Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 25 JULY 1901

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

158 Notice cif Motion. [ASSEMBLY.] Questions.

THURSDAY, 25 JuLY, 1901.

The SPEAKER (Hon. Arthur M01·gan, Warwick) took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

APPROPRIATION BILL No. 1. AssENT.

The SPRAKER: I have to report that I this day presented to the Lieutenant-Governor the Appropriation Bill Ko. 1, and that His :BJxcel­lency was pleased, in my presence, to subscribe a'sent thereto in the name and on behalf of His Majesty.

The SPEAKER further '1.nnounced the re­ceipt of a message from the Lieutenant-Governor intimating his assent to the said Bill.

MEMBERS SWORN. l'IIr. Charles Borromeo Fitzgerald, member for

the electoral district of Mitchell, and l'llr. Herbert Jheemont Hardacre, member for the electoral district of Leichhardt, took the oath of allegiance to His Majesty the King.

QUESTIONS. REPORT m' GENERAL INSPECTOR EWART.

HoN. K B. FORREST (Brisbane North) asked the Premier-

Referring particularly to the report of the General Inspector, dated 3lst May last. addressed to the l:nder Secretary, Department of Public Instruction, which appeared in the report of the Secretary for Public Instruction for 1900,-

l. Whether any evidence has been submitted to the ~Hnister of "the eo m plaints, the wranglings, the mis­conduct, the Relfishness, the conceit, the laziness" of any member or members of the staff!.'

2. \i\Tha.t confirmation can be found for the statement that thf· dep~rtJ11ent i!'; unable to rid itself of any man, "well known to be a scandal in the neighbourhood, till it is clearly shmvn th&t he is a sot ; or of a woman, who is so harsh and ungracious in speech and manner as to be feared by her pupils, disliked by the parents, and detested by her fellow-teachers"?

3. To what extent is the practice tolerated whicb permits teachers "to fling scrawly, unpunctuated, ill­composed, aml. uugramm:.tticalletter~ at the office "?

.t. Assuming that the :Jiinister's attention has been directed by th-e department to the matters referred to in (l) and (2) as aboYe, has any action been taken?

The PREMIER (Hon. R. Philp, Townsvi/lc) replied-

l. Yes. 2. 'rhe records of the department support the state­

ment. 3. The practice is not tolerated; efforts are continu­

ously being made to check it. 4. Yes. Every case is dealt with as effectively as the

circumstances will permit.

Questions. [25 JuLY.] Agl'icultural Lands, Etc., Bill. 159

ALLEGJW t:SE OF RAILWAY TRICYCLE BY MR. J. T. BELL, M.L.A.

Mr. GIVENS (Cairns) asked the Secretary for Railways-

1. Is it true that '\lr. J. T. Bell, }I.L.A. for Dalby, had the use of a tricycle on 15th July instant, to traYel on the rnilwav from Jiacalister en r _lttle to Brisbane?

2. Is it llot against the railway regulations for any person outside the service to use a tricycle on the State railway lines?

3. \ifho gave the member for Dalby permission to use the tricycle?

4. Have members of Parliament. in addition to their raihvay passes, the right to travel on the State 1'aihvays by tricycle, and also the free use of tricycles :w

The SECRE'I.'ARY JTOR RAILWAYS (Hon. J. Leahy, Bul/oo) replied-

1, Xo. 2. Yes.

DEPOSITS IN CONNECTION \\'n'H PIUVATE RAILWAYS.

Mr. W. HAMILTON (G1·rqory) asked the Secretary for Railways-

!. How many of the promoters of the private railway Bills passed last se'lsion have paid the neces·,ary deposit within the specified time!-'

2. \ifhat are the names of those who hase paid within the specified time P

3. \Vbat are the names of those,vho have failed to do so?

The SECRETARY :B'OR RAILWAYS replied-

1. Three. 2. The Callide Coal Syndicate, Lirnited ; the Queens~

land ~ilver Lend 3:Iint-·'. Limited; and the :J.Iount Garnet Freehold Copper and Silver 3Iiniug Company, IJimited.

3. The Glassford Creek Copper :\line Proprietary has not yet paicl.

RRTillE}IENT m· MR. H. C. STANLEL Mr. BOWMAN ( Wa?'rcgo) asked the Secre­

tary for Railways-1. Is it true that mr. H. C Stanley. Chief Engineer

for Railwu,ys, is retirh1g from that position? 2. Is he retiring before he had previously intended

to do so? 3. If so, why? 4. Is his retirement absolutelv voluntary, or is it

practically forced~ ~ 5. If the latter, will the Minister say why?

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS re­piied-

l\Ir. Stanley. who was appointed to the raihvay service under the Civil Service Act of 1863, requested permission to retire under the provisions of that Act.

SEAI>'ORTH EsTATE. Mr. LESINA (Clamant) asked the Secretary

for Public Lands-1. On what date was the Sealorth Estate thrown open

to selection':! 2. lTp to date, what number of applications for hold­

ings has been m::tcle by intending selectors 2 3. 'rhe amount of such holdings selected?

The SJWRETARY J<'OR PUBLIC LANDS (Hon. W. B. H. O'Connell, 1viusgrat•e) replied-

1. The 5th of March, 1901. 2 and 3. None.

ALLEGED St:BSTITU'l'ION OF CONCRETE FOR GRANITE IN NEW LANDS 0J>'l<'IOE.

Mr. LE SIN A asked the Secretarv for Public \Vorks- '

1. Is it true that concrete is being substituted for granite in some portions of the work in connection with the building of the new Lands Office:--

2. If so, will the .:\Iinister state the difference in the schedule prices?

TheSECRETARY:B'OR PURLIC WORKS: (Hon. J. I,eahy, Bulloo) replied-

1. l'io.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT ::\OTICE.

ALLEGED DISGRACEJ<'UL PROCEEDl~GS AT \VOOL­LOONGABBA SPoRTS GHot:Nll.

Mr .. TENKI::'\SOX (Wide Bay) ·1sked the Home Secretary, without notice-

1. HaR the attentieu of the Home Secretary been drawn to the alleged disgrttcefnl proceedings at the \Voolloon:.!J.tblx~ Svorts Ground on ~aturday night la~.;t?

2. If so, is it his intention to cause an inquiry to be made into the matter:~

The HOME SECRETAHY (Hon. J. ]'. G. Foxton, Ca?'ncwTon) replied-

1. Yes. ~. I have already instructed inquiries to be made,

and they are now proceeding, with tlle view to decide what action, if any, shall be taken.

PAPERS. The folbwing papers, l<tid on the table, were

ordered to be printed :-(1) Report of the Joint Committee of the

two House& for the management and superintendence of the Parliamentary Buildings for the period from 1st

(2)

August, 1900, to 30th ,June, 1901.

Return of advances made during the year ended 30th June, 1901, under the M8•<t and Dairy Produce Encourage­ment Acts, 1893-5.

(3) Report of the Commissioner of Police for the year 1900.

(4) Report. from the Registrar-General on agricultural and pastoral statistics for 1900.

PETITIONS. LICENSIXG ACT-SUNDAY THADIXG.

HoN. E. B. FORREST presented a petition from the Defence Lodge, Nu. 'i, Independent Order of Good Templars, protesting against Sunday trading by licensed victuallers.

Petition received. A petition of similar purport and prayer was

presented and received, as follows:-By the PREMIER (Hon. R. Phiip, 'l'owns­

villc), from the Chapter and Synod of the Diocese of ::":' orth Queensland.

The tlECRETARY FOR AGIUCULTURE (Hon. D. H. Dalrymple, lliackay) presented a petition of similar pllrport and prayer from certain residents of :\oiackay, and suggesting that no change be made in the present law until the question had been submitted to a referendum. Petition read and received.

GRA:lEIIAR SCHOOL SCHOLARSHIPS.

The SECRETARY FOH AGRICULTURE presented a petition from certain persons in the Mackay district, protesting against the extension of the scholarship system to other than grammar school<.

Petition read and received.

AGRICULTURAL LAXDS PUHCHASE ACT ~-U\'IENDMENT BILL.

On the motion of the SI!JCRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS, it was resolved-

That the House '"ill aL its next sitting resolve itself into a Committee of the \)~hole to consider of the desirableness of introducing a BHl to ameud the AgriH cultural Lancls Purchase Acts, 1894 and 1897.

160 Shwrei's Bill. [ASSEMBLY. J Workmen's Compensation Bill.

ABORIGINALS PROTECTlOK ACT A::\IEND:VLE~T BILL.

:FIRST READING.

On the motion of the HOl\IE SECRJ<J'l'ARY, a Bill to amend the Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act, 1897, was introduced, and read a first time. The second re.tding "'as made an Order of the Day for Tuesday next.

ACCO::\fl\IODATION OF SHEARE.h.S BILL. INTRODVOTION IN CoMMITTEE.

Mr. IV. HAMILTON (Grego;·y) moved-1. That it is desirable that n Bill be introduced to

proTide for the proper and sufficient accommodation of shearers.

2. That an address be prf'',ented to the Lient~mant­Governor, praying that His 1:xcel1ency wjJl be pleased to recommend the necessary appropriation to give effect to such !Hll.

HoN. A. S. COWLEY (Herbe1·t) thought the Committee were entitled to some information from the hon. member as to the amount of money which it was proposed to spend in con­nection with carrying the measure into effect. It was a very serious matter to be asked to pass a resolution of this d<"cription, and commit themselves to expenditure, without having any idea what the amount would be. It was nec"s­sary that they should know the amount required, because the Bill was nJoved by an irresponsible member. If the GovPrnment had come down with a similar res,1lution they would be respon­sible to the House for their action; and if the House disagreed with it they could ex­pre-"s their di'""'grePment in the usual way, and the Government would vacate office and their opponents go in. It was altogether different with the hon. member. The incur­ring of expenditure by private members was safeguarded by providin" that no motion of this description should pass unless the necessary expenditure for carrying out the objects of the Bill was recommended by the Governor; and tberdore he maintained that before hon. mem­bers were ae;ked to come to a vote it was only fair and just that they should be informed, approximately, of the amount required. This was especially the case, seeing that this was to be followed by another Bill of a like naturP, and seeing also that there wa", a deficit to be faced this year, ami would probably be another deficit next year. Hon. members should be very care­ful before committing themselves in any shape or form to any expenditure a,;ked for by an irresponsible member. He would be very much obliged if the hon. member could give the required information.

J\Ir. \V. HAMILTON said he was going to say he was surprised at the hon.

[4 p.m.] member for Herbert objecting to a motion of this sort. but he was

not at all surprised at that. At the present stage, he thought it would be much better for hon. members to wait till they had seen the Bill. He had endeavoured to frame the Bill in such a manner that its administration would not cost more than £20 a year. He had framed the Bill so that the police could be used in its adminis­tration. All the districts could be cut up into police districts, and the police could do the work of ir>.spectors while they were doing their ordinary patrol duty. The Bill was for a very humane purpose ; and, only ten minutes ago, he saw in the Brisbane Telegraph that a sin1ilar measure had been mentioned in the Governor's Spe~ch in New South \Vales. It was the law in New Zealand, and it had been the law there for many years. The difference was that

the New Zealand measure was much more drastic than the Bill he wi,hed to introduce. It dealt with woolsheds. This Bill only dealt with the accommodation for these men to eat and sleep in, and sanitary conveniences. It did not deal with woolsheds. He was quite sure that hon. members would have no objection to the Bill as it was framed-no reasonable man could have any objection to it.

Mr. CO\VLEY said the hon. member was entirely mistaken in thinking that he had any objection to the Bill. He was simply asking the h<m. 1r.ember for information. Now the hon. member had given the information he desired­namely, that the expenditure in conn8ction with the measure would not exceed £20 per annum.

Mr. IV. HAMILTON : I don't think so. Mr. COWLEY said he was under the impres­

sion, looking at the title of the Bill, that it meant providing accommodation in the way of erecting houses for these men. If it only meant the supervision of houses already erected and the necess!1ry sanitary accommodation, he had no objection to the measure. Not knowing the nature of the Bill, he thought that the expendi­ture might mean thousands a year to the State. Therefore, he thought it was very necessary that, before a motion of that sort was passed asking the Govel'nor to make the necessary recommenda­tion for the expenditure in connection with it, the hon. member should have given the committee some idea of the expenditure. That information had heen obtained. He knew the hon. member ·was a practical man in such matters, and if he said the expenditure would not exceed .£20 a. ye:tr he (Mr. Cowley) was quite satisfied.

::\fr. IV. HAIIIILTON: I don't think it should exceed that. At any rate, there will Le no large expenditure in connection with the Bill.

Mr. CO\VLEY said that, evAn if the expendi­ture was double that amount, the House, he thought, would not cavil at it.

The PREMIER said he had no objection to the introduction of the Bill, but he would like hon. members to remember that last session, when he introduced a Bill, it was opposed hy the Labour party at that stage. They would not allow the Bill to be read, but opposed it on the title.

Mr. REm: Which Bill was that? The PREMIER: One of the private railway

Bills. If the htm. member for Gregory wanted to g< t cotntesy and consideration shown him, he hoped the hon. member would show it to others. He hoped the hon. member for Gregory would in future extend the ;ame courtesy to the Govern­men'. side of the House as was now shown to him.

Question put and passed. The House resumed; and the resolutions were

reported and agreed to.

WORKMEN'S COMPEJ'\SATION BILL. INTRODUC1'ION IN CoMnii'l'TEE.

:\fr. RYLAND (Gympie) moved-1. 'l'hat it is desirable that a Bill be introduced to­

amend the law in re:pect to compensation to workmen for accidental "injuries suffered in course of their employment. and for other purposes.

2. That an address be presented to the Lieutenant­Governor, 11rayingthnt His Exeollency will be pleasecl to recommend the necessary appropriation to give effect to such Bill.

Mr. COWLEY said he must ask the hon. member for Gympie to kindly give the same in­formation that he had asked the mover of the previous resolution to give. Had the hon. mem­ber any idea of the amount of appropriation that would be required for the purpose he had in view?

Sale qf Land for [25 JULY.] Recenue Pu1'poses. 161

Mr. RYLAND said the amount of appropria­tion in connection with the Bill would. be "ery small indeed. In fact the only expense would be in cases where there was an arbitrator appointed, and in some cases where such matters would be referred to the District Uourt. So the expense in connection with the Bill would be very small. He did not think there was any­thing to prevPnt the Bill passing through the House.

Mr. COWLEY understood the hon. member to say that the expenditure in connection with this Bill would be in connection with its adminio­tration, and that he was not asking for any sum of money in the way of compensation to work­men.

Mr. RYLAND: No. Mr. COWLEY: All he wanted was informa­

tion on the matter. He wanted to know where they were before the Governor was approached, asking him to make a recommendation with regard to expenditure. He understoPd the hon. member to say that the expenditure in connection with the measure would be very small and that it would be incurred in connection with the administration of the Act, and not to compensate workmen for accidents.

Mr. RYLAND : That is so. Question put and passed. The Hou"e resumed ; and the resolutions were

reported and agreed to.

MINING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY BILL. On the motion of Mr. JENKINSON (Wide

Bay), the House in committee affirmed the desirableness of introducing a Bill providing for mining on private property; and the resolution was reported and agreed to.

SALE OF LAND FOR REVENUE PURPOSES.

Mr. CURTIS (Rockhampton), in moving­That, in the opinion of the House, the policy of the

GovPrnment in selling the public estate in large areas by public auction for revenue purposes is inexpedient and opposed to the best interests of the State, and should be discontinued-

said : I think it will be generally admitted by hon. members that this motion comes very opportunely before the House, inasmuch as we are face to face with a large deficit on the public account. It has been suggested in certain quar­ters that the best, and easiest, and simplest way of [(etting rid of the deficit would be by selling the public estate. The deficit is a large one, an<l to "ipe it out by that means would involve the sale of a very lar[(e area of the public estate. I think, therefore, there should be a definite expression of opinion on the subject by this House ; otherwise it is not at all unlikely that the Government may feel inclined to avail t.hemsel ves of that means of getting over their present difficulty. I think it is desirable, both in the intereets of the Government and of all parties in the House that some definite un­derstanding should be come to in reference to the sale of the public estate for revenue purposes. It is generally known that the bulk of these sales has in the past been held in the Central division of the colony, with the consequence that a very strong feeling of antagonism has arisen in that part of the colony against the action of the Government. I will just read some particulars I was furnished with to-day by the Lands Department, showing- separately !.he total area of land sold in the different divisions of the colony under the Special Sales of Land Act of 1891. In the Northern division the

1901-11

total area only amounts to 13, fJSO acres ; in the Central division the area disposed d amounts to no less than 570,812 acres; and in the Southern division the area disposed of amounts to 328,519 acres. Thus it will be seen that in the Central division nearly twice the area of land has been sold that has been sold in the more populous Southern division, while in theN orthern division lesq than 14,000acres has heen sohl. Now, in view of these figures it will be very well understood that there is a strong feeling against the continue<l sale of the public estate for revenue purposes in the Central division. It is evident that the Central district ha. been specially selected for these sales under the provisions of the Special Sales of Land Act. From time to time many protests have been made both in this House and in the public Press of the colony against the continued sale of the public estate. I think the leading metropolit>tn paper, the Courie1·, has expressed its condemnation over and over again, ann it is not surprising, therefore, that Sir Hugh Nelson, when Premier, stated in this House that the Government had abandoned that policy and that there would be no recur­rence of it.

The PREMIER : Can you point out in Hansa1·d where he said that?

Mr. CURTIS : Referring to Hansarrl of the· 29th July, 1896, I find that Sir Hugh Nelson, expressed himself as follows :-

The settled policy of the colony is to look to revenue from our land more by facilitating and encouraging settlement than by the selling of large areas by auction.

After that time the late T. J. Byrnes became· Premier of the colony. \Vhen be visited Rock­hampton in May, 1898, the Chamber of Corn-· merce waited upon him, and a protest waS' made against the continuation of the policy of the sale of public lands. I think that in the interval which had elapsed since Sir Hug-h Nelson expressed himself in those terms, some sales had taken place. Hence, when the late Premier, the late Hon. T. J. Byrnes, visited Rockbampton in May, 1Sfl8, a deputation waited upon him. The matter wa.s put before him pretty fully, and in reply he said-

1Vith regard to the sale of land, vou have had evi­dence quite recently of what the teri1per of the Govern­ment of which I happen to be the head is in the fact that we withdrew large areas of land whioh were offered in this particular way. There are some, per­baps, who are advocate~ for sales ot land in larg'e areas; but I am strongly opposed to it. At the same time, the creation of free holds in moderate quantities is a policy that will always have my sympathy. I do not think anyone would object to that. At any rate, you ltlRY rest assured that there will be no resumption of any policy of selling land in large blocks. (Applause.) As regards grazing farm settlement, we are all sympa­thisers with the grazing farmer, because we all have evi­dence of the immense value they have been to a.ll parts of the country, and p~rticularly to the West. I look to him to solve many of the difficulties that at present obstruct settlement in that particular part of the colony. Instead of having large areas held by absentee owners, we shall have a resident proprietary, by which means we shall make Queensland the great country we all hope it may be. We shall give every aid to the grazing farmer. The complaints that Mr. Hartley has made are not confined to the Central division. T hear them ev0rywhere. The people are disappointed beca.use they are unable to get land; but it is hard to satjsfy ever.\' one. The Government will go on opening up t·he country, and I think you may rest assured that there w·in he plfmty of land thrown open to satisfy all desirable requirements. I think you can safely leave it in our hands.

Mr. BELL : What was the date of that?

Mr. CURTIS: That is what the late Hon. T. J. Byrnes said in Rockhampton, in reply to a protest by the Chamber of Commerce against the continuation of the policy of selling the

182 Sale of Land for [ASSEMBLY.] Revenue Ful'jJoses.

public estate. In view of that, it is uot surpris· ing, when it was notified recently that further sales were about to take place of large areas of land-that is, t.he sale of the Logan Downs aud the Northampton Downs statiuns-there was an ouLburst of indignation, especially after the distinct promise made by the late Mr. T. J. Byrnes1 when Premier. The Chamber of Corn. merce sent in their protest to the Government, and subsequently the Logan Downs land was withdrawn from sale, and latPr on the sale of he Northampton Downs was postponed, it being

notified that that was in consequence of the lessees not having surrendered their leases.

The SECRETARY l!'OR PUBLIC LANDS: Not the Logan Downs land.

Mr. CURTIS: No, I was speaking of the Northampton Downs land. It was notified in the Press that the sale of that land was postponed because the lessees had not surrendered their leases. We know that it is only recently that a large area of land on Telemon run was sold by public auction, and I heard the hon. member for Dalby, Mr. Bell, condemn that in Yery stro1;1g terms. It appears to me, from what he told us, and from what we have heard about it in other quarters, that that was nothing less than a very gross blunder.

The SECRETARY l!'OR Pu!lLIC LANDS : In what way?

Mr. CURT IS: Well, in it not having been properly advertised for one thing, and for another, that for land so situated close to a pro­posed line of railway extension-thP line to Richmond, I think-to be sold by public auction was cer'ainly very inexpedient.

The SECRETARY ],'Ol\ PcBLIC LANDS : That is "'matter of opinion.

Mr. CURTIS: We know the effect of this policy in other countries. In the United States ,of America especially, we know what have been the results of the sale of the public estate in large areas. Of course it results in land mono­poly, in the aggregation of huge land monopolies in the hands of a few persons, and the blocking of settlement. If we desire close settlement in this State, and there is no doubt that that appears to be the general desire, it must be a great error in policy to continue the sale of the public estate in the way in which it has been carried on for some time past. We know very well, of course, that the rentals that the lessees of these runs are paying are comparatiYely srr,all. We know that the amount i" very much less than the interest on the purchase money of any !Jor­tion of the property of these runs. Taking the purchasing price at 10s. an acre, at 5 per cent. that would mean, of course, 6d. an acre. There must be a very strong reason why the lessees, in view of that tact, prefer. to purchase the fee-simple rather than keep the leaseholds. No doubt there must be some great object to be gained, and I think it is Yery well understood that the lessees willingly buv back the portions of their runs w hi eh control and command much larger areas of country, which would be comparatively nsele8, after· wards to any other holding. It means that they buy what have been termed strategical positions -which are like so many forts, scattered about the country, commanding and c"ntrolling large are~s of country, to the det.riment of the State, and particularly to the disadvantage of th<;se who wish to eettle on the land, ur who reqmre the land in smaller blocks for uona fide settle­ment. I may say at this stage that I am not a land nationalist. l am certainly in favour of selling the public estate when it is done .to meet the uona fide demand for actual occupatwn 'md settlement, but that is an entirely different thing to what has been done by the GuvernmenL. 'Vhat the Hon. T. J. Byrnes said at Rock-

hampton was that he was distinctly opposed to the sale of the public estate in that way; he was only in favour of it being sold in comparatively small areas to meet the bona fide demand for actual settlement and occupation. No doubo the selling of land is an easy way of raising revenue, but whether that is very statesman like I very much question. I think there are a great many people in the country who would be prepared to say that it is nut a statesmanlike thing to do. Of course it will be said by those in favour of that being done that there is no actual property in land, and that the State can always tax the land. Of course we know that, but I presume that the lands on the Darling Downs were liable to taxation. Yet we find that after they were sold to the original purchasers from the Crown, and notwithstanding that they might be taxed by the State, the State has been obliged to step in and reacquire them in the public interest. It certainly seems to be an inconsistent and con­trarlictory policy for the Government to be repurchasing land in one portion of the colony and apparently repeating the blunder perpetrated when they first sold land by selling land in large areas in another portion of ~he colony.

Mr. LESINA : It is making the Centre pay for the experience of the South.

Mr. CURTIS: The hon. member interjects that it is making the Centre pay for the experi­ence of the South, and I am heartily inclined to concur in that expression of opinion. It dues seem Yery singular, and contradictory, that the Government should be trying to remedy the palpable blunder which was made when the Darling Downs lands were sold years ago by repurchasing them and at the same time be perpe· trating and repeating the same blunder by selling land in large areas in other portions of the colony, not to persons who intend to reside on the land and use it, but to speculators, or, I presume, mostly to speculator~. 'V e understand that very few of these lessees are actually occu­pying the land. Must of them are absentees, and we know from our own experience and from the experience of other countries, that that is the very worst, the moRt objecti<•n­able, and the most obnoxious form of land ownership that a country can have. On this great subject, and it certainly is a great

subject, and one of paramount im­[ 4 ·30 p. m. J portance, I think we can obtain

some jnHtruction and a warning from the experience of the United States of America. Tt1e United States, of course, had a vast estate, and, like some of the Australian colonies, they were ver:· prodigal in the sale of ic ; but they have found out now that they have been too prodigal, and that they have made a serious mistake which they would be glad to rectify if it were in their power to do so. I shall make a few quotations from a work by an American writer, J'Hr. W. A. Phillips, entitled "Labtlur, Land, and Law." The writer, re­ferring to the report of the General Lands Office for 1884, states that the Commissioner for Lands say8-

It iE> my opinion that the time has fully anived when \\'astefulness in tlle disposal of the public lands should cease, and that the portion remaining should be economised for the use of actual settlers only.

Further on, quoting from the report of the pre­sent Commis,ioner for Lands, Mr. Sparks, be says-

I found that the magnificent estate of the nation, in its public lands, has been, to a wide extent, 'vasted under defective and improYident laws, and through a laxity of public administration. Again, in a sentence pregnant with meaning, he sa vs-

The policy of disposing of public lands as a means of raising revenue has long since been rejected by enlightened views of public economy.

Sale qf Land fm• [25 JULY.] Revenue Pu11Joses- 163

Later on he says-Profiting by the loose modes of permitting the soil of

the country to go into the hands of speculators, the aristocrats of Europe have become landholders of great ·estates in this republic. The Duke of Sutherland, as we have seen, i~ the lA-rg£<-,t landholder in Britain. He owns ·125,000 acres in the United States. 'fhe Marquis of Tweedale has 1,750,000 acres. Sir Edward Reid and

· Co. own about 2,000,000 of acres in Florida. A :Scotch company, made up largely of titled gentlemen, have 500,000 acres in that State. A similar l"nglish company owns 3,000,000 of acres in Texas. At the present time some 20,000,000 of acres of lands of the'e united States are held by alien holders, capitalists, and noblemen, in farms or holdings of not less than 50,000 acres each, not to mention a very la.rge amount in holdings of a less acreage. In another paragraph occurs the following:-

In his remarks in the Stati~tics of A.griculture, Gene­ral "-""alker !'ays that "the amount of arable land still remaining subject to occupation under the homestead and pre-emption Acts, is barely sufficient to meet the demand of settlers for a Year or two to come." What then? Of those who muSt lne by farming, not much le~s than half of the agricultural population will have neither land, nor money tf) huy it, and must make the best terms they can with landlords. Nothing but prompt and vigorous steps can save the republic from the endless mischief and inequality that will follow by the creation of an immense body of agricultural renters and labourers subject and tributary to the landholding ·Class. Just one other short paragraph in conclusion-

The above causes al'e all leading to a system of land tenure that, with a great population, will be terrible for the working poor. One t.lnng is certain, such a form of landholding and a free Government cannot exist together. The (lltestion is whether we have nerve enough to correct such abUSPs in time. or shall "land monopoly'' and ''land speculation" be the -epitaphs on the tomb of Amenran liberty.

From that experience I think we can gain some instruction and a warning in dealing with our large landed estate. From the quotations which I have read from the report of the Cnmmissioner for Lands in the United State~, for 1884, we can plainly eee what has resulted from the prodigal sale of public lands in that C<nmtry. I maintain that there is a strong cousensus of opinion throughout the colony agaiust the saJe of the public estate in large blocks, though not against the socle of land for actual occupation to meet a bona fide dPmand. As one of the mAmbers for Rockhampton, where there is a very strong feeling against the sale of land in large blocks, I felt constrained to bring this motion before the House, and to get an expression of opinion upon it. ~he subject has been discussed to some extent during the debate on the Address in Reply, and a number of members have referred to it. The hon. member for Dalby last night expressed himself in terms of strong condemna­tion of the policy which I am now objecting to_ It is said by SO'lle that the sale of public lands in this way is the best means of wiping out the deficit, but I feel perfectly confident that there are other means of meeting that difficulty with­out having recourse to forced sales by <tuction of the lands in the interior for such purposes, A large area of land has been sold in New South \Vales and in other coloniPs for revenue pur­poses ; but, on referring yesterday to Coghlan, who is looked upon as a very good authority in matters of this kind, I find that he states that there is a very great doubt in the minds of the state,rnen of the other colonies as to the wi~dom or advisability of pursuing that r-olicy. I do nut know that it is necess,.ry for me to detain the House at any greater length. The question is, after all, a very simple one, and, as I have already said, it has been debated to some extent. It was debated ir, this House Sllme years ago, and a number of members have referred to it during the debate on the Address in Reply this session. It must be ,distinctly understood that what we object to is

the sale of public lands in large blocks for revenue purposes. If the sales were made to meet a bonii fide demand for land for actual occupation and use, we should not object to them, because we know that the result in all probability would be to secure a large number of small landowners, a sort of yeomanry class, and these are the people who would give strength and stability to the nation. But we do not want to see the lands going into the hands of a com­paratively small number of persons enjoying a huge land monopoly. It is not the landlord and tenant class that we want. What we desire to see is a territorial democracy-people li vin..; on the hnd, utilising it, rooted to it, bound to it by family ties_ Those are the sort of people we want, and not a great landholding class, because we know that in the past that has led tu great evils elsewhere, and that it will produce similar evils in this country. Without further remark, I beg to move the motion standing in my name_ * The PREMIER : I have no wish to address the House at any length on this subject, but I want to remind the hon. member for Rock­hampton that he will not m~ke his case any better by stating what is not a fact. He and others before him have said that on the one hand we are selling land, and that on the other hand we are buying the same land back again. ::'i•)W we have never done so, and we have no intention of doing so.

Mr. CGRTIS: You are buying back land on the Darling Downs.

The PREMIER: Yes, but that land was sold thirty years ago.

Mr. CURTIS : You are buying land back. The PREMIER: I say that that land was sold

thirty or forty years ago, and when it was sold we were under the impression that agriculture could not be )Jrofitably engaged in on the Darling Downs. In those days we did not know the con<1itinns of Queensland at all; but now every­one who has been any time in the colony knows its climatic conditions. They know the rainfall, and they also know where it is possible to enter into agricultural pursuits with any degree of profit. In those days we did not know that, and now, as opportunity offers, we are buying back estates which are close to the railway lines, and where it is likely we shall be able to sell the land again to people who are anxious to engage in agriculture.

Mr. Cm:tTJS: That is what I referred to. The PREMIER: But with regard to the

vVestern lands, I think that every hon. member is ~atisfied that they are not fit for agriculture.

Mr. CURTIS : They may be fit for grazing farm settlement.

The PREMIER: That is quite true_ I believe it is good grazing country, but, for the life of me, I cannot understand why people will buy these lands. I do not think sheep feed any better on freehold land than on leasehold, and you can get land on better terms by leasing it than by buying it. Still, there are people who will buy it. There was one f;'entleman who was a very large landholder-Mr. Tyson. He had a great earth hunger. Well, land that he gave the Government lOo<. an acre for some four or five years "go, and which has since been fenced and improved, can now be bought for 12''· 6d. an acre.

Mr. HARDACRE : N o-30s. an acre. Mr. KERR: Mete"r Downs? The PREMIER: Meteor Downs, in the

Leichhardt district, is to be had to-morrow, if the hun. member for Leichharclt wants to buy it, at 12s. 6d. an acre, with all improvements given in.

Mr. HARDACRE: I was informed the price was 30s.

164 Sale if Land .fo1• [ASSEMBLY.] Rez·rnue PuJ'}JOses.

The PREMIER : Then you were wrongly informed. And th€ leasehold is given away with it. Some other land that the same gentle­man bought in North Queensland-I forget how much he gave for it--

Hon. A. S. CowLEY : Fifteen shillings an acre. The PREMIER : That land is for sale-­The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : With

im)Jrovements, I snppose. The PREMIER: I am not sure about it, but

it is beautifulland-I suppose there is no finer land in Queensland-and it is for sale at 12s. 6d. an acre, and there are no buyers for it. So that every man who buys land from the Government does not make an enormous fortune out of it. In fact, I know that £40,000 was realised hy the Government at Cairns, and I believe the whole of that land could be bought to­morrow for £10,000-perhaps for £5,000. I do not know anyone who has been injured by the sale of land in that way. This particular land was a mangrove swamp, and it has been im­proved to some extent. We remember well one gentleman who was Secretary for Lands at one time-Mr. Dutton. He came into this House when he had just been saturated with the doctrines of Henry George, and all the authors who were then writing against the sale of land.

Mr. KERR : He was the best Secretary for Lands we have bad for some time. It would have been all right if the Act had been properly carried out.

The PREMIER : 'Well he was in office for about four years after he passed his Land Act, and, if the Act was not properly administered, it was his own fault, as it was in his own hands. But I have it on the authority of a member of the present Gov,ornment that he travelled from Sydney with Mr. Dutton about two years ago, and he then said that if he had the same thing to do again be would ad vacate the selling of every acre of land in Queensland. Yet he was one of the warme,t exponents of Henry George who has ever been in this colony, and he is the only disciple of Henry George who ever had the opportunity of giving effect to his opinions in a Land Act. The principle of leasing runs ri~ht through his Land Act of 1884, and yet he is now of opinion that the greatest misoake he ever made was to go in for the principle of leasing land in Queensland. In Victoria, with an area of about 60,000,000 acres, they have ROld nearly half of it, and the con­sequence is that there is more land under culti­vation in Victoria than in any of the other colonies. In Queensland we have only some­thing like 400,000 acres under cultivation, whilst in Victoria they have about 3,000,000 acres. The fact is that the more land you sell the more land you have under cultivation, and the more hnd you have improved.

Mr. JENKINSON: In small areas. The PREMIER: In small or large areas. I

am not an arlvo~atA of thA wholAsalA selling of land, but we have to sell some occasionally, and I say that this Government, or the previous Gllvernm~nt, have perhaps sold less land than any other Governments in Queensland.

Mr. JENKINSON : There has been no necessity for it.

The PREMIER: If the necessity arises we shall not hesitate to sell land. I hope that some day some Premier will have the courage to propose a scheme for selling sufficient land to pay off our national debt. It would be a splendid thing for Queensland if that were done. I was very much interested with what was said last night by the hon. member for Dalby, It is always a great pleasure to listen to the hon. member. Of course he is a strong advocate of the principle of leasing land, but my experience

is that the State is the very worst landlord we have in Queensland. The hon. ltlem her referred to the ravages of the prickly pear. I quite agreed with what he said in that respect. Now, I believe that the prickly pear pest first origi­nated on a reserve on the Darling Downs, and, if that land had beeu sold at that time, very likely there would not have been anything like the same amount of prickly pear.

Mr. BELL : Quite the opposite is the fact. The PREMIER : Well, I am informed that it

originated on a reserve near J ondaryan. Mr. LESIN A: Close settlement will combat it

in time, but big estates will not. The PREMIER: Of course it would. If we

sold all the land we have at, the present time round the country which is infested with prickly pear, it would to a certain extent stop the further progress of the weed. We do not see prickly pear on the Darling Downs, but as soon as you leave the land that has been sold, and go on to the Crown lands you find millions of acres, I believe, covered with it. I believe that the cheapest and most effective way of destroying the weed would be to sell a ring of land right round that prickly pear at a very small price. I do not thmk we wnuld get anyone to buy that prickly pear land at the present time. I would even advocate giving away that prickly pear land to anyone who would take it and eradicate the pest, but I am inclined to think nobody would take it. But no one would buy the land round it and allow the prickly pear to· spread. Of course there are some careless people ; but on the bulk of the land that has been sold on the Darling Downs you find com­paratively little weed. Beyond the Downs you, find millions of acres of land utterly worthless on account of it. \V e had a commission appointed some time ago, and they reported that it would take something like £6,000,000 to eradicate the prickly pear. And the danger is. growing every day. The biggeot grievance of the hon. member for Rockhampton seems to be that we only sell land in certain districts ; but he is mistaken there, because far more land has been sold in Northern than in Central Queensland. The Government have tried to force agriculture on the attention of the Central people by the establishment of a State farm; but, so far, I have not heard of any agri­cultural areas being taken up. In the North and South we know that agriculture was estab­lished before the industry was assisted by the Government. A great deal of the land which the hon. member refened to is really in the North. The whole of the land on the Bnrdekin, the J ohnstone, the Tully, and a great deal of the land on the Herbert has been sold on condi­tional purchase, and a great deal of it is now under cultivation.

Mr. JACKSON: S)me of it has been a bad spec.

The PREMIER: A verv bad soec. I think that for everyone who makes money by buying and selling land there are two who lose. Up to the present we have not sold such a large quan­tity ; in fact, during the last six years there has been less land sold than during any six years in the history of Queensland. And I would not advocate the sale of land now, only that it is better to sell land than to keep in debt. I ad va­cate the sale of land to pay off the deficit, not all in one year, but as opportunity offers. I have not the sentimental feeling that some people have in regard to the sale of land; I think it would be a good thing for the State if all the land were sold and in private hands. There would be more progress and more land under cultivation, and better use would be made of the land than at present. In Queensland we have something

Sale of Land foJ' [25 JULY.) Revenue Pu1'po,-es. 165

like 440,000,000 acres of land, and we have sold about 115,000,000 acres; so that there is no com­parison between the amount sold and the amount unsold. The land that has been sold has been well improved in most cases; but in the case of the Crown lands, every month in the year we have Crown tenants wanting a reduction of rent, wanting better conditions, and as time goes on those Crown tenants will say how much they will give the Government for the land.

:Mr. JENKINSON: You have to buy it back again.

The PREMIER : We are not selling agricul­tural land in large areas at all, and we are only buying back agricultural lands close to railways. I believe that if you calculate compound interest on the awount given for those lands thirty or forty years ago, you will find that the purchase was not a very profitable spec. for the buyers. And the bulk of the land we have bought back has been in the hands of mort­gagees. There is no use in selling small areas of land for grazing purposes. I do not think there is a man who could make a living in the Western part of Queensland on 3,000 or 4,000 acres all the year round. He wants at least 20,000 acres to make a living at grazing, and in some districts he wants 100,000 acres, I believe. The fact that 20,000 acres is necessary is recognised in the Act of 1884 by making provision for that amount. The law says that we can sell a certain quantity in a year, and I ;;ay that we have never sold the maximum amount. The Act says that we can sell in blocks of 320 acres.

Mr. JENKINSON: There was defective adminis­tration in connection with the sale of the Baramba lands.

The PREMIER: The sale was advertised all over the district, and in Sydney and Melbourne, as well as here. With regard to the Telemon lands, the proposed sale was known to the people of Hughenden, because they held meetings to pretest against the sale. By some curious action on the part of the Ad ver­tising Board, however, the sale was advertised .in every town of the State p,xcept Hughenden. l find that the sale of this land was advertised

in the Courier five times, in the [5 p.m.] Telegraph five times, in the Q"eens-

lander five times, in the Week twice, in the Gmzier three times, in the Hnghenden Observer once, in the Colonist twice, in the Capricornian twice, in the Townsville Herald twice, in the North Qneensland Regi$te1' twice, and in the Western Champion three times.

Mr. CuRTIS: Was the land advertised in such a way that people could make out where the land was situated ?

The PREMIER: I think so. At the same time I must say that I think the advertisements were rather scanty-they were not as big as I -should have liked to see them. The sales of all lands should have been advertised locally, Under the Act the sales of lands have to be advertised in the Government Gazette a month before they are held; and that was done, I know, in the case of Logan Downs and North­ampton Downs and in other cases. And it must be remembered that our Government Gazettes are sent to all country towns. If any more of our land is sold, I shall take very good care that the matter is advertised locally; and if any large quantity of land is to be sold, I shall see that it is advertised well in the other colonies, because we want to get as much for our land as we possibly can.

Mr. JENKINSON: I think the land wants to be better defined.

The PREMIER: The Government have done nothing in connection with the sales of land, €xcept by the authority of Parliament. In 1897, when the new Act went through, the Govern-

ment were empowered to sell 150,000 acres annually; but we have never sold anything like that quantity. In 1891, under the Special Sales of Lands Act, the Gc,vernment were empowered to sell land in order to meet the deficit, and I think we shall have to do the same thing again now. ~1:ore land is wanted for close settlement and heavy cultivation.

Mr. JENKINSON: \Vhois to decide what land is suitable for that?

The PREMIER : The Land Board. I would like to see more land cut up-and cut up by private owners. There are several private owners of land who are now, and have already cut up part of their estates. I may instance Westbrook and Canning Downs. I deprecate a land tax, for I think it would depreciate the value of our estate. The divisional board bxes are now heavy, and I think these taxes will have to be higher yet. I do not advocate a tax on the land by the Government, while we give subsidies to the local bodies, and while they put a tax on the land as well. That is not done in New South \Vales. There, I think, they spend more than one· fifth of the land tax received on roads and bridges. I think their land tax amounts to something like £250,000 a year.

Mr. KERR: They have better roads and bridges there.

The PREMIER: Perhaps they have; but New South \Vales is a much older and more thickly populated colony than Queensland. It is populated three times as much as Queensland and at the same time it has only half the area of Queensland. I hope that in time to come we shall have betterroarlsand bridges, but considering thtl vast extent of this colony, and its age, I think we have very fair roads and bridges. On the whole, I shall advoeate the selling of lands in preference to borrowing money. It is a sound principle for any man in business, if he finds he owes a certain amount of money, and h~ has a large estate, to sell a portion, at all events, of his estate to meet his liabilities. I hold that the feeling is in­herent in men, especially in the minds of men who cultivate land, that the more freeholders we have in the colony the better it will be for the colony and the greater prosperity we shall have; and freeholders are likely to make better use of our lands than the Crown, A man does not buy land simply to look at it: be wants to make something out of it. \Vhat is the use of a man taking up land unless he can make some use of 1t-unless he can make a profit out of it? The hon. member for Rockhampton quoted the United States in this connection; but what has been the cause of the success of that great country ? Principally the wholesale alienation of land and the building of private railways.

Mr. KERR : There is no country that has more paupers than the United States.

The PREMIER : I think America has made more progress in the last lOO or 130 years than any other country in the world.

Mr. Cl'RTIS : They might have been better off if they had been more careful.

The PREMIER : Probably; but that country ha• made more progress than any other country in the world all the same. T think it would be a splendid thing for Queensland if we cnuld induce enough people to come here and buy sufficient land to pay off our national debt. I do not propose that now ; but th~ time will come when some Premier will be bold enough to advocate that, and who will have courage enough to ask this House to agree to it. At the present time we are pretty heavily taxed in Queensland, just about as much as the people can bear, and I think it would be a splendid thing if we could in trod nee a lot of new people and new capital into the colony. However,

166 Sale qf Land f01' [ASSEMBLY.] Revenue Purposes.

that is not the question now before the House. The motion of the hon. member is against the sale of land in large areas for revenue purposes. At the present time we are selling very little land for revenue purposes, and in the near future I think WP shall have to sell a great deal more. I do not think Queensland will be the loser if more of our land is sold.

MEMBERS on the Government side : Hear, hear!

Mr .. HARD ACRE (Leichhardt): I regret that circumstances have compelled me to come in late this session. I am roused to say some­thin~ on this motion by the astounding remarks of the Premier. He must really be looked upon as a back number. There has been a great outcry about these sales of land by hon. members of this House and by the ontRide public. I think the Premier is looked upon as a sort uf Rip Van Winkle, coming to us from the dark ages, concerning this subject. I was particularly struck with the instance he gave with regard to Meteor Downs. If there is any case in Queensland which is a shocking ~xamplr> of the evil of selling land, I think that IS the case. It was sold under the Special Sales of Land Act at 10s. an acre, and 126,000 acres was sold to the same purchaser in one area. I understand that when that land was sold the surveyor was instructed to survey the very eyes of the country, and he EO surveyed the boun­daries that every bit of scrub and swamp was surveyed out ; the land purchased was the very cream of the country and commanded the whole of the adjacent land. I am not sure with re­gard to the price at which that land is on offer and the Premier may be right when he say~ 12s. lld. an acre. I happen to have travelled over Meteor Downs, which I consider is the pick of Queensland. I do not think there is any area in Queensland equal to it.

The PREMIER : What about Telemon? Mr. HARD ACRE: There is this difference

between the two, the Meteor Downs is in a district comparatively adjacent to the coast where there is a very good rainfall, and where agriculture can be successfully carried on, whereas Telemon is not so favourably situated. I was informed recently that the price now asked for Meteor Downs is 30s. an acre. I admit that that includes the stock, but there is not a very large amount of stock upon it, and even allowing for them the price asked means a great deal more than 12s. 6d. an acre. So far from the owners having improved the land since it was bought I believe that not a half-mile of fencing has been erected.

Hon. A. S. COWLEY : Was not a great deal of wire-net fencing erected?

Mr. HARDACRE: Yes, there was some wire-fencing erected, but that was put up before the land was purchased. If that land had not been sold the lease would have expired at the preeent time, and then right away from the Staircase to Ralston there would be one long line of grazing farms. At present there are not ten people employed on the whole property but had the land been leased as grazing farm~ there would have been at least a thousand people settled upon it. The sale of that estate has been a block to the settlement of the whole district. Now, the whole burden of the Premier's excuse for selling land was that we should thus get improvements on it, and that no one would buy lR.nd unless he wished to make somethincr out of it. As a matter of fact experience ha~ shown that the purchaser often buys it, not because he wants to make anything out of it but because he wants to prevent someone els~ making anything out of it. He wants to prevent it being taken up by selectors.

The SECRETARY l'OR PUBLIC LANDS : He wants­to use it, I presume.

Mr. HARDACRE: Yes; not use it to its best purpose, but simply for the purpose of grazing sheep and cattle upon it.

The PREMIER : There is no agricultural settle­ment in that district.

Mr. HARDACRE: Yes, a great deal all round Spriugsure. The hon. gentleman ought to know that wheat-growing is just commencing to to ke a hold in the Central district, and that there is great scope for agriculture there.

The PREMIER : It is only grown at the Govern­ment farm.

Mr. BARD ACRE: Oh, no! There is more grown by individual selectors than is grown by the Government.

The PREMIER : That is not verv much. Mr. HARD ACRE: No, not .:ery much; but

the prospects for the growth of w hca t in the Springsnre district are very bright indeed. The Premier also mentioned that in Victoria, where a great deal of land has been sold, more settle­ment has taken place, as if one was a con­sequence of the other. I know something of Victoria, and I remember one instance in par­ticular in which the sale of land has not led to settlement. Anyone who has travelled to· Melbourne will remember that within four miles of the city there is Baron Clarke's estate. Within sight of the factory chimneys of Melbourne there is an enormous estate at the present day which is simply used for the purpose of grazing cattle and sheep. It is­a fact that a !rtrge proportion of the land is alienated in Victoria, but in order to obtain land suitable for whflat-growing, farmers have been forced to adopt the share system under which the owners of the land take one-third of the total crop. I have here a work entitled "Land Systems of Australasia," by \Villiam Epps. It is recognised as the standard work on the subject, and the author gives the total amount of land sold in each colony. In New South \V ales 45,000,000 acres have been sold ; in Victoria, 22,000,000 acres; in Queensland, 12,000,000 acres; in South Australia, 12,000,00(} acres; in \Vestern Australia, 5,000,000 acres; in Tasmania, 4,000,000 acres; and in New Zealand, 20,000,000 acres; and then he sums up the results in the following way :-

Such results can hardly be regarded otherwise than as appalling. That the operations of the land systems of these three province~ for sixty-five years in one colony, and a little over fifty years in two otherR, should have resulted in 1.250 persons securing almost one-half the total alienated area, while 105,000 others between them possf'ss only just about one-fourth of the total extent alienated, is a striking commentary on the methods adopted. The unquestionable verdict must he that the systems have failed to produce true settlement. 'fhey have resulted largely in the building up of great free­hold estates; the consequent locking up of capital in land, which. leased under a secure tenure. would probably nave shown vastly increased productive power, and the alienation from the Crown of huge areas of the most valuable country, which in the next genera­tion or two would have supported a population of some millions of people.

Now, a few years ago t.he Government appointed a Royal Commission to inquire into the land question generally, and in their report the following observations in regard to the sale of land are to be found :-

Your commissioners are of opinion that the practice of alienating large areas of ·western lands at public auction is a proceeding which receives no justification eit.her from the experience of the past or from the con­ditions of the present time. The incongruity uf a public policy whicb, on the one hand, buys back land at a price double that which the State received for it but a few years before, and, on the other, continues to sell large tracts of Western downs to individual purchasers or private . companies, must be manifest to all wh()> examine the subject.

Sale '![ Land fur [25 .JuLY.] Revfnue Purposes. 167

The c'?mm.issioners . recommended strongly that no legtslatt ve sanctiOn should be given to :tny departnre from this principle, even for the purpose of relieving a temporarily embarrassed Treasury. So that on all hands we have a decisive verdict against the selling of hnd in large areas. Personally, I am against the selling of land in large or small areas, because I believe that the policy is an evil one, and from a financial point of view I think it is an absurd policy. We are actually selling our assets. It is not good financing to sell our estate and put it into current revenue. That cannot be called financing at all. The Lands Department, in itsannnal report, gives the figures with regard to the total amount of alienated land which has been sold and how much has been received for it. The Jast figures I have are those for two years ago, and they show that 1-!,000,000 acres have been sold, and the total amount received has been £8,000,000. If we look at the municipal and divisional board valuations we find that they value the ali.onated land in Queensland at a~out £33,000,000, so that the Crown has only reccrved £8,000,000 for land which i< valued at £33,000,000.

The SECRETARY FOR PcBLIC LANDS : If it had not been sold what would have been the value?

Mr. HARDACRE: If it had not bem sold it would have been of jnst the ;;ame value as it is now, because the sale of land does not make any diffetence to its value. It is the progress of the colony that gives the value to the land. There­fore, the progress of the colony having been the same, the value of the land would be the same whether it were in private hands or in the hands of the Government.

The SECRETARY !<'OR PUBLIC LANDS: If the progress had heen the same.

Mr. HARD ACRE: Yes, if the progress had been the same. That is probably a matt.er of opinion, but I hold that the progress would have been a great deal more if the land had remained in the hand;, of the Crown. Instead of it being ker;t idle as it is now around the centres of popu­latt~n a';'-d other places where it is required for cultivatiOn and other useful purposes, it would have been 'ettled on by selectors, who would have had to pay a very much smaller ]Jrice for it than they have to pay )Jrivate holders now. Surely the. e;"ample of the Darling Dowm ought to be suffiCient for us. That land was sold in the early days to private individuals. Whv did not the owners of the Darling Downs land-s use it? The:y: did use it, it is true, in a small way, but certamly not to the same ad vuntage that it has been put to since it has been repurchased by the Crown and made over to small selectors I do not intend to say any more, except to refe; to ~ne ~f the statements made by the Premier, whwh, tf he endeavours to put into force in this House, will meet with my strongest objection and I hope also the objection of every membe; of a country district. That is with regard to the proposed reduction of the endowment to divisional boards, if there is to be any tax put upon land values. The suggestion, I think, first c;>me from t_hA Hon. the Home Secretary, Mr. ] ox ton, and tt has been repea.ted by the Premier. It is, that it would not do to put two taxes on land values-that is, the present divisional board tax on lrmd values ~.>nd a national tax on land values. Now, any attempt to reduce the endow­ment on divisional boards at the present time would be a blow to local government, and would be an endeavour to allow the great cities of the colony, where the l_and is of the most value, to escape from a fatr share of the burden of national taxation, because it is the cities and the towns of the colony, where land is of the most value, where the people are where the industries are, where the most progress has taken place, and where land

has become of the greatest value. If we were to relieve them in this way it would be simply to reduce the endowment to the divi­sional boards. If we attempt to apply taxation to land values in this way, we shall be putting a tax upon the country districts and allowing large cities, where la,nd i,, the most valuable, to escape, and that is a policy which will meet with my objection if it is ever proposed in this House. * ::\ir. LESINA (Clcrmont): I am simply aston­ished that when an important matter such as this which is agitating the people who occupy the large pastoral and agricultural centres in the North, the Central, and the \VAotern portions of the colony is being discussed, the Minister in charge of the department should not have got up to r.eply to the charges which have been made.

Mr. TURLEY : Why don't you wait for him? Mr. LESINA: \Ve have waited very patiently.

The Premier took the contract out of his bands in the first instance, anrl now, after the ex­Minister for Lands has delivered his soul on the question, we find that the Minister still occupies his position of indifference. This is a serious matter, the selling of the public estate in various portions of Queensland for the purpose of filling up a depleted Treasury. It is not a good policy. It was condemned, I remember, by Sir Samuel Griffith, in his manifesto to the electors in 1888, a.nd there are one or two passages in that which I intend to quote when I speak on the .Address in Reply. Sir Samuel Griffith pointed ou~ that it is a most mischievous policy for a country to undertake the selling of the national patrimony for the purpose of meeting some financial crisis. ]'\ ow the Government are pre­pared to sacrifice the public estate in order to pull through their troubles, but they are not prepared to go in for a policy of direct taxation, such as an income tax and a tax on accumulated estates ; they prefer to sacrifice the national patrimony to the extent of about a million acres, becauBe, in order to recoup themselves for the annual charge upon the deficit, they will have to raise something like £20,000 per annum. If they ar<:> determined to do that and ignore every other policy, the method they have adopted in the Clermont di;;trict is the worAt they could possibly adopt. The method they have adopted there is precisely the same as was adopted in the sale of Telernon Station in the Hug-henden district, the sale of ~ orthampton Downs in the Bo.rcoo, and I think in the case of the Baramba run in the Southern portion of the colony. The first intimation that we received in Clermont was that portion of the expired lease of a run was going to be put up to public auction.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: No, part of the leasehold.

Mr. LESlNA: They did not thr::>w this open to selection, but they must sell it by auction, and they cut it up in mch a way that it would be utterly impossible for the selectors to purchase it. They inserted no advertisements in the local papers notifying the selectors that it was the intention of the Government to sell this land; and, furthermore, the auction sale took place in Brisbane, and none of the selectors were wealthy enough to go to Brisbane to compete for it, and very likely many of them were not wealthy enough to engage an agent. Very likely they cut it up in such a way that access to the in;;ide portions was almost impos,;ible; and then, again, it was subdivided int.1 such small areas that no selector would have been able to make a living out of it. I think the areas of the blocks was 150 acres. If the Government propose to sacrifice the national estate for the purpose of encouraging settlement and settling people on the soil, it is a very extraordinary way of doing

168 Sale cif Lancl.fl))• [ASSEMBLY.] Revenue Pw'Poses.

it to cut up the land in aref1.s utterly un­'Suitable for selection. Not only that, they keep the people in the distric~ completely in the dark as to what they intend to do, which shows clearly that the Government were merely playing with the question of land settlement. It >tppears to me, under these circumHtances,

that the hon. member for Rock­l5"30 p.rn.] harnpton is perfectly justified in

placing this motion on the business­paper, and I should like to see the motion carried by the House. I should like to see hon. mem­bers express the opinion that "the policy of the Government in selling the public e"tate in large areas by public auction for revenue purposeK is inexpedient and opposed to the best interests of the State." I am convinced of that, not only by my small experience in my own electorate, but by the instances of the Northampton Downs and "Telemon land sales. T think we should f1.dopt a better system of dealing with our public lands than 'that of selling them in large blocks. 'l'he system 'they are now going in for largely inN ew Zealand is a system of perpetual or indefeasible leasehold, which is a much better system than that of sell­ing lands by public auction. ·what the occupant of the soil really wants is f1.bsolute security for the improvements he puts on the land, and he can get that under a system of indefeasible leasPg. Every economist who has written on this question is agreed that the idea uf bartering away our patrimony for the purpose of raising revenue is simply astounding.

The SECRETARY l!'OR PCBLIC LANDR : "When did they introduce the perpetual leasehold system in New Zealf1.nd?

Mr. LESINA: I cannot say just at this moment, as I have not had time to look up the matter. Had I had time I should have consulted the authorities on the subject, and have got all the particulars of the system. But if I am not able to reply to a catch question on the spur of the moment, I dare say there are other members who can give an answer. At any rate, I am perfectly sati;;fied that the system of reckless alienation of our public l~tnds is inexpedient and mischievous. I am strongly opposed to such a system, and I trust that the House will express its opinion in no uncertain way upon the matter. I know that the public outside have done so. In fact, they expressed it in such a way in my elec­torate that the .Minister rapidly withdrew lands which were proposed to be offered for sale, and they have not been sold up to the present. How­ever, we are not sure of the Government. As long a; they have a deficit to meet, the public property may be sold in order to bring money into the Treasury. I shall vote for the motion.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS (Hon. \V. B. H. O'Connell, 111usgrave) : I was pleased to hear the last speaker say that he was in favour of indefeasible leases, because as far as 1 can see what you really do when you give a freehold title to any person you give him an indefeasible lease at a peppercorn rent. When you sell land you alienate from the State the right to say how that land shall be used, but you have still got the right to tax it in any way you choose, and also to reeume it if it is wanted for public purposes. So far as these sales of land are concerned, the question as to whether it was desirable or not to sell land never arose in con­nection with the conclusion arrived at by the Government. No qnestion was ever raised as to whether a policy of selling or of leasing lands should be initiated. The facts were that we were very much behind with our revenue, and we had the right under the existing land law to sell 150,000 acres a year, and place the product of the sale of that land to the credit of the con­solidated revenue. So that it is an absurdity to say that we were acting illegally.

Mr. TURLEY: Nobody said it was illegal. The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS:

I understood that that had been suggested. I know that one hon. member told me that, before he entered the House, from what he knew of me he thought I was a thoroughly decent chap. Possibly he may now think that I should he let out under the First Offenders Probation Act. However, I wish to thank him for his good opinion of me, and I hope that my action in the future will not belie' what he knew of me in the past. The actual procedure with regard to these lands is, I should think, well known to a great many members of this Assembly. The land is held in many cases under lease. In the case of Northampton Downs the lease did not expire for twelve years, so that if the land had not been sold the public could not have got it for that period. The rental we are getting for North­ampton Downs is £114". per square mile.

Mr. KERR : What would ,-ou have got if you had leased the land to smaller holders?

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: WA should have got 3d. an acre, and should pro­bably have hf1.d a deputation of farmers coming down nnd saying that the rent was ruining them, as has been done in other instances. That is the sort of tenant we should be likely to get.

Mr. FITZGERALD: The men you refer to are wealthy squatters.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LA::\'DS: I do not know what the hon. member would call them, but as far as I know they are entered in the books of the Lands Office as grazing farmers. If the hon. member can prove that they are not grazing farmers, I shall be glad if he will get up by and by and demonstrate that they are some­thing else. I believe they are small p~tstoralists, or something of that sort.

~Ir. FrTZGERALD: 'rhey are worse. The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS:

So far as the books of the Lands Office are con­cerned, they are known as grazing farmers ; and those men meeting at Longreach came to the conclusion, after debate, thf1.t the rents, which they virtually assessed themselves, were so heavy that they were being ruined by them. The revenue for the last year from selections has failed to the extent of .£50,000. A very large proportion of that revenue we receive from grazing farmers and the holders of agricultural farm .elections. Of course, the great bulk of the deficit in payments was in the V{ estern districts, where they have suffered from droughts. \Vith regard to these sales of land, some hon. members seem to sugge•t that I have entered into a plot with the pastoral lessees to deprive the State of some of the moRt lovely lands of the colony, or, as thev term it, the heritage of the people. I absolutely deny that I have done anything of the sort. I was asked by the Treasurer of the colony to get him some revenue out of the public estate, and I naturally had to find out who was prepared to buy land. The information came from different sources that different holders of runs in the West were prepared to surrender a certain portion of their holdings if the Govern­ment would put them up to auction. \V e said, "All right ; if you agree to surrender your lands we will have thtm surveyed and put up to auction as the law allows us."

Mr. W. HAMILTON : Didn't the proposal come from the Government first?

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: I have already told the House that the Govern­ment wanted to •ell the land, that I had to find out who was prepared to buy land, and that subsequently the persons with whom we were dealing said that if we were prepared to put the land up to auction they would surrender a certain portion of their runs. If hon. members turn up Hansa1·d they will find

Sale qf Land fur [25 JULY,] Revenue Purposes. 169

that this matter has been fully debated several times, and they will also find that the procedure laid down in the Act is exactly that which was followed in this case. Someone who did not wish to see land sold thought he would be able to block it by insisting that it should be put up in 320-acre blocks. Of course, as the hon. mem­for Gregory ]Jointed out, when the de]Jutation waited on me with regard to selling land on Northampton Downs, cutting up \Vestern lands into blocks of 320 acres is not likely tu create competition, because the area of the blocks is so small that no one is likely to buy it. But it has to be offered in 320-acre blocks because the law provides that it shall.

Mr. FITZGERALD : Why don't you alter the law?

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: I hope that during this session I shall have the opportunity of asking the House to enable me to sell land in a more rational manner, so that, if a man wants !1,000 acres or 10,000 acres, he will be able to secure it, instead of having tu go through what is a mock auction, so far as I can see, and buy it in blocks of 320 acres. The thing is so well known that for anyone to say that I have been acting in collusion with the pastoral lessees in having the land put up in blocks of 320 acres is most unfair, because it will be found by a reference to Hansard that that is the only way in which it could be offered for sale.

Mr. W. HAMILTON: \Vboever framed that Act knew what he was about.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: At all events, that provision was put in because it was thought that it would check the sale of land.

The SECRETARY ~'OR AGRICULTURE : And that people would buy lands in those districts-which they will not.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBll>IC LANDS: The dreadful fear that is entertained by some people that we are going to sell such a large area of the public estate that there will be nothing left for posterity is altogether unfounded. The area that has been sold up to the present moment is almost a speck on the map. Here is a diagram which shows the colony of Queensland.

Mr. KERR : Yes, but it is the best of the land that has been sold.

Mr. JENKINSON: It is the eyes that are being picked ,mt.

The SECRETARY l<'OR PUBLIC LANDS: That is another thing that is said-that the land which is being sold destroys the value of the adjoin­ing land to anyone else. It does nothing of the sort. Before the discovery of artesian water, if you sold 5,000 acres, or say 2,000 acres on the frontage, it would command a large area of back country which would be useless to anyone but the owner of the frontage; but artesian water can be got all over this country.

Mr. W. HAMILTON : No.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: Well over a very large area, anyway. That makes the frontages less valuable.

Mr. KERR: It is very expensive to get water. The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS:

You have to spend money, certainly. The figures with regard to the public estate are as follow :-Area under mining lease, 89,276 acres; area in process of alienation, 2,890, 968 acres; area alienated by deeds of grant, 13,323,524 acres ; area under grazing and scrub selection, 21,0±9,451 acres ; area under occupation license and depasturing right, 83,091,200 acres; area reserved for streets, roads, and other ]Jurposes, or unoccupied, 130,392,061 acres ; area under pastoral lease, 177,001,600 acres. The total area

of the colony is 427,838,080 acres, so that the area alienated is an infinitesimal portion of public estate.

Mr. J ENKINSON : All of that is not fit for close settlement.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: I have seen a lnt of land which has been ,;aid to be unfit for ciose settlement, but which has after­wards been found quite suitable for that purpose. T wentv years ago there was plenty of land around the city of Brisbane which was said not to be worth taking up, but it has since been occu]Jied. As a larger population settles down it is found that land becomes more valuable than it was when put to a different use. It i' just the "ame with the repurchased estates. The Darling Downs in the early days were occupied by what were called "shepherd king"," who came over the border with their flr,cks and herds. They did remarkably well for a time, and would, no doubt, have made fortunes if the Government had not put under their noses the temptation to purchase the land. If the Government had per~isted in what the hon. member for Leichh:.rdt wants, and had always leased the land, it would have been the best thing that could have happened to those Darling Downs squatters.

Mr. TURLEY: And the best thing for the country.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: Howe\'er, the squatters bvught tbe land, and the weight of interest on their shoulders no doubt ruined a g-reat many of the original settlers on the Downs ; but when the population increased, it was found that the land was suitable for another form of occupation, and it is gradually coming under that form of occupation, to the satisfaction of the people who are taking it up. With regard to these repurchased estates, I am quite sati"fied that if the Government had been receiving interest on £1 or £1 10s. per acre at the rate of 5 ]Jer cent. from the time that the land was sold until now, they would perhavs have accumulated a very much larger sum of money than would enable them to repurchase the land from the present holders.

Mr. HARDACRll: You have got to set againso that the use of the land.

The SECRE'fARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: Yes, you would find that it would repre,ent an enormous sum, even taking the rate of interest at 5 per cent. ; but in those days, I believe, there was no one in Queensland who was able to get money on landed security at less than 10 per cent., and in many instances 12~ per cent. was paid to investment companies, and you can reckon up what it would come to at those rates. Now, with regard to what it means to the colony. These people are paying at the present moment about ~d. per acre, and supposing they could get money for about 4 per cent., they would pay at the very least something between 3~d. and 4d.­it would be over 3d., anyway. But I am quite satisfied that none of them are able to get money at the same rate as the Government. They would probably have to pay at least 5 per cent., and, taking the purchasing price at 10s. per acre, they would have to reckon that the land would cost them 6d. per acre for ever, or at any rate until such time as they could either pay it off from their profits or borrow money at a lower rate of interest. At present the purchase of these lands means a very large increase to the purchaser on the rent he is paying to the Crown ; but against that he can set off the fact t,hat he has a perpetual right to the land, and that he need not put away out of his ]Jrofits a sixpence to make good the time when his lease will fimsh. Under present condi­tions he must, during the period he holds the land, make provision to remunerate himself for the loss of his lease, otherwise he would be a big

170 Sa le qf Land. [ASSEMBLY.] Addnss in Reply.

loser in the end ; and I believe it is that factor which is inducing the persons interestbd to pur· chase the bnd. I was very much astonished to find, after the great losses some or those m cm had incurred, that they were prepared to give the price they did. The purchasers of Telemon were a considerable time before they surrenderee\ their lease. There were cables sent home to Mr. Collier, the principal of the firm, in London; and there was some doubt as to where they would find the money to purchase if they got the chancP, so it was not looked upon as such a splendid bargain after all. With regard to Northampton Downs, if the lease had been surrendered the Govern­ment were prepared to go on with the sale. For some reason, which I do not know at present, the lessee at the last moment refused to Rurrender his lease; but I will take care that that does not happen in future. I will take care, if we go so far as to advertise the land for sale, and it is on part of a leased half, that the Government will have a free hand to go on with the sale. I do not think it is a fair tl1ing that eiLhet' the Govern­ment or the lesser, should have the right to block the sale after it is ad vertiserl.

Mr. FrTZGERALD: The Government hae sold land before without the lease having been surrendererl.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LA~DS: I am not going to sell land which •omebndy else has a legal title to use. I think that would be most unjust and improper.

Mr. KERR : Who is paying for thA survey•? The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS:

The Government. The Northampton Downs survey was made some years ago, and there was very little additional expense as far as Northamp­ton Downs was concerned. What we took most into consideration in initiating these Hales of land was the fact that Queensland had to find money to pay it' way. As the Premier has already said, the Government are of opinion that it is not desirable to increase the burden of taxaiion, and that it is desirable that the State of Queensland should get a considerable amount of money from the p11blic estate. In New South Wales they got £1,985,281 from the public estate in the year 1899, and Queensland got only £540,166 from the whole of its public estate in the same year. In New South Wales the amount derived during that year from pastoral leases was £222,185 for runs, and about £500 from "ome other kinds of pastoral leases. The amount received on account of selections included the following itP,mS : -­Newcastle pasturage reserves sales, £1,870; improvemenL purchases, £2,0·14; deposits on conditional purchases, £38,502; instalments on conditional purchases, including interest, £901,516; balance on conditional purchases, £110,828; miscellaneous purchases, £12,135; interest on land conditionally purchased, £66,181; conditional leases, £158,411; home­stead leases, £51,618 ; homeRtead selections, £25,5-11; settlement leases, £39,320; improve­ment leases, £11,586; artesian leases, £933; quit rents, £498; church and school lands, £6,024; and scrub selections, £·4,095. They also received £102,9ti5 for occupation licenses, and £47,779 ou account of annual leases. Then their auction sales produced £93,646, which is £20,000 more than we are allowed by law to derive in that way. And their miscella­neous receipts amounted to £87,085 for the year. I shall be very happy when we can tell the Treasurer of Queensland that he can expect a return of £1,985,281 from our public estate in one year; and though I don't know that the time will evet· come when we shall be able to pay off the whole of our national debt from the public e8tate, I believe the public estate should return a much larger amount to the Treasury than it does at present.

At 7 o'clock the Ho1tse, in acc01·dance 1vith the Sessional Order, proceeded with Government IJ'Usiness.

ADDRESS IN REPLY. RESUMPTION OF Ih;BATE.

Upon the Order of the Day being read for the restFnption of the debate on the Address in Reply-

Mr. FOX (Nornwnby), who, on rising, was received with cheers, said: Itisnotmy intention to criticise very largely the Speech of the Lieutenant-Governor; but there are two or three questions in that Speech that I will refer to. It i;. not my intention to deal very largely with any of those questions. I wish to express my appreciation of the speeches that have ~wen made on both sides of the House, more espemally by ::\1r. J!'orsyth, Mr. Bell,andMr.Browne. I may· say I was exceedingly pleased at the moderation in the speech of thehon. the leader of the Opposition,. and this moderation excited in my mind a sincere feeling of admiration. The first matter I will touch upon is the Local Government Bill. I find from the debate that there is a probability of the subsidy to divisional boards being reduced, if not altogether withheld. Now, Sir, as a matter of fact, in some of the larger districts­one of which I represent-the area is large and the revenue small, and, therefore, to withdraw the whole of the subsidy from such outside divisional boards would be a serious matter to· them. As far as the divisional board of which I have the honour to be a member is concerned, I am very happy to say that we have endeavoured to keep out of debt. We have not mace any demand on the revenue of the State ; but we have endeavoured to carry on without that assistance; but if the subsidy is with· drawn I am afraid that will lead to very serious difficulties, and I think this can also be said of many other boards in the outside districts. However, I assure yon that I am in strong sym­pathy with the Treasurer and the Government in the position in which they are now placed. There is not the slightest doubt that the severe drought from which portions of this colony have· been suffering lately nas been unprecedented, and it is clear to me that the present depressed state· of the \Vestern country is due to that C.\l,ose. Therefore, I sympathise with the Government and with the Treasurer in the position in which they are placed. I shall do all in my power to assi~t the Government in any measure towards. relieving the Treasury. I have heard it men­tioned this evening from the other side, that it. is desir<tble to have a land tax : but on that. point I am in accord with the Premier when he said that it would depreciate the value of our own estate ; and I cannot see where the justice would come in, in having a land tax. I think, under the circumst:tnces, that the boards will receive every consideration from the Govern­ment and from the gentleman at the head of the department, and therefore I hope, if it is pos­sible, that they will endeavour to help all the poorer boardH in the distant parts of the colony. The richer board' may be able to carry on with­out assistance. I am also informed that it is the intention of the Government to give these boards. larger taxing powers. Well, I think, under the present conditions ·of things, that that would not. be a bad measure; but if there is going to be any· further tax in this way, I think other people should put their hands into their pockets. There· is a measure, I believe, to be introduced in con­nection with land lBgislation. I was in the Lands Office yesterday, and I examined a very excellent map there, and I found that there is a large quantity of land re­sumed within 100 miles of the coast, and that very little of it was taken up. That

Address in Repl;lj. [25 JuLY.] Address in Reply. 171

land is of an inferior quality compared with the Western country, and the maximum area of :JO, 000 acres in the Western country may be sufficient. I have no doubt it is, and that a man could make a fair living off it, but on the coast the Rame conditions do not apply. I think if the Government wish to have the land taken up which they have resumed, and which is now under occupation license, they should increase the area. \Vith regard to the Land Act, it has, I think, taking it altogether, bePn carefully prepared and is an excellent measure, but the great fault is that there is something wrong in the administration of it. \V e find that if a man wants Anything done> with his land in the shape of ringbarking or anything else he has to apply to the local commis­sioner, who has to refer the matter to Brisbane. Everything is centred in Brisbane. I think some better arrangement might be made where­by facilities could be given to people desiring to take up bnd. That is to say, there should be centres of communication in the South, Centre, and North to which people could apply direct. I remember a few weeks ago I was addressing a meeting at N ebo, and a person came to me and informed me that he wanted to take up a piece of land of 175 acres in extent as a homest~ad. He applied to the Lands Department for this as a homestead, and his request was refnsed. The onlv alternative he then had was to abandon the 2s. '6d. ·an acre provision, and take the land up under the unconditional provision of the Act, which meant paying £1 an acre, that being the minimum price mentioned in the Act. The result was that he would not take it up under that provision, and he applied to the Lands Department and offered to pay for the remaining 10 acres 9s. per acre, but was told he could not get it. By some rule of the department they were unable to comply with his request. The second case I have to quote is that of a man who applied for a surveyed portion of 160 acres, and he had to take it up at £1 Os. 6d. an acre, that being the unconditional price of land in the same neighbourhood. Well, I think these things should by some means be altered. There should be some regulation unde>r the Act whereby men would be encouraged to take up land. This man, I believe, took up the area I have mentioned on which there was a lot of timber, and as soon as he had removed the timber the land was abandoned. That was a decided loss to the country and the whole community. I am quite sure the Ministry are desirous of doing what they can to settle people on the land. We all know that the men who are settled on the land have to carry the whole country on their shoulders as it were. They are the men upon whom the country has to depend, and every encouragement should be given to them. Now, with regard to the Central district, I have one matter which I wish to bring under the notice of the Government, and that is in reference to the experimental farm at Gindie. It is situated between Springsure and Emerald. For the past four or five years they have been able to do nothing there. I think that they are scarcely making any progress, and it appears that it is a refuge for the unfortunate men who have been out of em­ployment through the depression in the West. I think the Government are to be commended for their action in taking these men into their employment, and finding them work and food for the time being until something better turns up. I think I shall be borne out by those persons who know the locality that this experimental farm is in the wrong locality to be of any great advantage to the Central district. The fact is tl,a t a farm of that description should be situated where there is closer settlement, as, for instance, in the neighbourhood of Westwood. I have

recently visited the people there, and fc,und a number uf most industrious farmers. Those men have been struggling against great dis­advantages, and it must be remembered that as soon as the duties are abolished between the various tltates, our farmers will have to compete against the farmers in the southern States. I am not at all despondent about that. I think the farmers of Queensland are quite capable of holding up their end of the log, but at the same time, they must have eve>ry encourage­ment from the Government. Now, if that experimental farm was removed from Gindie to the situation I have suggested, "'nd farmers could see the implements which are in daily use at such a place :os Gatton, I am quite sure it would be of great advantage to tnern. They would be able to carry on their operations in the same way in which operations are c:orried on at Gatton; they would have an illustration of the proper kind of implements to use ; and if, in addition, the American system were adopted, they would have many advantages which they are not at present possessed of. In America I understand they establish what are known as bure<tus where the best horse otock is kept, the best milking stock, and the best breed of pigs, and the far!llers can go there at any time and buy a male beast with which to improve their herds. I believe they also send horses ro01nd to the different farms for the use of the farmers, who are charged a small fee. I think if the Government were to adopt that plan it would be a great b0on to the farmers, and certainly would· be in the best interests of the country. I hope, therefore, the hon. gentleman at the head of the department will consider the matter with a view of carrying out such a plan as I have indicated. There is a very nice> estate near Stanwell that is now for sale, and I do not know whether the Government can be induced to purchase it, but if they can, it will be an excellent position for the object I have drawn attention to. I see from the Speech that there is some idea of dealing with the franchise. Now, in this House in 1878, I with other hon. members, among whom I think was Mr. Ivory, at one time an officer of this House, advocated the Hare system of voting. I would like Lo draw special attention to this. I have no doub.t there are many mem hers in the House who have given con"ideration to the question, but possibly there are some that have not, and therefore I will ask the patience of the House while I address myself to this question. The Hare system would deal with the whole colony as one electorate, and the Hare-S pence system would divide the colony into groups of six or seven electorates. The system is fair, just, honest, and feasible. Now, I maintain that our present system-the block system-is about one of the worst and one of the most unfair and unjust of systems, and if we were called upon to choose the system without having it handed down to us, I do not think we would ever have attempted to introduce the block system. Since the payment of members there is more inducement to candidates to offer their services to the country. Take, for instance, the Gympie election and the North Rock­hampton election, which have recently taken place. In Gympie I understand there was a majority of four. Well, you can hardly call that a majority, but at any rate the minority in the case was very large, and as far as they are concerned you might just as well have torn up their votes, or the returning officer might as well have disregarded them, because they were as effectually disfranchised as if he had done so ; and more than this, they were humiliated. I do not wish to be personal in this matter whatever. I am only using it as an illustration. Now, take the North Rockhampton

172 Address in Repl;IJ· [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Repl.IJ·

election. You can scarcely say the hon. mem­ber was returned there by a majority, because there were three candidates, and of course under the block system the man who had the rllost votes was declared elected.

Mr. LESINA : There was the same number in the Normanby election.

The SECRETARY J<'OR RAILWAYS: There were only two candidates there to start with.

Mr. FOX : I was reading the other day an account of an election which took 1•lace in New South Wales. In New South Wales there is no deposit required, and consequently there were more candidates for each electorate. In one electorate there were seven candidates, and they started with one, two, three, and upwards, and the last candidate had one vote. The next candidate had two votes, and the next three votes. These were distributed among the others, and I should not tell you that, under these circumstances, the majority was not represented. In regard to this system of effective voting, or the quota system as it is sometimes called, I may say it gives justice to e\·erybody. It will not in any way affect the working of the Labour party. It will give them their quota according to their number, and it will give every interest their -quota according to their number, and no vote will kill another vote. '!.'he system is very -simple. Some people say it is complicated, but I think if they were to substitute the word "unfamiliar " for ''complicated " it would be more correct. In fact, the complication does not arise with the electors or the voter-any compli­cation that arises has been dealt with by the returning officer and his assistants.

Mr. .J ACKSON : It may work out more in favour of the large towns than in the country.

Mr. FOX : I do not think it would. 'Vith the permission of the House I will just read irom a pamphlet I have received from Canada­it will give you a better idea of the system than I could give you myself. I can tell you that there nre several different ways of applying this ·system, nnd there are several system.,. There is the Hare-Spence system, the Gove system, and the i::lwiss system. Speaking nf the Hare-S pence system, the pamphlet says-

This system was originally proposed by Thomas Hare, :an English chancery lawyer and a very a.ble man. John Stuart :Mill, the great writer on political economy, warmly endorsed ~r. Hare's plan. 'fhe English Pro­portional Representation Society advocates it. Sir John Lubbock and other well-known men are members of the society. Miss Catherine H. Spence, a veteran of Australia, has devoted her life to the advocacy of the Hare system, and has popularised it in Australia. It is much advocated in California, where the exertions of Mr. Alfred Cridge have done a great deal to popula­rise it. The method of working is : If you are voting on the Hare-Spence system in a seven-member con­stituency, you mark your ballot for seven candidates {or less) in order of your choice with the figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. The man whom you like best you mark No. 1, and so on in rotation. If your vote goes to help the candidate of your first choice to be elected, then it does not count for anybody else. But if the candidate whom you have markecl Ko. 1-your first <choice--has enough votes without yours, or has so few votes that he cannot be elected, then your vote goes to the Juan whom you have marked No. 2. If your No. 2 does not need or cannot use your vote, then it is passed on to No. 3. and so forth. In counting the votes, the :first operation in the Hare system is to sort out the ballots into as many compartments as there are candi­dates, according to the first choice or No. 1 votes, pay­ing no attention for the present to other figures on the ballots. While this is being done two tally clerks are keeping tally of the votes. When the total number of votes is thus ascertained, it is divided by seven, which is the number of members to be elected. This gives the'' quota" or number of votes required to elect any one man. For instance, if seven members are to be elected, and 14,000 votes have been cast, the "quota" will be 2,000. Then any one of the candi­dates who has a quota or more than a quota is declared

.elected. If he haF~ more than a quota his surplus votes

are transferred to snch of the other candidates as may have been marked Ko. 2 on the ballots so transferred. If the candidat.e marked l\o. 2 on any of these ballots has already been elected, then the ballot goes on to Ko. 3, and so on. It never happens that tbe full number of members required have quotas of Hrst­choice votes: so we then begin at the other end, take the man at the foot of the poll, with the lowest number of votes. declare him "out of the count," and then distribute the whole of his vot£'s amongst the remaining candidates, according as indicated by the voters them­selves, each on his own ballot. This process is repeated until seven of the candidates either get a quota or come the nearest to it.

That is the system. We hear much talk about democracy, but a great deal of the democracy we

hear about is false democracy. If [7·30p.m.] demor:racy means anything it means

government by the people for the people, and not for any section of the people. An eminent writer, Sir Thomas Erskine 11ay, in his "Democracy in Europe," uses the follow­ing words with r<>gard to democracy :-

The highest ideal of a democracy is that which secures to every citizen equality before the law, freedom of person, freedom in the family, freedom of conscience, freedom of opinion, freedom . of speech, freedom of trade, freedom of labour, freedom of property, freedom of action -when not mjurious to the State or society-a share in the election of his rulers, and in the making of the laws by which he is governed, and in the voting of taxes which he is called upon to contribute, which provides that the enlighte~ed will of the majority shall he the rule ol all, while none shall be restrained, but for the general good, which, combining the strength of a whole people, has for i'bs first object security for the rights and liberties of the State. As I have already informed hon. members, I referred to this question in this House in 1878, and, having given some consideratwn to the subject, I think it is only right that I should lay my views before the House. There is another question that I am very much interested in. I do not think I need be ashamed of admitting that I am very much in favour of many of the Acts which have been passed in New Zealand. I am very much imbued with the advantages which have accrued there under the Advances to Settlers Act, and I am glad that the Government intend to introduce a measure of that kind in this Parliament. I know that such a measure is in exi•tence not only in New Zealand but also in South Australia and in Victoria under the credit foncier system, and I find that the New Zealand Act has been an eminent suc­cess. Indeed, it has been the means of settling quite a number of people on the land. I shall not deal with this matter nny further now, because in all probability I shall take part in the debate which we shall have on the subject later on. I can assure the House that I shall support any measure which is for the benefit of the country, no matter from which side of the House it may come. I shall give the Government an independent support, but they must clearly understand that I shall not be in any way bound to them. I will support them if it comes to a party question, but in every other way where I am free I shall certainly exercise my own jndg· rnent. If a man joins a party and extreme measures are taken by the other side, I do not think he should desert that party. He should stand by them, and I should do that if I were sitting in Opposition. There is one matter that I had very nearly forgotten, that jg the kanaka ques tion. I think this House should enter a protest against any extreme measure being taken for the sudden, harsh, or unjust exclusion of the kanaka. from the colony of Queensland. The kanaka is a producer, and in that respect is in a very dif­ferent position from the Asiatic. In my opinion we have as much right to stop the Asiatic from coming here, though he comes peaceably, as we should have to stop an invading army. But I

Address in Repl.'J. l25 JuLY.] Address in Reply. 173

tak~ a very different stand with regard to the kanaka, and I think this House should protest against the Federal Parliament taking any mea­sures which are likely to injure this colony by the sudden removal of the kanaka. The kanaka is a producer, and he does nothing else. He is hereunder certain regulations and restrictions, and I feel sure that the Government will see that those regulations and restrictions are observed. I will certainly assist them in doing so. For the Northern sugar plantations the kanaka is abso­lutely nece'8ary. In Bundaberg, and in other places situated near Maryborough, they have a large settled population from which they can get labour to deal with the cane in the se'Lson, but it is very different in the Northern portion of the colony. There they cannot get su"h labour. If the planters required labour they would have to send t) the centres of population for it, and even if that labour was of the character desired they could not get it until too late, and unless the labour needed is promptly sup­plied they would lose the work of the whole year. Therefore I say that, to the Northern sugar­planters particularly, the kanaka ie a necessity. It has been said by members on the other side repre­senting Labour, that if a white man can do the work of stoking in a steamer, or can work in a mine, he can do the work required on a cane­field. But I would point out that there is a great deal of difference between the remunera­tion for work on a steamer and that for work in a canefield. A man working on a steamer gets £3 or £4 a week, and a man working in a mine gets £3 a week.

An HoNOURABLE MEMBER : No. Mr. FOX: \Veil, I am informed so. But we

will say that a miner gets £2 10s. a week on Gym pie, and £3 on Charters Towers. The sugar planters are not in a position to pay that wage. I remember reading not long ago that Mr. Dawson, who waK leader of the Labour party at one time, and who is now in the Federal Parlia­ment, said that we should soon civili.>e the kanaka off the face of the earth. I think eo too. I think that the black races-particularly the Polynesians-will go down before the white race, so that there is nothing to be alarmed at about in brin>:ing the kanaka here. In the next place, there is an agitation in the Federal Parliament to take possession of the Pacific Islands. How are we going to take over those islands and insist on an open door for ourselves there, while we refuse them an open door here? I do not think that would be just. I now come to the qnf'stion of railways. I am rather chary about going into this question, as I know I shall meet with strong opposition when I tell members on the other side that I am in favour of private railways.

Mr. LESINA : Y on did not say that at election time.

Mr. FOX: It justs amounts to this-A body of men secure a mininfl' area. Y on cannot take that land from them so long as they fulfil the conditions. That body of gentlemen propose to make a common road to their property. I am sure hon. members opposite will say, "What enterprising men !"

MEMBERS on the Government side: Hear, hear!

Mr. FOX: Well, what is a railway but a superior road?

Mr. LESINA: Why don't you give the gardens and Queen strPet to private syndicates?

The SPEAKER: Order, order! Mr. FOX: I take it that no Government would

allow people to make rail ways without some re­strictions. They will see that they are open to the general public under certain regulations, and I do not see any objection to that. We want to open up the country and to see population

settled here. America has been referred to to-night. J'\ow, during the last century the population of America has increased by nearly 1,000,000 a year. She increased her population during the century from 4,000,000 to 80,000,000, while we have not a man and a boy to a aquare mile. In fact, we have no more people in Australia than they bave in the Arctic regions; and, if we do not push the country on and increase the population, it is a tern ptation to China and Japan, who are our neighbours, and whose· surplus population for one year is more than our whole population, to come here on the ground that we are not making use of the country, and to take it from us.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : They would do it to-morrow but for the British fleet.

Mr. l<"OX: We want to encourage people to come here. I beard a Minister say to-night that by means of land-grant railways they have increased the population of America. I am prepared to bear him out, and say that, if we had hnd-grant railways here, we would push the conntry along more in ten years than we will do now in 100 years. They cannot eat the land,. and they cannot take it away. It is there to be taxed. · They would bring population to the country, because each of these companies would be so many immigration agents, inducing the best kind of farmers to come here, putting them on the land, and assisting them with implements and in other ways to make use of the land. Of course, if I advocated such a thing in this House, hon. members on the other side would bang me to the first tree they came across, but I say it is a fact. Another thing is that these private railways open up and <levelop the resources of the country. They settle people upon the land ; they increase settlement ; they give employment to miners, and to· numerous other people ; and it is all to the advantagE' of the country. Again, taking the majority of the rail ways that were passed by this House last session, they are feeders to our main !in es, and will increa8e the trade to our· ports. Take Gladstone, for instance. I do not think we should adopt a dog in-the-manger policy in the matter. Indeed, so far as I can see, it has been rather a one-sided business so far as capitalists coming to Queensland are con­cerned. I believe the majority of them would much rather have kept their money at home, but I do not think that the depression or the losses they have sustained of late will continue. As the country develops and we encourage them to come here, the population will be increased, and it will be of benefit to Queensland. I have said rather more than I wanted. I rather w<>rmed up after I •tarted, and if I have said anything discourteous, I regret it.

MEMBERS of the Opposition: No, no! Mr. W. THORN (A~'bigny): I regret very

much to miss two faces that we used to see on· the front Ministerial bench, and particularly the face of the late Hon. J. V. Obataway. That gentleman was advancing the State of Queens­land in agriculture.

HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Mr. W. THORN : He is a loss, not only to

the Government, but to the whole State of Queensland.

HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Hear, hear ! Mr. W. THORN: He was a man with whom

any farmer could converse, and he would do all in his P<>Wer to give that farmer the best of his knowledge. No doubt the other bon. gentle­man and I had our differences, but he has passed away, and I am not going to say anything harsh about him. I am very pleased to see the change that has taken place on the front Ministerial bench through the acceptance of the office of Treasurer by the hon. member for Ipswich, Mr.

174 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

Cribb, and of the office of Secretary for Rail­ways by the hon. member for Bnlloo, :Mr. I~eahy. They are both estimable gentlemen, and I am sure that the Government will get on remarkably well with them. \Ve have heard within the last week a terrible lot about close settlement. 'We have heard from this side--I do not think we have heard much from the Go­vernment side-a lot of blame heaped upon the Government for not purchasing the Felton Estate. I should like to touch upon a new subject ae far as close settlement is con­cerned. There is no doubt the land that has been purchased on the Darling Downs has been very much a step in the right direction, but, like one hun. member on the other side who was talking about Felton, I think that we are going rather far from our railway lines. I can assure hon. gentlemen on the Treasury bench that the State of Queensland has got just as good agri­nulturalland in the Aubigny electorate as in any other part of the colony. If the Government were to expend, not £100,000, but £20,000 or £30,000, in building light lines into that farming centre, they would be doing just as much good as by purchasing some of these large eotates.

MEMBERS of the Opposition: Hear, he~tr! Mr. BROWNE: Y on only want that Goom­

bnngee line. ~Ir. W. THORN : I wonder what the hon.

member wants. Mr. BROWNE : Lots of things. Mr. W. THORN: I suppose he wants £100,000

or so spent on deep sinking on Charters Towers or Croydon. Every member in this House should stand up for the righ•s of Queensland as a whole, and not merely concern himself with ihe requirements of his own constituency. '-Ve have been forced into federation, partly by n1embers on the other side, and still mnre by members on this side; and now Wfl have g-ot it let us make the beso of it; but if we are going to have things done in a parochial manner, I don't think Queensland will become the State which some people expect. As to close settlement, I may say that the Government have been offered the Gowrie Estate, and I hopa that estate will be repurchased by them. It is an estate that has not only one linE> of railway, but three lines of railway within a radius of 1 or !"i miles. The senior member for Drayton and Toowoomba wishes the parties selling to let the Government know the prices they are willing to take. But suppose they were to give the price to the Government, and the Go­vernment did not buy the estate, that would not be a very nice position for the owners to be in. I have sufficient faith in the Government experts to believe th.:tt they are "ble to value those properties better than they can be valued by members of this House. There is also another estate which might be repurchased if we want close settlement, and that is .Jimbour. 'rhere is a railway there, too. At the same time I say that where the Government have Crown lands suitable for close settlement, and where the only thing wanted is a light lice of railway, the Go­vernment should provide the necessary railway communication, and the close settlement will very soon follow. The hon. member for Lockyer made a great cry about the whole of the Lake Claren­don Estate being settled upon, and I am pleased to hear it. There was (t small estate in my elec­torate which was repurchased by the Government -namely, the Pinelands Estate--and every acre was selected within six months of the estate being thrown upen. There were three farms in the estate with a certain amount of pine on them. The Government made £1,500 out of the pine, and after the timber was removed there were thirty or forty applicatiom for each selection. I

would like to know how many people from the southern States took up land at Lake Clarendon. I believe that every acre was taken up by people in the neighbourhood. When south­ern people come to Queensland they go for land on the Darling Downs or in the vicinity. '-Ve want population, and the way to encourage those people to come here is to give them the land they are eager to g-et. The hon. member for Dalby the other night touched on the prickly pear pest. I am sure the Secretary for Agriculture will give this matter every consideration, and I hope before the session ends a Bill will be introduced dealing with the pest. There is no doubt that Crown lands are becoming overrun with it, and even some of the farmers are allowing it to spread. Those who are battling with it say to me, "'-Vhat is the use of battling with the prickly pear when the divisional boards and the Govern­ment allow it to spread on Crown lands?" Some people imagine that the kanakas, the Chinese, and the Japanese are a great obstruction to Queensland, and no doubt they are; but I can assure hon. members that if the prickly pear pest is n<>t done something with it will be a greater curse to Queensland than all the Chinese and Japanese who h>tve come here. I remember, about seventeen years ago, when the Condamine about W arra was as free from prickly pear as the floor of this House ; but now you C<>n hardly go anywhere on the river about there without sitting on a pear. There is land at J ondaryan which is honestly worth £5 or £6 an acre ; but the Government do not see their way to grapple with the pest, and, therefore, that land is lying idle. Another subject on which I will touch is the tick-line. I can assure the Minister for Ag-riculture, in whose department this matter comes, that in my electorate there are people living just over the line, just beyond the buffer area. 'rhey are struggling, hardworking farmers, who took up their SO acres in the early days. Their families have grown up and they have been obliged to take up land on the other side of the range 3 or 4 miles away. They did this long before the buffer area was establi"hed. They are engaged in dairying ; and I am glad to be able to say here that the Government are doing all they can to give that industry a fair show. The hon. member for Cunningham said the othPr night that the Government were trying to kill the farmers by high freights. There is cer­tainly one thing that troubles that hon. gentleman, and that is wheat. He says the fanners on the Darling Downs will not be able to compete with the southern farmers on account of the high tariff. \Vhy did the hon. member not think of that when he gave his vote in favouroffederation? Why did he not go out to his electors and tell

them so? He was not thinking of [8 p.m.] that then; he was thinking of some-

thing else--he was thinking of wheat. I have not interviewed the present Minister for Agriculture on the subject, but I have had many a talk with his late colleague over the matter, and he was a! ways willing to give these people a fair show. He knew it was their whole aim and nbject to make a living and k~ep their families from ruin. I know the present Minister for Agriculture will take the same interest in these people as his late col­leaguP did. As far as I can see, I think he should do away with the buffer area alto­gether -let it be extinct. \Vhat has New South Wales done for Queensland? What did New South \V(tles do when the Duke of York came here? Why, they actually prevented that great boat the "Ophir" and the cruisers from coming to Brisbane. ("Hear, hear," and laughter.) 1 say that the southern people will do all they can to injure this State. Now s the

Address in Reply. [25 JuLY.] .Add1·ess in Repl_y. 175

time for Queensland to speak out for herself. "\Ve have territory here that New South \Vales and Victoria would like to get hold of. The men we have seut there-that is, to the Federal Parliamt-nt-I do not believe are able to hold their own with other members there. (Laughter.) No doubt some hon. members on this side may not be lnyal, but I can a•sure the House that I am, and I hope that I shall never, and that my family will net'er, see Queensland a repub­lic. ("Hear, hear," and bughter.) We have cgot a certain debt to pay to the old country. She watches over us, and she is always wi•h us; and if we want money, where are we going to get it from? (L~ughter.) What do some hon. members in thi' House care about money so long as they draw their £300 a year? \Vhat else are they looking for? Some hon. members of this House wish to reduce our £300 a year, and I for one will he quite sati<fied to pay my portion towards the deficit when the time comes. \V e are sent here for a certain pur­pose. \V e are to do all we can for the State of Queensland. I can assure this House that we have a right to stand np in our places in this CChamber and do all we can for this great colony. I q11ite agree with the remarks that fell from the hon. member for Carpentaria. To my way of thinking, his was the most sensible speech that has heen delivered in this House this session. Touching on the £500,000 deficit, he was of opinion that an income tax should be put on the peopkc To my mind, the people of the colony who are drawing big incurnes are the people who can well afford to pay something towards this deficit. Most of them get their money not altogether from hard work, and they are the right class of people to hPlp to pay the deficit. I hope the Government will take this into consideration, and I think that that will be one way of collecting a portion of this money. I totally disagree with the land tax, although there are some members on this side who are in fa\ our of it. But what land have these hon. members ever had or ever will have?

Mr. LESINA: We have got more brains than you ever had.

Mr. W. THORX: Then I wish those hon. members would use their brains, and if they do, I am sure that the time will come when they will not speak in the way they are speaking now. How can we at thA present time have a land tax when we have a divisional board tax, a rabbit tax, and other taxes? Has New South \V ales a divisional board tax now, although they have got a land tax? Certainly not. If you wish to have a land tax, I think we should do away with the divisional board tax. That tax is large enough without a land tax for this colony now. (Laughter.) It is all very well for hon. gentle­men to laugh, but how much land have they ever acquired in their lives? I do not think they ever will acquire much, or ever have acquired much. I believe in an income tax, and also in an absentee tax.

HoNOURABLE MEMBERS : Hear, hear ! Mr. W. THORN : And, Sir, I do hope that

the Government will be sincere this sEJssion in passing the last Bill that we see in the Speech of the Lteutenant-Governor-that is, the measure concerning advances to farmers. It is a Bill that I bP!ieve will be of great assi"tance to those on the land. It is all very well for hon. mem­bers to ask : \Vhy should we assist the farmers? But I say that they are the backbone of the country--they are the people who are the bone and sinew of the country, and they are working, many of them, not eight hours a day, but twelve an::! fourteen hours a day, and, moreover, they are working for their own puckets-they are not working to put money into the pockets of the Labour party, and I hope they never will.

(Opposition laughter and cheers.) I do hope that the Government will see th< ir way clear to pass this Bill this seRsion, and th" tc they will go further and expel that Railway Guarantee Act from off our statutes, ond build clr ·ap lines in the farming centres. I can assure the H•mse that thP Government will have my support in everything I am able to give it to them upon. I am sent here as an independent member to support measures anrl not men, and, as br as I can see, the Government are the people who should get my support.

HoN. E. B. FORREST (Brisbane North) : I propose to follow the example of the hon. member for Norman by and refer c to the satisfactory character .,f the speeches that have been de­livered here this session, but instead of confining the compliment to two or three members I will go further and say that I think the House is to be congratulated on the moderate character of the speeches deliverer! this session on both sides. There is no doubt whatever that thev have been perfectly free from anything like bitterness, and it is most s'ltisfactory to have made a start of that description. I am inclined to think that that is an evidence that there is not much in the Speech to which exception can be taken. Certainly we may assume that it is an evi­dence of the fact that there are rea!ly very few grievances to be redressed. I may say that the chief grievances to which hon. members have referred have a great deal more to do with the Imperial Parliament than this Parliament, and some of thPm have a great deal more to do with the Federal Parliament than this Parliament. Very little exception can be taken to anything this Ministry or this Parliament havP done. The hnn. member for Cairns, Mr. Givens, took great exception to the rejection by the Imperial Government of the Sugar Works Guarantee Bill, but I would point out to him that that is a grievance more particularly against the Imperial Governtnent.

Mr. GIVENS: Not a bit of it. HoN. E. B. FOR REST: His remarks were

entirely in that direction. Mr. GIVEN::;: The Imperial Government were

mi"led. HoN. E. B. FORREST : He directed his

remarks to the Imperial Government, and took great exception to their action. In fact, he went so far as to say that he intended to carry his grievance to the foot of the '.rhrone. I hope he will not do anything of the sort, because I feel satisfied that if he does the electors of Cairns and this House will be deprived of his services in the future. I venture to say that, if he leaves Australia and goes home on a mission of that kind, he will for ever after be a dead bird to Australia and Queensland politics. Therefore, I hope he will reconsider his de,cision, and not leave this colony to lay his grievance at the foot of the Throne. There is another matter which is one for congratnlation, and that is the unanimous desire there seems to be to give some sort of relief this session to the pastoralists. \Vith one exception, every hon. member who has spoken has promised to listen carefully to any proposal put forward with a viBw of giving relief to that section of the communitcJ.

Mr. LESINA : And to everyone else. HoN. E. B. J<,ORREST: I am speaking now

more particularly of the pastoralists, and I say it is ~atisfactory to find an assurance being given that that relief will be forthcoming this session. The only exception came from the hon. member for Charters Towers, Mr. Burrows. His was the only discordant note in connection with this sub]ect, and I am sorry for that. I really expectd to hear from him that there had been nothing whatever in the shape of a drought. I

176 Address in Reply. [ASSKi\1BLY.] Address in Rep~1f-

do not think he realises what has taken place in this colony for the past two years. He seems to have some hazy idea of it, but he does not appear to regard it as of very much conse­quence. Now, if he has any doubt about the drought, I would like him to refer to the statistics of the colony, and give a reason if he can for the falling off in our exports to the ex­tent of £2,500,000. Let him also explain away if he can the enormous falling off in our railway receipts that haa taken place. I think these two things are strong evidence of what this colony has passed through. Take, again, the sugar in­dustry. ·what has caused the falling off in pro­duction if it is not the drought? During the year 1898-99 the producHon was 164,000 tons, in 1899-1900 it was 124,000 tons, and in 1!J00-190l, 73,000 tons. The production has certainly come back thie year to 117,000 tons, but what is that fallinv, off due to unless to bad seasons caused by the drought ? There is no doubt that there has been a very bad drought, probably the worst that we have ever experienced in this colony; and as regards the pastoralists, they have suffered more than any other class. I claim that it is due to the pastoralists that this year we should give them some measure of relief. That has been promised year after year. Last year hon. members will recollect that it was promised in the Governor's Speech. At that time we were informed that the Government were waiting for certain returns to come in, showing what was the demand for closer settlement. \Ve have not yet heard anything of those returns; but whether they are forthcoming or not, I trust the Govern­ment are now in a position to come forward with some measure of relief for the ]Jastoralists.

Mr. LESINA: They are always whining for relief.

HoN. E. B. FORREST: Well. in this in­stance, at all events, I am perfectly convinced they deserve it. I only intend on this occasion to refer particularly tu one subject mentioned in the Speech, but there are many others which may be more fittingly dealt with on the Finan­cial Statement. I would like to refer to the first Bill which has been promised-a Bill to con­stitute certain harbour boards. I do not exactly know what boards it is contemplated to estab­lish, but I trust among-st the number there will be one for Brisbane. I am not going on thisocca,;ion to place particulars before the House, but I am quite prepared when the subject comes up to enter into the question as to whether we shall establish harbour boards or harbour trusts as exist in Sydney. \Vhen the proper time comes, I shall be prepared to show what is the practice in or her parts of the world, and more particularly in New Zealand and the United Kingdom. I say that everything points to the advisability of placing h0ards of this kind in the hands of the people. No doubt the working of the boards in New Ze:tland and the United Kingdom has been entirely satisfactory, and I venture to say that the evidence which will be forthcoming will be very much in favour of boards ~·ersus trusts. We have an Act on our statute-book, passed in 1892, creating harbour boards. Under that Act several boards have been conetituted, and as far as I am aware most of them are working- in a most satisfactory manner. If we are going to substitute trusts for boards, it appears to me that we shall have to consider the propriety of repealing the 1S92 Act. I do not think there should be any suggestion of the kind ; but if the Government intend to create trusts as we find them in existence elsewhere, we will have to repeal the present general Act, and that means that there will be no provision made this session for the government of the harbours of the colony eithPr by trusts or boards. I do not intend to refer to any of the other sub-

jects in the Speech. There are many matters to which I would like to refer, but what I have to say will come with very much more force when the Financial Statement is before the country. Then I have no doubt we shall have the oppor­tunity of saying what we have to say on these subjects. * Mr. CAMP BELL (Moreton): I do not intend at this hour to traverse the whole of the matters referred to in the Speech, but there are some points I would like to say something upon. I am very pleased to see that the Government intend to introduce an amendment of the law relating to mining companies. This matter has been referred to by previous speakers, and those who are acquainted with the various ramifica­tions of this matter, those who deal with Bhares and scrip, will welcome any attempt to obviate the abuses which exist. I ~m also very pleased to see that there is an intention to amend the Fire Brigades Act. The recent disastrous fire· in the nei~hbouring colony, in the city of Sydney, has certainly directed very forcible attention to the necessity of placing these brigades on a more efficient footing, and I trust that when the Government are dealing with this matter they will see their way to also deal with those brigades in the suburbs of the towns. At the present time in this city, what is called the metro­politan area is the line within which the main brigade works. Outside the brigades have no support and no endowment, and therefore they are unable to attend the fires that may occur out­side. I am glad also to see that it is the intention to amend the land laws, I suppose in more ways than one. I hope the Government will not be long in introducing a measure to enable, under the Land Purchase Act, dairy farming land to be acquired. This measure was introduced last session, and I am sorry to sav met with disaster at the hands of the Upper 'House. I hope it will be introduced in such a form this session that it will be enabled to go through, and I believe that if it passes it will be a great boon to­the community. I am informed, on the most excellent authority, that fully 75 ]Jer cent. of the applications for land, especially in this end of the colony, are for dairy farming land, and I take it that the Government cannot have been alive to their duty in this respect, or they would have provided land for this class of settlement in the past. A great deal of good land c~n be acquired at a moderate price. I believe that many men corr:e from the south in search of land, and go away disgusted, because thE'y are unable to get what they require. Now, in regard to the question of the relief to squatter-s, the hon. member for Clermont seems to have a pet aversion to the name of squatter. I had an opportunity during the recess of travelling out as far as Cunnamulla, and I fiaw the devastation which has been caused by the drought. I am satisfied that some relief is absolutely necessary. In most of the cases that came under my notice, I was sati,fied that if the rent had not been demanded at all the unfortunate men would not have been able to pay their way. I take it that the question forced upon one's. mind in connection with that matter is the con. dition of the country. To use a common expres­sion, the normal condition of that country is drou~ht. I believe that the old squatter ideal will have to obtain again. I believe that grazing farms in that class of country are a mistake, Men have been induced to take up this land, to pay a high rent, to stock their holdings to the full extent without any reserves to fall back upon when a drought such as this occurs. lf they had large holdings with reserves behind them, as the squatters used to have, not only would they have been able to survive, but their stock would have been able to survive.

.Address in Reply. [25 JULY.] .Address in Reply. 177

An HONOURABLE :YIE~!BER: The squatters have gone down too.

Mr. CAMPBELL : Simply because the land has been taken away from them. Their reserves have been taken away from them, and they have nothing- to fall back upon to keep their stock. So far as I am concerned, I shall do what I can to see that the squatters get a fair share of relief, consistent with the general welfare of the colony. During the last few weeks of the recess, I took a journey North, and had the opportunity of travel­ling through the Cairns and \Voothakata elector­ates, and I went theretostudy, among other things, the question of coloured labour, and also the ques­tion of private railways, and to see for myself whether a great many of the statements made by the hon. member for Cairns were borne out by facts. I wish to give to the House the benefit of my experience, and to relate the facts that I have gathered in connection therewith. I found on the Cairns-Mulgrave line a great deal of good had been done by the establishment of a central mill and the tramway in connection with it. I found that the whole of the land being culti­vated was being cultivated by coloured labour of one kind or another ; and I found no instance of where white men were cultivating the land in that vicinity. I found that at a meeting of shareholders of the central mill a short time back, when the question of coloured labour was agitating the minds of the community, a resolution was put to the meeting, to the effect that it was undesirable that any alteration should take place in regard to the conditions applying to the field culture of cane and to black labour. That resolution was carried with only two dissentients, those two dissentients being, one a publican who has a house immediately opposite the gates of the mill, a man who employs a coloured billiard-marker, a coloured cook, and who cultivates the whole of the land that he has by coloured labour. The other man was a prominent Labour man, a prominent sup­porter, I believe, of the hon. member for Cairns. He also cultivates his land with coloured labour, mostly Chinamen.

Mr. LESINA: There is nothing discreditable in that, if you admit it.

Mr. CAMPBELL : Quite so ; but I am only stating the fact. I went over the tramway and the ramifications of the sugar-mill. On my first visit the mill had not commenced work, so I went back and got out to Mount Garnet, Lappa, and other places. \Vhen I returned to Cairns I went out again to the mill, knowing that a contract had been let to two strong Labour men to feed the carriers of the mill with cane for that season. The manager informed me th:tt he had given these men the preference over the other tenderers for the express purpose of seeing whether white men could feed the mill on the same lines as the others and as profitably. I got there on the Friday morning, the mill having started on the Wednesday previously, and as I came into the mill I was watching the performance of the men, and wag perfectly satisfied th!tt the mill was not being fed pro­perly. A little while after I was speaking to the manager about it, and he asked me what I thought about the contract, and how it appeared to be getting on, and I said that. from experience I had had in sugar-working in the past, l did not see how he was going to make his 6,000 tons of sugar with these men. He said, ''No, I do not think we shall. There has been a lot of trouble already, and these men are absolutely dis­gusted with their fellows, and they have asked me this morning for permission to employ coloured labour." These men, who had had the preference, and who were paying their men £1 5s. a week, had to confess that they were

1901-N

absolutely beaten after less than a week of feeding the mill, and they wanted the permission of the manager to employ coloured men.

Mr. LESINA: \Yell, authorities maintain that Bill Sykes in Parliament is a Government supporter.

.Mr. CAMPBELL : I think that the facts I have given afford an unanswerable answer to the statement that white men can do the work that the coloured men do.

l\Ir. LESINA: How does that affect the ques­tion of one man one vote?

Mr. CAMPBELL: It does not affect that question at all.

Mr. LESINA: Of course, it does not. It is only flapdoodle.

Mr. CAMPBELL : I know that it does not suit the hon. gentleman, because it cuts too deeply. The manager of this mill told the men that he had no power to do anything of the kind, and he did not intend to do anything of the kind, as the condition of the contract was that the mill was to be run with white labour feeding the carriers.

Mr. GrVENS: There was no condition of that sort.

Mr. CAMPBELL : That was a condition he made in letting the contract, and that is what I am talking about.

Mr. GrVENS: It is a condition which has been broken dozens of tim<>s then.

}lr. CAMPBELL: I do not suppose thel'e I&· anything to prevent a Chinaman or a Japanese·

from feeding the carrier, but cer­[8'30 p.m.] tainly a kanaka cannot do the

work. I was very much interested in what the hon. member for Cairns said last session as to the route the railway to Mount. Garnet should have taken, and I travelled from. 1Iareeba to Atherton, from Atherton to Her· berton, and from Herberton to Lappa, by the Hot Springs. I found when I got to Mount Garnet, and before I arrived there, that the people I met were very glad that a private railway was to be constructed in that district. I found no dis­sentient voice anywhere. The day I arrived at Mount Garnet I went into the question of freights with a few men who were gathered at the store where I was, and, taking the tariff which would be in operation on the private rail­way, we found that flour would be landed at Mount Garnet £3 a ton cheaper than it was carried by packers or teamsters. And all the other requirements of life would be in proportion. l:lpeaking to three or four of the men I asked, "How is it that you return a member who did everything in his power, with the members on his side, to block the passing of this private rail­wrty ?" They replied that they did not know why they should object to that so much, '::>ut they were going to get a lot of other things from that side that they wanted very much. I do not think there is a sensible man in the district who is against the private railway, but they think that in addition to the railway they will get something better from hon. members opposite than they will get from this side of the House. When I got down to Lappa I found a scene of com­mercial activity that I do not think I have seen surpassed anywhere. \Vhile travelling along the road I discovered that the Mount Garnet Company had attempted to make an agreement with the teamsters who were taking goods to Mount Garnet and ore back to Lappa, and that the teamsters stated that it was impossible for them to work at the price offered, something like £4 a ton. The management then opened negotia­tions with the camel people, camels were brought there, and some of the men who refused to work at £4 a ton are now working for the camel pro­prietors for £2 10s. There we have those people

178 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Llddnss in Reply.

who call themselves the friends of the country allowing camels to come in and compelling their people to work for £2 lOs. That is the effect of ·the agitation which has been going on to keep those teameters from accepting a fair thing.

Mr. LESINA : \V hat nationality are the camel­drivers?

Mr. CAMPBEL T" : They are Afghans, and I exceedmgly regretted to find those men there. In t!Je Herberton district, which is as fine conntry as I have ever seen, I believe there is scarcely a single acre under tillage but what is cultivated by Chinamen and other aliens, and they are there to stay. The kanaka is an innocent man compared with the others, and had he been allowed to come the Chinaman would not have been here. On the morning I left Lapp<t there wer• no less than three trains loaded, one going down from Chillagoe, and two up the line and a busier ,,cene I have never seen anywhere. 'And th~t is distinctly ·•ttribntable to private railways. "\Vrth regard to the hon. member's argument that the railway should have been built by the other route, I '~'a!ntaht that if it is found a good enough venture, 1t rs f]mte poss1ble for the Government to build that line still. If it is found that Momtt Garnet develops _into a fine mining property, and warrants the rarlw.ay ~hich is being built, and the rarlway whrch 1s sttll to be built then I see no difficulty in the Government building a rail­way by the route advocated by the hon. member for Cairns. The.re is nothin" against it if the line will serve the number ~f peo1Jle the hon. =ember claims.

Mr. GrVENS: Is not the present route a round­about way?

Mr. CAMPBELL: Yes. I believe it is a roundabout way to get to Mount Garnet ; but the hon. member did not attempt to justify a line being built by the State to Mount Garnet.

Mr. GIVENS : Yes, I did justify it. Mr. CAMPBELL : I have read the hon.

®ember's speech, and I cannot find such an .argument in it.

Mr. Grn;Ns: I did not expect to convince you.

Mr. CAMPBELL: I am not a difficult man to convince, certainly not nearly so difficult as the hon. member for Cairns. From what I have seen I am more than ever convinced that these private railways are a good thing for the country.

Mr. LESINA: Down South?

Mr. CAMPBELL: Yes, down South, if the Government cannot build them. I do not believe in this great country standing still for all time because the Government are not in a position to build a uailway. Hon. members opposite deplore the debt of the colony and blame the Government for it, and still suggPst that we should adopt a policy which would increase that debt ; in fact, we should double it if we were to carry out their ideas. I do not think all enterprises should be carried out by the State. 'Nith regard to the deficit itself, I have no very g1a ve misgivings with re8pect to it. I am quite in accord with the way in which the Premier suggests it should be dealt with. The deficit is nothing more than we should have expected under the circumstances, and it c<tnnot be attributed to maladministration on the part of the Government. Certainly hon. members opposite are not game to challenge the Ministry on a question of that kind. The Government have at least done as well as hon. members opposite would have done had they occupied the Treasury benches. I hope the business of the session will jgo on smoothly and C(UiP-kly, as I believe we shall do more good for the country by proceeding with the business than by wasting two or three months here talking as we did last session.

Mr. LESINA ( Cle1"1nont): I may say at the very commencement of the remarks I intend to make to-night that I am not at all in the grn.tu­latory mood that has characterised the utterances of hon. members who have preceded me. I think this will come as a kind of refreshing change. vVe haYe had one long series of con­gratulations from members on both sides of the Chamber. Members appear to have come here to scratch each others' backs, and there is absolutely no necessity for it. Th€re are two parties in the House. The object of the party on this side is to oust the party on the other side, and if pos­sible to bring n.bout, by legislation, an entirely different state of things in the country. Every man sitting on the other side is an enemy to members on this side, and we should by every posbible means endeavour to oust those members from their constituencies. In the House we will do all we possibly can, by referring to the utterances of hon. members opposite outside this Chamber, to show what is the relationship of the Ministry to the country which they are supposed to administer. I pro­pose to take first the actions of one or two Ministers, and to refer to their dealings in con­nedion with the colony ; but before I do that I wish to say that this Speech is not one whit different from any other Speech which we have had during the last forty years in Queensland. The last Speech contained as the very first plank in its platform one man one vote and an up-to-date system of electoral reform. Have we achieved that yet? IV e did not e;·en reach the stage of considering the matter. I noticed, in lo,>king back over a long series of Speeches, that for many yE<trs p<tst this Elections Bill has served as the prime joint in the bill of fare at the Govern­ment b"nquet which is laid before Parliament at the opening of each session, and it has always been relegated to the wastepaper-basket at the close of the session.

The PREmER: It never appeared in the Speech before last year .

Mr. LESIKA: It was in the programmes of both Sir ,James Dickson and Mr. Byrnes, and it now appears in the programme of the Premier and of all the independent members now sitting on the other side whom the members of the Government have supported on the public plat­forms. Ministers of the Crown, from the Premier down, have publicly, vigorously, and vehemently barracked for the return of independent candi­dates to this House. Fancy members of the Government going outside and asking the electors to return independent Labour candidates. Have we on this side ever disgraced ourselves by doing any such thing? Have we ever attempted at any time to add to our strength in this House by seeking to have returned to it men who are prepared to come here as half­and-half supporters-as shandygaff labourites? No. It remained for the Government of the day to seek to get support from any qnarter at all-even to secure the return of an inde­pendent candidate in a constituency where they knew their inability to secure the return of a straight-out Ministerial candidate. The Go­vernment have not failed to do that, and men have been returned to this Chamber, and are sitting on the other side of the House, who are against black labour, who are in favour of one man one vote, and of one or two other reforms in the platform of this party. Tbos8 men sit on the other side of the House, although they are dead against some of the cardinal planks of the Government. These are remarkable circum­stances for the House and the country to face. JI,Iust it not appear to any independent body of men, who calmly consider the thing, that this Government is hanging on to office purely by the favours of the great,

Address in Reply. [25 JULY.] Address in Reply. 179

purely by the favours which they expect from the constituencies outside by a variety of means which they have adopted, and which are more or less questionable? Now, I am not at all sur­prised that this Governor's Speech should also -contain the usual promise of electoral reform, and I am satisfied that at the end of the session we will be just as far off having gut it as we are at the present moment-and we were never further off it in our lives. As a matter of fact, it would not pay the Government to introduce one man one vote after the result of the federal conflict the other day, when we succeeded in returning at the top of the poll men whom the Premier and his colleagues in the Upper House and in this Chamber cried down on e1·ery platform - who were howled at, not only on the platform, but in the public Press by jour­nalists supporting the policy of the Government. \Ve 8ucceeded in returning tbose men at the head of the poll because every man in {:,lueensland exerciced but one vote. That frightened the Government immediately, and though they have promised electoral reform in the Governor's Speech, and though they have promised it in connection with the election in the V alley on Saturd>ty, they have not the faintest in­tention of carrying out their promise. They simply des1re to hoodwink the constitu­encies, as they have hoodwinked them for many ye'U'S past. Not till a change of Government takes plac<J-not until a fresh accession of strength takes place to the party sitting on this side of the Chamber-will it b€ possible for us to secure one of those simple reforms which are already enjoyed by men of the san1e race, breed, colour, and religion as ourE:el ves across the borders of the other State, of the confederation. \Vhat an anomaly it is that in every other Australian State to-ciay a man is a man with one vote and no more, but the moment he crosse> the (:.\ueensland bord"r he is less than a man! He is then worth no m re than the most miserable speck of dust owned by an allotment­peg owner, just because the Government of the day live by the corner-peg men. It is these allotment pegs that secured the return of Mr. Tolmie as the Government candidate in Too­woomba the other day. A remarkable circum­stance to consider is that one of the most influential papers in Queensland-the Rockhamp­ton Bulletin-when commenting upon the recenb victories of the Labour party at Bundaberg, Charters Towers, Rockhampton North, and else­where, made the followin'l' statement in connection with our chances of getting electoral reform this session :-

One result of these r~abour victories will be the post­ponement of electoral reform. In the Commonwealth election, where one man one vote prevailed, the Labour party swept the polls, and it is only too plain that if one man one vote were to be the law at the next Queen10~ laud election the Government woultl be routed. It retains its hold of office only by the support of plmal voting, and not by the wish of the majority of the people of Queensland. With this fact put beyond denial, the Government may be depended upon to throw their pledges of electoral reform to the winds, -and jealously preserve the privileges of the plural voter, in order that he on his part may save the Ministry from destruction.

That is the statement of one of the ablest journalists we have in Queensland to-day-the statement of Mr. Blair, the editor of perhaps the ablest and fairest-conducted paper in Queens­land. It is so true that it is in every man's month. You hear it in the 'buses, in the hotels, and in the street. Wherever you go men are talking about it, and yet the Government go out and by the aid of their big gun, Mr. John Leahy, the Secretary for Rail ways, who used to be the candid friend of the Government, and who has slipped into a big Ministerial portfolio-

by his assistance they rake in supporters from every quarter, and put up independent," shandy­gaff," half-and-half Labour candidates, demo­crats, or what not-men of any shade of politics at all-so long as they will sit on that side of the Home and vote with the Government. Fancy a Government patting up an Independent candi­date like Mr. Tolmie to second the Address in Reply!

The SPEAKER : Order ! :Mr. LESINA: \Vhy, that gentleman on the

hustings at Toowoomba told the electors he was against the cardinal plank in the Government policy-black labour. He also told them he was against the next chief plank in their platform­syndicate railways; and the Government have now to put up with this humiliation in the con­stituency, but more than that, they have to sub­mit to it in this House. They have to listen to men on their own side saying that they trample under foot thc"e sacred principles of private enterprise, about which we have heard such a beautiful lecture from the hon. member for Moreton. 'What a humiliating position for a Government to be placed in! Are not the mem­bers sitting on the Government cross-bench waiting for some political cataclysm to bring about a change? On that bench, how many aspirants are there for portfolios?

Mr. BRIDGES: Thirteen. Mr. LESIKA: I do not know whether the

hon. member for Nundah has any particular <tmbitions in that direction, but I have no doubt that his hope' are thttt, in the hurry-scurry and scramble of Queensland politics, some day even he may be Premier of the State.

:Mr .. BRIDGES : \Vhy not ? Mr. LESINA: There is no reason why that

should not take pla.ce. I have no doubt that, although the bon. member has not blazed forth hitherto as a star of the first magnitnde, h" would make just as creditable a display ao Premier as the existing Premier has done hitherto. In looking through the Speech, I was also struck by a remark to the effect that the close of the war in South Africa is withm measurable distance of its termination. I would like to ask on what ground they make that statement? I remember when the war first broke out that the Courier, the Sydney Daily Telegraph, the Sydney ~Morning Herald, the Et'' nin[t News, and the Sta1·, as well as the A1'[/1<S and Ape, in Melbourne, pointed out that within a week, if England showed a firm front, the Boers would be routed. The Star went a little further, and said that in three months, at the very latest, our overwhelming force would certainly crush these rebellious peasants. The Sydney Even in[! News observed that a month would suffice for the pulling down of the Boer flag. It appears to me that having run the gauntlet for nearly two years there is a prospect of the war continuing another two years, or perhaps ten years for aught we know. \Vhen I was in Sydney about eighteen months ago I went on the first contingent boat, on which, amongst others, was Mr. \Voods, the New South \Vales Minister for Justice. Some speeches were made in the cabin over a glass of wine, and the captain of the transport, who happened to be a pro-Boer, said the war was not going to be anything like the picnic which some of those present imagined, and that it would not be over in two yehrs. Mr. Woods offered to bet him a new hat that it would be over before that time, and the offer was accepted. The captain said he had already bet :>ix new hats on the subject ; and I think it looks as if he is going to win seven new hats very soon. Recent operations in South Africa have only intensified the bitterness of the struggle. \V omen, old men, and boys have been gathered into the concentrated camps, and the

180 AddTess in Repl,y. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply.

result has been that the Boers now in the field are impelled to stay out longer than they would otherwise, because they do not know what has become of their wives and children. Farm· burning and hunting women is not going to bring the war to a speedy termination ; and this statement in the Speech about the early termination of the war is merely put in to gammon the electors. Before I con. gratulate the Ministers who have taken port­·rolios I would like to congratulate the Premier on not having accepted the title offered him. We have the statement made on the public plat­form at Cooktown, by the Government whip, that the Premier was offered a knighthood, which he modestly refused. If that be true-and anyone who knows the beautiful character of the Go­vernment whip will readily believe he was telling the truth-I must congratulate the Premier on sticking to his plain title of "Mr." The new Minister for Rail ways for some considerable period occupied a seat on the cross benches, and he has repeatedly given the Government a piece of his mind.

Mr. BRIDGES: Not the present Government. Mr. LESINA: No. He is a member of the

!!.resent Government, and of course all that G-overnment does is perfectly correct. He was the candid critic of the Government for some time, and it was only by the disappearance into the federal arena of Mr. Dickson that he was able by a peculiar political somersault to pop into the portfolio of Minister for Railways and Works. That gentleman went some time ago toN ormanby to assist in the return of Mr. Fox. In the course of his speeches he made one or two statements for which I would like to take him to task. At Stanwell he made the statement that coloured labour, the extension of the fran­chise, old age pensions, and other matters, had been removed for ever from the conflict of parties in the individual States, and had passed on to the :B'ederal Parliament. Then :Mr. Murray interjected, "And arbitration," and Mr. Leahy went on to say that, of course, a great many other things, including arbitrati"n and conciliation, had passed out of the State control. Jf the hon. member for Bulloo made that statement believing it to be true, he was ignorant. If he made it knowing it to be untrue, then, though it would be unpar­liamentary to characterise him in the way I should under other circumstances, I will say, as the Hon. G. H. Reid said on one memorable occasion, "If I saw him sitting between Ananias and Sapphira, I should say he was in the bosom of his family." I should say that statement, for unmitigated ignorance, takes the palm. Adult suffrage, arbitration, and concilia­tion have not passed out of the hands of the individual States. We have still power to pass legislation to deal with those matters. The 51st clause of the Commonwealth Bill does not apply to strikes that take place in the States, unless they extend beyond the boundaries of the Btates in which they originate. If a strike takes place in New South Wales amongst the seamen, and remains within the confines of that State, the Federal Government has no power to intervene; but if it extends over the border into Victoria, then the Federal Govern­ment has power to pass legislation to deal with it, and to apply the legislation they pass. The statement of the Minister for \Vorks practically amounts to this: if these things have gone beyond our control, we have no power to pass a Bill dealing with conciliation and arbitration in Queensland, to deal with strikes that originate and stay within the borders of our own State ; and in making such a statement he betrays ignorance which is culpable in a Minister of the Crown. We still have the power to make our

own electoral franchise, and he is convicted out of his own mouth by the statement in the Governor's Speech that it is proposed to deal with that matter. Many hon. members have expressed surprise that there is no state­ment of the Government railway policy in the Speech, and no mention of a public works policy. We are simply in a state of drift and stagnation, with a large deficit, with taxation hoverin!< over us, the drought in the West, a war bill to meet, and an incapable Government to settle the difficulty. The reason why we have no vigorous works policy has already been revealed. The Minister for vVorks, speaking at Stanwell about three months ago, said: "The railway policy for the coming seRsion, if there is to be such a policy, has yet to be discussed. My opinion is that there will be no railway policy, for the simple reason that if there is such a policy there will have to be a fresh loan, and the Government would be unable to pay the intPrest on a fresh.loan even if such is desirable." This is what we hear after all the lavish promises made hy the Government, aft2r the eighteen railways passed last session, after voting £1,750,000, and after members going back to their constituents, their faces radiant with glory for the coming time. They claimed that they had succeeded in getting a railway for a petty little constituency. But

what has become of all these lavish [9 p.m.] promises? Why, the reply is that

the Government is bankrnpt-tbat they are frightened of the Brisbane merchants­they are frightened of the men with big incomes. In this respect, I say that this Government is a knock-kneed Government, and I have no admira­tion for any Government of this kind. The only way to touch them is for a man 1Jo expertly throw a half-a-brick at them. Let us look at the bill of fare provided here. It seems to me like a bill of fare provided at a municipal conference. We see here the Registration of Dentists Bill, which the hon. member for Dalby has advocated year after year. After herculean efforts, that hon. member succeeded in having it placed at the bottom of the paper session after session, and the Government finding that sometimes a candid friPnd may do some harm, and recognising the hon. member for Dalby as a vigorous enemy, have determined to rescue this little bantam measure and take it under their motherly wing. Then we have a Bill dealing with our city traffic here. I think our police could easily deal with that, and our local bodies can easily m <ke regulations governing their traffic. It seems to me that the Government here can rise to no higher flights than a paltry traffic measure, and a Bill to register dentists. vVhy I have seen larger questions dealt with at municipal conferences. In New South Wales at municipal meetings I have seen a much better bill of fare, and I have seen more statesmanship exhibited there, and better legis­lation than this Government asks us to swallow here now. I compare this proposed lPgislation with the legislation that has been proposed and carried by a red-blooded Anglo-Saxon like Mr. Seddon, of New Zealand. Compare him with the hon. gentleman who is at the head of this petty Governn;ent here. In New Zealand they propose to have a State coalmine. I see that the Secretary for Agriculture smiles quietly at the bare mention of a State coalmine. I hA.ve here in my possession a report of an interview--

The SECRETARY ~'OR ~\.GRICULTURE : It must be a gas mine.

Mr. LESINA: Of an interview between a Telegraph representative and the Minister for Railways, the Hon. John Murray, twelve months ago, in which he advocated the establish­ment of a State coalmine.

Address in Reply. [25 JULY.] Address in Reply. 181

Mr. W. HAMILTON : Rank socialism. Mr. LESIN A : Yes, it is a slice of State

socialism, but the Government have never made any utterances on the subject. I do not think the Secretary for Agriculture thanks the Hon. J" ohn Murray for advocating a State coalmine, so there is no necessity for the hon. gentleman to smile when I mention that the Right Hon. Mr. Seddon first started the idea of a State coalmine. He also ad vacated the extension of the parlia­mentary fr~tnchise-one man and one woman one vote to each of the local governing bodies. Also a fair rent bill to prevent landlords from chargj,ng extortionate rents. Fancy this quiver­ing Government putting forward such a proposal here? Why there would be a rush of members from the other side to this side in that case.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: Rebellion in the Trades Hall.

Mr. LESINA: No; there would be no rebel­lion there, but there would be a rebellion on the other side. Then Mr. Seddon proposes to intro­duce the referendum in connection with matters of importance, and a State :Fire Insurance Bill.

The SECRETARY J;'OR AGRICULTURE : They certainly want that.

Mr. LESINA: He is also going to introduce an Eight-hours Bill; measures aiming at securing reduced freights for New Zealand products to South Africa ; State cold stores in London ; the betterment principle to apply to all lands pur­·Chased five years prior to the construction of any railways or public works that have improved the valnes of such lands; State foundries for mannfacturing iron and steel so as to prevent the big Americrm steel trust from bleeding the colony, and a State cable across Tasman Straits. And instead of the predicted ruin that State ownership is said to mean, the Government that for the past ten years has been leading the wor Id in this respect faces its Parliament with a surplus on last year's transactions of £532,564. And the Queensland Government which governs on private enterprise lines faces its Parliament this month with an acknowledged deficit of £528,000. Now, here our sleepy, slippery little Govern­ment, which encourages private enterprise of the sort we have seen, has a beautiful deficit of £528,000. I have noticed that a good deal of noise has been made about the absence of the Premier at a critical time in our history-on the €V8 of the arrival of the Duke of Cornwall and York. Then onr Premier levanted-he disap­peared off the scene, and we had no details as to his whereabouts for some time. He was lost in South Africa for a while. After a time he bobbed up serenely somewhere to the north­west of Natal. I have seen in the South African papers that at one time our gallant Premier did a rapid flight in an ammunition wagon. Now we have seen that a gentleman named Mr. Carter has gone to the shades of the cemetery above. (Laughter.)

The SPEAKER : Order ! Mr. LESIN A : I mean to say that he has

gone to adorn the Upper House, and no doubt he has got there for his remarkable statements about the red flag of socialism and the black flag of anarchism. We have also learned from the Premier's own lips that he ran the risk of being captured by British officers as a Boer. He publicly stated that fact himself at a banquet here recently. Fancy our friend the Premier being mistaken for a Boer ! I don't know whether he escaped in his night-shirt, as Mr. Steyn did, or whether he escaped under circumstances a little more respectable. The public want to know why he did not stay here and wrestle with the Duke-(laughter)-­stay here and meet and entertain him, and straighten out the financial <lifficultieg into which the hon. member for Ipswich, Mr. Cribb, has

managed to run the colony. \Vas it that the Premier anticiLJated this approaching deficit, and having clung to the Treasury during prosperous times, turned tail at the correct moment and led the innocent member for Ipswich into the trap? There is some reason to believe that that was so. But there are persons who give quite a different reason for the absence of the hon. gentleman at this critical time. I noticed in a Croydon pal?er a telegram taken from the Cape A1·g1LS whrch has led me and many others to believe that the hon. gentleman had a little business to transact in connection with company flotation, and the placing of fat stock on the South African market, in which business it is known he has a more or less distant interest. The So1Lth African A1·gus says-

For some time past negotiations have been in progress between ::_vressrs. Kingsmill and Bul·ton. on behalf of the Pastoralists' Union of Australia, and :J.Ir. C. J. Rhodes and the British South Africa Company for the further­ance of a farming scheme. :J.lr. A.. R. E. Bnrton arrived in Salisbury on 1Vednesday for the purpose of settling details with the Administrator. Briefly, the scheme is to place Australian settlers on Rhodesian land under the care of expert farmers who, acting as instructors, will te11ch less experienced men the whole business of profitable farming. For this purpose the B.S.A. Company r,ave agreed to grant 50,000 morgen of land at a nominal rental on the condi­tion that the grantees (J.Iessrs. Kingsmill, Government Observator of Tasmania, and Ahbot, president of the Pastoralists' Union of Australia) shall expend £1,000,000 in improvements within ten years. Central buildings will be erected, il! which the students and teaching staff will be domiciled. and as the students become qualified they will he allowed suitable portions of land for their own use at small cost.

Apparently he has been there making certain inquiries in order that he might induce native Australians, and especially Queenslanders, to depart from these lands and settle on certain properties owned by Cecil Rhodes and the Chartered South African Company. What m:.kes the matter more astonishing is the fact that he arrived in South Africa just about the time that Mr. Burton arrived in Salisbury to arrange the details of the South African Com­pany. Even the South African papers com­ment on the visit of the Premier of Queens­land at this particular time, and it appears now that the object of that visit was not so much to recruit his shattered health after his herculean labours of last session in piloting throngh this House half-a-dozen pri­vate syndicate railways, but in order to complete a little commercial transaction in which he was personally interested. Now, the mem­ber for North Brisbane, Mr. Forrest, and several other speakers on the other side, have made a piteous appeal on behalf of the ruined squatter. We are becoming accustomed to the perpetual wails in reference to the ruined squatter. He has been ruined for years l?ast. Every time that anything has happened-t1cks, droughts, floods, or dust storms-the squatter has been ruined, and his representatives have come whining to the Government for assistance. The representatives of the squatters have worn a hole in the mat of the Treasury waiting about for subventions for their patrons. \Ve have been told that the industry is ruined and can no longer pay interest, and that the squatters must throw up their runs. We have been told that if it had not been for the drought they might have been able to meet their engagements. I will point uut by means of two illustrations to what extent they have been ruined. For these illustrations we have to look curiously enough to the London papers, for we cannot get the true state of matters from the squatter-influenced Press of this colony. The Australian Pastoral Company, according to the Government Gazette, holds 281 square miles of country near St. George, a

182 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] Address in Reply

drought-ravaged district, at a rental of £167 per annum. Out of its pastoral properties last year it made a profit of £111,309 as against £166,8!!3 the previous year, also a draughty one. Its expenses amounted to £91,724, leaving a balance of £21,ll50, out of which dividends amounting to £16,500 were paid. Not a bad result from an industry that h"s been ruined by drought. The next is the Australian Mortgage, Loan, and Finance Company, which, according to the Got·ernmcnt Gazette, holds 1,440 square miles of land, at an annual rental of £771. The profits for the awful drought year so complained of up to 31stDecemberof this company are £43,500, outof which it pays its shareholde"' a 5 per cent. dividend. The hon. member for Balonne, Mr. Story, told us about the dead man lying by the highway there. He told us a story that would draw tears from the stone god in the museum when he was picturing the ruin and desolation of the squatting induotry, and yet I venture to say there is no man in this House who would mind being ruined to the extent of a 5 per cent. dividend being declared by the company in which he was interested after a flisastrous season of drou!l'ht. Yet they for ever cry, likt- the daughters of the horse-leech, "More, n1ore, n1ore." Thev cluster round the doors of the Treasury, these Oliver Twists, and there is no end to the demands which they are prepared to make in order to gain assistance for themselves. "\V ill they never stop calling out for subventions? Will they never stiffen their spines like good hone·,t Anglo-Saxons, and work for themselves instead of depending upon the State for e~'ery little bit of a thing that they require'? If they are never to show any dependence upon themselves, if they are for ever to burden themselves upon the country, would it not be far better to bundle the whole lot out of their tenements and run the pastoral industry as a State concern? I observe, by the way, that the Government, knowing retrenchment is going to be forced upon them, although it may not be in the shape of reduced wages or reduced salaries, but knowing that retrenchment is inevitable, have shown their desire to give effect to economy bv pur­chasing in London, at a cost of £750, a picture entitled "The Home "\Vind." In addi­tion to that, they have spent £2,000 in letting off a lot of Chinese crackers to celebrate the arrival here of the Duke and Duchess of Corn­wall and York, and yet, at the same time, there are at Dunwich between sixty and seventy old pioneers, some of them old squatters who have been squeezed out by the banks, and who are living on the island in calico dwellings at thlil present moment in this bitter cold weather. They spend £750 on a picture for the upper-crust society of Queensland to look at up to 4 o'clock each day in the town hall, and they will not spend £20, or £50, or £100, in order to give shelter for the old men and women who have largely helped to make Queens­land what it is to-day. And this is the Government that expect the people to throw up their hats and yell, and give expre,sion to the esteem in which they hold their rulers-men who are perfectly content to draw their £1,000 a year, leaving those old pioneers at Dunwich in the state of destitution. "\Vell, I suppose they are perfectly entitled to do what they like. So long as they draw their £1,000 a year, and so long as members on this side are in thlil minority, they will continue to do as they like and bring glory upon themselves by such actions as I have mentioned. I am sorry there is no reference made in the Speech to the federal elections. I thought the Government might in their graciousness, seeing that we have all been so gracious to one another until I got up, have put a little paragraph in the Speech

expressing their joy that Queensland had done so well and nobly at the federal elections, when she sent down such a body of honest, earnest, capable men like Higgs, and Dawson, and Stewart, and others to represent her interests in the Federal Parliament. There is, too, another omission from the Speech. Kot a word is said aboun the noble patriots representing the other side of the House who came to the front and did battle during the federal elections on behalf of black labour. Why is there not a tribute to the mournful fate of the hon. member for Herbert ? He above all others was the kanaka's friend at the federal elections. He took the kanaka to his bosom as bis newly discovered, long-lost brother. He went down with a dull thud that was heard all over Queensland. Not a word, not a tear for the mournful fate that befel that unfortunate politician, Again, there was the member for Cook. Now, if any hon. member of this House deserved to get a seat in the Federal Parliament-on his own showing-it W;tS the hon. member for Cook. I have here a little ex tract from a little address which he delivered, which shows the estimation in which that hon. gPntleman modestly holds his qualifi­cations. I will favour the House with this gem of biography-

Tote for Hamilton, Australia's champion sportsman and athlete. A most intluential, able, and industrious. State member. He has whipped Parliament for fifteen years, and will whip all opposition!

How did he do it, Mr. Speaker? He did not get 17,000 votes, and after all was beaten by the· unfortunate pro·Boer Stewart, the hon. member from the corner there.

The miners' friend! His pocket a walking bank in the old days. Let the Government in their trouble appeal to this walking bank. Let them call upon this walking bank and see if it will come to their rescue.

Organiser of the Queensland national party of 1888.

"\Vhere is that national party now ? That national party nad one or two principles which the hnn. gentleman has done his very best to vote against since he has been in this House.

Hamilton can do more things than any politician in Australia.

That is a modest estimate for a man to place upon his services, his abilities, and his character as a legislator.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: Probably true.

Mr. LESINA: A man of affairs, a man for the drawing-room, a man

for the miners' camp, in fact a man for all sorts and conditions of men. There is no keener politician in the Commonwealth than Hamilton. Listen to this, Mr. Speaker; it is par excel· lence the gem of the collection-

He was born, although we are glad he is amongst us, a few hundred years too late. (Laughter.) You would hardly think it possible that a politician running for the :B'ederal Parlia­ment against the three selected Labour men would publish things like this about himself, and not only that, but post it all over the colony, with his photograph in the centre of it. It was published in his own office-at the Street office-the office of the Government organ-

We should like to bave read of him in the days when men of his disposition wore his complete mail. . . Queensland politician whose name is known from end to end of the continent. And yet he did not get in, but it was the despised pro-Boers Stewart and Dawson, who headed the poll with William Higgs, and not a tear in the Speech at Ruch a sad waste of talent! Little did we know we were harbouring a

Address in Repl,y. [25 JULY.] Address in Reply. 18S

genius like this in our midst, for he has given no evidence of it before, and that is the peculiar thing. I suppose it is his modesty that compels him to hide his light beneath a bushel. I would like to make a remark or two about an inde­pendent politician, who sits on this side of the House. I refer to Mr. Curtis, the hon. member for Rockhampton-Mr. Curtis, a follower of Mr. J enkmson, the member for Wide Bay. He belongs to what is called the In­dependent party. I would like to point out that this hon. gentleman first entered the House as a Minis•-erialist. Later on, he came back as an Independent, and then he became a Ministerialist. Again, recently, he has been returned as an Independent, and he is now manifesting Ministerial leanings. How i·' it possible for any party to seek the support of hon. gentlemen of that kind-of a member who doesnotknowon which side of the fence he stands. There is a passage by Char!e., Dickens, many years ago, in Household TVords, in which he gives the following description of the independent candidate, and it appears to me to apply so very aptly to the hon. member for Rockhampton that I cannot help quoting it-

Our honourable friend has sat in several Parliaments and given bushels of votes. He is a man of t,hat pro­fundity in the matter of vote giving that you never know what he means. V\1hen he seems to be voting pure white. he may be in rea:ity voting jet black. ""'"hen he says Yes, it is just as likely as not-or rather more so-that he mrans Xo. This is the statesmanship of our honourable friend. It is in this that he differs from mere nu parliamentary men. You may not know what he meant then, or what he means now; but our honourable friend knows, and did from the first know, both what he meant then, and what he means now; and when he said he didn't mean it then, he did in fact say tha.t he means it now. And if you mean to say that you did not then, and do not now, know what he did mean then, or does mean now, oll.r honourable friend will be glad to receive an explicit declaration from yon whether you are prepared to destroy the sacred bnlwarks of our nationality.

(Laughter.) This applies so truly to the hon. member for Rockhampton that I will r.ot apolo­gise at all for quoting it to-night. 1 think, also, that it applies to one or two more of the inde­pendent class of politicians who have entered this Chamber, and to whom the Premier gave such a well-deserved snub the other night. There is no room in Queensland politics at the present time for the Independent party, and evidently the constituencies are of that particular turn of mind. The Premier says there are only two parties, the party led by himself and the party led by the hon. the leader of the Opposition, Mr. Browne, and between these two parties the line of demarca­tion is so broadly drawn and defined that it is impossible for any rail-straddling politician to have a leg in either camp. Now, I would like to make a passing reference to the Hon. John Leahy before I close. He is the Minister with the care of an important department in his hands, and any :Minister who has care of 8,

department in his hands shoald not be mixed up with private monopolies in carrying out his duties. He should not be exposed to the danger of hL, private duties conflicting with his duties as a Minister. I notice that G!aclstone laid down as a very important condition which any members joining his Ministry had to observe, that the moment they became members of his administrati~n they were to completely sever themselves from any connection whatever with directorates of any kind. They were to give up their guinea-pigships and they were to become plain English gentlemen and politicians, devoting the whole of their abilities and their energies to the consideration of the State. It is a pity wecannotlaydown a similar rule here. \V hen I proposed that something of the sort should be done last session, the late Sir J ames R. Dickson

got up and denounced the proposal as wild and revolutionary. The idea that a man may be a Minister of the Crown and not disassociate him­self from directorates and companies, where he might sometimes be brought in conflict with his duties as a lV1inister of the Crown, appeared to that hon. gentleman as a revolutionary pro­posal, which could only emanate from a Labour member. I find that Mr. Leahy appears to be connected with the Chillagoe Syndi­cate Company, and that in his C;.tpa­city as a Minister, and as representa­tive of that company he signs the cheques for the company. I will give you an instance of how this conflicted with his duties some time ago. Some time ago, some men were employed by the Chillagoe Company through Mr. :B'rew, its engineer, to cut brirlge timber at Caboolture, On the completion of the contract, the men came to Brisbane to get their pay. At !J o'clock on the morning after their arrival they called upon Mr. Leahy at his private office, the office of the Australian Estates Company, which, by the way, I may say is on its knees in London begging for hard cash at the present time.

Hon. K B. FaRREST: Which they are getting all right.

::VIr. LESIN A : Yes, and if the nublic knew a little more about them they would not get.

An HmWURABLE lVIEii!BER : They are bleeding hundreds of men in the \Vestern portion of Queensland now.

J\Ir. LESINA: These men met the engineer at this office, and he informed them

[9'30 p.m.] that Mr. Leahy's signature was necessary before the cheques conld

be obtained. The men in question went away, and on going were told that they would have to wait until Mr. Leahy returned. In the meantime the hon. gentleman was up in the Normanby electorate assisting Mr. Fox in his candidature. The men called again at 12 o'clock on the same day, and were again told that the Minister was absent, and that they would have to come again. On the Monday morning they called again, and engineer Frew asked them to call again later on, as the accountant was away. At noon they called again, and were informed by a clerk that the accountant was not away, but that they could get no money until Mr. Leahy, who was then at Rockhampton, returned to Brisbane. For a week after that those men were kept walking about the streets of Brisbane waiting for their cheques, while the Secretary for Railways was at Stanwell with Mr. Murray touting for the hon. member for Normanby. I say it is an astounding thing that a Secretary for Railways should in his private capacity sign cheques for the Chillagoe Company. The thing is intolerable, and it is only the beginning of a system that will extend its ramifications throughout the colony, unless the people stop it. If it is not checked the time will shortly come when Ministers will be merely an executive committee acting on behalf of big rail­way and mining corporations in this Chamber. I hope that day will never come. I should like now to refer to a remark made by the hon. member for Rosewood, Mr. Keogh. That hon. member stated that certain things had been done in Ipswich with reference to early closing. He said the railway men outvoted the citizens, and that as a result the storekeepers were compelled to adopt the Saturday half­holiday. I should like to inform the hon. mem­ber that the Saturday half-holiday has been voluntarily adopted in thP following cities and towns-namely: Brisbane, Townsville, Rock­hampton, JYlaryborongh, ·:vrount Morgan, Ips­wich, Cairns, Charleville, Longreach, Cooktown, and Beaudesert, and that it is working most successfully in those places. It is only opposed

184 Address in Repl,y. [ASSEMBLY.J Address in Reply.

by the night-owl storekeepers who would keep open till 1 o'clock in the morning if the oppor­tunity offered. A statement has been made by the Secretary for Rail ways in the course of the Valley election campaign, and it has been repeatedly affirmed at by-elections, and repeated in this House--namely, that the Labour party, by their excessive talking last session, prevented the passage of useful legislation. In fact the statement is so old and familiar that even members on this side are inclined to believe it. Yet there is not the faintest vestige of truth in the statement. As a matter of fact, the work done last session was considerably larger, b;:Jth in its importance and its scope, than the work done in any previous session for some time past. \V e only sat for about five and a-half months last year. There were fifty-five Bills introduced during the session -that is fifteen planks more than we have in the platform of the Labour party. Some of those measures were introduced in the Upper House, and some in this Chamber. We dealt with and passed thirty-four Bills, and one of them-the Sugar \Vorks Guarantee Bill-was reserved for the King's pleasure. Four were discharged from the paper partially dealt with, one was thrown out on the second reading, eight lapoed or were withdrawn, and seven were stopped by the prorogation of Parliament. \V e also paHsed eighteen lines of railway, which involved an expenditure of £1,750,000. Twelve of those railways were passed after three days' dis­cussion. \V e adopted the Address in Reply in two days, though it usually takes ten aays. That debate has occupied several days this ses­sion, for the simple reason that the Government, by refusing to take off the gag and guillotine, have compelled us to stote on the Address in Reply what are our opinions on matters of importance to the country. \Ve disposed of the Financial Statement last year in three sittings, although it usually takes from ten to fifteen days in this and in o•,her Parliaments of the Austra­lian colonies. Does that look as if we desired to obstruct the passage of useful legislation ? It was a~;reed at the first caucus meeting of this party last selision that we should do all we pos­sibly could to expedite the passage of useful legisbtion by speaking as little as pos;ible, ,;nd we adopted that course until the syndicate rail­ways came on. Then we showed what we could do, and one little Bill took nine weeks to go throuah the House. The second reading of the Health Bill, which comprised 170 clauses, passed in one sitting, and though there were important and comprehensive amendments to deal with, it went through committee in about two and a-half days. Does that look as if we obstructed the passage of useful legislation? Again, the Factories and Shops Act, on which there were a number of amendments in connection with that very important piece of social, industrial, and economic refo~m, passed its second reading in one sitting, and 1t went through committee just as rapidly. It will therefore be seen that no Minister of the Crown was justified in making the statement th_at. we ~pposed useful legislation. The rapidity w1th whiCh measures were passed last session shows that we were anxious to pass useful legislation, and if the statement made by the hon. gentleman is repeated I shall simply have to trot out the reply which I have now made to the House, and which I may have an orpnr­tunity of repeatin~; on a public platform. In view of the facts which I have stated, I contend that no hon. member who has any regard for the truth can possibly repeat that statement here­after. I hope we shall get through th~ legisla­tion oft his session just as rapidly ; and I believe we shall do so if the measures introduced are useful and beneficial to the country. But if

syndicate legislation is brought forward, I may say that, as far as I am person11lly concerned­and I think Mr. Browne, the hon. member for Croydon, can make thA same statement on behalf of this party as a whole-the same opposition will be extended to these proposals as was shown to the syndicate measures in trod need last year. For the country does not want them-at any rate, the con­stituencies which h:we returned us are opposed to such legislation. Having said so much, I shall now make way for some other member to move the adjournment of the debate, and I trust that it will be continued for some time longer. The legislation that is offered for our considera­tion is not of a character that will cause any very heated discussion during the session, unless the Government have something up their sleeve which they have not hitherto revealed. If that something up their sleeve is syndi-cate railways, I have no doubt that when the measures are before the House we shall have the same bitter fight, the same bitter discussion, and very likely the same application of the guillotine as char:>cterised last session, and made it notorious in the annals of Queensland politics.

Mr. MACKIXTOSH (Cambooya): At this late hour, I do not wish to say much on the Address in Reply.

Mr. BROWNE : It is not late yet. Mr. MACKINTOSH: Very good, I will speak

as long as you like. I fully endorse that part of the Speech of His Excellency the Lieutenant­Governor which refers to the death of Her Most Gracious Majesty the late Queen. We all regret her death, particularly as she had the most peaceful reign of any Briti"h sovereign for hundreds of years, and a' people enjoyed a greater amount of liberty under her than under any other sovereign. I have also to express my satisfaction at the accession of her noble son to the throne, I have particular pleasure in regard to that event, because I happened in my youth to have been in his company. I have also to express my regret at the loss of two great states­men who were in this House last session-the late Sir James Dickson and the late Hon. J. Y. Chataway. I had the pleasure of Sir .James Dickwn's acquaintance for nearly thirty years, and I am very proud of it, and I regret that he is not amongst us to-day. The late Secretary for Agriculture (the Hon. J. V. Ohataway) was undoubtedly a friend of the class of peo[Jle that I represent. The loss of both gentlemen is much to be deplored, and I express my deep sympathy with their bereaved families. 'l'he next question to consider in connection with the Governor's Speech is how to get out of the financial diffi­culties in which we find ourselves. The deficit may be attributed to many things that have taken place in this House during the last two years-particularly to federation and to the sending of the various contingents to South Africa. Another serious piece of ex­pense was in connection with the taking of the referendum. That compelled the Govern­ment to expend more money than the matter deserved. Of course, the Government are no more to be blamed over that than the Opposi­tion. They were all equally inclined to go into the federation, and I hope they will realise their most sanguine expectations, although I am under the belief that they will not. The federation reminds me of the time when I had mv two first children born, and I took home a doll for them. When they got it home they did not know what to do with it or how to dress it, and now that people have got federation they do not know how to manage it. At the same time the Federal Parliament is going to lay one of our industries on the shelf. vV e are going to have the question of the supply of labour for the sugar industry settled at once, so that the

Address in Reply. [25 JULY.] Address in Reply. 185

settlement of the difficulty in connection with the industry is as far ·off as ever. As far as the deficit is concerned, I do not consider it much. It is only £1 per head of the popula­tion in this great State, and that is not much consid6ring that our great national resources have hardly begun to be developed yet. I have often been in pecuniary difficulties myself. I do not know that I am quite out of them yet, but if I got as low as £1 per head of my family I would very easily get over them. I would sell some­thing to enable me to get on to a solid financial foundation again, and I am sure that the people of Queensland are sufficiently patriotic to come to the same conclusion, and put their shoulders to the wheel and try to take the ship of State out of any financial difficulties that we may be labouring under in the meantime. The ship is not yet wrecked, and there is not the slightest danger of that happening so long as it ·has a good pilot on board, as it has at the present time. Ro long as he did not get taken a prisoner in the Transvaal he is all right. Of course, I have several schemes in connection with the financial deficit, but the matter has been dealt with to such an extent by other members that I hardly wish to repeat what they have said. SorrH\ of them have said what is right, and some of them have talked a lot of nonsense. ·whilst on the .subject of the expenditure and the sending of the contingents to the Transvaal, I may say that I do not agree with all the contingents that were sent from this country. I am as loyal a;; any­body, but, at the same time, I think too much fuss was made over the matter. I strenuously supported the sending of the first and second -contingents, and I believe if those two contin­gents had been compellerl. to stop there until the finish of the war it would have been put an end to long before now ; but, unfortunately, no sooner had they got there than they were re­embarked and sent back to Queensiand, and other contingents had to go to replace them. I do not believe in that. Another source of loss fhas been the drought in the \Vest. N otwith­·standin§O what anyone may say about the pastorahsts, they have suffered an enormous .amount of loss. I have been in that industry, too, and I know something about it. I was out West not long ago, and the country was in a more deplorable state than I have ever seen it during the forty years I have been in Queensland. The pastoralists lost their ostock, and the railway lost the traffic resulting from the sending of the produce of the stations to the market and taking back the stores necessary to the carrying on of the industrv. In addition to that, there was the loss of wages to men con­nected with the industry. When the measure to give relief to the industry comes before ns, it will have my support, if I think it is fair and straightforward and for the good of the country. I· do not wish to go into all the measures that the Government intend to bring before the House, but there is one Bill that I certainly think should have more attention paid to it and more support given to it than it has yet received. That is the Bill to amend the Fire Brigades Act. We have a standing army, which no doubt may in time be useful to defend usagainstany foesthatmayattack ns. In my opinion, we have one thing more dan­gerous than any invasion that we may expect for a number of years to come, and that is fire. We have seen lately the great destruction of property and loss of life in Sydney, and we know that from time to time, in almost every town in Australia, destruction is caused by fire. I be­lieve that if one-half the amount spent on military manreuvres in Queensland were spent in connec­tion with fire brigades, it would be more to the ad vantage of the people, and give greater security .and prosperity. If there is money enough to

spare, it is a good thing to have both. There is no doubt that cheap money for farmers is a good thing; but we must consider what is to become of the produce the farmers grow. If the farmers have sufficient money to pay for labour, they must have a m'lrket for their produce, and if they can find a ready market they cannot grow too much. The next thing will be for the Government to be approached to find markets, and last year when the blight came in the wheat, the farmers were led to believe that the Government would appoint agents in different places to find markets. In my opinion we have sufficient territory in this State and sufficient resources, and if we could only induce capital and enterprbe to come here, that would cause sufficient markets to spring up amongst ourselves. \Ve would then have a large populati< n developing the country, and they would be only too glad to consume all the farmers could produce. I have travelled a great deal over Australia, and I am surethatthere are different sources of wealth in this country that have not been touched yet, particularly the timber and the minerals. \Vhy should we not give every encouragement to capitalists to develop our mineral resources, and enable them to take the different ores to port? By doing so they would give employment to hundreds and thousands of men, and keep the whole of the Darling Downs going in growing suitable pro­ducts for them. \Ve have the land and the energy and the pluck ; and I am sure the money will not be lacking to enable us to do our part in the development of our farminrs resources if we have a ready market. I have seen some con­troversy in the papers about the injurious effect that federation will have on the cereal products of the Darling Downs. I may say that I was always against federation, and I am not in any dread of intercolonial freetrade, but more in connection with the heavy expenses neces­sary to carry it on, and that we could do without it for another ten or twenty years, until our population entitled us to more repre­sentation. \Ve have good land here, and as good men as I have met in the southern States. When they come here from the south they have to learn from us, and get acclimatised to our modes of working the soil. Three horses are sufficient to plough the land in the south, but it takes seven or eight, or even more, on the Downs. Anotlcer thing, the land they cultivate in the South is such that it would not pay us to turn a sod of it here. In connection with finding markets for our products, there is the extension of railways into agricultural centres to be con­sidered. I am sure that financial members of this House will agree that there is no difficulty with men who have sufficient security getting money at 5 per cent. Even the Government could not do it at less, except on a very extensive scale. I am sorry there is not a word in the Speech in connection with the construction of rail ways to enable farmers to take their produce to market. Such a railwcty could be made from Pittsworth into the finest agricultural land in creation; one could be made from Clifton towards Ellangowan, and the flourishing gold­fields of Thane's Creek and Talgai ; another could be made over country as level as the floor of this House, from Oakey Creek towards Happy Valley-another beautiful district. And from the Western line near Oakey Creek a line could be made towards Goombungee, which is magnificent country. Three years ago, when I was elected,,it was on the distinct under­tanding that cheap railways would be made into agricultural districts. The manifesto of the late Sir J ames Dick son distinctly stated that railways would be made on a cheap scale as the result of the information gained by the Chief Engineer in America and Europe .

186 Address in Reply. [ASSEMBLY.] .;lddress in Reply.

I see no word with respect to that matter here. I am very sorry that the Treasurer is not here,

for he knows and thoroughly under­[10 p.m.] stands the difficulties the farmers

labour under. I am also sorry that the Premier has not taken a trip through the Downs to see for himself what the country there is like, and the position of the farmers, for if he did I am sure he would advocate the con­struction of railways there. Now, I think we could wipe off the whole of our deficit in a couple of years.

An HONOURABLE Jl.iE}IBER : \Vhere is the money to come from?

Mr. MACKINTOSH: We can get any amount of monev if we ask for it. "Ask and you shall receive." If the Premier wants to get the ship of State off the threatening rocks and pilot it on in the same way that he has done for some time, I am sure that by coming to the rescue of the farmers and by constructing rail ways in farming districts, he will have no difficulty in so doing. If he does this he will be in his present position as long as he wishes to stop there. \Vith other hon. members, I say that the Federal Parliament has assumed to itself matters in connection with Australia that I think should be left to the management of the individual States. I refer more particularly to the sugar industry in this colony. I think this State is in a better position to deal with that industry than the members of the Federal Parliament are, some of whom have never been farther north than Sydney and others not farther north than Mel­bourne. In connection with this industry, I say that if we have the necessary machinery and labour taken away from it it will collapse. Take my word for that. I have been working myself in agricultural districts, and I have been on the Mulgrave River, and I do not envy any man, black or white, who has to work in the rows of cane in that fertile part of Queensland. A great many people are under the impreihion that the Federal Parliament deals with the labour in connection with the sugar industry and that we here have to deal with the duty on sugar. There is a protection duty of £5 and an excise duty of £3. That means as near as pos­sible ld. per lb. If we are going to pay any increased duty on sugar, I shall certainly join with the party who say that the price of sugar should be left as it is. I say that sugar should be free. Vie have the land and the labour for producing sugar, and why should we not utilise that? I would be sorry to ask a labouring man to do some of this sugar work. I have tried to do some of it my­self. A great deal of it I can do. I can cut cane, feed the rollers in the mills, deal with the sugar in the pans, and deal with it in the re­fining process, as well as any man. The difficulty is that we do not get as much sugar sometimes as we would like to have, and on the other hand when we do not require it, we get too much of it. I say that this industry should be managed by this State here, and not by any foreign body. With regard to developing mines, I think we should encourage the introduction of capital by pro­vidingfor private railways. I supported that prin­ciple years ago, and I am not going back on it now. As long as I am here I wili adhere to that principle, and if I get tired of that opinion I shall adhere to any altered opinion I may have as strongly as I have stuck to my pre­sent opinion. I think we should wait and see what the Local Government Bill is like before expreosing any opinion on it. I have been a member of a local government body for ten years, and I know many amendments are wanted in that law. I shall express my opinions on this subject when the Bill is before the House. In

connection with electoral reform, I hope that. any measure that is introduced in this connection will be an improvement on the present law. No m>"tn has been persecuted so much as I have in this respect. As far as women are concerned, some of them are better able to mind· themselves than those men who pretend to protect them are. I don't know what this. electoral reform measure is. Some pecple out­side say that it is on the lines of the Belgium system. If it is, I think it will be a very good one. I have studied that system and similar systems in other parts of the world, and I think that we have greater facilities for exercising the franchise here than in many other parts of the world. I know people who have refused to have their names put on the roll. In other cases, if a man helps to get them on the roll, he has to pay hundreds of pounds in order to defend his action. In fact, grave amendments are nece,;sary in connection with the franchise. \Vhen the Bill comes before the House, I am sure the Home Secretary will be quite capable of explaining it, and he will have my genuine support. I am not in the confidence of the Government, and of course do not know the contents of the measure ; but I am an indepen­dent member, and I am prepared to support anything which I consider will be of value tu the country. In regard to the inspection of dairies, that is another matter upon which we are promised legislation. I think, however, that. such inspection may be made too drastic. I do not at all deny that in the immediate vicinity of the towns it is necessary to have strin­gent inspection in connection with the supply of milk, butter, and cheese ; but in the country I do nob think there is such a great necessity for general inspection. I may inform the Hous& that I have in my pocket at least fifty applications for the position of inspector which may be created under the Bill. I hope the Bill when introduced will be found to be reasonable and wise, and one which there will be no outcry against because of its drastic nature. Overdoing these matters is very often as bad as notJ dealing with them at all. We have at the present time a great number of inspectors in the country; we have tick inspectors, and those appointments are a bit of a farce in many cases. \Ve also have meat inspectors, and I must say that I do not altogether approve of multiplying the number of inspectors, for the simple reason that it creates a sort of hunting­ground for billet-seekers. No doubt if we get the proper persons to look after our various industries a great amount of good will be done. \Ve have in existence at the present time a number of agricultural farms and colleges, and perhaps in many cases, considering the amount of use they are to the people, they are a great loss to the Treasury-in fact, my hon. friend the mem­ber for Cunningham tells me that every pumpkin grown at an agricultural farm costs £1 1s. I have spoken a little longer than I intended, but I can assure the House that any measures brought forward will have my earnest attention, and if I approve of them they will also have my ardent support. I cannot conclude my remarks without complimenting the Government upon the additions made to their ranks in the shane of the Hon. T. B. Oribb as Treasurer, and the Hon. J. Leahy as Secretary for Works, to replace the two lamented gentlemen recently deceased. I am sure that at the end of twelve months they will be found to have given great satisfaction to the country, and the leader of the Government may congratulate himself upon the happy choice he has made.

Mr. BARBER (Bundaberg): I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

Question put and passed.

New .LWember. [30 ,JULY.]

The PREMIER: I move that the resumption of the debate stand an Order of the Day for Tuesday next. I hope we shall finish the debate on Tuesday, because we have now been a fort­night at it.

Mr. BROWNE : Six days do not make a fort­night.

The PREMIER: \Vel!, we have been at this business and nothing else for two weeks. I think nearly every member has spoken, and those who have not will be able to finish on 'fuesday. If necessary, we can sit a little later in order to finish. I think the House is quite satisfied with the speeches which have been made, and we shall very likely have the same speeches over again if we continue the debate much longer. I will undertake for this side of the House to finish the debate on Tuesday if the leader of the Opposition will do the same.

Mr. BROWNE (Croydon): I am quite willing to assist the Premier as far as I can to close the debate on Tuesday. At the same time I would point out tbat it has been pretty general on both sides. In fact members of my party have had a very poor show.

Mr. JACKSON: There have been so many grievances from the other side.

Mr. BRO\VNE: Yes, as the hon. member for Kennedy points out, members sitting behind the Chief Secretary have so many grievances against the Government that they are making a stronger protest against them than members on this side. I am quite willing to get on with other business, and anything I can do to expedite business I shall be happy to do.

Question put and passed. The House adjourned at twenty minutes past

10 o'clock.

Questions. 187