iount Garnet Freehold Copper and ~ilver .:\'lining Company, Limited, to construct and maintain a line of tram\YfiT from Halpin's Creek to )'lount Gnrnct, con­neeting ·-vdth the :Jiareeba to Chillagoe Railway, and for other purposes subsidiary thereto.

Mr. DUNSFORD ( Chm·te>·s Towers): I believe one hon. member on this side called " Not formal" to this motion, and as he is within the precincts "f the Chant ber, he may be able to offer some good reasons why the motion should be di>>cus,ed at this stage. Personally, I do not know of any reason why it should be, bnt as that hon. member may be here in a moment be may like to give his reasons, or perhaps the Minister may have some reasons to state to the House for introducing it. The,,e motions have caught us "on the hop," and hon. members not actually in the Chamber were unprepared for them. The debate on the \V orkmen's Compensation Bill collapsed suddenly--

The Hmm s~:Ol\ETARY: At your instftnce. ::1<1r. DUN8FORD: Yes, at my instance. But

the hon. member I am referring to is now entering the Chamber, and I suppose he will state to the House w h v he called " Not formal."

Mr. MuDON ALD (Plindcrs): I called "Kot formal " to these motions because I am opposed to them altogether, and I am sorry I happened to he out of the Chamber at the moment the first Oli8 went through, more especially as a

284 Balpin' s 01'eek, Et e., [ASSEMBLY.] Tramway Bili.

portion of the proposed line is in the electorate I represen~. In opposing this I am going to follow the . adyice of the Home Secret>try, who said, ea:rher m the afternoon, that there were certain !3llls that ough~ to be opposed at the first stage If they were obJected to by a considerable body of the House, becanse the motion embodied the whole principle of the Bill.

The Hmm SECHE'rARY : I said I could under­stand it.

_JVIr. :iY1cDON ALD : Then the hon. gentleman Will undE\rstand my opposing thi, motion at the present t!me,_ fo~ the whole principle of the Bill Is embodied m It. What I think should have been done in the matter is this: the Government should have come down and told us straightfor­:-vardly what their railway policy was~-whether It was to be a pohcy of purely Government lines, or w_hether_ they were prepared to pass certain syndicate hues and other lines to be constructed ?Y the. State .. Inst~ad of ~hat they have brought m their syndicate lmes piecemeal-first one Bill and _then another and another-without any inti­m-:twn to th_e House a~ to what they are really gomg to do 111 connect10n with the matter. I do not know that I have a gre<ct deal more to

say on the motion" at this formal [7 p.m.] stage, but as it has been stated that

the country desires these milways ~o be constructed, I would ask the Minister if he IS prepared to lay on the table all the corres­pondence which has led up to ti::te introduction of these Bills. It is only fair that the House and the country should understand the facts in connection with the construction of the whole of these rail ways, and I am prepared to drop the matter now by askmg that question. As a rule when Bills of this nature ""re going through the House they are safeguarded in a different form f,rom that which is adopt~d in this imtance. 8nch _measur~s have always been introduced as pr_Ivate BJ!ls, and those Bills have been submitted to a select committee for report. Their report, together with the evidence and papers, has then been laid refore the House, but m the present case the Government have t.>ken the matter up and made it a Government measure,. so that the public have not the same opportmnty of getting information as to the persons behind the proposal as they have when su?h a Bill is intr~d~ced in the proper way as a pr!vate Bill. This Is purely a private Bill for private purposes, and as such ought to be sub­Im_tted to a_ select committee, but, failing that, It IS only fair to the House and the country that the hon. gentleman should lay on the table all the correspondence that has led up to the intro­duction of the Bill.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: In reply to the hon. member, I may say that I have no objection whatever to lay al!' the correspond­ence on the table of the House, if the hon. mem­ber moves for the production of the papers in the usual way.

Mr. FISHEr!: Lay them on the table without th>tt.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: I do not feel warranted in laying them on the table except in response to an order of the House.

Mr. McDONALD: You have no objection to lay them on the table? ?-'he_SECRl<~TARY I<'OR RAILWAYS: No

ob]ectwn whatever. If the hon. member chooses to.muve, in the usual manner, that the papers be lmct on the trtble of the House, I shall be pre­pared to lay them on the table.

Mr. MoDoNALD: The whole of them? The SECJmTARY J<'OR RAILWAYS·

Yes, the whole of them. ·

Mr. BROWNE ( Croyclon) : I wish to say just a few word> with regard to the motion for the mtroduction of this Bill. I am very sorry that private members' business was passed at ten minutes to f) o'clock, and that I was not here when the motion for the introduction of a Bill for the construction of a rail way from Port Norman to Cloncurry was proposed, because I have just the same objection to the construction of that line by private enterprise as I have to all others. Hon. members know that when these private rail ways first came before the House I stated that I, and the party supporting me, did not believe in the principle of the Bills and that we intended to oppose them right frorr; the very JUmp. It seems to me that there has been a lot of very undue haste in the introductiun of these mea', ures. \V e have a very large programme in the Governor's Speech, and there are several important Bills mentioned which have been in­quired about from time to time, and which we have been told are not qmte ready. But it appears to he the Government policy to en­courage_ the building of railways by private enterpnse, and we have five Bills rushed into the House one on the top of the other at the com­mencement of the session. \Ve are told that there are a number of lines that the Government approve of and are going to submit to the House.

Mr. BoLES : Pass t;hese, and we can then get on with the others.

Mr. BRO\VNJ<~: \V e have also been told that the Government are going to introduce a lot of light lines ~o encour,tge the fo.rmers. \V here is there any word about encouraging' the fanners by these proposals ? There is nothing at all. The whole aim.ancl object of the Government at the present time seems to be to encourage private enterpri'e in the building of rail ways, and these Bills are all being rushed in one after the other as quickly as pos,;ible. I do not think they will get through any quicker with this undi1e haste, because we have other busineseto il"O on with tlutt should be dealt with by the Hou';;e. I asked a question the other dav as to when the Financial Statement would be" delivered. Since Queens­land has hrcd a Parliament it has been a very rare occurrence that so long a tin1e has been allowed to elapse between the closing uf the deb,1te on the Address in Heply and the delivery of the ~'inancial Statement as.has elapsed in the present mstanc,. \Ye do not knc1w the e.tate of the finances, and yet we are asked to deal with Bill after Bill to authorise the construction of rail­ways by private entt'tprise. There are a large number of measures mentioned in the Governor's Speech which I think are of as much importance, indeed of more importance, than these Bills. There is an amendment before the House on the motion for the second reading of the first Bill introduced, and I think the Government should have interpolated some other business before introducing these other Bills, so that the general pnblic, of whom the hon. gentleman spoke so fluently lagt night, might have an opportunity of expressing their opinion on the matter. \\'ith regard to this proposed Bill to authorise the i\lount Garnet Freehold Copper and Silver iVIining Company to construct a railway, anyone knows what that company i,;--that it is what is called in that district one of the "Chillag<le pups"; and there i.s not the slightest doubt that there will be an attempt made to get the country round Atherton at the mercy of that company.

The SJWRETAHY FOil RAILWAYS: This has nothing at all to do with that.

Mr. BROWN:E : I know that. At the time the Chilhtgoe Hail way Bill was going through the House we were told that the company would have nothing to do with the Cairns wharf,

Halpin's Ci·eelc, Etc., [9 AuGusT.] Tramwa!J Bill. 285

but they got it all the same. I am not going to speak any longer on this matter at pre•.ent, but I enter my emph~tic protest against the intro­duct 1011 of theRe B1lls, and the way they are being rushed into the House. 'fhe Government say, aft~r calling Parliament together at such a late perwd, that other Bills of importance are not reacly, and yet every one of these Bills to authorise private companies or syndicates to construct railways are prepared and laid on the table of the House almost immediately after we meet. ;; Mr. GIVEXS (Cairns): I have a most de­cided nbjection to the introduction of this Bill at this stage. It is a fact that there is pending in this House a motion which, if carried, is calcu­lated to bind this House to referring the matter of private railways to a referendum of the people, and I consider it is positively indecent to endeftvour to rush these measureo through until that motion has been disposed of. I also object for the re~tson that the pPople have been languishing for legislation of a domestic character fo~ yoars. The Government make no effort to brmg that forward for the amelioration of the condition of the people, but they bring in B1ll after Bill for the amelioration of private syndicates-to give facilitieo for those syndicates to fleece the country. The colony has been htnguishing for improvmnent in the local govern­ment laws. A big cnmmiRsion was appointed, and a big Bill drafted, yet there is no sign of it being brought forward for the benefit of the colony. Deputfttion after deputation has w:tited on the Government to ask them to amend the laws rehting to factories, and to provide for early closing, and other things relating to the dftily domestic well-being of the ]Jeople; and the continual reply is that the Government and the Ff ouse has no time. A big deputation waited on the head of the Government the other day, asking for a law de11ling with conciliation and arbitration, and the reply was, as usual, "There is no time." But it appears that private syndi­cates have only to wink at the Government, when they rush in with legislation to give these syndi­cates facilities for carrying on their jobbery in the colony. I object altogether to the time of the House being wftsted--

11EMBERS on the Government side: Hear, hear!

Mr. GIVENS: By members of the Govern­ment, in order to give facilities to private syndi­cates to fleece the colony. vVe were told just now by the Secretary for Rail ways that this railwfty had nothing to do with the Chillagoe Railway, I ,:ay it has everything to do with it. It 1s the same company that owns the Chil!agoe Railway and Mines th.1t owns the Mount Garnet freehold. It has been known for months past that this scheme was on foot, and that this com­pany had a scheme to throw out its tentacles and encircle the whole of the district. It is something like their scheme for grabbing the Barron l!'alls · but if this House was corn petent to block that scheme, I think it is competent to block the one now before us.

The HoME SECHETARY: And regret it just as well afterw .•rds.

Mr. GIVENS: Let me give a few facts which may not be known to the majority of people. The Ohillagoe Railway and Mines Company not only aspire to own what they have already got, but they aspire to own tbe whole of the timber and agricultural country in the district. They have deputed Mr. John Moffo.tto act as their agent, and he has taken up Evelyn Station. That station embraces a large portion of the finest pos,ible country both for timber and agricultural pur­poses.

The HOME SECRETARY : vVhat is the tenure?

Mr. GIVENS : It is an ordinary pastoral lease. That station runs for seven miles into the finest belt of cedar country to be found in any part of the colony. It is proposed now to shift the head station right into the midst of that timber country, and then, according to the pro­visions of the law, no one can come "ithin two miles, and in that way they can get a monopoly of the timber.

'fhe HoME SECRE'l'.<I.RY : It would be of no use to them.

Mr. GIVENS: Why? The HmiE SECRE'l'ARY : Because it would not

be theirs any more than any one else's. Mr. GIVENS: It is ab,olutely theirs so long

as they f!et timber licenses to cut it. The HOME SECRE'l'ARY: No; that is not

correct. Mr. GIVENS: Excuse me, it is correct, with

all due respect to the superior knowledge of the law which the hon. gentleman possesses. It will be like the leRse of the Barron Falls. The Go­vernment will allow the solicitor· .. of the company to prepare the neces·.ary documents, and the Cbillagoe Company will have ample influence to interpret the law as they like, unless this House points out the illegality of the transaction. 'l'heir openly avowed object is to get this line from Lapva to :Mount Garnet, and then from there to the scrub lands. Is this the sort of way iu which syndicates are to be permitted to gmb the finest lands in Northern Queensland ? :Four­fifths of the electors in the Cairns electorate are utterly opposed to this scheme, ftnd I would point out that about three months ago a big meeting was held on this subject in the town of Herberton, which is the centre of the electorate in which this line is proposed to be built. At that meeting both I and the hon. member for \Voothakata were present, and it was unanimous against the scheme. There w,,s not a single individual ftt that meeting who dare lift his voice in favour of such a nefarious scherrte, the Ineeting unani­mously resolving in favour of the Government building the line to the famous Atherton scrub, and from thence to Mount Garnet. I object to these private lines for other reasons. If the Bill comes before the House we will have an opportunity of naming many objections, but at the present time I mfty nftme one. This syndi­cate already possesses permission to build the line from Mareeba to Ohillagoe on specified con­ditions, and we have no guarantee that those conditions will be fnlfilled. As a matter of fact, it is an utter impossilJi!ity to fulfil them.

The SEORE'l'ARY FOR RAILWAYS: vVhy? Mr. GIVENS: Because the Act provides that

the line shall be built within three years. Nearly three years hftve pas~ed, and they cannot do it in the time. Again I would say that the line as far as it has gone is a jerry-built line, on which there will be a bi!' disaster some day. It has been built without Government supervision, and I am credibly informed that the concrete piers have not a third of the cement in them that is used in Government works; where embank­m_ents are required the formation i~ not nearly w1de enough ; where there are cuttmgs there is only just sufficient room to allow the footboard to pass through, and there is little or no ballast. I ask if we are to be cftlled upon to give further concessions to syndicates of that kind that do not carry out their obligatiom? Now, we hear a great deal about the amount of wftges that will be givAn, and the good that will be done to the working man. The unfortunate unemployed are to bP. made the stalking-hnrse in order to give concessions to syndicates to rob the country. \Vhat would the .Minister think if, owing to circnmstances which were unavoid­able for the time being-, he was called upon to give away all his property to a syndicate in

286 Halpin's 01~eek, .Etc., [ASSEMBLY.] Tramway Bill.

order that hi' family might get work? The State is in exactly the same position. The GO\ ernrnent should be like a father to the people of the St<tte. And I say it is very bad policy fur them to give away all the property of the State to snne out­side individuals, in order that these outside indi­viduals may find work for the children of the StaLe-a very bad policy indetcd. It can be utilised wholeBale by the State itsP!f in a much better mo.nner for the benefit of the people of the State. \V e also hear of the gre,,t ad vantage that the Chill ague line has been to that portion of the district; how it has sent up the mining receipts enormously; how it has settled an enonnouR nu1nber of people in the rnining di8-tricts up there ; how it has increased the railway traffic on the C.1irns Railway; and also he-w it has increased the propert.y generally in that portion of the colony. Now, it has done nothing of the kind. ME;~mEHS on the Governtllent side : Oh, oh ! Mr. G IVKI\rS: It has absolutely tione nothing

of the kind. I will tell hon. gentlemen that we do not hear very much about whc t the working miner has contributed. I ""'imit that the operations of the Chillagoe syndicate !mve contributed sorrll'what towards that desirable result, but nothing like to the degree hrm. gentle· men oppmite say. There have been sr·veral camps of working miners called into exif'tPnce since the Cbilla"oe mines were prospected, and snn1e before it was pro;o;pected, whic:,~ have owed th(•ir existence in no respect or degree to the operations of the Uhilla(l'oe syndicate, and if anything more than another has contributed to the increased prosperity of that di,trict it has been the en'Jrrnous increase in the value of mincrah.

1\Ir. Brrow~m : He 1r, hear ! Tin and copper. Mr. G IVENS : At the very best of times,

according· to hon. gentlemen opposite, there are only some 200 men working in the Uhillagoe n1ines. Now there is a, camp of working n1iners, in which there is not a single et, pi! alist, which has been called into existence on the Hodgkinson, at a place called \Volfram Creek, where there are at least 220 men working-rnen who are working on their own, men who do not come crawling here on their bR!lies asking for favo1us; and these are the men who are the backbone of the countrv. There are several other districts in which working miners have contributed rcqnally largely to the prosperity of the place, and we do not heo.r hon. gentlemen opr,JOsite say a word about them. All their cry is, syndicate railways.

The SEURETAl\Y ~'OR RAILWAYS: \Ve have a great deal more respect for them than you have.

Mr. GIVENS: The hon. gentleman says he has e. great deal more re2pect for them than we havr:. Then all I c"n say i<, that it is a pity he does not show it a little more. Now, we are told by the Premier, who is also the Secretary for 1Y1ine:-;, of the enormous increaRe in revf'nne that the JYiines Department have received owing to the operations of the Cbillagoe syndicat~. I admit that they have received an enormous increaRe of revenue o'ving to the operations of the Chillagoe Railway and Mines, but how have they received it. By grnnting wholesale exerr1ptions. Six months after six months of exemptions were gmnted in a wholesale aml illegal fashion, and the fees which htwe been received by the Depn,rtment of l\llines for those wholeeale exemp· tirms have swelled the mining receipts in such an enormous manner. It would be infinitely better for the State, and for the public revenue, if the labour conditions were fulfilled, and these fees were not received.

The HOME SEOHETARY : \Vould it be infinitely better if the land were not taken up at all ?

Mr. DAWS0:-1: The land would have been taken up all right.

Mr. NEWELL: That is your idea. Mr. G I V E;'\S : That i,, not my idea at all. I

would like to see all the mineral lands of the colony taken up and worked; but I do not believe that it is a good thing for this colony to give away the mining land of this colony whole· sale when ohev can be worked to our own advantage. And, furthermore, when I hear these people talking about the splendid wages th>Ct the miners make, I know, as a matter of fact, that no man will be allowed to make good wa:,;es. The contracts for the Chillagoe syndi· cate have a clause in them which enables them to break the contract at any time, and if they find the miners are making m1re than wag·es, or anything like good wages, they immedi ~,tely step in and take the contract away. They will not let these men go on with the work; they re~ let the work to other men at a lower price; and as a matter of fact, there are dozens of working miners up there now who are not earning more than 5s. Gd. a day under con­tract, and working very hard for it, too. There are hundreds of miners in the streets of Brisbane who h;,ve come away dif,gusted because they cot!ld n0t make anything like enough wages to support their famili"s down here. For these and several other reasons I object to this Bill being introduecd. In the first place, I think it would be only common decency to wait the result of the moticm now pending befnre the House as to whether a referendum of the people should be taken on this question or not. Again, I object to ~ny further concessions being granted to the Ohiliagoe Railway and Mines, Limited, to build any further railway until they have fulfilled the contracts under~the existing concessions that they have received. And, again, I object, more eopecially in the intereFts of the district which I represent, and in the interests of the district surrounding it, to a go away and come back line like that. The line will go into the interior until it strikes the Chillagoe Mines and Railway, and then to come back to the coast again. In f~ct, if this co11ce· si on is allowed, they will take a wide sweep so t1s to take in all the Cairns elec­torate and the magnificent Barron Scrub, so that pract1eally they will obtain the control of the whole of the di;;trict. I defy anyone to say that the majority of the peopie of the \Voo· thakata electorate, in which this line is proposed to be buiit-I defy anybudy, even the hem. mem· her for the district, to tell me that the people are in favour ot thi~ line being built ; and more especia1ly in the town of Herberton, which is the chief centre of that electorate, and which is closely connected with the mines outside, three-fourths of the people are thoroughly opposed to this concession being granted at all. 'vVhen the two member.s of the districts concerned are able to get up in this Hou;;e and announce the feeling un the part of the electorates concerned, I say it is a piece of effrontery for the ~viini,;ter for Rail­wayo or fm· any other Minister to introdure a measure of this sort. The people of vVoothakata b,t\~e nut asked fur it ; the people of Cairns have not asked for it; and the people of the colony have uot asked for it. It is only the syndicators that have asked for it; and it is only their friends aJ.1J the present Governn1ent who are anxious to "Ttmt it. I came here to legislate on behalf of the people, to uarry out the wishes of the people, and not to legislate on behalf of syndicates, or to curry out the wiohes of syndicates; and if this Parliament is going to be prostituted in that fashion, then the sooner honest men get out of it the batter.

The SEORETAHY l!'OR RAILWAYS: You are one of them, are you?

'rhe SPEAKER: Order!

HaTpin's Creek, Etc., Bill. [9 AuGusT.j Glassford Creek, .Etc., Bill. 287

Mr. LE SIN A ( Cleruwnt) : I have • one par­ticular objection to offer against this motion being pass9d at the present stage. A few days a!<O I asked the Premier if it was the intention of the Government to table full official informa­tion, maps, plans, specificctions, route, probable traffic, quality of country, in connection with all the private railway Bills to be introduced this session; and the Premier said thrct all the informa­tion in the possAssion of the Government would be given to the House. Until that information is given, I object to this motion being carried for the purpose of permitting Ministers to intro­duce a Bill of the character mentioned in that particular motion. There is another reason why we shonld have the best possible information. According to a report which appeared in the DailN Telmraph of Sydney &ome time ago, the directors' report of the Mount Garnet Company contains the following pamgraph :-

The eonstruction of a railway or tramway, connecting the mine with the Chillagoe Hail way, ha:;; been under careful consideration, and has been the subject of varions communications with the Queensland Govern­ment and the Chillagoe Railway and A-lines. The latter com1mny has power under their Railway Act to con­struct ten miles of this connecting line as a branch of their main line, and has already made the permanent survey of this branch with the view of ~mmediatcly commencing the work. The comp-.tny has also in­structed their surveyor at our request to make the permauent survey of an extension of this branch to )fount Garnet, a di.stance of about twenty-four miles, and the Queensland Government has promised to intro­duce a, Bill during the next session of PaTliament authorising this extension on the hues of the Chillagoe Railway or as a special narrow gl'Lnge rail way. That paragraph shows that the Government have been in correspondence with this company.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: Did I not promise to put all the correspnndence on the table of the House?

J\!Ir. LESI:::-T A: The Premier made me the samA promise too, but what has

[7'30 p.m.] been done to fulfil! these promises? \Ye are becoming suspicious when

these promis«> are so persistently made by hon. gentlemen opposite and never fulfilled, or fulfilled at such a d<tte os to render it impossible for us to make use of the information tabled for the purpose of pointing onr arguments.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: vVhy did you not ask sooner?

Mr. LESIN A : I asked as soon as I could, and was promioed the information, but where is it? It is in the possession only of the Govern­ment. But for seeing that paragraph in the Sydney paper, I would not have known that these negotiations were beil'lg conducted at all. \Vhy are the Government condueting these negotiations in such a secret fashion? Are they afraid to let the light of day into these transac­tions? If so, io not that a sufficient reason why we should be suspicions of these private railway propos»ls. If the Government desire to maintain a pleasant front, and that the people of the country shall have confidence in their bona .fides in connection with these priva.te railw:1y pro­posals, they must take the representatives of the people in this House into their confidence with respect to all the details connected with these proposals for private railway construc­tion. That is all we want-information; and I object to the passage of this motion until we get all the correspondence that has taken place between the Government or the Secretary for Railways and the company. It is impossible for us to form a correct decision upon the merits of these proposals nntil we have some informa­tion to go upon. W onld it be poesible for a judge or jury to form a conclnsion as to the guilt or innocence of a person unless they had all the evidence before them? vV e are the jury in this case, and we cannot determine what

should be done in the matter of constructing these lines unless we have the evidence to go upon. "Where is it? It is not here. The Go­vernment should have met the House with all this correspondence ready printed, that we might have had time to read it dispassionately before we took the full responsibility of supporting or opposing the Pill proposed. They have not seen fit to do that. They have kept us in the dark, and we do not know what negotiations ha.ve been going on behind the backs of Parli,tment. vVhen we ask for information we are put off with pro­mis<<i, made very often for the purpose of being broken. I ask again for information. I take the full responsibility of opposing the passage of this motion, because I want infnrmation. I want light, and that apparently the Government are not prepared to give.

Question pnt and passed.

:FIRST READING. The Bill was presented and read a first time,

and the second reading made an order for Tues­day next.

GLASSFORD CREEK AND MIRIAM V ALE RAILWAY BILL.

IN'rRODUOTION. The SECRETARY J<'OR RAILWAYS

(Hon. J. 1Inrray, Normcmby): I beg-to move-That leave be given to intrcrluce a Bill to authorise

Robert Herbertson, of Glassford Creek, and Yinccnt }:lackay Dowling, of Rocklmmpton, to c mstruct ancl maintain a line of tramway from Glas.sford Creek to l\!iriam V<~le, connectmg with the ,\ orth Coast Rttilway, and for other purposes sub8idiary thereto.

Mr. BROWNFJ (Croydon): I intend to object to leave being given to introduce this Bill for the same reasons as I gave in Ghe case of the others. In seems to me almost indecent haste the way these measures are being rushed in one on the top of another. I object to it, especially as one of those whom the Secretary for Railways excluded from the number of the general public last night. As a miner, and one who has Jived by the industry, I object to the miners of this colony being put under the yoke of private com­panies in the way the hon. gentleman, assisted by the other members on the Government bench, is duing. In any case we should have had some other legislation intervening between these Bills. Here we are at this stage, and there is no public business before us. We know nothing about the public finances a11d the condition they are in. In the Gcwernor's Speech, in a par<tgraph long preceding the reference to these private railways, we were told that the Govern­ment had prepared a list of SLte railways which they were prepared to submit to the House. How is it the Government have not had time to submit any of the State lines they are going to build. The Secretary for Agricultur" has so far made no mention of that great scheme for pro­viding cheap money for farmers, to which he referred when he was going round electioneering during the recess, and when this House wa• kept waiting while Ministers went ronnel the country vote catching, and promising this, that, and the other. vVhere is the cheap money for farmers? As I am reminded by the hnn. member for Rock­hampton, if we wait until eiection time we will have it promised again. The country is getting weary of thaee promises, Another measure which has been referred to is the Local Govern­ment Bill, which has been before the country for three or four years, and for which all the locp.J authorities have asked. The Government have no time to attend to that Bill us ked for by gentlemen who give their service; for nothing, but they have time to attend to these gentlemen who have found that there is a certain amount of

288 Glas.iford Creek, Etc., [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Bill.

mineral in the country which nobody seems to touch, and which they think they might get out of the country altogether--that is, if the Government will only give them advantages which they vigorou,ly deny to the working miners of the colony. \Ve htwe at the hea.d of the Government now a gentleman who has been Secretary for JI/Iines for seven years, and profess­ing a gr cat regard for the miners of the colony, and as Treasurer of the colony he has had the power to prevent them labouring under what the miners in no other colony in the Aus­tralian group have had to labour under-­that is, a tax upon the ordinary miner's tools which the miners of the colony use. Everything the miner h"s to use, and everything the small companies have to use in the way of nwchinery, ls taxed; and the Governrnent come forward and say they are going to help the min­ing industry b.v allowing big companies to come in, and granting them privileges which they won't grant to the working miner. If an unfor­tunate miner wants to go and cut a few loads of firewood and can't ante-up the 10s. for a license, he is summoned to court if he is found cutting timber without a license; but when a big com­pany comes a.!ong it can get concessions in the matter of timber licen,es which the working miners cannot get. I think the way this is going on is very discreditable, to say the leaet of it, to any Government anxious to do thdr best for the miner; and by voice "nd vote we intend to do all we can to .cafe;Juard the interests of the country, even if we· c"1mot prevent these Bills becoming law. " HoN. ·D. H. DALRYMPLE (Macl.:ay): I think what the hon. men1ber seems anxiou.s to do is to slate the Governm<ent. It is his business as le'1der of the Opposition to show that the Govern­ment are in the wrnng under all circurnstances.

Mr. BROW!S"E : Jf 1 wantect to do tlmt I need not confine myself to this rrteasure.

Hox. D. H. DALRY1IPLE : The hon mem· ber would not confine himself under "ny circum­st.mces, 1 should say, to limiting his condemna­tion of the Government. He confines himself a little too much, I think, to condemning the Government and abusing them, and accusing them of injustice, and so on. The hon. member for Enoggem said the other night, in reference to the statement of the hon. member for Bnndaberg that the Trades Hall were a tyrannical associa­tion, that this was an assertion, and that the hon. member for Bundaberg made no endeavour to prove it. I beg to remind the leader of the Labour narty that what the hon. member for :Enoggera said on th"t occasion is right-that mere assertion without prouf is of very little value. An assertion nmde by persons who are biased and pledf(ed beforehand to get up and atuse the other side is of still less value.

An Hm:ounABLE MEMBEl\: You abuse the other side.

HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE : It is not necessary for t.he G overnn1ent to abnf:e the other side. The Opposition abuse the Govern­ment because they are desnous of turning the Government out of a particular place and occupying it themsehes; lmt the Government are not desirous of turning the Opposition out of their pla~e- (laughter) -and they ha ye no disposi­tion to abuse the other side. The concecsion made to the Chillagoe Company in connection with timber licens· s was jJerfectly legitimate and proper ; and it was called for because it was just and right. That is a transaction that will stand the most searching investigation.

l\Ir. GIVEN'': "Why does not the poor man ever get a concession?

Hox. D. H. DALRY.MPLE: Under the same circumstancEs, he would get Pxactly the same concessions. It is constantly dinned into

our ears, ·for electioneering reasons, that we have no sympathy with the poor man; and we are very much abused by members on the other side. This side of the House is expected, not by reasonable men, but by other persons, to do something that w11l plea'e the Opposition. Does not everybody know that such a thing is impos­sible? That becauoe buc.iness is brought before the House it is rushed through too quickly, and must be held back? That if it was not brought f"'·ward <jUickly we should be told that we had no business ready, or were not anxious to bring it torv. ard? Doc-s the hon. gentleman imagine that, because the Government did not bring forward what the Opposition want most anxiously, they ·are to be condemned by any other people except themselves? \Vhat possible arrangement of Government business could be made that would please either the pre~ent or the late leader of the Opposition? J'\one. \Vhatever was brought forward first they would promptly and loudly state sh::mld have been brought forward last. It is nmrvellons how the Home Secretary and myself are charged with stonewalling if we get up to make a few observations on the second reading of a Bill introduced by the other side, and h. re, when measures are brought tor­\Vard one after another, and perinisf:iion is asked for lheir introduction, we have practically the same debate as we had on the Chillagoe Railway on each of these three Bills. And every one of these Bills will have to be debated a second time, because I presume leave will ultimately be given for the introduction, and we shall have precisely the same debates over again on the three Bills. If those tactics were practised by hon. members on this side, they would be accused of stonewalling-. One of the grievances mentioned is that the Chillagoe syndicate took over Evelyn Station. I don't see why Mr. l'IIoffat should not be allowed to buy Evelyn Station. I suppose somebody else held the station before on exactly the same terms as l'IIr. l'IIoffat ; and every squatter who happens to be srtuated in a district where there is parcly scrub and partly plain may be charged with the same thing. I do not know who owned the Evelyn Station, although I know the country very well. I am told it was taken up by a wdrking miner, Mr. Stubley.

l'l1r. DAW~ON: He was never a working miner. Hon. 'l'. J\L~ODO!S"ALD-PATER80X: Yes, he was. Hox. D. H. DALRYMPLF.;: \Veil, a success-

ful miner, then. I have a higher opinion of working miners than to suppose that because they tura out a good crushing they despise and look down upon work. If I am not mistaken, that is the view tile late leader of the Opposition took.

An Ho:-;on\ABLE lYIEMEER: He was a black­smith.

HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE: Let us assume that he was not " working miner. He achieved success by hbonr in some form or other, and he represented Charters Towers at all events. I wish to say that the lease conveyed no more powers when Mr. Stubley took it up than the transfer conveys when J\Ir. Moffat holds it. I do not know "why the transaction in one case should be unobjectionable and in the other case particularly objectionable. Now, with regard to syndicates : We know that many circles of men have what we may call their cant, and I have no hesitation in calling that word a part of the Labour cant. What are syndi­cates? \Vhat the hon. member apparently means is a company of persons who have something to lose. Y on can call them CO·operators if you like, or companies ; but because those n"mes do not convey a sinister interpretation, he chooses to call them a syndicate, w hi eh seems to bear some other meaning. Hon. members are simply car­ried away by their own glibness. I am speaking

Glasiford Creek, Etc., [9 AUGUST.] Railtvay Bill. 289

of the way the term is used. A station is owned by a syndicate, the Trade~ lbll is run by a syndicate--

Mr. REm : The Trades Hall is not run by a syndicate; it is run by a board of management.

HoN. D. H. DALRY;\IPLE: It is oJl the same by whatever name you may call it ; and as long as a syndicate denotes a company of persons who have got some !:'avin~s ancl are dispo:-:.ed to devote thoee savings to developiug the we>tlth of the country, that term, to my mind, is not in >tny sense oppmbrious. But it is used by the other side as an opprobrious term, In most cases hon. members wonld admit that the persons who saved something and expended that some­thing in co-operation with other., was rendering a service to the conntry. But all this t1.lk abont syndicates is simply cant to mislead thoughtless persons. A syndic,teis a company of persons who are disposed, as miners do en Charters Towers, to devote the savings of their own or of other people to do important work which a poor man cannot do, or which the Government c.tnnot do if it is a poor Government. To do this there must be co-operation and syndicates before any wealth on a large scale can be produced. It is by those people that the wealth i~ to be got. Seeing that the prosperity of the conntry depemls very largely npon the co-opemtion of people with savings, whether by borrowing from people at home or taking advctntage of the funds of a bank, so long as the wealth of the country depends largely upon that CJ-opemtinn it is perfectly ridiculous to stigmatise those co­operatort; as pel'sons who are injuringtb"' country. On the contrary, they are people who are com­bining to benefit the country by the development of ils resources.

Nfr. DAWSON: Supposing their co-operation is for the purpooe of exploiting the people of the country?

FfoN. D. H. DALRY:YIPLE: \Vhrtt rlne,, the hon. member mean by exploiting? \Vhy not say "rob·' plainly? The hon. member w"nts to get on the edge of robbery, and he does not like to s~y the word because it is probable that robbery can be disproved. It is another cant word conveying a sinister interpretatinn or 1nean~ ing of a perfectly innocent Act. The last. hon. member who spoke, in >tlluding to the Chillagoe syndicate, said that other parts of ftneemland were very badly in want of railway communica­tion.

Mr. DAWSON: That is already passed. Hox. D. H. DALRYMPLE: The whole

thing is on all-fours. 'rhe hon. member for Cairns was referring to the Chillagoe syndic .te for tbree-quorters of an hour, and I am only referring to what he said.

Mr. DAWSO'I: That w ,,s not on this question at all.

HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE: The hon. mem­ber must have been out of the room, or his bmins must have been wool-gathering.

:Y1r. DAWSOX: \Ve are now on motim1 No. 3. HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE; I am reLrring

to what was said by the bon. member for C>tirns. Mr. DAWSON: He was not the last speaker. HoN. D. H. DALRVMPLE : It is most

difficult to recoilect who was the last cpeaker, there are so many interruptions. The hon. member for Cairns referred to the Chiilagoe Company.

Mr. DAWSOX : That was in the previuus debate.

HoN. D. H. DALl:tY::'IIPLJ;;: Not more than five minutes ago.

Mr. LESINA: I rise to a point of order. What is the question before the Honse?

The HmiE SECRETARY: That is not a point of order.

1900-v

The SPEAKER: The question is a motion to introdnce a Bill to authorise certain persons to construct and maintain a line of tram way from Glassfnrd Creek to Miriam Vale. The hon. member for Mackay, Mr. D<tlrympie, is techni­cally oat of order in referring to a previous debate; but he would not be out of orrler in alluding to the Chillagne Company.

HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE: I am not allud­ing to a previous debate. I am alluding to what the hon. member for Cairns ;;aid about five minntes ag-o.

Mr. MuDoNALTl: That was during the previous de hate. ·He has not spoken on this question.

Hox. D. H. DALJ:tYMPLE: These debates are really following nne another so rapidly that it is ra' her difficult to distinguish between the two. I will Gay this, however, with regard to the Chillagoe Company, that if they do not conclude thi' railway within three years they could not, by the terms of their agree ment, be chargerl with onything very improper. T!lGre wn-q conrl.itions by which the contingency

nf their not being able to complete [8 p.m.] the railway by that time were taken

into consideration, and something ebe was to be donP, if delay occurred.

Mr. BnowNE : They could apply for an ex­tension of time.

Hox. D. H. DALRY::YIPL1';: Yes, that is so, and I presume the same or similar terms will be granted to the other com[Janies. But I do not wish to spmtk any further on this question. As I lJointed out at the beginning, nothing i~ n1ore claar than that wc are taking up time which will have to be ntiH~ed again in a similar fashion, be~ canse when the Bill is introduced hnn. members will go over precisely the same ground, and probably t>tke up more time than they have done on thid occaRlon.

Mr. BOL~ES (P01·t Gu,·tis): I must expreos my regret that the leader of the Labour Opposition has adopted the oame tactics with regard to this Bill as he did on the Bill which was before the House on a prer1ous occasion. I am pBrftctly astoniKhed that a man like the hon. member for Croydon, who repreRentg a 1nining constituency, and poses as a friend of the miners, should take np this attitude. He h3s more than once com­plained of the taxes which miners have to pey, and yet whPn a nu m her of miners at Callide Creek are waiting until the Bill now before the House for the construction of a railway m that district is pas,;ed in order that they may be able to raise the money to pay those taxes, the hon. member says he is going· to give that measure all the oppo;;ition pr.ssible.

Mr. LESIXA : How many miners are there at Ca:Jide Creek-are tbere six?

Mr. BOLES: There are over fifty men there, and they are earning nothing at the present time, but are practically waiting for the passing of the Bill to which l have referred. However, I do not take any notice of the hon. member for Cler­mont, because he has bad no experience in the matter of mining, but the hon. member for Croydon has much sympathy with the mining industry >tncl with the miners, and I am perfectly a'tonished that be should take up such a hostile position with regard to that measure, and also that he ~honld oppose this Bill before it is intro­duced. The proper and constitutional manner io to allow the Government to bring forward their measures and then deal with them. If we go on in this way throughout the session we shall never be able do any bu>iness. At the beginning of the session it was stated that it was hoped this would be " session of business, but how are hnn. members on the left of the Spe~tker meeting the Government in the matter? By opposing measnres before they are introduced. I can

290 Glassjord Creek, Etc., [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Bill.

assure the House that though I sit on the Oppo­sition benches, I have not the slightest sympathy with such tactics, and I hope a different method of procedure will be adopted, more esrmcially by the leader of the Labour Opposition.

:'l[r. N.EWELL ( Woothukutn): We have been 1old by several menrbers that they are surprised at the action of hon. members opposite. I am not surpl'ised at anything that comes from the other side of the House, after hearing their speeches in reference to the motion before the House. To my mind all these railways are for the benefit of the colony, but as far as I can eee members on the opposite ,;idt>. of the House are determined that they will not allow the colony to progress if they can possibly help it. They do not war,t the people who are in the colony at the present time to ri"e above the level on \vbich they now stand ; they do net want to give them employment, but they wa:rt to keep them down and to keep them agitated. Now that they have not got the Queeneland National Hank to attack, their cry is against the Chillagoe Rail­way C,;mpany and private syndintes. \Vhere are the people in the country to get employment? Where is the money to come from? Have the Labour 0 pposition got no ambition :1t all? Has no one else in the colony got any ambition? Are the people willing to sit down and be eat on by the Labour party? I do not believe they are. I have a very different opinion of the working men of Queensland, and I think hon. members will find that they are not going to be diet •.ted to by agitators who are trying to instil into tlwir minds discontent, and to make them believe that syndicates are endeavouving to gr,cb everything that comes along. But where are we to get the money from?

1\Ir. S·rEWART: Innnigration. Mr. N.KWELL : Hon. members opposite say

they do not want syndicates. vVhat are s,\ ndi­cates? vVhy, if you go to Croydon or Charters Towers you will find that every mine is owned by a syndicate, by mPn who combine together for one end. Hon. members opposite are not employers of labour, and they try to sow the seeds of discontent among employees, so that they may be able to hold their seats. At a meeting held in the Woothakata electorate, at which I was present, the lwn. member for Cairns made a speech which was nothing but a tirade of abuse against the Chillagoe R.a,iJway Company and a condemnation of the Barron ]'alL; conces­sion, and so much was his speech thought of that never a word ,,fit 11ppeared in the paper'. Again, in talking about these syndicates being monopo­lists and grasping and exploiting the country, reference wa,s m:1de to Ivir. John Moffat and Evelyn Station. I honestly believe that Mr. John Motfat would be very well satisfied if he had never seen Evelyn Station or the great tract of country which, as the hon. member fm· Cairns said, abounds in magnificent cedat.

:Mr. GrVE:>'S: Do you say I have never seen it? Mr. NEWELL: I give you my opinion that

J\Tr. MoJfat would be very well satisfied if he had never had anything to do with it. Hon. gentlemen opposite are perfectly content to paint one side of the picture, but the side which does not suit them they don't refer to at all, and that is the method they adopt when they go through Queensland, endeavouring to educate the people. Their eJforts on this occasion seem to be direeted towards hunting people out of the colony, instead of encouraging others to bring money into it, and thus give employment for the people, VVe are told about the great number of swagsmcn who are wandering about the country looking for work in the North, but where do they come from? We are told by S'>me hon. members that they are all from the Chillagoe Railway; but is it not a fact that many of the people from Croydon an:l

othet· mining centres have flocked towards Chil­lagoe, with the result that they cannot all get work ? The hon, member for Croydon has him­self told me that many of the miners from his part of the country have gone to Chillagoe. If you go to Sydney you will find thousands of unemployed ; if ;, on go to Charters Towers you will tincl unemployed; if you go to Cairns you wi;l find unemployed. I do not crtre where you go, if it is a htrge centre of population, there you will find unemployed, because it is in the large centres that people seek employment, and do not always get it. A few months ago there were many idle miners in the \Voothakata district, but as ,;oon as the Chillagoe .Mines Cumpany started thBy found employment. vV e are told that the wages are as low as 5s. 6d. a day. That is the first time I have ever heard of miners being oJfered 5s, Hd. a day.

:i\Ir. GrvE:>'S: There are some of them cannot make that.

Mr. LESINA: Finns at 3d. a day. Mr. J'\1:£\VELL : I know very well the place

which the hon. m:,mber for Cairns was champwn­ing-the place where there is no syndie~te and which iB doing so remarlmbly well, but I do not think the \Volfram Camp em[Jlr,ys so verym,.,ny n1en. The hm1. rnen1ber 'vas very ernphatic in championing the cause of that company, yet he looks down tn,on Hyndicates which are prerJared to c •Ine hete and ;)pend a grE-:tt arrwunt of tnoney, and at the same time find :1 great deal of enJploy­ment for the people.

.Mr. GrvJ£:-;s: Are you in favour of a syndicate line fron1 L tppa. to l\lount Garnet?

Mr. NE\VELL: I am in favour of anything that will open up the country, >tllow its resources to be m»de known, and make the community pr•lsperous. vVe need to !:ring capital into the country to gi 1·e employment to our people so that they may earn a decent livelihood, instead of becJ111ing wandering S\V!lgsu1en all over the country. If the Government ie not in a position to build these rail way lines, and they can be built by prirate enterpride, the interests of the country being carefully guarded, then I am -in favour of opening up the country by that means.

Mr. l(gm: \Vhat do your constituents .-ay? ::11r. l\EvYELL: As far as the Bill which we

have seen is concerned, I thin!• the interests of the country are fairly well protected. Hon. metnbers opposite nw .. ke a great deal out of the word" concession." \V ell, I really think it is only a name. 'l'here is very little concession about it. These companies really only ask for permission to make a road. As the Premier pointed out last night, it is really only a road, and why should we stipulate whether they run a machine on two rails over it, or whether the vehicle'< should be drawn by bullocks or by traction engines? The fact of the matter i~ that traction engines are now hauling timber in the l\ortb, and when a track is made the general public go upon the line. All that is stipulated for is that these companies should have the right to their own lines on roads which they make, and tbe orJy concession is th:1t they may nmke a charge for its use by the g?neral public. I am in fdvonr of leave being given for the introduc­tion elf thio Bill.

HoN. T. 1\IACDONALD-PA'l'ER.SON (Bris­/,unc No1·th): I must say tbu·e has been a strange departure from custom this evening. I do not understand what it is all leading to, or why hon. members should traveloversubjectsfrom a hairpin to a steam-engine, or a road-roller. 'fhe whole thing seems very unseemly. It is a terrible waste of time. There was a great amount of weight in v.hat was said by the hem. member for ::'.fackay, when he ,aid ti1e whole of this debate will have to be gone over again. This is what I rose to protest agoinst--going over ground at this stage

Glassford Creek, Etc., [9 AuGusT.] Railway Bill. 291

which must necessarily be traversed on a future occasion. The ground we h<1Ve gone o,,~er to­night is very b~d ground indeed. Let us by all tneans affirm or reject on division the q11e8~ tion whether leave should be given to introduce the Bill, but do not let ns sr1uetnder time in this manner. I am glad of ttw opportunity of eaying that althou,;h many public spr >cl1es have been made by the Premier, I never expected that the Government would father all these private railways, and I am sure the country never expected it either. It is a matter tlut ha,s surpeised me a good deal, and this is the first opportunity I have had of expressing my surprise. I do hope that the de hate will be confined to the simple qm:stion as to whetller leave should bs given for the introduction of the Bill, and when we see the contents of the Bill we mn,y possibly then talk of traction engine>, and Chillagoe rail­w,oyc;, and those sort of things.

Mr. ANNllAR: This is a second rearling.

Ho;~~. T. MACDONALD-:PATERSON: Tllis is not a second reaJing. This is a motion for leave to introduce a Bill. I think, under the circumstance;;;, unlesa we get on better within tha next five minutes, the bedt thing the Government c'"' rlo is to adjourn the H"use nntil 'fuPsday next.

Mr. GIYENS: Notwithstanding the very eloquent protest of the member for North Brisb~ne, 1\lr. l\Iacdonald-Pat.erson, I think this debate is not at all useless. I think the House and the cvuntry are getting a great deal of valuable informa,tion from it. My object in getting· up on this occasion is to reply to some remarks made by the hon. member for \Voothakata, l\Ir. N ewell. I wish to refer particularly to one statement made by him­that all these lines are for the benefit of the colony; and I want to ask why the hon. member makes that statement here, when he was not game enou,;h to make it in his own elec­torate when he was called upon to do so? A me8ting was held at Herberton, and really a most emphatic protest was entered against the concession being granted. The hon. member for \Voothalmb was there, and if be held that these lines are for the bAnefit of the colony, and for the benefit of the mining industry, it was his place to say so in front of his constituents, and not come here behind their backs and say it. He said just now that all these lines were for the benefit of tl1e colony. As this is one of them, why did he n'Jt '"-Y that to his constituents?

Mr. DAWSON: :Perhaps he did.

Mr. GIVENS: He did not do anything of the kind.

Mr. DAWSON : He may have done so pri­vately.

Mr. GIVENS: ThreA-fourths of the people of \Voothakata are against these milways.

Mr. NllWJ;CI,L: Oh, are they? Mr. GIVENS: The hon. member also said

that it was part of the policy of the members of this side to keep the miners down and that we object to them rising. \Vel!, I think the experience of the past will show that the conduct of this side with regard to the working minere uf the colony, as compared with the conduct of the members' on the opposite side of the Chambm·, proves conclusively that the true friends of the n1iner~ are on this side.

JYh;~mllRS of the Opposition: Hear, hear! Mr. G IYENS : It is such gentlemen as 1\Ir.

Newel!, who owes his rise to mining-more luck to him !-who object to miners rising; and ev2n he is nut as good a friend to miners as he ought to be.

The SllCRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: How many of them do you employ?

Mr. GIVE='I"S: The Hnn. 1\Iinister for Rail­Wltys ask; how many do I employ, just as if a m .,n who bad not si:q >ence in his pocket and never employed a m:tn in world could not be as good, if not a b.·tter man tha,n a millionaire who employs thousands. He apparently judgc·s a man by the amount of boodle-the amount of cash-that he has in his bre,ches pocket. The hon. gentlem"tn'd conduct shows the absolute foolishness of the public in keeping him in the position that he occupies.

Nir. TUHLEY : \Vhat colour are the people that hH employs'?

1\fr. (HVEJ'\S: \Vhen I employ anybody at all I empi''Y white men. I would like to know, if he h so anxious to know how many I em ploy, how nuny b: employ;, what wages he pays, and what colour they are? Perhaps he will give a c>Ltegorical answer to those questions; when he does 1 will give a categorical answer to his ques­tion.

The SECRE'l'AI\Y l!'OR RAILWAYS: l would be verv sorry to em ploy you, at any rate.

.Mr. G l VE""S : The hon. member for \Vootha­katu, asks where is the money to come from to develop these mines? \Ve have the history of th colony to give a very effective reply to him. As I have pointed out, in the \Volfram camp, on the Hurlgkinwn, the whole district has been dcv8loped l.Jy n;en without "' shilling, and not oniy are they developing the district, but 200 to 250 men t1re CO!Jstantly employed there. vVhen, however, they did not know the value of wolfram, the hun. member for \Vuothakata bought it from them at very much less than the market price which he ought to have given them.

1\Ir. REm: He is the friend of the miner all the same.

Mr. t+IVENS: Then who was it developed the Herberton distric~? It was not the capitalist, but the working miner. The hon. member, Mr. N B\\·eil, ·who owns one of the riche,,t mines there, keeps iL shut up even now. There was not a single man of capit-al who stood by the Vulcan tu keep that mine going in Lhe bad times.

The l'RE:I!IER: 'l'hey kept it going with some It.clians.

Mr. GIVKi'\S: 'fhe hon. member is always talking al.JDut the working miners and what he would like to do for them; but he is one of the biggest shareholders in the Great Nmlhern, and notwithstanding the increase in the price of tin it is kept closed down and they won't work it.

An HoNOl'llABLJ<J ::\1JDIBEll : It is under exemption all the time.

Mr. GIVENS : Who developed Charters Towers? It was not the capitalists; it was the working miuers, who did not hnow where their next feed was to come from. \Vho de,·eloped Gympie, and who is keeping Gympie going to-day? It is the working miners. \Vho sank the shaft on the luglewood reef years before the great capitalists came along?

The PREillllllt: The Government found a lot of the money for the sinking of that shaft.

Mr. G IV ENS: The hem. member for \Vootha­katagave the whole case away when he talked about the benefits of syndic tte raib ays. One example of the benefits which they confer is affor,1ed oy the fact that the company already in existence is advertising constantly for men. Their object in doing that is to fill the place full of unemployed so that ~hey can get their work done for nothing.

An HoxOl::nAm.E MEiiiBEI\ : Where do they come frorn?

Mr. GIVEJ'JS: From the various colonies. \Vhen they get up there they cannot get away, and they have to take wlmt they can get. The hon. m em her uses as an argument the fact that my speech was not reported in the Wilcl River 'Times, as if any S]Jeech against the interests of the

292 Glass(01•d Creelc, Etc., [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Bill.

biggest company there, whose advertisements for exemptions for six monthe, making from forty to sixty applications for which the )>aper gut lO.s. a time, or on the average from £25 to £40 a week, would be likely to be reported. vVas it likely that a newspaper getting from £25 to £40 a week, would publish anything which did not suit that company? I kno 'v the proprietor of the paper very well ; and he is a very r.ice old chap, but he is not so nice that he is likely to quarrel with his bread and butter.

Mr. NEWELL: \Vhat about the Advocate? The SPEAKER: Order, order! Mr. GIVENS: There was no necesoity for

the Advocate or any other paper to report my speech on that particular occasion, because I had said the same things over and over again in different parts of the elecb)l'ate. I went to that meeting at the particular request of the Herber­ton people, and I am very glad I did go there. That meeting was called for the exr.reH purpose of getting an expres·.iun of opinion from their member on the qnestion.

Mr. ltb;ID : He was afr~id to give it. Mr. G IVENS : It was called for the express

purpose of enabling him to state hiti opinion; but he was not game to do it, and he came here behind their backs to do it.

Mr. NEWELL : It was not called for anything of the kind.

JI.Ir. GIVENS: Excuse me, I know the object of the meeting.

J\Ir. NEWELL: The 1neeting w:tR eallod for the consideration of the line from l\Iareeba to Ather­ton.

The SPEAKER: Order, order ! Mr. GIVENS : I know quite as much about

it as the hon. member for \Voothakata; and I know what the objects of the convPnPrs of the meeting were. I know what all the local Rpeakers at that meeting said ; and I also know what the hon. member for \Voothakata said ; and with all that knowlec!ge in my possession I emphatically say t.bat the meeting was called for the purpose of getting an expression of views from the hon. member for \Vuothakata on the railway proposal with regard to the line to l\1onnt Garnet, and whether it should be a syndicate line or not. He says now that all those syndicate lines are fnr the good of the colony. Then I say why did he not f(et up and tell his constituenls that face to face?

Mr. NEWELL: I say that is not the question for which the meeting was called.

Mr. JlOLES: I rise to a point of order. \Vhal has all this disagreement between the hon. member for Cairns and the hon. member for Woothakata got to dn with the Glassford Creek Railway? I would like to ask your rnling on that point, Mr. Speaker. I understand that the hon. gentleman in a.ddressing the Chair, has been dealing with a totally different subject to that before the House.

The SPEAKER: What is the point of order? l'I'Ir. Bor,Es : As to whether the hon. member

ftH' Cairns is in order. The SPEAKER: The hon. member w,•s

apparently replying to some remarks [8'30 p.m.] made by another hon. member. He

has done that sufficiently fL1lly I think, and I now ask him to return to the ques­tion before t.he House.

Mr. GIVE~S: The particular question before the House novY is a propo.~ml to authorise certain individuals toconstrnct a railway from Glassford Creek to :Miriam Vale. I want to know who has asked for this particular rail way ? Have the people of the colony or the people of that particular locality asked for it?

Mr. BoLES : Yes. Mr. GIVENS : Have there been any public

meetings at which it has been asked for.

Mr. BOLES : Yes. Mr. G IV Ei\S : Then it is very strange that

we have never heard anything about it. I ask why slwnld the Government be rushing these Bills wholesale upon us when they refn;e, or cannot find time, to go on with the domestic l<,gislation the colony has been crying out !er for years? I wonld like to know if the hon. member for Port Cnrtis crtn gi'e us any pftrticulars about the.se meetings which he says have been held, who spoke at them, and were they people of any in!inence at all in the place?

Mr. BOLES: Let the Bill be introduced and you will get the information afterwards.

Mr. GIVENS: I object to the introduction of these Bills for the benefit of private syndicates while the country is langui;;hing for domestic legislation. The country has beeu crying out for years for an amendment of the local government laws. .L\_ very expensjve cmnmi~sion inquired into the matter, and a Bill was dr::tfted based upon the findings of that commission. That 1lill has br;en before the public for two years, and there is not a word about its intro­duction, though the country is in a bad way for it, and the local g<Jvernment boards all over the colony are at their wits' end to know how to carry on. In order that we may have industrial peace in the colony the people have been asking for a n1easure to provide for industrial conciliation and arbitration, and the reply of the hun. gentle­man at the head of the Government is that they haYe no time, but when he is asked to give facilities to these syndicates to come along and exploit the colony then he finds plenty of time. \Ve haYe been promised for years, and the country has l>een languishing for years for a proper measure of electoral refonr., and why do not the Government introduce tbat Bill?

The SECRET AllY l<'OH RAILWAYS: That will not fe,·d the people.

Mr. GIVENS : It is evident that the desire of the present Government is to benefit syndi­cates and not private incli,'icluals. The hrm. member for Mackay, Hon. D. H. Dalrymple, said a syndicate was merely a co-operation, but th•; two words have, to my mind, an entirely dilferent meaning. A eo operation is generally admitted to be an association for the benefit of those connected with it, to share profits with its cnt:;torners, anrl to give fair conditions to those whom it employs; while, on the other hand a syndicate is an association of individuals formed for the expre-s purpose of exploiting the country and fleecing the people living in it. Only the vivid imagination of the hrm. gentleman could see any similarity between the ideas con­veyed by the two words. \V e do not know yet what the Government rail way policy is to be-whether they will be prepared to come down with a fair amount of railway works for the corning two or three years sufficient to give a fair amount of employment to the unemployed now in the country about whom they seem to be so anxious, and whom they are making stalking­horses of to get concessions for their pet syndi­c ttes. \Ve do nut know what the financial policy of the Government is to be for the present year, or w bat sort of Fioancial Statement the Treasurer is going to bring down. \V e do not yet know our financial position, and we '1re asked to take a plunge blindfold ana deal with five syndicate railways almost in the first month of the session. Is that a fair way to carry on the business of the country? I ask the Premier, or the Secretary fur Railway~, if he thinks this Home has nothing batter to do than create facilities to enable pri \'ate syndicates to fleece this coluny and the people in it ? \V e are told that the people are not going to be inter­fered with-only the miners. In my opinion the miners are amor;gst the blst citizens of

Glas.fford Creelc, Etc., [9 AUGUST.) Railu·a.IJ Btll. 293

Queeneland, and when, in 18G6, Queensbnd was very low down indeed it was the discoverv of Gym pie by a miner which rescued this colony at that stagA "f ite existence from practical insol­vency. It was not a syndicate that did it. Again, the miners of the great goldfields of Charters Towers, Croydon, and other places have done more for the colony than any other industry, because they have provided the best markets for all the other industries. They have found a splendid market for thesquatters' cattle and sheep and for the agricultural products of the Southern portion of the colony. And yet we are told by the Secretary for Railways that the miner is not to be regarded as one of the general public at all, and no facilities must he given him. Ag"in, we have the experience that the railways to Gympie from lYiarybnrough, before it was extended to Brisbane, the line to Charters Tnwers, to Mount lYiorgan and other lines to mining centres have been amongst the best paying lines in the colony. I ask, then, why the miner i.o to be handed over to the tender mercies of syndicates, whether at Glassford Creek or anywhere else? \Vhat sort of mining conditions will we have when all onr mining resourcee are handed over to theQe syndicates? \Yhat sort of a place would Charters Towers he, or would Gympie be, if held by one company? The surfac0 golcl wonld have be"n t>tken ont of them and they would have been shut down, and one.-sixtieth of the gold in them would never have been found. It is time that those in this House who have any regard for the welfare of the miner or the mining inrlustry, or any desire tn ~Pe the rr1iner given the same opportunitir-s to develop the rnining resrnuces of the conntry in future that he h,1s had in the past--it is time they raised their voices in this House againRt h::tndinff over the magnificnnt 1nlning resources of th1s colony t0 cormorant private syndicates. That is the attitude I take up on this question, and I object to the time of the House being wasted for the benefit of private syndicateil when we should be going on with the domestic ]eg·isbtion of the countrv. '"rhe present Govern1nent see1n to he shwishly dependent npon private synrliPctt.es to rescue the colony out nf nny difficulty it rnay be in, and if they had half the capacity thtey claim to have they wonlcl find some other remedy for any temporary depres,ion th~tt may exiot ·than allowingpriv<ttesyndicat.esto come along and help them out of the hole. They say they cannot get the monev to build these lines. If they cannot get the money, where are the syndicates going to get it? Accnrding to their published statement it cos" the Chillagoe syndicate £83,000 to borrow £400,000. It cost them over 20 per cent.

An Hm!OURABLE MEii!BER : That has nothing to do with ns.

Mr. GIVENS: I will come to that directly. That means that they sold £100 rlebentures and could only get .£80 each for them. They have to pay G per cent. for that money, and they only got .£80 per £100 for it in the first place. That means that they will have to pay £G per annum for the use of £80. Again, it will be three years before the money hormwerl can earn anything for them, and that means that they have to pay three years' interc;st-£18-out, of cn,pital. That will leave them only £fi2 for every £100 they borrowed, and on the £62 they will have to pay £6 interest per annum. That is a ruinous rate of interest. It may be said that is no concern of the peonle of the colony, because it is the company that will ha Ye to pay. If tlw rail way and mines are going to be a succes< that money will have to come out of the colony before it can he ]Xtid to the foreign b'md· holder. Snppose, on the other hand, they no not pay-suppose it is a swindle-then I ,isk is it desirable that this House should give facilities

to a syndicate to fleece the public and take down foreign bondholders? Tbese syndicates are going to be mere gambling companies. Take the Ohillagoe svnclicn,te. It is a well-known fact that the original shareholders would not care if there never was an ounce of copper got from the mines or an ounce of cargo e'rrien over the railway, because they have sold their shares to the guilele.~s public.

Mr. :FoRSYTH: That is absolutely untrue, and I know it.

Mr. G IV ENS : That is rather a strong state· n1en t to 1nake.

Mr. :B'oRSYTH: \Vel!, I will say it is incorrect.

Mr. G IVENS: It is rather a strong statement, Mr. Speaker, for the hon. member to make, saying that what I said was absolutely untrue. However, I accept it as his opinion, and no more, and my assertion is quite as good as his.

The SPEAKER: Order! If the hon. mem­ber said that a statement made by another hon. member was ab<olutely untrue, he used unpar­liamentary laaguage, and it should be with­drawn.

Mr. :FORSY'I'H : I have alre:tdy withdrawn the statement.

Mr. GIVENS: \Ve have seen times out of nun1 ber records of enormous sales of those shares, and if they were never sold by the original shareholders they must have been sold by people who never had them to sell.

Mr. FoRSYTH: \Vho bought them ? Mr. G IVENS : The original shareholders

palmed them off on a guileless public, who thought they were going to 1nake 1noney out of them.

1Ir. KERR: I know some who bought shares and are sorry they got them.

Mr. GIVEJ'\S: If these mines and railway are going to be a good thing, the concession given to a foreign syndicrrte is a bad thing; if they are not going to be a sncceRs, it is not the business of this Hous•" to encourage gambling gwindles of that sort. I have heard a great deal about this GlaRsford Creek, and from wh>et I have heard it is going to pruve a pron1ising rnining centre. J know of my nwn knowledgA that a little farther inland there arA son1e very promising mining centres eontaining gold and other minernls, and I know for a fact that all those mine; will be entirely under the thumb of this foreign syndicate as soon as it is formed _and the line 0onstrnctec:l. \Vhy should the mmers of Queensland be denied the right of State rail way communication as well as the agriculturists and the station-owners? Is not the miner as good a citizen as the pastoralist? Why should he be sin"'led out for the tender mercies of the private synDdicates, while all the other classes in the c~Jlony are going to he provided with State rail· ways? The moneys with which the :::ltate rail­w :cys are built throng-hnut the colony are borrowed on the general credit of every in­dividual in the colony, and the miner has to pay his full share-more than his share­towards paying the interest of the money bor­rowed on the public eredit; and that bei1.1g so, he is entitled to his share of public money m the builrling of railways and other public works. \Vhy should the miner be treated as a social outcast, a social leper, by the present Govern­ment? The big mining centres contribute. more lar"'ely than any other centres of populat10n to the~ revenue of the colony, and it will be a bad thing for the colony w'hen the prosperity and development. of ils mining fields is dependent on foreign syndicates. \VhAn the Bill com":s before the House I intend to go very fully mto the matter. At present I shall be content. with entering my emphatic prote•t against the t1me of

294 Glasiford Creek, Etc., [ASSEMBLY.] Railwa!J Bill.

the House being wasted to oblige these syndi­cates, while the Government cannot S]Jend a day or an hour on domestic legislation for w hi eh the people are clamouring, and which is absolutely essential for the benefit and welfare of the people of this colony.

Mr. ANNEAR(Ma1·yuoro1<gh): I think I owe an apolog-y to the htm. member for Brisbane North for making the interjection I made aHer coming into the Chamber. Seeing the hon. member for Port Curtis on his feet, the hon. member who moved the adjournment of the debate last night, I felt sure that the business was going on in the way we have seen it hereto­fore, that is, the con tin nation of the deb:<te on the second ren,tling of the Bill moved by the Minister for Rn,il ways last. m·ening. I find I wa• in error. I tender this n,dvice to my hon. friend, if he will take it in the same spirit in which it is given-that it would be far better to have gone l!n with the second read ;ng than to have had thrs debate on the introduction of this other railway to be constructed by a company. I shall vote for the introduction of this Bill ; but for the life of me, how the hon. member for Cairns, above all members, can oppose this Bill, I cannot understand. If there is an electorate in the colony which is prosperous and benefits by private c.tpital clJining into Queensland, the.t is the electorate represented by the hon. gentle­man. I trnst that the hon. member hn,s not come back to this Rouse this session with what is known as ,<welled head. I have been n,hout a lhtle bit; I hn,ve been to the eledorate of the hon. gentlenmn; an<! I have met gentlemen who have been there. The hon. geutlemn,n went up to ~lareeba during the rece:.;s, a.nd he was sorne~ what disappointed when a gentleman and half-a­dozen boys met bim at the railwn,y sbttion. RA felt a little cliscomfilecl until lois friend said, "Come along with nte, rr01n. Don)t be down­hearted. Come along with me." (Ln,nghter.} The hon. member went, I believe, to the largest hotel at l\Iareeba, and whn,t did he se:"? He saw the hrge clininl(-roorn crowded with his consti­tuents, who had cc;me there to meet him, and they 'aiel to him in a most hearty way, "Good day, TorrJ, w~ are glad to see you ; come in and sit down. There is a toast to be pronns~_:d." And the hon. member's health was prcJposed. What did they say? Thty sn,id, "We have decided that there is <>nly one position for you to occupy in the fnture, and that is that vou must represent this part of the cohnv in "the Federal Pn,rliament." (Laughter.) It wae a very he,uty gathering. After the hon. mew Ler's hen,lth was drunk, he replied; and wLn,t did he oay? If I am making a mi"'statemellt, I tnmt the hon. member will correct me. He said, "I thank you f.n' the hearty rec.·ption you have given me here to-d>ty. But consider this : I have mn,de :1 great impression on the Legislative Asseml.Jly, and I hn,ve made a name there. (Laughte,.} \Vben many mtm­bers addn ss the House the Chamher becomes vacant, hut whenever I r.m on my feet it goes throng·h the whole place, 'Tom is up, the member for Cairns."' (Con tinned htughter.} Aud the hnn. member said in all sincerih· to his friends, ''You have a 1nost importnnt rn3tter to consider. Cnn.~idering the podtion I occurJY in the Rome, consider cwefully if you can spare me from the Sta.te Parliament." (Renewed laughter.} \Vhile I am on my feet I would like to reply to a remark made by the hon. member for Rockhampton North the c.ther evening when discu;;,ing this qnestion. I harl made an inter­jection, and he said to IYH", "You wlsh to con­struct these r·aihvays by introducing i1n1nigrnnts from the old country." I say nothing of the kind. Pa s these Bill•, and there is no need to introduce men from the old country or any

other crmntry. Let the wnrk be there, and the mm "-ill follow the work without the expendi .. ture of one penny by the people of this colony. I shall have S<'lpetbing to say afterwards on the debate that W!Cs adjonrned on the motion of the hon. member for Port Curtis in answer to re­marks made by hon. n,emb .. rs opposite, and also in answer to the remark,; of the hon. gentleman who introduced the Bill last night. In the nwmtirne I intend to vote for the introduction of this Bill.

Mr. MoDONALD (Flinders): I certainly must enter my protest against this conl.inued waste of time by Government, supporters. The speech we have ju;;t beard was an attempt-! will not sety a deliiJerate attempt-to waste the time of the House. \Ye have had a large num­ber of speeches from the Government side which appear to me to have had no other purvose than to waste time. The hon. member for Port Curtis rAerred to my wasti11g tin1e. rrhat hon. member is so seldom in the Charuber that he has no right to accuse anybody of wasting time. There is no hon. member with such a low record of attend­ance. One session he was only here four or five times, and that goes on session after session; and I suppose he is here on the present occasion because there ;,, a certain syndicate railway proposed which goes through a piece of his electorate. That hon. member was good enough to tell us that the leader of the 0 pposition merely professed to be in sympathy with the working miners, n,nd that if he was in sympn,thy with them he would not atteml>t, in any shape or form, to oppose this mntiun. But the hon. member for Croydon diifers from the hon. member for Port Curt.is in bnving certain politico,! principles which he thinks it is nece,·ary for him to n,dvocate, while the other hrts very little political principle, excepting- that his political principles will go whichev r w'v is likely to catch the most votes. The hon. mm.nber for Croydon on all occn,sions has plac"d the principles he believes in before the countrv, and is at all times prepared to ad vo­mtte tho'e "principles-the same as other members on tLis side of the Rouse. 'Ihe lwn. member alLO said thn,t w'" on this side never employed any working men. Suppose we did not, what has thn,t got to do with this questi"n ? Does the hon. member want to tell me that syndicates employ men from philanthropic moth;es, si'? ply to give them work-that he merely gives hun a job so that he can get money to live on? Cer­tainly not. They give the working man em­ployment because they can use him and make profit out of hirn. If they did not they would uot employ him. \Vhat is the working man to the average ;.ynclicr~tor? Nothing-absolutely nothing. He is not of himself of so much value »s the ordinary pick that is usf d to make the exca;·"twn. If a pick bren,ks it costs 4s. or 5s. to get a new one. If a man dies they simply employ another next clay and no more is con­sidered about it.

The SECl(ETARY FOR RAILWAYS: If you died to-morrow anntl1er man would take your place.

Mr. McDONALD: There is just this differ­ence between the bon. gentleman's position and my own : th~t if he dierl to-murrow the country would benefit very materin,lly, hecn,use it would be imposdble to put another man of such weak intellect into the same position. vVe hn,ve nothing at all to Rain by the introduction of theee syndi­cates. "'e have been told about the grand prosperity they will introduce into the country. \Vhn,t do they mem1 by prospr1·ity? Take the ino~t prosperous conntry in the world at the present time. Is it because tlwre iH :111 extra­ordinary output, or because there is a larger number: of men employed there than in any other country? Does prosperity mean that the exports

Glassford Creek, Etc., [9 AUGUST.] Railwtt'!J Bill. 205

are much larger than the imports? My experience of a prosperous country is that the very time when it is supposed to be at the height of its prosperity is the worst time for the working classes. At that very moment we have the breaking of the boom, with misery of every de,cription following in its wake. But the people to whom we are asked to give these concessions do not want to bnild the line'l at all. They simply want to put them on the London market. I might refer to one case in the Cloncurry district. I ask if the large syndicctte there which has held

eleven or twelve leases in that dis­[9 p.m.) trict have done anythinv, to develop

tho.-e mines during the last ten or twelve years? Are they doing anything now? Certainly not; anrl the people who are applying for the line from Port Normanton to Cloncurry have never done anything to forward the minin" industry of the colony. "

The l:'RE1IIER: 'l'hey baY-J spent £150,000. Mr. McDONALD : There was a company at

one time which spent £150,000, but the present owners of the mine have not done so.

The PrmmER : Oh, yes ; the same people exactly.

Mr. McDO~ALD: Thoee particular mines have been held for ten or twelve years, anrl there has not been a solitary attempt made to develop them.

The PREMIER: It will not pay to work them. Mr. McDONALD: Why do they not make

the attempt? In one particular instance the man who discovered the Hampden mine got a handsome return after carting- his ore to the nearest railway, and it was much more difficult to get it from there than it is from the Cloncurry mine. But these people want this concession, so that they may cre0,te larger dividends, and boom their shares to a greater value, and then pnt them on the London market.

Mr_ HARDACR!l: It was much more expensive then to cart the ore.

Mr. McDONALD: Jt was much more expen­sive then. There i·• no comparison between the cost of carriage now and what it was at the time the Hampden mine wets working.

The Pm;mER: I helieve that carriage is higher now.

Mr. Mu DOl'\ ALD: Th'Lt is not so; eYen with the drought it is not higher now than it was at that time. We have been taken to task by a member of the Government, th8 Hon. D. H. Dalrymple, for opposing these lines, and we have been told that we do nothing but abuse the Government.

Mr. BOLES : And waste timA. Mr. McDONALD: I tell the hon. member

that he ought to be the last member in this Chamber to talk about wasting time, becau"e I suppose that as soon as his particular railway goes through he will leave the House, and \\ e shall not see him in the House again till next se>si<-'11. \Ve have aloo be~n t<'lcl th>~t we are con­tinually abu~ing the Governn1ent about this thing and the other. \Ve do nothing of the kind. But there are certain things in connection with the construction of these lines that we do not approve of. \Ve say that the fullest possible light should be given to every one of ns, and that the sanction of the country shonld be ob­tained before the lines are bnilt. I a<ked the Secretary for Railways whether he would lay all the papers and correspondence in con­nection with the proposals to constrnct these railways on the table of the House, and he said," Yes,'' if T wonld move for them in the ordinary way. Previous to that, the hon. ~:wntle­nnn at the head of the Government promised the leader of the Labour Opposition that he wonld lay on the table the papers in connection with

the Callide Creek Railway Bill. \Vhy does not the Secretary for Rail ways make a similar promise in this case? \Vhy should I be put to the neces­sity of moving for the papers to be laid on the table? The hon. gentleman know" that I cannot give notice of the m.;tion before Tuesday next, and that if he calls " Not formal" to the motion on \Vednesday, I may never get to it this session, and the couseqnence would be that we should never have the papers.

The SECHETARY JWR RAILWAYS: I want to know if it is the wish of the House that the papers should be laid on the table.

Mr. McDONALD: It is not a question of whether it is the wish of the House. The country should have the fullest information on the matter.

The SECRETAHY l!'OR RAILWAYS: If the House asks for the papers you will get them.

Mr. MoDO~ALD: \Ve are not here to usurp the rights <Jf the people. You are bargaining away the people's heritage, you are attempting to give away large concessions of the people's rights, and you deny the people the fullest infor­mation as to what you are doing.

'l'he SP:B~AKER: Order ! Mr. MoDONALD: \Ve have been accused at

different times of being suspicions of the Govern­ment. I think that under the circumstances we have a right to be suspicious of them. There are not only meml>ers in this Chamber, but a large number of peovle outside, who are sus­picious of their action in these matters. If it is a good thing for the country that these railways should he comtructed by private enterprise there should be no attempt to hide anything from the people, and eh~ least thing the hon. gentleman can do is to la.y those p"pers on the table of the House. I ask him now if he will do the same a.s the Premier promised to do in con­nection with the papers and correspondence relating to the Callide Creek Railway? \Vill the hon. g~nt],,manlay the papers and corres­pondence that have led up to the introduction of all these Bills on the table of the House?

The S!WRE1'AllY FOR RAILWAYS: If the House desires it I shall be most happy to no so.

Mr. IVIcDO~ ALD: The hon. gentleman says if the House rlesires it he will lay the papers on the table. Does nl'>t the hon. gentleman know that the Government have a majority on their side of the House, and that they may turn round and say as has been said this afternoon by one hon. m~mber on that side, that they do not in­quire into the legislation that the Government bring in, but. blindly support any measure the Government bring forward?

The Pm:MIEll: You were never told that. Mr. McDONALD: That is the position the

hon. member for I"ockyer, Mr. Armstrong, took up this afternoon.

The PREMIEH: No, it was not; it was quite the rCV·'rse of tha.t.

Mr. MoDO::\ALD: \Vel!, the hon. member con get up rtnd tell us what he did say after­wads. but I think that most members in the ChambRr will agree with me that that is what he said. If we move for these papero, the hon. gentle1ran knows that there is no hope of our getting them for some considerable time, and that in the meantime this discussion will be going on. If the hon. gentleman desires to give the House straightforward information on the subject, he will lay the p0,pers on the table.

The SEOHETARY 1-'0R RAILWAYS: The House bas not asked for the papers.

Mr. DAw~ox: An hon. member has asked for them.

'rhe SECRETARY FOil RAILWAYS: That is not sufficil'nt.

296 Glassford Creek, Etc., [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Bill.

Mr. ~foDONALD: The hon. gentleman has got such a great intellect in connection with the procedure in this Chamber that he seems to know all about it. \Vhy h"s your chief come down already and granted it in one instance over your hear!?

The SPEAKER: Order! Mr. McDOl'l ALD : That is jnst the position.

~l'he hon. gentleman mys the House has not granted lea veto have these papers bid on th a table. Yet we find the Premier coming down and actually going over the hectd of the h,m. gentle­nlan, and promising the papers in connection with the Callirle Creek Railway.

The PuE11!ER : That is not a fair argument at all.

Mr. MoDONALD: Is it not true then? The PREs!IER : It is not true. Mr. 1lclJONALD: 'l'he hon. gentleman

distinctly stated this afternoon to the leader of the Labom Opposition that all papers which led np to the introduction of the Callide Railway Bill would be laid on the table of the House. Is that true?

The P RElHIER: Yes, I promised that. Mr. McDONALD: The hon. gentleman now

sn.ysthat he promised that without an order of the Honse.

The PHEMIER : That is different ; that is not these pctpers at all.

Mr. McDONALD: What is the difference between the papers? What is the use of attempt­ing to quibble that way? If the hon. gentle­man can do itJ one case, he can do it in the other. If the Secretary for Railways refuses to do it, I ask the Premier if he is prepared to do it?

The PREMIEH : Certainly not in the way you ask for it.

Mr. McDOl'\ALD: If he refuses, then there mnst be something shady behind these papers, or else we would get them.

The SECRETARY E'OR RAILWAYS: "Suspicion haunts the guilty mind."

Mr. MoDONALD: Just RO; that accounts for the hon. gentleman being so suspicious of the chairman of the Public \Vorks Commission.

Mr. DAWSON: This is the Barron :Falls over again.

Mr. McDONALD: Now, we will have an opportunity of discussing these matters fully, I hope. Personally I have some 300 or 400 objections to the introduction of this !'articular measure, but I am not going to relate them to the House now, because I think they will come in very well in committee in the shape of amend­ments. But I think the very fullest safeguards should be introduced into the Bill. Although the hon. gentleman 'villmake no promise, I will test the sincerity of the Government, and will give notice on Tuesday for the production of all these papers, and we will see whether the Government are prepared to lay them on the table of the House or not.

Mr. DAWSON: They should lay them on spon­taneously, without being asked.

Mr. LE SIN A : The stcttement has been made bJ: the S";cretary for Rail ways that the papers Will be laid on the table of the House if the House desires. The hon. me m her for :B'linders answers that the Government have a m"jority behind their back, and if that majority insists that the papers shall not be produced they will not be forthcoming. The Premier interjected, when the hon. member for Flinders took him to task about his promise to the leader of the Opposition, that he d:d not mean the papers referred to by the Secretary for Rail ways.

The PREMIER: I was only asked for the Calli de papers.

Mr. LESINA: I will prove to the sathfaction of the House that the Premier has already given an answer which covers all the railways likely to

be introduced into this Honse. Let ns see if he can get ont of his own reported words. I asked on the 1st August the following question:-

Is it the intention of the Government to table full oflidal ill formation, n:HJJS, plans, specifications, route. prolmhle tratlie, qnnhty of <~ountry, etc., in connection with all the private railway Bills to be introduced this sm,sionP The hon. g-entlem;>,n forgets what he has already denied. llere is the an,wer I got-

All the information in thB possession of the Govern­rr.cnt wlll be given to the House.

The Pm~MIBR: So it will be. ::VIr. LESINA: How is it, then, that the hon.

gentleman says his answer did not cover the papers refermd to by. the hon. member f~r _Flinders? Who is tellmg the truth? \Vho JS

rio-ht. "Th~ PRE311ER: Is the hon. member in order? Mr. ]\;foDOXALD: You are not running the

Chamber. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr. LEt·iiNA: 'fhe position is perfectly clear.

There are four or five Bills providing for the construction of private railways. I have already asked the Premier whether he will give us all the information covering eYery poe~ible point in connection with those matters, and he has said that he certainly will do so, but now the hon. gentleman who, hy a happy series of political accidents is at the head of the Railway Depart­ment sa.:s he willlav the papers concerning this rail w~y ,;n the tibleif the House wants'them. The Premier. in an interjection, said that he did not refer to this particular line, so yon see there is a great deal of quibbling going on.

The Pnnrmn: None at all. All the infor­mation wiil be given to the House, but I object to being bullied.

l'llr. LESIN A: It may happen that Ministers are at cross purposes. It may happen that the Secretary for Hailwavs is in possession of papers and information which the Premier knows nothing about. Otherwise, how can the Premi.er give me one '1nswer and the Secretary for Rail­ways give the member for }!'linders a ~ot'.'lly different one? This comes of Ignonng a prmmple '"hich we have always insisted upon, that in discussing all public questions memhe;s on both sides, as well as the country, are entrtled to be placed in pos>,ession of the fullest and most com­plete information in possessiOn of the Govern­ment before the discussion takes place. How is it pos,ible for hon. members to come to a corre?t jndg-ment with respect to an:y: matters .of pubhc policy unless they are placed 111 possessiOn of the whole of the facts? Now, what do we know about this Glassforrl Creek proposal? .. Who has a p­proached the Government? And if the Govern­ment has not been approached, what member of the Government has been approached? And if the Government h ts been approached through one of their members, who was the person who first approached that memher and laid the pro­posals b..fore him? \Vhat information have we got on theee vital questions? \Ve are asked to take a blind leap in the dark, deliver up all the rights which we possess as a legislature, and take on tnmt everything that is pla9e•! ?efore us .. We are de:cling with ,-tt·Jt potentwhties of natwnal wealth and we are asked to gamble away our chilJre~'s heritage, and the heritage of genera­tions to follow. \Ve want information, and look in vain for it. vVe ask the responsible Minister, and he declines to give it. I say it is a point that we must insist upon most rigidly. There is one other point I would like to insbt upon. It was annonnced by the hon. member for Cairns, and it was not contradicted by the hon. member for Purt Cnrtis, that in the vicinity of thfl Gla~sford Creek Mine there is other very valuable mmeral country. That is another reason why we should

Glasiforrl Creek, Etc., Bill. [9 AuGUST.] Oallide Railway Bill.

not be too eager to pass legislation of this character. \Ve should not entertain snch pro­posals until we are in possession of all the facts. I presume that l\linisters have the facts and figures at their fingers' ends. I cannot imagine that they would dare to introduce such legisla­tion if they did not see that there was some necessity for it. If they have got that informa­tion, they are keeping it very dark. They are keeping it very close-very likely in the black boxes which each of them keeps at his side. If the country round Gla;;sford Creek is valuable, and conhins m><ny kind;; of precious minerals, that in course of time would become of great national value, do you not see that if you give one private syndicate the right to run a line to Glassford Creek they can refuse to carry the produce of the miners in the district round about unless they are allowed to stand in and share the profits? bo you nut see that they can black­mail all other industry round about tlut district? That is precisely what happens in the l~nited States. It is the C<ISe even in I~ngland to-day, and the whole history of private railway con­struction in Europe proves the same thing. Give one company the control of the only means of communication and you strangle all other in­dustries in the immedmte vicinity, unless the railway-owners are allowed to stand in and shar'1 the profits of the gold, or silver, or copper, or lead mines, as the case nHy be. There is an article in a recent copy of the Anna, a very excellent American reform journal, or mag:azine, written by an American railway auditor, who has had forty of fifty years' experience in auditing the books of railway companies in America; and he mentions in that article the result of giving monopolistic con­cessions to certain railway syndicates. He states that the effect of companies operatinO' the lines in certain communities is thot they have repeatedly closed down the mines in that community, if it did not pay them to carry their produce to market, or if thAy did not stand in to have some share in the total profit arising fr01n working of a particnlar mine. They are in a P?sition to blackm>til an industry, to InJUre an mduetry by a resolution carried by a ~oard of directors. That is another point whwh ought to be well worthy of consideration in this particular matter. But apart from these matters, which can be discussed later on, I feel perfectly .instified in conscientiously opposing the passage of t.his motion.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: I think it is--

The SPEAKER: The hon. member has spoken. Mr. BRIDGES (Nundah): I trust that our

friends on the other side of the H on se will treat us somewhat in the same manner that they expect us to treat them.

HONOURABLE lYIEMBEHS: Hear, hear!

Mr. BJUDGES: When we had a private Bill before us this afternoon, as soon as the Home Secretary had spoken a few minute.,, he was met by int.erjections of stonewalling. "\Vel!, I do not believe in stonewalling. But wh>tt are we doin~ now, and what have we been doing all the even"­ing? I say that while I am in the House-and there are many others on this side, and I trust also on the other side who think the same--I am willing to give bir play to every mLasure that is introduced into this House.

HoNOUHABLE MEMBERS : Hear, hear!

Mr. BRIDGE3: I think that those who are opposed to the introduction of thi;; Bill have snfficiently proved to the country their sincerity to-night. If those in favour of tbe introduction of the Bill are in the majority, in all fairness to the House, it ought to be allowed to go to that test.

\V e h>t ve been returned here to represent the people of this colony, and before I say whether I will support this Bill or not I wish to see the Bill, and so do the majority of hon. members.

Mr. l)A WSON: Have you got the information we ask for?

Mr. BH,IDGES: The information that has been asked for, to my mind, has not been asked for at all. (Laughter.)

Mr. LESlNA: You are giving your case away. Mr." BRIDGES: Even if I excite a little

laughter I do not think I have done any harm ; it has not injured me. Certainly, certain infor­mation has been attemnted to be bounced out of the Premier, and I trust he will never allow bounce or dictation to force him in any way while he holds the position that he does.

Mr. DAWSON: His sense of duty ought to in­duce him to do it without being asked.

Mr. BRIDGES: I say there is not a more g-entlemanly Premier in all the colonies than our Premier, nor one more ready to give information when it is asked for in a proper manner.

Mr. LESINA : And seats on a commission. Mr. BRIDGES: At the right time I am

qnite prepared to defend my position as regards Royal Commissions. I am sorry my friend is not on a cornrnission ; if he were he 111ight be more pleased than he is at the present time.

Mr. 'l'URLEY: Is that why you smile so cordially?

The SP:EAKER : Order ! Mr. BRIDGES: I can smile when I like. I

think this is a free country. I do trust that hon. gentiemen opposi\e will treat their oppom'nts with that treatment that they e'Cpect to receive­that is, to allow any rnatter, after fair discussion, to go to a vote, and say whether it is to pass or not.

HoNOcHAHLE J\IB;\IREHS: Hear, bear! Question put and passed.

FIRST READING. The Bill was read a first time, and the second

reading was made an Order of the Day for Tues­day next.

SUGAR WORKR GUARANT1<~E ACTS, WJ3 TO 18:J.5, Al\IERDMENT BILL.

The House, in committee, having affirmed the desirablem·'s of introducing this Bill, it was read a firBt time, and the second reading was made an Order of the Day for Tuesday next.

OALLIDE RAILWAY BILL. SECOND READING-RESUMPTION 01<' DEBATE. On the Order of the Day being read for the

resumption of adjourned debate on Mr. JYlurray's motiun, That the Bill be now read a second time ; on which Mr. Browne had moved, That the question be amended by omission of all words after "That," with a view to the insertion in their place of the words "this House is of the opinion that before any private railway measure is passed and becomes law, a referendum shonld be taken to decide whether the .·ettled policy of State-owned rail ways should be departed from"-

Qn€· ticm--That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question-stated.

Mr. BOLES : In following up the debate upon this question, I desire to say a few words upon

the amendment which has been [9·30 p.m.] moved, and upon this measure,

which is one of the most important that will he introduced during the session. In the first place I desire to congratulate the Secre­tary for Rail ways upon his able exposition of the Bill. So able was it that the hon. gentleman entirely took the wind out of the sails of the hem. gentleman who leads the Labour party. After going very carefully over the Bill myself,

Oallide [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Bill.

I was anxious to hear what objections could be raised to it from the Opposition benches. I took it for granted that if the leader of the Labour party, a gentlc~man who is supposed to have a certain sympathy with the mining- industry, and who is a miner himself, had any flaws to find in the Bill we should have heard what they were. Instead of that we heard nothing at all. The hon. gentleman started out on the same old string, harped on the same old tune, and gave us-if I may be allowed to use a homely expression-" the same old lie'' that he gave us when a previous Bill of the kind was introduced. He went all over the universe to find out argu­ments to flatten out this little Bill. His whole speech may be reckoned up in these words: That in the forty-nine articles of political faith which the hon. gentleman is guided by there is one commandment which says, "God will not love the Labour party, nnlesg they stonewall syndicate railways:," and the bon. gentletnan wa'3 anxious to carry out that commandment. During the whole course of his speech, which lasted about an hour, I think I quote him correctly when I say that he referred to the Bill once, anrl once only. If there were any flaws in the Bill, he ovedool<ed them and simply opposed a measure which I am certccin will do a large amount of good for the colony.

Mr. LEBINA: It is not usual to go through a Bill clause bv clause on the second reading.

Mr. BOLJ£8: It is usua.l for those opposed to a mensnre to point out in a fair way what objections there are to it, and whether there are special concessions given by it which should not be given. The hon. gentJen1an made no objection to this Bill in that respect, and indeed the. only part of it to which I heard him object was the termination of the title of the Bill, the words "and for other purposes." I do not know of a.ny other thing the hon. gentleman objected to.

Mr. BROWNE : There are a lot of other things you don't know, too.

Mr. BOLES : Possibly, but if the hon. gentle­man wanterl to make ant a case against the Bill on the se,cond reading he should have placed his arguments before the House that the country might be seized of them. Mining members of this House must recognise that a railway or a tramway to a copper or coal deposit is quite as necessary as a winding plant to an ordinary quartz claim. It is part and parcel of the necessary machinery for the development of the mine. If the Labour party, generally speaking, object to syndicates building railways to a mineral field, under restrictions which the Ho1rse is prepared to impoee, they should come down with ftn abstract motion pointing out that even on goldfields it is not nece"sary to allow a winding plant or a steam engine to be erected, and that we should go back to the old primitive stage of the windmill in order that additional work should be given to the workers. That is what the argument really means if they object to a tramway or a railway to conrJect this property with a port that thP mineral wealth there may not contim1e to lie dormant. I am certain if a proposal of this kind is not entertained it will never be entertained by the Cinvernment, as no Government of this colony would attempt to introduce a proposal for a Government railway t,, an undeveloped field. If then a syndicate or joint stock company are prepared to come forward and build this railway on fair terms they should be allowed to do it. It has been said that the Government are depart­ing from the milway policy of the. count.ry, but I bold th>l.t they have not done so m anv shape or form. I think the lPader of the Labour party was unjust in that respect, because, so far as I understand, the Government intend to go on

building railways in the usual way by loan money, but it has been admitted for the past three years that in order to develop the mineral fields, especially of copper and coal, some other system must be introdlwcd. Under these conrli­tions I think it is one of the best things for the country. In connection with the Chillagoe line a great deal of extraneous matter was intro· duced. I will only say that I believe that line will do a great deal of good. I have been twitted, and so has the Minister for Railways, with n 't !u,ving introduced this ma.tter to the notice of the House before; and the leader of the Labour party seemed to have taken a spasmodic fit in connection with this Callide property when he ·read l\fr. Hands's report on the quantity of coal. I may say that I have drawn attention to this more than once.

Mr. TlROWNE: I said you had-three time". Mr. BOLJ£S : I have referred to it several

titnes when the rnining E-:timates have been under consideration ; but I did not believe in the Government building speculative railways when other parts of the c,1lony were crying out for railways. On the 12th September, 1893, I asked the following que,tion of the then Secretary for Railways, Sir Thomas 1\lci!wraith :-

.Are the Government prep:ned to favonra.bly eonsirler the construction of a line of ra1hntY from Glaclstonc to the Central system, du Callide Coal~.:\1ines, on the land­grant principle of railway construction P I may say that at that time the policy of the country was bnilding railv.ays on the land-grant principle. The Secretary for Hailways replied-

'rhe Government will comdder any proposition sub­mitted for the eonstrttctiou of a raihvay from Glad­stone to the Central S}:::,tem, 't:ia Callide Coal Field, on the land-grant pri nciple~whcthor favourably or no~ will depend on the conditions sought.

I did a good de;cl more than that in connection with the matter;. but the object of asking the question in the House was to ghe the Oallirle coal property as much publicity as possible. On the question of the Chilla:::oe railway being intro­duced, I made a brief allusion to it also. Had I introduced a rnotion calling on tt1e Government to build a railway from G!adstone to the coal­mines, even if I had brought for'.' ard the most abunda.nt evider1CP in favour of itH construction, I don't believe anyone v-.ould have opposed it more strongly than some of the members on the Opposition »ide. l believe the leader of the Labour party himself would have brought in the Etheridge and other places as having better claims for railway counnunication.

Hon. D. H. DALRHIPLE: You would have been laughed at.

Mr. BOL:ES: I would have been scnffed at. On the Chillagoe railway question the remarks I made were brief. I c>tid-

If there arc rich mineral lands lying undeveloped, is it not hetter that they should be developed at, the earliest possible rnomeut so that we may participa.tc in the benefit? I consider that this is a on pi tal propo~al, and I would be very glad if a company would offer t.o con­Rtruet n railway to connect Gladstm;e \Vith the coal deposit in that difltriet. which geologists have classed as one of the largest in ..:tuHtralia.

In speaking on the queAtion of a bnrl-gnmt rail­way and the principle attached, it remind" me Yery much of another measure, one to which I believe the Labour party He also opposed, and to which I am as a rule opposed. I do not think, however, that the Labour party arc npP< sed to old age pensions; neither am I. The principle is the same in both cases; bnt the conditions are different. And it is the same with this Bill. Though the principle may be thes:une, and though you may ct:~ll them all 1 ori vate syndicate rail ways, still, when you look at thE· m, the condition '·are dif­ferent. There are railways in which the returns of the line are made nut of the actual traffic; but in

Callide [9 AuGusT.] Eailtvay Bill.

the case of the Oallide line, and some other lines, the railway is simply a necessity to gPt the mineral to a port, and forms part and p•1rcel of the working of the mine. Unless this is granted I am certain this mine will never be developed. The hon. gentleman in his remarks referred to posterity. I am inclined to think that if we allow that coal to lie there untouched fifty or sixty years, posterity will cla,.; us as a lot of fools for not opening up this wonderful deposit. With regard to the route, I may say that this milway will not only benefit the Oallide mine, but a large number of other places. It will pass through Oallinpe, and it will be within fifteen miles of what is known as thE' Kroombit Copper Mine. This line of railway, when completed, will not only give access to the Oallide coal proJ!erty, bnt also to numbers ,,f others in the vicinity. I am rather astonished at some of the arguments used by hon. members of the Labour party. I can hardly think that some of them were speaking according to their convictions, and I cannot but believe that some of them, if they were allowed to support this line, would do so.

Mr. REm : vVho is to prevent them ? Mr. BOLES: There is a syndicate in connec­

tion with the Trades Hall, I understand, and the hon. member for the Valley pointed out clearly that the Trades Hall had somethin<> to do with it. At least that was the inferen,;'e one would gather from what he said. I might also point out that the hon. member for Kennedy, when speaking on the Address in Heply, almost gave himself away when he said although he might feel inclined to vote for some of these railways, he could not do so without going against the Labour platform.

Mr. REm : Had that anything to do with the Trades Hall ?

Mr. BOLES : I believe there is a large number of Labour members who, if they' were at liberty, would willingly vote for this liue. In­deed, I do not see how anybody can be so blind as not to see the benefits that are likely to accrue from it. For instance, the Bill provides for a royalty, which all depends upon the de\'elopment of the mine, 11nd the syndicate, or company, have all the responsibility on their shoulders. Again, from the settlement that is likely to take place, the State will reap the benefit. It is certain that a large amount of settlement will take place there if this railway is allowed to be built and the popubtion, I h;1Ve no doubt. within the' next five years will be S,OOO or 10,000 at the very least. The hem. member, Mr. Higg-s, referred to the land, and tried to make a point against the Government by saying that certain land was thrown open there in l11rge areas in order to give people an opportunity of taking it up knowing that this railway was going to be made. I happen to know something about that, and with aJl due respect to the bon. member and to the Government, I may state that this land was surveyed a very long time ago, Grazing farms are not thrown open in 11 day ; it is often a matter of many months, and I do not think the Govern· ment knew very much at the time about a pro­posal being ruade them in connection with Oalbde. Apart fr•>m that, I do not think the Government could h11ve done a better thing than throw that land open for grazing farms.

Hon. D. H. DALRYli!PLic: If the railway does not go on that will be the best thing to do.

Mr. BOLES : Exactly ; it will bring more revenue in to the State and settle more popula· tion on the land. But as soon as this propos11l was made in connection with this svndicate or company, a_nd the h_on. member for" the Valley drew attentwn to th1s fact, I went to the office saw the Minister, and pointed out to him that if

this line was made a large quantity of the land would be required for small settlers, and that it would be better in the meantime to have the land withdrawn. That the Minister agreed to do; he saw the necessity for it at once, and I belieYe the Minister intended to take that adion even if the hon. member had not orought the matter before the House, and even if I had not seen him on the subject. I merely mention this becauae hon. members may have got the idea that, because this land was thrown open, it w11s done so in order that certain persons might get hold of it and make a good thing out of it. Judging from the number of appli­cations for the grazing farms, it does not appenr as if they were being taken up on the hypothesis that the railway would go there. I wish to make 11 few rem8,rks on the report nf Mr. Rn.nds in connection with the coal at Oalli,le. It was after reading this report-I think in 1892 -that I Was impressed with the importance "f this deposit, and a good deal has been done in the way of development since. I may say, before l forget it, that two years ago a mineral expert from Victoria came up to the district of Port Curt is, in se11rch of copper. I recommended him to pay a visit to Callide, so that he might get an idea of its possibilities. He did so, and when he returned, a "veek or ten days afterwards, he assured me that J\/[r. Ramls had not done the thing justice. He s~id it was the most gigantic affair in the matter nf coal he had ever seen. At the time of Mr. Rands's visit a consi' lerable amount of development had bceu done, but since that time the mine had been opened np a good deal. I wish to qnote one paragraph of his report, so th~t hon. n1emher.s 1nay see the irnpnr­tance of the question. 1\lr. Hanc!H says-

I give the full owing :fignres for the purpose of show­ing the cxtnnt and importan~e of this discovery. rraking tlte ·weight of one f:Jot in thickness of coal over an area of one square mile at 1,000,000 tons, and putting the an .·1 ov0r \Vhieh the eoal has been proved nt five Sttnare milH, we get 5,000,000 tons per foot over that area,. ~CJ\V, the avera,~e thicknes~ of coal pa..s~~ed through in tltc various ~hafts is over 21 feel·, and allow­ing one-half of this afi:l available, the total \Veigbt of anLilnble eo1l will be 50,000,UOO tons. Last year the output ot coal for the \Vhole colony was 33~,33·.t tons, the largeRt output of an.v 'ear; so that ovm· the at·ea alread:· proved only there is snflieient eoal to la1'0t 150 y{· ar~ with an output equal to that of the whole of the colony for bst year.

Hon. members will see that even in 1892, when Mr. Rands examined this property--

At 10 p.m., Mr. KIDSTON called attention to the state

of the House. Quorum formed. Mr. BOLES : Hon, members will .~ee that so

far as lvir. Hands's report is concerned, and judging from the development which

[10 p.m,J has t:tken p!Rce in the property since he examined it, there is not

the slightest doubt that it is one of the largest deposits of coal in the southern hemisphere. That being so, 11nd this company being prepared to tnke upon themselves the respomibility of building this railway to a seaport, I think the HousP should pa'B the Bill. For· the develop­ment of such a field it is necessary that tliere should be railway communication with a port, and I do not know of any better port for that purpnse than the l ort of Gladstone. 'The distance is said to be seventy-five m'les, but I dare say that may be reducer]. K ow I sh11Il say just a few words with regard to the amendwent. The policy of the Government for the hst six years has been to bnild railw;tys with borrowed money--that is, railways for the development of the country, and I do not think they have departed from thnt one iota. But at the last general election it was

800 Catltde [ASSEMBLY.] Railtcay Bill.

put before the country that, in cages similar to the one under discussion, it would be a very good thing for the Government if we could induce private companie., to build the railways or !ramways to connect with a !JOrt. I think that 1s a most excellent policy, and I really cannot understand the op!Josit.ion to it. I could say a great deal more on this question; but I do not wish to detain the House any longer, and I shall have another opportunity of speaking on it when the Bill gets into committee.

Mr. KIDSTOX (Bockharnpton) : I quite agree with the hon. member for Port Curtis in all that he has said as to the richness of the di,trict lying to the south and south-wegt of Gladstone, and as to the desirablen~ss of having the country there opened up by a railway, but I am not aware-:-and I li,;tened to the hon. member very carefully-that he advanced any particular reason why so promising a district as he described this to be should be h>tnded over to a syndicate for fifty years. I >tm inclined to com­pliment the hon. mtember on the very distinct vim with which he seems t., have gone into this question. It was quite refreshing to hear the unmistakable tone of earnestne's with which he felt inclined to shte the Labour party tor opposing this Bill. He took to task the leader of this side of the House for having spoken so long on the Bill without referring to it, but I snspect that the trouble with the hon. member is that the hon. member for Croydon, Mr. Browne, referred to the Bill too pointedly, and dealt with the matter in a way that the hon. member did not like. 'l'he hon. member seemed exceedingly surprised that the hon. member for Croydon should profess to have thc1 interests of the working miners at heart. H<e cannot understand why any hon. member who professes to have the interests of the working miners at heart can oppose such a Bill as thic:. \Vel!, thehon. member for Croydon has been a working miner himself, he has lived among working miner:-;, he has been one of them, and now he represents them. If he does not fed a genuine sympathy and kinship with working nriners, I do not know where working 1niner~ nng·ht to look for a man who is likely to have that feeling for them. If an hon. member like tlJe hon. member for Croydon, who is so mnch akin to worki11g n1iners and feels so cl(Jse and personal an intenest in the1r wellbeing, sees some objection to a proposal of this sort, it might occur to the hem. member for Port Curtis, who knows very little about them, that he himself may be wrong in the matter. The hon. member refermd to the Labour party in a way which I do not think any member i"n this House has a right to refer to them, unless he is prepared to give some kind of evidence on the matter. \VeheHrdfrom the hon. the Minister with­out a portfolio this e\ ening that an assertion was not proof. Now, it has been continuallyasserted,by opponents of the Labour party that Labour mem­bers are under some kind of control by the Tmdes Hall, or some other mysterious body that no man can clearly define. No one who has made that statement has been able to explain how members of this party are under bondage to that particular body. There have been Labour members in this House, an organised and large numher of Labour mem­bers, for the last seven years. Hon. members opposite have observed thEir conduct, and have known pretty intimately all >tbout them and their relation to bodies outside, and yet not one of them has ever attempted to show in what way members of the Labour party are particularly bound to do anything at all, except what they consider right. I challenge the hon. member for Port Cnrtis, and I challenge any hon. member in this House to show a aingle instance where any Labour member was compelled, either by the

party in the House or by the Trades Hall, or by any other power outside of himself, to do the thing he did not want to do.

Mr. BOLES : I dare you to vote against this Bill.

Mr. KIDS'rON: I was always a bad sort of fellow to dare, but I will have the greatest plea­sure in voting again~t this Bill if it ever cmnes to a vote.

MEMBERS of the Opposition : Hear, hear ! Mr. KIDSTON: 1 do not think there is much

dar.ger of the hon. rnernber voting against it. But it is not the point whether I vote for the Bill or against it. The allegation was made that the Labour members were in some way compelled by the Trades Hall to vote against a thing which they believed in.

Mr. BoLES : The member for Kennedy con­firmed it.

Mr. KIDSTON: The member for Kennedy did not confirm it. 'rhe statement that the member for Kennedy made-although it was a somewhat extraordina.ry tltatement, I confeRs­was the very reverc,e of that. The statement the h(m. men>ber made was that he felt himself pledged by his own promises.

Mr. BoLe:s: No, he did not sign the platform. Mr. KlDSTON: The hon. member for Ken­

nedy went to his constituents and said, "I will do 'so-and-so," and they returned him on th'!'t account. The hon. member 1s bound by h1s promise to his constituents. He is bound, as every member of this House is bound. \V e are all honourable men, but we are not all honour­able enough to keep the pledges which we mnke to our constitlwnts.

'l'he SECRETARY J.'OR RAILWAYS: Only the member8 of thR Labour party do that.

l'llr. KIDSTON: Members of the Labour party do that. In any cnse, the contention of the hon. member for Kenned;• wa' that he was bound by that pledge, and it" has nothing at all to do with the Tmdes Hall, or the Centennial Hall, or any <Mwr hall. When a member like the member fnr Port Curt is makes an allegation like that, after being so intimate with many IJabour n1etnber8 for so long, I think be onght to have attempted in some way or other to justify his statement, ,;nd havA given some kind of plausible ground for holding such an extraordi­nary opinion regardiug members of this party.

Mr. BoLRS: \V hat about the member for Bunclaberg?

Mr. KIDSTON: I have no doubt the member for Bundaberg is old enough to talk for himself.

Mr. BOLES: What about the tyranny? Mr. KIDSTON: It is quite evident that the

hon. member for Bunclaberg has not been bound by the Trades Hall, for be has done what he li'ked.

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPI.E: After he severed his connection with them and was re-elected. You forgot that.

Mr. DAWSON: He is going to vote against this Bill.

Mr. KIDS TO~: If it might be proper for me to retaliate upon the hon. member for Port Curtis .in a somewhat similar manner, I think I might be permitted to S'-'Y that his zeal for this Bill is perfectly transparent to every member of the House. Whether we oppose this Bill or not, no member in the House can charge us with that.

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE: What is that? Serving your constituents?

Mr. KIDSTON : It is an easy and delightful job to serve your constituent;; when you are at the same time serving yourself. I would h!. e to complimPnt the Government, although it is _not a thing I often have the opportunity of domg, upon the noble stand they have -taken in this matter.

Calli de [9 AuGusT.] Railway Bi:l. :301

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE : ·what have they done that they should be complimented by you 1

The SECRETARY !<'OR RAILWAYS: I do not know that your compliment would be of much value to them.

Mr. KIDSTOX: Well, I think they are de­serving of it. \Ve have for some years been condemning the Government for their colourless­ness and for the feebleness of their policy, but on tbis occasion they have come down flat-footed, and no mistake about it. It occnrs to me that they must be very confident of succe;s when they plank down five syndicate railways on the table of the House in one bunch. If we had thcmght that the Government was hazy and un­decided in their policy we can cerbinly not bring that charge ag,1inst them now, and if we are correctly informed, if this bunch of five rail­ways is accopted, there is more to follow, like the grace of Heaven. I think, under the circum­stances, and despite the childish protest made by the Oour.Zer that no change is being atteinpted tn be madf'in th,_ rail way policy of Queensland, it is manifest andperfect.ly open toev~rymemberofthe House that a new and very important departure is being made in theuil way policy of Queensland; a change which will affect the welfare of the people of the colony to a much greater extent, probably, than many of us yet realise. I cannot help thinking, when I see a radical like the hon. member for Port Curtis c<crried away with a proposal of this kind, that in his zeal for a temporary advantage he and his district are very likely to r:ay too much for their whistle. I think, when so vital a change is being made in the railway policy of the country, the least the Government can do is to consult the people before they make it. A change that will affect the people in so many districts, and ultimate.ly the whole colony, is a change that ought not to be carried out without some mandate from the people. No such mandate h<ts been received. The leader of the Opposition has challenged the Government to justify this change of policy by tr"king a referendum of the people on the matter, and I think I may venture to say that with all the splendirl confidence on the pa,rt of the Government and their supporters that they have the country at their backs, they are not g tme to do it. If the Premier thinks it will suit his purpose better to dissolve Parliament and go to the country on this one issue, I am perfectly willing, hut I maintain that before such an im­portant change is made in the railway policy of Queensland, the people of the colony, whose business it is, and whose interests are being involved, ought to be first consulted. There is another matter. Very often, when members of this House are urging upon the Govprnment to arlopt some refornr legislation that has been adopted in the other colonies, or elsewhere, we are almost in variably told not to be too hasty to rush into experiments of this character, but to wait and o~e how it works. Now, in an important matter of this kind, it seems to me that it might be well for the Govern­ment to take a little of their own phy"ic. They have already made an experiment in the matter of private railways, and it might be well if they, as I said, took a little of their own advice, and walted to 1.'3ee how it work~, hefore they rush wholesale into this new policy. But proLably the Government are of opinion that their only chance of carrying this is to rush it through before the people fully realise what it is that is being done. Probably they think if they wuit to see the result of the Pxperiment at Chillagoe there will b8 no more syndicate rail ways in Queensland. I notice that already this session one hon. member of this House got up in his place and declared that, after oboerving what had taken place in consequence of the concessions that we

had granted to the Chillagoe Railway Com­pany, he would refuse to vote on any future occasion for any such conceosions being again made. Aad probably, as I say, the Go,·ernment are wise in their generation in trying to ru'h this business through wbole~a!e before the people of the country have time to realise what it means to them in the end. I think there are already indications that this House has granted the Chillagoe Railway Company a great dea,l more than the House had any idea that it was granting. I noticed, some time ago, a newspaper report of the annual meeting of the Chillagoe Railway Company, he.ld in JYlelbourne on 27th June last; and the chairman in his address said-

In connection with the rttilway, I may also mention the company's wharf at Cairns, ~ts it is rega.rded by us as being in the !tail way Department. 'rhe new wharf was commenced some months ago, nncl it is now very nearly completed. "rhen in operation it will be a very valuable asset to the company, as well as a most impor­tant convenience, not only to the company, but also to the p0rt of Cairns. It has beAn carefully designed to accmmnodate as much as can be obtained of the very considerable sbip)Jir'g business of the port, of which it will present facilities not novl-' existing, including the great advantage of direct railway commnnica.tion from the rich and extensive :mgar districts and tt1e interior to the ship's side.

That is the chairman of the Chillagoe Company speaking in Melbourne. The Home was induced t.o grant cer·t:tin concessions to that company for the purpose of enabling· it to work a mine, and now it begins to :tppear that we have given it a concession which will enable it to exploit the whole of that district.

MEMBRilS of the Opposition : Hear, hear ! Mr. J. HAmL'l'O"' : By exploiting you mean

developing, I supp'JSe. Mr. KIDSTON : I notice a matter came up 'n

this House a few days ugo in connectiou with the present works; and on that occasion the B1'is­bane Cou,.ier pointed out this in a leading article.

Mr. REm : Is the GoU1'ier an authority 1 i\Ir. KIDSTON: I think the le.ading journal

of the colony and the maimtay of the Govern­ment--

Hon. D. H. DALRDIPLll: You spoke of the other as a childish plea of the Courie1·.

Mr. KIDSTON : Even the supporters of the Government may disagree, as the bon. gentleman knows very well. However, this is what the Courier says-

Given State ownership of railways, and what is prac~ tically f-Jtate ownership of harbours and rivers. and it is inevitable that the :state should take possession of the final link between the two. Only so can we hope to hold our own against southern competition.

That is, the Courier believes that only by the State owning the doors-the means of communi­cation for trade and commerce-can we hold our own against southern competition. And in giving the Chi!lagoe Railway Company a con­cession for the purp' se of wnrkin~· its mine it turns out, as it appears, that we have given that company, not only the power to work its mines, hut the power to work the mines of all the other people in that district.

MElliBRRH of the Opposition : Hear, hear ! Hon. D. H. DALRBIPLE: It could not be

worked at all before. lYir. GIVEXS : They were worked years before

the Chillagoe Company went there. Mr. KIDS TON: And I remember--and it is

for members of this House to remember--that this is merely the beginning of the thing. 'I'his is merely the opening up of the bud, as it were: and if this kind of thing is done in the grEen tree, what may we not expect to be done in the dry 1 By and by that company promise'•. to lay their claws over the whole of the Chillagoe dis­trict, anrl over the whole of the Cairns district;

302 Callide [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Bill.

and I guppose the hon. memLer for Cairns will be carried about in the pocket of the chairman of directors.

Mr. GrVE:"'S : They would like to, if they could.

Mr. KIDSTO~: Well, if they cannot carry the hon. member, they will squeeze him out and m>rry someone else. I suppose w shall see in Cairns-a/4 I have seen at :Yinunt l\lorgan-the bosses of the company leading down the free and independent electors through the streets to the polling· booth.

Mr. KERR: ·with a beer bucket in front of them.

Mr. llE!I>: \Vith the bread and butter behind. Mr. KIDSTON : :From the little experience

that we have of the one experiment in private rarl ways in Queensland, it looks very like a., if the pamful experiences in connection with the building of private railways that have been suffered in other countries, such as America and in I~ngland, '"ill be repeated here. I was speaking about the political power the Chillagoe Company is likely to have OYer this district. I noticed sorne dayK ago, in a. newspaper, that the Salisbury Goverl!me"nt broug-ht a B:ll forward in the House of Commons for the pm·pose of g-iving greater safety and security to r.he tmvdling­public; and althoug-h the S: !is bury Government is probably as strong a Government as I have ever knm•n to exist in England, that Government fonnd the railway cmnpanies so strong that they had to withdraw the Bill. Oases have been qnoted over and over ag-ain in this House, to show the political and social

corruption that has char:wterised [10·30p.m.l private railways in Americ:>.-how

they have created a smell that has sprnd over the whole earth. T hM·e bf'Pll a good deal surprised at some of the argnments which have beon OHtensibly advanced for the purpose of inducing the Honbe to accept this nostrum of the Government. The Se•:retary for Railways told us that Queenslanrl is so large that it is altogether b(;yond our power, with our small population, to meet the requirements of raih·ay development, prtrticularly in view of the ditfi. culty of rarsing muney. And the hon. member for Bulloo, who--if I understood him correctly, de,1cribed bim,;elf as an agent for one of these syndicates-told us that our great heritage waB of no use to us, unless we could g-et these benevolent syndicates to come in and dewelop it for ns. 1 am thankful that the Parliament of Queem;bnd <lid not always conoL;t of such £:tint· hear~Pd pessimi;-;t.~.

1\f""lnEns of the Opposition: Hear bear! :\fr. KlDflTON: Where were the' benevolent

synclic tes thirty years ago, when we were strugglin;; to get our railway up the Toowoomba nng·e" ? \Vhere were they when we were building· a rail w.cy over the Drummond Range in the Uentral district, or over the mountains behind Cairn'? \Vhere were the benevolent syndicates then?

1\/f r. RJ<:!ll: Lending- nwney. Mr. KIDSTON: I am g·lad to think that

ovving to the cou1·age, enterprise, and sel[~reliance of rnany previon;;; 1ne1nb8rs of this House, the people of Qu2en>land were tauo-ht to do these things for themselves, without ~yndicates. In spite of the taunt that we c.mnot dev,·lop onr territory without the aid of syndicates, it seems to me that the milway development that the people of (.,jueensland have already accomplished throughout their vast territory is something marv<'l:ou.s. Considering the small handful of people and the few years during which the works have been carrier] on, I think that the work that has been accomplished-while it may not be all that is desirable; while it may not be even all that was possible-'-! do think that

the work that the handful of people who have constituted the population of Queensland have managed to accomplish during the last thirty yf·ars, is something marvellous. A small popu­lation of from 230,000 to 500,000 has in thirty years built 2,500 miles of railway-more rail­ways prolc,bly than the same number of people in any other part of the world. 'Ehey have undertaken a burden of over £30,000,000, but they have undertaken it for the sake of a great purpc,;e, which I believe will in its result amply justify them for the burden and loss they ha,·e already borne. I think that the resuit of our experience in tlw State con­struction and ownership of railways is such as to make us desire to ;,void any change in our railway policy. It seems to be the vur­pose of the Government to try and convmce the people of Queensland that the rail way policy they have hitherto pursued has been a huge failure, The Secretary for Railways­who I re~;ret to say is nop in his pl>:ce-seemed to do his very best last mgl!t to convulce us that we had made a huge misLake in building those railv. a vs, He read over an awful string of figures·, which seemed to be to this effect-that we had lost something- over £2,000,000 in run­ning our railways dming the past ten years. I cannot help thinking that it is not any wonder that we have difficulty in raising loans in London, when we have a Minister of the Crown wa.iling, in this Oas,sandra~like way, over the public works in which so large an amount of those loans have been invested. I should like to give the Htmse a few figures, which, I think, will put a slightly different complexion upon the matter. The purpose of the :!'.Linister la;:.;t night was to convince us how ruinous a busi· ness the rail ways of Queemland had been during the last ten years. These a,re Rome figures obt:tined from the hon. gentleman's own depart­me.rt. The net revenue from our railways in 188D-\10 was £157,000-I leave out the odd hundreds. I,ast year, 1898-D, it had risen tu £G37, 000. Ten years ago the intereet e.arned on m>pital was l!Js. lOd, per cent., last year it had risen to £2 12s. 2d. per cent. Ten years ago the. actual charge to revenue-that is, loss on the working of our railways-was £493,000-just ahout half-a-million. Last year it had fallen to £244, 000-something under a <J.narter of a million. Put in ar;other way, the charge to revenue on the working of our railways was, ten years ago, £1 4s. 3d. per be:td of the popnlation, and last year the charge per head had fallen to 9s. 9d, No man can fairly consider theoe figures without recognising nnmistakably that they give the people of Queensland a very rational hope that before an•>ther twenty or twenty-five years, at the outside, the public rail ways of Queensland will be as htrgely a revenue-producing asset tu the Trea<urer as the lands uf Queensland are to-day. I say that, in spite of the alarming figures the Secretary for Railways read out to us last night, the people of Queensland are perfectly satisfied with the in vestment thev ha ,·e made in rJ.i!ways, and that they ha•e eve"ry reaiOn to be quite satisfied the Treasurer knows quite well.

Mr. REm: He will be saying so himself in the :Financial Statement in a week or two.

Mr. KIDSTO~ : The Treasurer knows quite well that the railways of (..lueensland are worth to the people of f<itwen8land, or to any syndicate tbat would take them over, a. great deal more than they cost the people of Queensland. The hon. gentleman knows that if you put them in one bunch, and gave the syndicate that bought them the same power to exploit the colony that thic. syndicate will have to exploit the Gladstone district fur the next fifty yurs to come, he would get a gre. t deal more for them than those rail· ways have cost Queensland.

Callide [D AuGusT.] Railtvay Bill. 303

The PrmMIF.R: I have not tried, so I don't know.

Mr. KTDSTON : I don't know what the hon. member will try next. He has come out in so bold and unmistakable a way over those five milways that if he just begins to get a little confidence I would not. be at all snq>rised if he came down with a Bill next session perhaps to sell the rail ways of ~lueensland.

J\•Ir. LJ<:SINA: ]3ettcer a civil war than sell an inch.

Mr. KIDSTON: I contend, in view of the policy which h1s be n c~nied on so versistently, and with such a heavy loss by the people of Queensland hitherto-a loss that is likely to be made up and compensated for in many ways in the future-and considering that it has been so clearly nnrlerstood and recognised by our public men, and by the people themselves, as the fixed policy of the colony in regard to railways, that the Premier has no moral right to attempt in this way to alter the policy of the colony in so im­portant a matter without getting some kind of mandate from the people. While my opinion on the matter will remain the same, I am quite prepared to let the people of Qtwens­land take their own way in the matter; but the Premier has no business to u<e a catch majority in this House for the purpose of affecting the wellb9ing of the people of Qneens· land to the extent that he proposes to do. There is one thing that has amused me very much in this discussion, and that is the manner in which it seems to be necessary for the Go "ernment to blow hot, and then immediately afterwards to blow cold. ]<'irbt, we are told by a Minister that the building of this rail way will be so risky a specnlation that the .~overnment could not entertain it for one moment; a quarter of an hour afterwards the very same .Minister paint,; a rosy picture of the great future of Gladstone; if only this railway is built we are told that G ladstone will become a second K ewcastle,

:Mr. BoLES: Hear, hear ! Mr. KIDSTOK: I say, "Hear, hear," too, to

that. Tbe PREMIER : Do you think so ? Mr. KIDSTON: Yes, I think so. I think

the cost of this rail way might be well paid by the Government, and I don't think it is necessary for the Government to find a shilling of it. I think the railway could be built without it. The Minister for Railways first tries to appal us with the dreadful risk the company is undertaking in building such a line, and five minutes after­wards he tries to convince us that the building of this rail way will transform the whole of the Gladstone district into a second Newcastle. I noticed that immediately after the Minister for Railways had spoken about this future New­ca,tle of Queensland, the Premier got up and clearly indicated that in his opinion the syndi­cate proposing to build this railway were likely to burn their fingers and lose their money.

The PREMUR : I never said so. Mr. KIDSTOK: Any hon. member who

noticed the incredulous smile the hon. gentleman gave when referring to his hon. colleague's l"<'SY picture of the future Gladotone, quite understood that, whatever the Premier believed, he was trying to convince this House that it was a very bad speculation thi~ syndicate was going into. The fact of the matter is that those hon. gentle­men don't know very well on what point we can be most easily caught. They tell us this is so risky a business th<>t the Government must not touch it, and then they say it wc•nld be of such enormous benefit that it is desirable the line should be built ; and I would like to know from some member of the Government which of those statements is true? Tbey cannot both be true, and I think it is desirable that we should

get some definite idea from thfl Government whether they think this is a bad project or a good project. I would aloo like to abk the Pre111icr ·whether the Governtnent does not know quite well that this conce<sion, if granted, will simply be used as a bait to catch investors.

The PREMIER: You would not accuse the ]JOOr workiug miner of doing anything of that sort.

:Mr. KlDSTON: There is noth~ng amuse.s me so much as this solicitude for the poor working man when there is anything to be got out of him. The Minister for Railways told us that this was a business in which the colony could not possibly lose; in whieh we stood to gain every­thing. It seems to me that we .•.:and to lose a grP Lt deal in this matter. The Government know quite well that this conceosion, so soon a,, granted, will be used as a bait to catch Bri',ish investors; and if the investment comes out so calamitous as the :Yiinister for Railways and the Premier seem to think it will turn out, do those hon. gentlemen imagine that the Go­vernment and-what is of far more importance-­the colt my of Queen,;land can esc,pe the odium of having played into the hands of those specu­lators to fle•\)8 the British investor.

The SECRETARY J<'OR HATI,\YAYS: You have a very great regard for the British investors.

Mr. KIDS TON: I have no special regard ior the British investors; my concern in this matter is for the colony of which I happen to be a citizen-that the party which has so often done it before shall not again drag the name of Queens­land in the dirt.

The PRE>mm: The Taranganba bnsiness in the Rockhampton di;trict was the biggest swindle that we ever had in the colony.

Mr. KIDSTOX: Yes. And what was the result? It has killed mining speculation in our district; you cannot get outside money into a Rockharnpton mining venture now. If the Govern'nent get their own way in this thing, and some of these specul".tions turn out as the Premier believes they will, tl::e result will be the same thing for Queensland. \Ve ha;·e a great deal more to lose th8 n gain in this matter. This thing has not only happened in :Rockharnp­ton ; it has happenuct over and over again in other places; and it happened in \Vestern Aus­tralia a few years ago. The Minister for Railways is not the only member of the Ministry who blow,; hot and cold iu this m"tter; the Premier is just as bad. A few weeks ago that hrm. gentleman was at Charters Towers, and he told the people there that he would not have the slighte'lt di[ficulty in raising c£1,000,000 sterling to build them a rail way to carry coal from Cler­mont to Charters Towers.

Hon. D. H. DALRYi\IPLE : Y on may raise £1,000,000 for a railway in one partiCular place, but you can't raise n:illions for rail ways every­where.

Mr. KIDS TON: And the hon. gentlemen told them more than' that. He told them that, owing to some conversation he had had with Mr. Holder, of South Austn:tha, he believed the Government would be able to run the coal along that 200 miles of rail wtty at !d. per ton per mile. Kow, we are discussing the railway to Callide Creek, which is believed to be the richest coalfield in Australia, and it is within seventy miies of the seaboard..

Thf, PRKIIIER : Who says that? Mr. KIDST0:0l': One of the men most com­

petent to give an opinion-Mr. Rands, the Government Geologist. If he doe,; not use the exact words I have quoted, he uses eornething vary like them.

The PRE>IIER: Give us exactly what he did say. Don't use words of your own. You have tt wonderful imagination.

304 Callide [ASSEMBLY.] Railway Bill.

Mr. KIDS TO~: I do not think it is necessary. The hon. member for Cro.vdon read it last night, and I do not wish to read it over again.

The PRJ<;illi!lR: Does he say it is the richest coalfield in Australia?

!\fr. KIDSTON: I said Mr. Rands described it a~ the richest coalfield in Australia. Mr. Rands does not use those exact words but he gives such a description of the area 'and the depth of the coal there as justifies anyone in applying such an epithet to that coalfield. How­ever, that is by the wa.y. The Prerr.ier told the people at Charters Towers that he could find a million of money by which he could build a rail­way on w~ich he could run coal at td. per ton per mrle. Now we are dealing with the G!arlstone district, where, if not the richest eo cl· field in Anstralia, there is a phenomenal de]Jo;;it within seventy miles of a deep-water port ; and yet the hon. gentleman cannot find £160,000 to build seventv miles of railway to it ! If he can rn~1 coal down tho"t seventy miles at ±d. per ton per mile, then we can take the cod from Callide Creek to Glad­stone Harbour for ls. 7d. ; and for 4s. or os. per ton fine steaming co·•J can be put on board the steamers at that port. If the hon. gentleman c:>n do that there is no donbt aho'lt Gladstone becoming the Newcastle of Queensland.

The PREMIER: You cannot procure coal in Queensland under 7s. Gd. a ton at the pit.

:Mr. KIDS TON: It does nnt matter whether coal at the pit is 4s. or 7s. 6d., if the hon. gentle­man can carry coal at ld. per ton per mile the freight from Callicle Creek to Gladston~ would he ls. 7d.

The PREmER: Does i! not strike you that you can carry chellper per rml.e for 200 miles than for seventy miles?

Mr. KIDSTON: This is what strikes me with the force of a sledge-harJJmer: That wh8n the hon. gentleman was at Charters Towers he was dt· slrous, for &mne purpose, of convincing the people there that they should not ~o t0 Bowen, but rather that they should go to Olermont, and now he is dPsirons of convincing the 1-Ionse, not that a line is necessary to connect Clermont and Char'ers Tower<, but that it is necessary to hand over this rich mi11Pral district to a symficate.

The PllEl\IIER: If it pleases you, I am quite satisfied.

Mr. KIDS TON : In any case, when I see those hon. gentlemen blowing hot and cold in this way ~~aying one thing to-day R,lld another thing tO­morrow-I want to know where we are; how to take thmn-whether we are to believe them when they say they can do a thing, or whether th"y say they cannot or will not do it.

The SEcm;TARY FOR RAILWAYS: Find out where you are yourself.

Mr. KIDSTON: I was varv much interested to see the sudden anxiety the Secretary for Rail­ways developed with regard to the unemployed. I have known the hon. gentleman a long time, and up to the pres,:nt his only anxiety in that direction has been to find an unemployed b!Rck­fellow for a few coppers a week. And yet, whenever it suits the hon. gentleman's book, he ~·8ts really imprecsivR in trying to convince the House what a serious unemployed problem is comjng up in the nPar future. :b-,or once in his life, I believe, the hon. gentleman is right-that a huge unemplnyed difficulty will face the Go­vernment before very long. I suggested to the Premier a couple of weeks rtgo-on the Address in Reply-that if he really saw what is inevitably coming in that regard he should at once cable home to the Agent-General to st.op immigratirm. Has the bon. gentleman done so, or ha' he any intention of doing so? Or again, if the Secretary

for Railways is anxious to help the unemployed, why does he not bring down some Government ra.il ways that he can start straight away?

'fbe SECHETARY l<'OR RAILWAYS: They will come along in due time.

~Ir. KIDSTON: For an hon. gentleman, who, like the Secretary for Rail ways, has professed so

warm a desire to help the unem­[11 p.m.] ployed, I think that remark of his

-that these rail ways wiil come along in clue lime-is really heartless. It shows a lack of symp:1tby with the unemployed that would 1Hrr1ly be expected from the hon. gentleman. ·what I want to point out is that thir; syndicate need not put a peg in the ground, or S]Jend a penny, for nme mr,nths at least; and what are t.he unemployed to do during that time? If the Government are really anxious to assist the un­employed, why do they not start with their own railways? "Why do they not eome down to the House with their own raiJw,w proposals, and get them through Parhament and start the railways, and then submit these private rc,il ways ? The fn.ct of the matter is that the Government seem to he quite helpless. They must call in syndicates to build rail ways ; they must cell in syndicates to place their loans· they must even call in syndic~tes to help th~ unem!Jloyed; and I quite anticipate that sotr,e of these days we shall learn that this Govern­ment are actually calling in a syndicate to help them to draw thtlir salaries. They have already got Rvyal Commissions to advise them what to do, and now th"y want syndicates to do it for them. It is, nf course, gratifying to know that although the Government cannot see tbeir way to do anything for the unemployed-and that they seem tn be helpless in the matter-they have got a number of benevolent syndicates who will do it. But I rather suspect that these benevolent syndicates are somethiug like Dominie S:cmp,nn-that they will confer these little senices on the unemployed "for a consideta­ti.on." I have no objection to •yndicates. I believe there are a very large number of mem­bers on this side of the House who at one time nr another were-or are, perharJs, now-mern bers of syn<licates, so that I have no objection to syndicates pe1· se. I have no objection to capital­ists, >md I have no objection to money earning money in a leg-itimate way. But I am sick of this talk about the unemployed-this profec·sion of a de'!<'e to help the unem]Jloyed--when the hon. gentleman who made it knows-and we who heard him know perfectly well-that the thing is simple hmnbu>;".

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE: You are judging him by yourself.

Mr. KIDS TOX: The honourable Minister without a nortfolio talked this afternoon about "Labour mint." This is capitalistic cant. This is the old promise of Sir Thomas Mcil wraith of "a big loaf" over again. \Vhenever the Govern~ ment want to make an ass of the working man, they tell him that they want to find employment for him. Here is the simple, indisputable truth about t.he matter-the truth which every man in this Hou'e perfectly recognises: The proposal of the Bill we are now discutising is sin1piy an expe­dient to etutU1e certain person::;; to make 1noney, and the Premier knrJws that just as well as I do.

The 1'HEiliiER: Or to lose money. Mr. KIDSTON: Xo, I do not want them to

lose money. If they come before us with a legitimate propo ·a!, I am quite willing to assist them so far a;; I can in making money. This proposal will give that syndic>1te the power to make money in one of three ways, or all of three ways. The syndicate may nse this concession to work their mine, and so far as that is concerned I have every desire to help them. I think that is a perfectly legitimate way to make money, and the

Oallide [9 AUGUST.] Railway Bill. 305

more money the syndicate make in that way the better I would be pleased, and the better it would be for the whole district in which they are work­ing, and for the whole colony. In that respect I am prepared to do anything reasonable to g-ive the syndicate facilities to work their mine. But there is another way in which the syndicate may make money out of this conces,ion, and that is out of the railway. I object entirely to that. I have shown what is likely to happen, and what some of my colleagues know is happening now in the Chillagoe district-that giving this con­cession means giving that company the power to exploit the whole district. I claim that we in Queensland ought to keep to the principle of only building railw"ys for the public be,nefit, and that we should permit no rail ways at all to be built fnr the sn,ke of making profits for private individuals. Then there is a thrrd way in which these concessionaries may ,make money, and it is the most objectionable of all-thn,t is, they may make money on the Stock Exchange out of the British investor or any other investor, for I do not suppose they would be particular about the nationality. I do not think I am going too far when I sn,y that the Premier knows perfectly well that the Callide syndicate have no more intention of building a railwav to Callide Creek th<1n I have, or than he has. The Premier knows perfectly well that the day this Bill becomes law-if it ever does become law, which I hope it will not-the fact will be cabled to London, and the clev''" gentlemen who are getting this concession out of Parliament will make their money on the Stock Exchange, and will leave somebody else to hold the baby-they will leave somebody else to develop tl;>e latenb resonrceg of the wonderfully rich mineral distrrct around Gla,dstone,

The PREMIER : Is that what you would do? Mr. KIDSTON": It is quite possible that that

is what I would do, if I were a member of that syndicate. I do not pretend that I am any better than the individuals who compose that syndicate; I know I am not better, and I do not make any pretence about it. I was discw,siug this matter some few weeks ago with an hon. member in this Rouse-I see him opposite to me now-and after we had fought it for some minutes that hon. member said--

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: 'Where was that-on the veranda?

Mr. KIDSTON : The hon. gentleman is developing a curiosity which I will not gratify. That hem. gentleman said to me, "Y on want to be a great deal too good to the Government." Of course by "the Government," he meant the public of Queensland. Now, it appears to me that hon. members are here for the purpoFe of looking after the interests of Queensland, and it is a curious charge to make against a member of Parliament that he is trying to do that too much.

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE : He was chaffing you.

Mr. KIDSTON: Very possibly. But as the gentleman happened to be a Scotchman, he is not addicted to jokes. In saying what I have said, I do not think I reflect in any way upon the individuals who compose the Callide coal syndicate. These gentlemen believe they have got hold of a good thing, and they will make money out of it when they float the mine. But I do not see that we have any business to help them with that scheme--

Mr. BROWNE: Especially when we have an anti-l'ambling law.

Mr. KIDSTON: Though I am quite willing to help the syndicate in a legitimate way to develop the mineral resources of the district. We are told that the Government cannot build this line.

1900-w

The PR~;i\HER : That they would not be justi· fied in building it.

Mr. KIDSTON : I know that the Govern­ment have put it in a great many different ways. The Premier now tells us that they would not be justified in building it. The Secretary for Rail­ways told us last night that Queensland was getting beyond the control of the Government­it was too big a job altogether.

The PREMIER : Did he say that ? Mr. KIDSTON : And th:tt they had to get

syndicates to help them to build railways because the Government could not raise the money.

The PREMIER: Would you vote for the Govern­ment building a line of this sort ?

Mr. KIDSTON: I will tell thehon. gentleman by and by what I will vote for. In the mean­time, I may say that before the Government had any right to come to the House with a drastic proposal of this sort, they ought to have come down with their own railway proposals.

The PREMIER: "Why? Mr. KIDS TON: For this reason, which I

think will appeal to the hon. gentlemen himself, whether he admits it or not. If the Government had come down with their railway policy and bad said to the House, "\V e see our way to pro­pose these lines, but we cannot see our way to do any more, and if the House thinks it neces­sary that more rail ways should be built in Queensland, then we must invite the assistance of private enterprise." That would have been a legitimate courGe to follow. But instead of that, they drench the House with this deluge of private syndicate railwn,ys. It is unmistakable that the result of the last loan is being nsed to frighten and force us into this policy. We are told that our credit is practically stopped ; that we cannot do this kind of work for ourselves any longer.

The PREMIER : Who told you that? Mr. KIDSTON : 'l'he Secretary for Railways

said so last niqht. The PREMIER: He said we would not be justi­

fied in building this line. Mr. KIDSTON : The bon. gentleman said

something like this : "Queensland is so large that it is altogether beyond our purse, with our small population, to meet the requirements of railway development, particularly in view of the dlfficultv of raising rnoney."

Hon." D. H. DALRYJiiPLE: It would take £25,000,000 to build the railways that are desired at the present time.

Mr. KIDS'ION": 'l'he Government seem to be coming down--and it is about the funniest position I ever heard of intelligent men taking up-and saying "we cannot afford to build all the railways, but we will pick out the profitable lines to build, and we will get benevolent syndicates to come in and build the unprofitable ones." I have heard about the millenium, when the lion and the lamb will lie down together, but this is a sort of millenium in which the lamb will eat the lion. The fact of the matter is that all this talk is mere bluff. The Treasurer, I regret to say, has a natural tendency to help speculators. I do not eay that with any improper meaning. I believe it is simply the result of his training, and upbringing, and political associations which make him believe that this kind of thing will be for the benefit of the colony.

Mr. STEW ART: Re does not believe anything of the sort.

Mr. KIDS TON: I have no doubt that the hon. gentleman believes that, and he is tryin" to induce the House to accept this kind of thing under the belief that we cannot do it for our­selves. Now, the hon. gentleman knows quite well that he could build 500 miles of railway in Queensland during the next five years and not

306 Oallide [ASSE.M:BLY.] Railway Bill.

ask for a penny of new money on th6 London market. I think the hon. gentleman will admit that.

The PREMIER : It depends upon where you want to build them.

Mr. KIDS TON: If that is so, and the hon. gentleman as good as admits it--

The PR,;}mm: No, I do not. Mr. KIDSTO:i\r: I do not care whether he

admits it or not-it is true. The Government of Queensland can quite afford to build BOO miles of railway at a cost of £1,500,000, and c .. u-ry out other necessary public work" during the next two yeMs without going to London for a penny piece.

The PRE}!IER: You are bbwing hot and cold now.

Mr. KIDSTON: No, I a!Il not blowing hot and cold.

The PRimiER: One day you say we have no money and the other that we hrtve plenty.

Mr. KIDS TON: I am not s:tying· we have plenty of money. I quite recogni·;e that Queens­land has a very difficult time in front, and I very much re-gret it. I am talking about all the Tre,surer can do with the money at his dic,posal during the next two years; anc1 I my that being the case, neither the Premier nor the :Yiinister for Railways is justified in coming to this House and wailing about the helplesmess of the people of Queensland to do this work themselves.

The PREJ\!IElt : You are doing all the wailing. Mr. KIDS TON: And we have no need to

throw the whole thing into the hands of syndi­cates for the purpose of getting it done. And, even if I were to admit everything that has been said by unemployed, and everything that has been said about the hardupedness of t.he Government, I do not think it would be a legitimate argument, or a snffieient argument, to justify this Honse in adop' ing in this whole, ,Je way this system of private railways. Of comse I know that what I say on this matter is not likely to convince the Premier; and as I am anxious to convince him, I will quote him from the Courier to the same effect.

The SECRETARY l•'OR RAILWAYS: \Vho are you quoting now?

Mr. KIDSTON: The Courier-the paper that runs the Government.

An HONOURABLE :MEMBER: The Governm.,nt spider.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: The Courier does not know everything.

Mr. KIDS TON: Perhaps the Hon. the Minbter for Railways does not know tbat there are a good many things that he does not know.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: I know a good many things that I know the hon. member would not like to have disclosed.

Mr. KIDSTON: If the hon. gentleman could disclose anything that would be very unpleasant to me, he would have disclosed it long ago. However, I was wanting to show the Premier what the Courier says.

The PREMIER: I have read the Courie1· long ago.

Mr. KIDS'rON : I am glad to hear the hon. me m her reads the Conrie1·, and I regret to see that it has so little effect upon him. I wonder now how the Cm<·rier· can possibly expect to have any effect upon the Labour party, when it does not seem to affect the Premier.

Hon. D. H. DALRHJPLE: You said it ran the Government about two or three minutes ago.

. Mr. KIDSTON : The Courier· replies to the only arguments which have been brought forward on the other side in favour of private railway", and says that, even admitting- those arguments, they do not justify the building of these rail­ways.

The PREMIER : What is the date ?

Mr. KIDSTON: The d0ote is 23rd July, 1900. Ti1e PREMJER : They had not seen the Bills

then. Mr. KIDS TON : The Cuurie>· says-Bnt tile incentives behind private railway enterprise

are a.t the moment dangerously strong. 'l'here is the limited spending power of tlle Government; there is the anxiety to compensate for the bur_;e arrest placed upon pastoral production by the stimulation of other industries. It is laudable to have re~ard to these things: but it is possible to make a bad use of them; ancl we axe suspicious of them when they arc 1mt f-orward as rea..;ons f'o1· subsiituUng private for State constructiOn of railways. I am ple.1sed to say I agree with the Courier on this matter.

N.Ir. DAWSON: A gleam of intelligence. Mr. s~'EWART : A lucid interval. Mr. KIDSTON : There is another matter,

now I have this clipping in my hand, and that is tbe danger of introducing· log-rolling into Queens­land.

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE: Oh! Heard of that beforf.

Mr. KIDSTON : I think it will be admitted that it is to be re::;retted if in any way the high purity of our public life, and the unimpeach­able character of so n1any of our puhlic Inen, shonld be sullied by anything at all a]1proaching, or having the suspicion of log-rolling. Yet the Co1wier distinctly esserts that one nf the dangers of this system of building railways is the intro­duction of log-rolling. 'l'his is what the Cow·ier says-

There will be d::tnger enough of the pt'eference of privrtte to public interes~-tlutt is, plainly, of log-rolling -without our going ont of our way to seek it. I have a good deal to .c·cy on the subject.

HoNOURABLE 1\'IE}JBEHS: Go on. The SECRETARY _For~ ItAIL\VAYS: SR.y it Bll. l\ir. KIDSTON: I feel something like the

hon. member for :FlindcrM. I have 400 other reasons, but I will stop when I have said as nmch as will enable the hon. gentlem2,n to under­stand the position I take up. I was referring to the subject of log-rolling; and it will not be anything wonderful, think, to hon. gentlemen who kno-O" anything about the unspe ·kable corruption that h. s taken place in Amel'ica in connection with private rnihvays, if the intro­duction of private ral!wa:."s into Queensland introduces something of the s .me kind ,,f thing. And as a matter of fact the same kind of thing has startAd now. I have in my hand the copy of a letter which I was shown by a gentle­man, vvhose name I cannot give, and f01~ that reason I will not even name the writer. lL was offering a bribe to this ~entleman. He was sup­posed to have sorne influence in pron1otlng the passage of one of the l'tail way Bills now laying np~on the table of the House, and this was that provision in the letter : that a"' soon as the Bill possed he would get in cash £150 and 600 shares.

HoNOt:HABLE MEMBERS: Oh, ob! The PHEJ\IIJCR : Y on ought to disclose the name

of your informant. Mr. KIDSTON: Wait a moment while I tell

you : Th"e sha1 es would be Korth £2 each. The PREMIEH: You ought to disclose your

informant. The SECHETARY FOR RAILWAYS: Name him. Mr. KlDSTON: I have already stated that

the gentleman who showed me the letter told me that he was unt1ble to permit me to mention his natue for business reasons .

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTuRE: Is that the way you t<pread the lie?

Mr. KIDS TON: And for that reason I have not given the name of the gentleman who wrote the letter.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: You are bound to divulge the whole of it.

Callide [9 AUGUST.] Rail-way Bill. 307

Mr. KIDSTON: I am afraid I cannot. The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: Y on ought to

divulge the whole of it. The SPEAKER : Order, order! 'l'he PREMIER: It is your dutv to the public

and to the House to name your informant. Mr. KIDSTON : The hon. gentleman will

aliow me to be the judge of my [11'30 p.m.] duty in this matter. I thought it

was my duty to make it publicly known what was being done. I could not help wondering if the Courier knew anything about this kind of thing when they spoke of the danger of log-rolling. I considered it my duty, although I could not give the name--

The PRE:HIE!l: You ought to give the name. Mr. KIDS TON: I cannot br?::tkconfidence-­The SECRE1'ARY FOH AGRICULTURE: Any mem-

ber could turn out libels like that by the dozen. Mr. KIDS TON: Any member could stand up

and do this, but will any member do it unless he has actually seen the letter?

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE: It looks very fishy. Mr. TuHLEY: Yes; it does look very fishy. Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE : The unsupported

statement does. Mr. KIDSTON: The letter is in existence,

and if the hon. gentlemen are very positive about getting it, perhaps the lett,er can be pro­duced.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: You produce it. Produce it !

Mr. KIDSTON: In the meantime, as I told you to begin with, I have done what my duty in the matter was.

Hon. D. H. DALRYMPLE: No, you have not. Mr. KIDBTON : And unfortunately I cannot

go any further at the present time than I have gone. But you have it on my personal word of honour that what I have said is absolutely true. ·what does it matter to me? I have no motive at all in saying such a thing if it were not true. Do hon. gentlemen pretend that they don't believe it ? I am looking at some of the men who have been in Queensland politics since the time of the steel rails--

Mr. STEWAH'r: And many other steals. Mr. KIDS TON: Since the time of the s>tlmon­

coloured allotments ; since the time of the Queensland National Bank, and they pretend not to believe a little thing like that !

The PREMIER; I don't believe it. Mr. FISHER : You don't believe he saw the

letter? Hon. D. H. DALRY>rPLE: Vv'hy not prodnce

the letter? The SECRE1'ARY FOR RAILWAYS: I challenge

him to produce it. Mr. KIDSTON: I have no wish to detain

the House any longer. It i.s not of the slightest consequence to me whether the Premier believes I saw the letter or not. It does not alter the fact that I did see the letter, and that the thing is being done.

An HoNOURABLE MEMBER: vVho wrote the letter.

Mr. KIDSTON : And it is a perfectly natural thing ; the thing is done over and over again.

JYir. J. HAMILTON: The man who has such a letter and doeR not produce it is a dishor.ourable man.

Mr. KIDSTON: The same kind of thing has been done before over and over again, nnd really such a pretence of unbelief, after the hiHtory of Queensland political affairs for the last ten year,~, is surprising.

Mr. J. H.HIILTON : Any man who has snch evidence and does not prcduce it is dishonour­able.

Mr. TURLEY: You a,re a judge of honour. Mr. J. H.U!ILTON: You are not, to judge from

your reputation.

Mr. KIDS TON: I think in any case I have shown a good many reasons why it is highly desirable that before this new system of things is introduced into Queensland, the people of Que0nsland should have some voice in the matter themselves. I do sincerely trust that every man who pretends to believe that the people of Queensland are wanting this thing will give them a chance.

ME>IBERS of the Opposition: Hear, hear! Mr. KIDS TON: Some hon. members oppo­

site had a great deal to say about the referendum in regard to federation. There are thousands of people in Queensland whom this thing will affect far more bitterly than the question of federation will affect them; and I say this thing should not_ be clone until the people of Queensland have been consnlted.

lYIEMBBcRS of the Opposition : Hear, hear! The PREMIER : I have already spoken in

this debate, bnt I think, by permission of the House, I may make a fe" remarks with refer­ence to the statement made by the hon. member for Rockhampton.

HONOURABLE MEMBERS : Hear, hear ! The PRE;I;IIEH: I think it is the duty of the

hon. member for Rockhampton to substantiate the statements he has made.

MEi\!BERfl on the Government side: Hear, hear!

The PREI\IIER: It ought to be done, and I promise this House, that if, in connection with any of these railway Bills, any attempt is proved to have been made to influence any hon. member in that respect, I will at once drop that railway Bill.

HONOURABLE MEMBERS : Hear, hear ! Mr. KmsTON : I did not say a member of this

House. The PREMIER: You spoke of bribing a

member of this Honse. Mr. KIDSTON: If I produce this letter will the

hon. gentleman drop this Bill? Hon. D. H. DAI"ItnrPLE: No, because it is

probably bogus. 'l'he l'Rli:MIER : What I say is that if the

hon. member for Rockhampton can substantiate a.nd prove his statement that any attempt has been made to bribe a member of this House to vote for any of these lines--

Mr. KIDSTON: I did not sav that. Mr. BnrnGES : That was the inference. An HoNOURABLE ME~IBER : He said "a man

supflosed to have influence." The PREMIER: If that is shown to be true,

I will at once drop any line in connection with which any attempt of that ~ort has been made.

lYIE}!BERS on the Government side : Hear, hear!

Mr. J. HAMILTON : There is a challenge. Produce your letter.

Mr. BRIDGES: I beg to move the adjourn­ment of the debate.

HoN. D. H. DALRYMPLE: I should like to ask what the opinion of the House is on the subject. Personally, I do not think we should adjourn at this time. The hon. member for Rockhampton has rnanaged to get in a very long speech at a time when hon. members have been debarred from going home. I prefer now that the debate should be carried on, especially as a great, deal of time has been lost to-day in intro­ducing Bills.

Mr. BRO\IVNE: As the hon. gentleman wants to know what the opinion of the House is on the adjournment of the debate, I may s<ty t,hat the Premier, treating me, as leader of the Opposition, with the courtesy he has a! ways done, agreed that immediately Mr. Kidston finished his speech a member on the Government side would move the adjournment of the debate. That has

308 Address in Reply. [COUNCIL.]

been done, in accordance with the Premier's promise, and I trust that even the Minister without a portfolio will not induce the Premier to break that promise.

The PREMIER: I understood that the dtbate was to be finished at half-past 10.

Mr. BROWNE: We could not help it. The PREMIER : And that it was arranged

that the gentleman should not speak for long. Mr. BROWNE: Oh, no ! The PREMIER: It seems that the hon.

member for Rockhampton, under an hour and a-half, could not express his views.

Mr. BROWNE: Keep on then, if you like. The PREMIER: No, as I made the promise

I will keep it; but I think the leader of the Opposition should have put somebody up who would not have kept the House so long.

Mr. BROWNE: When we went out to arrange the matter Mr. Boles wa' speaking, and when we got back Mr. Kidston was up.

The PREMIER: I think we ought to adjourn now ; but I hope the leader of the Opposition will try and get some business done. The whole night was wasted over the introdLlCtion of these Bills.

Mr. LESINA: If you had given us the informa­tion there would have been no delay.

The PREMIER : It is not usual to give information on the notice for the introduction of a Bill. The notice for the introduction is brought on so that the Bill may be tabled and the information given. I promise the House that all the information we have on the matter in connection with these lines will be tabled as soon as it can be got ready. I promised that to the leader of the Opposition, but I was not going to be bullied and dictated to by the hon. member for Flinders. A question asked in a reasonable way will be civilly answered, but when the hon. member for Flinders stood up and tried to bully me, I was certainly not going to give way to him.

MEiiiBERS on the Government side: Hear, hear!

Question-That the debate be now adjourned -put and passed; and the resumption of the debate made an Order of the Day for Tuesday next.

The House adjourned at nineteen minutes to 12 o'clock.

Papers.