Full day Hansard transcript

Divorce Extension Bill.
382
[COUNCIL.] J. Hi391'.ns' Homestectcl Lease.
which, as I do not wish to transgress the
rules of the House, I shall not mention.
They feel that they ham a majority now ;
out they have apparently no great assur.ance that on the full consideration of the
··111atter, that majority w'i.11 increase. They
rather anticipate that- it will dwindle
.away, and, therefore, hasten to a division
rerrardless of the feelings of an hon. membe~ who has made a proposition such as, we
are told by the hon. and learned member,
}.'[r. R. E. O'Connor. has never before been
refused. I woulrJ {irge tl:em for the sake
of decency and courtesy, to allow their
opponents, who are in a minority, to ha,·e
further time for debate.
l\'Ir. W. R. CA~\'.IPBELL : I can see
nothing indecent in the amendment proposed by the hon. and learned rnem ber,
Sir Alfred Stephen. It is a most unusual
thing for hon. members who have al.ready
spoken to try and extend the acl.iournrnent of a debate; and I hope the House
will not consent to it.
Question-That the words proposed to
be omitted s~and part of the question_put. 'l'he House di vi de cl ;
Ayes, 13 ; noes, 1 !) ; majority, 6.
AYES.
Bowker, Dr. It. R. S.
Charles, S.
Dodds, A.
Faucett, P.
Reydon, L. F.
Knox, E.
.Macintosh, J.
i\foore, C.
Mort, H.
Salomons, J. E.
Simpson, G. B.
Teller.~,
King, P. G.
O'Connor, R. E .
N°OES.
.Campbell, '"· R.
Creed, J.M.
Oarran, Dr. A.
Jacob, A.H.
Lackey, J.
Li:unb, W.
MacLauria, Dr. H. N.
Manning, Sir \Villiam
·Norton, Dr. J.
Rundle, J .. B. .
Smith, R. Burdett
Stephen, Sir A.lfre(l
Ste1rnrt, J.
Suttor, F. B.
Suttor, W. H.
Tarrant, H. J.
Trickett, W. J.
Tellers,
Dangar, H. C.
Roberts, C. J.
Question so resolved in the negative.
QQestion-'.l'hat the words proposed to
·be inserted .be so insertecl-:-·-<tgreecl to.
·. : Question-That the debate be now ad.j.ou.rnecl-until to-morrow-resolved in the
affirmative.
- · - ·House :idjou-cnecl: at: I0'30 p.in.
[ ~11r. Heydo;.
..._
-
1.Legi75latib't
~.!HHmbip:.
Tleclnesday, 14 .i.llay, 1890.
District Government Bill-Coal-mines llcciu!ation Bill--J.
lli_ggins' Homestead Lease-Losses of Stock-Dredge,
Numbucc:i. Ili\·er-8ale of Bluestone-Ruf3t in 'Vhcat
- Bridge a.t Gr~g Greg-Ur. Midclton-Kirkconnell
Public School -Railway Bridge, Mulwaree CreckPolice :lfagistrate, Broken Hill-Railway Department
Appointn:ents-Railway Refreshment-rooms-Police
Force-Public Works-The Unemployed-Net-fishing
in Port Juckson-Pupcrs-Adrnrtising on Tram Tickets
-Coloni<>I Architect-Ecclesiastical Court- Land
Court Proceedings-Petition-Jlisconduct of "{jnh·ru·sity Undergraduates-Linwood Colliery-Ortlnge Ho-s-
pital-Liens on Wool Bill-Adjournment (Railway
Accident nt Bathurst)-Austmliaa Federation.
J'ifr. SPEAKER took the chair.
DISTRICT GOVERXJIEXT RILL.
Message recommending the expediency
of making pro.-ision to meet the requisite
exprnses in connection with a bill to divide
New Sonth Wales into district government areas, &c., received from his Excellency the Governor.
COAL-:IIIXES REGULA.TIOX l3ILL.
Message recommending the expediency
of making provision to meet the requisite
expense in connection with a bill to nnke
better provision for the regulation of c'.lalrnincs aud collieries, &c., received from his
Excellency the Go>ernor.
J. HIGGIN"S' HO".\IESTEAD LEA.SE.
l\Ir. WALL (for l\lr. J. P. ABBOTT)
asked the SECRETARY FOR LAxns,-(1.)
Did .l\Ir. John Higgins apply for a homestead lease at Wentworth for land situated
on the Boundary Run, on the l\:Iurray
River; and, if so, on what date1 (2.)
·when did the local land board deal with
the application, and did it recommend
that the same be grante<l 1 (3.) Has Dr.
Cockburn, the Premier of South Australia, requested that the le:ise should be
refused upon the ground that the fr;mtage
may be required as a port1 (4.) When
were t 11E) papers relating to the case received in the Department of Lands 1 (5.)
Is it the intention of the department to
gazette the lease; and, if so, when 1
l\fr. CARRUTHERS auswered,-(1.)·
-Yes; on the 28th August, 1889. (2.) 22nd
,January, 1890. (3.) Yes.. (4.) 9th April,
Loss.es of Sto_ck.
[14 1\fAy, 1890.J
1890. (5.) The papers have been refe_rred
to the Department of Mines as to wheth"er
there are any ol>jections to the lease being
granted, in view of the necessities of
stock traffic.
LOSSES OF STOCK.
1\Ir. WILLIS asked the SECRETARY FOR
l\iISES AND AGRICULTURE,-Will he instruct the stock inspectors in the districts
of Bourke :rnd \Valgett to ascertain the
approximate loss of stock in their cfotricts
from the late floods~
l\Ir. S. SJ'IITH answered,-In reply to
the hon. member, I desire to say yes.
DREDGE, N.ALl:IBUCC.A RIVER.
Mr. SLATTERY (£o1· l\Ir. 0. 0. DANGAR) asked the SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC
WORKS,-( 1.) Is the ch-edge for the Nambucca River, for which £8,000 was voted
last December, in course of construction 1
(2.) How soon may this dredge be expected
to be ready for work on the river 1
1\[r. BRUCE S~1ITH answered,--The
dredge is in course of construction, and
will be ready for work in about twelve
months.
S.ALE 01!' BLUESTONE.
l\Jr. TONKIN (for Mr. HAYNES) asked
the SECRETARY FOR MrnES AND AGRICULTURE.-( I.) Is it not a fact that bluestone
(sulphate of copper) is largely used by the
fo.1•mers to prevent smut in wheat; and
that bluestone has been added- to the
schedule under the Poisons Act 1 (2.) Is
it a fact that this is ca,using great ahnoyance and i neon venience to the farmers
throughout the country 1 (3.) I~ the interest of the farm·ers, will the Government
immediately cause blnestone to be removed
from the Poisons Act by proclamation 1
l\:Ir. S. SMITH answered,-In reply to
the hon. member, I desire to state that the
matter is under consideration.
RUST IN WHEAT.
Mr. SLATTERY (for Dr. Ross) asked
the SECRETARY FOR MINES AND AGRICULTORE,-(1.) In reference to his answer
to a question by Dr. Ross, on the 8th
May, on rust in wheat, in which he stated
that the department had issued recommendations, and is now• conducting experiments, with the aid of fifty-eight of
. },fr.
Mideltoii.
'383
the farmers themselves, to gain light oh
several matters of importance--will he
state for the general information of
farmers (it now being the season of the
year for planting seed wheat) what the
recommendations are that haYe been
issued and recommended, the names of iJ:ie
fifty-eight farmers who have undertaken
to conduct these experiment$, and the respective localities where the experiments
are now being made, together with the
nature of the experiment each former has
undertaken to perforru 1 (2.) Are they
to receive any assistance or remuueration
for the same; if so, what~ (3.) Are any
of these experiments being' tried in the
1\folong district 1
l\'Ir. S. SJHITH answered,-The papers
in connection with this matter will be laid
upon the table of the House.
BRIDGE AT GREG GREG.
l\lr. SLATTERY (for l\Ir. Ln-E) asked
the SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC WORKS,(1.) ·what steps have been taken towards
the completion of the approaches to the
hriclge at Greg Greg, Upper l\Iurray
Rived (2.) '\Viil he ha\e the matt<~r attended to at once i
l'.lfr. BRUCE Si\:IITH answered,-I
have gi,·en instl'Uctions to lrn,·e the work
carried out at once.
MR. MIDELTOK.
l'.lfr. SLATTERY (for 1\fr. ScnE>) asked
the COLONIAL SECRETARY,-(1.) In view
of his promise made to l\1r. Schey during
last session, that he would, during the receRs, thoroughly inquire into any grievance
which Mr. Midelton, lately locomotive
engineer, Railway Department, might esteem himself to have,-will he now please
say whether be made such inquiry during
the recess 1 (2.) What was the nature .
and scope of such inquiry (if any) ~ (3.)
What conclusion did he arrive at on the
matted (4.) Is he prepared to grant any
further inquiry into the merits of the
case 1
Sir HENRY PARKES answered,_During the recess I gave myself a good
deal of trouble inquiring into this question
concerning Mr. Midelton. I obtained a
statement of his case from himself, and laid
it before the Colonial Treasurer as i\Iinister for .Railways. I afterwards required
384
1lfr.
jjjidelton.
[ASSEMBLY.]
an explanation from the commissioners
upon everT item of the statement of his
case, and in other respects I gave myself
as much trouble as I could in the matter,
he having applied to me as head of the
Government. The result was that on the
61;h March the Principal Under Secretary, by my direction, addressed this letter
to him, which, so far as I am concerned,
closed the case:
Sydney, 6 March, 1890.
Sir,-I am directed by the Colonial Secretary
to inform you that he has given as much attention to the voluminous papers in your case as
the continuous pressure upon his time from
duties more immediately obligatory upon him
would per~. He has found the task of examination the more difficult from the very conclusiveness of the evidence against reopening
the case.
The tangible facts in yo'ur case appear to be
these. The railway commissionera have by law
the absolute power to employ all such persons
as may be required in the railway service, and
the employment in every instance is during
pleasure. This great power was undo:ibteclly
gi\•en to the commissioners to be exercised by
them in their judgment and discretion unbiasserl
by any consideration whatever other than the
efficiency of the senTice. In the exercise of
their lawful authority you were removed by the
commissioners, and on the 9th clay of April,
1889, you gave a receipt in full for the sum of
£1,500 (fifteen hundred pounds) as compensation for loss of office. It appears that in December last, at the instance of Mr. Schey, )1.P., on
your behalf, the whole circumstances of the
case were investigated by the Civil Service
Board, who reported that since your acceptance
of the terms of your removal by the receipt of
the liberal sum awarded for compensation and
in lieu of notice, nothing had m·isen to create
any further claim in your favour.
As you appealed to him as head of the Admin·istration, Sir Henry Parkes bas deemed it his
duty to go o\·er the case already dealt with on
the be~t evidence he could obtain, and has requested the con'nnissioners 'to offer explanations
upon your letters. He is informed by them that
you were afforded ernry opportunity to show
your ability to administer the important subdepartment placed in your charge, and that yon
did not exhibit the reorganising capacity necessary for dealing with the great difficulties
attached to it. They, therefore, felt it incumbent upon them "after most careful consideration" to make the change which was made in
the public interest.
I am to say that it cannot be admittecl that
any person who may have his services accepted,
or even continued for a term of years, in a public office, can thereby establish a claim to consideration apart from official competency or fitness, or of what may be clue to the public whose
servant he really is. There may be qualities, or
the absence of qualities, which render a person
of unimpeachable character quite unsuited· for
[Sir Henry Parkes.
Bridge, Mulwaree Creek.
the performance of particular duties; and those
in responsible charge must be the judge.
In the present case Sir Henry Parkes can discover no ground which would justify him in
interfering.
I have, &c.,
CRITCHETT vV ALKER,
Principal Under-Secretary.
KIRKCONNELL PUBLIC SCHOOL.
11fr. CRICK asked the MINISTER OF
PUBLIC !NSTRUCTION,-(1.) ·what is the
classification (if any) of the teacher of
Kirkconnell Public School, Yetholme 7
(2.) \Vas she ever a student at any training school ; if not, how did she obtain
her qualification 1 (3.) Is it the intention
of the Department of Public Instruction.
to appoint a married male teacher in place
·of the present teacher of Kirkconnell
Public School i
l\1r. CARRUTHERS answered.-(!.)
Her classification is 3 A. (2.) She underwent a two months' course of training as a
candidate for a small school. She gained
a certificate of classification by examination. (3.) It is not intended to remove
her at present.
RAILWAY BRIDGE, MUL\VAREE
CREEK.
:Mr. \V AD DELL asked the SECRETARY
FOR PUBLIC \VoRKS,-(1.) Has any estimate been made (and by whom) of what
the cost would be to make the railway
bridge at Goulburn, over the Mulwaree
Creek, capable of carrying two lines of
railway; if so, what is the estimated cost i
(2.) Has any estimate been made of the
cost of duplicating the railway line from
Goulburn to the point at which the Public \Yorks Committee recommend the
junction of the proposed Goulburn-Crookwell railway with the Great Southern
railway1 (3.) If so, what is the estimated
cost i ( 4.) Has any estimate been madi>
of the cost of a railway bridge over the
\Vollondilly River at the point where the
Public Works Committee recommend that
the proposed Goulburn-Crookwell rail way
should cross this rived (5.) If so, by
whom; and what is the estimated cost i
(6.) Has an estimate been made of the
total cost of resuming town and suburban
land at Goulburn, in the event of constructing the proposed Goulburn-Crookwell railway on the route submitted to
the Public Works Committee? (7.) l£
so, by whom; and what is the estimated
Police :Magistrate, Broken Hill. [14 MAY, 1890.]
total cost of land resumption from the
point at which this railway would leave
the Great Southern line at Goulburn to
the vYollondilly Rived (8.) Has any
estimate been made, and by whom, of the
cost of a railway bridge over the Wollon<lilly River on the route submitted ~o the
Public Works Committee for a r1ulway
from Goulburn to Crookwell 7 (9:) If so,
what is the estimated cost1
Mr. BRUCE SMITH answered, - I
have already informed the members for
the district as follows :-(1.) Yes, by the
department.
The· estimated cost is
£32,000. (2.) No estimate has yet been
made. (3.) Now unnecessary in Yiew of
answer to question No. 2. (4.) No estimate has yet been made, but it is my
intention to have one made immediatelv
in order that it may serve as a factor i~
<lete'rmining the question of route. (5.)
Cannot be answered now. (6 and 7.)
The land valuer has been directed to give
an estimate of the land resumption on
the route submitted t0 the Public Works
Committee. (8.) Yes, by the department. (9.) £6,474 16s.
.Police .Force.
385
as follows :-Jam es Angus--;salary, £600
per annum (now temporarily in .receipt of
£900 per annum while acting in a position
to which a salary of £1,050 is attached) ;
D. H. Neil-salary, £550 per annum; J.
G. Corns-salary, £500 per annum ; C. _
A. Hodgson-salary, £500 per annum ;
Thomas Hall-salary, £1,000 per annum;
W. Foxlee-salary, £700 per annum.
RAILW A¥ REFRESHMENT-ROOMS.
l\ir. WILUS asked the COLONIAL TREASURER,-(1.) How many railway refreshment-rooms are leased in the colony 1 (2.)
vVhat are the names of the lessees 1 ( 3.)
vVhat is the rent paid for each room 1 ( 4.)
On what date does each lease fall in 7 (5.)
What is the cost to the country for the
erection of each room 1
Mr. McMILLAN answered,-(1.)
Twenty-one. (2.) Messrs. Castner & Co.
(15), Edward Jervis (1), George Biles (1),
Matthew Rooney (1), James P. Quinn (2),
and J. Everingham (1). (3.) Mittagong,
£63 per annum; Goulburn, £156 13s. per.
annum; Yass, £84 15s. per annum; Junee,
£693 10s. per annum; Penrith, £49 per
annum; Bathurst, £35 per annum; NynPOLICE MAGISTRATE, BROKEN HILL.
gan, £238 per annum ; Parramatta, £63
Mr. ViT. BRO'WN asked the MINISTER per annum; Harclen,£15417s. per annum;
OF JUSTICE,-vYhen will the police magis- Mount Victoria, £114 12s. per annum;
trate, appointed from t.he 1st :February Sydney, £54 12s. per annum ; Albury,
last, to perform ihe duties at Broken Hill, £270 l 6s. per annum ; Arrnidale, £228
be likely to arrive at that place, and com- per annum; l\iurrurundi, £205 per annnm;
mence such duties 7
. Singleton, £250 per annum; vYerris Creek,
Mr..GOULD answered,-The police £650 per annum; Gosforcl, £288 per
magistrate is expected to arrive at Broken annum; WollongoHg, £6 10s. per annum;
Hill to-clay. The cause of delay in enter- vVagga vVagga, £50 8s. per annum ; vVeling upon his duties has been unavoidable, lington, £413 lls. per annum. (4.) 31st
owing to th~ flooded state of the country December, 1890. (5.) It is difficult to
around W algett, where Mr. Badham was give the exact cost of the rooms, as in
last stationed, which prevented his leaving many cases those occupied are part of the
at an earlier da,te.
station buildings, and cost has not been
kept separate. If the hon. member will
RAILWAY DEPARTMENT
let me know if he desires estimated cost,
APPOINTMENTS.
it will be obtained and forwarded to him.
Mr. WILLIS asked the COLONIAL TREA- I may state that the present leases have
SURER,-(1.) How many men have the nearly all expired, and that a new arrangecommissioners for railways imported .into ment Ly which the department will obtain
the colony to work upon our railways 7 a lal'ger annual rental, and by which the
(2.) vVhat are the names of each person scale of charges will be reduced, will soon
so imported 7 (3.) What salary does each take effect.
person so imported receive 7
POLICE FORCE.
Mr. McMILLAN answered, - The
names of the gentlemen who have been
Mr. vVILLIS asked the COLONIAL SEcappointed from outside the colony to posi- RETARY,-(1.) Will he, at· an early elate,
tions under the railway commissioners are consider the urgent necessity of granting
·~
Public Works.
386
t.
[ASSE~BLY.]
the' police stationed fo the i!itel'ior an 'increase in pay to the extent of ls. per
diem ~ (2.) Will he also consider the
gmnting of three weeks' holiday (together
with free railway pass) per ann_um 1 (3.)
Will he abo issue order for the supply of
lighter uniform during the hot summer
mont.hs 1
·
Sir HENRY P ARKESanswered,-The
follo,~1 ing information has been supplied by
the Inspector-General of Police : -
..
(1.) \Vhen the cost of provision3 l!lld .necessaries baYc been exceptionally h.igh, owing to
droughts or other causes, special allowances
have been made to the police at certain stations.
Such claims are dealt with specially on their
merits as occasion demands.
(2.) Reasonable leave of absence is never refused when applied for, and practicable. There
appears to be no sufficient reason for granting
free railway passes.
(3.) The summer uniform is as light as can be
designed, namely, pith helmets and thin serge
jumpers, with white duck trousers for foot
police.
PUBLIC WORKS.
Mr. WADDELL: I wish to ask the
Premier whether immediately after the
federation debate is o>er the Government
will deal with. the public works proposals~
There are thousands of men about the
country wanting employment, and it
seems a pity that public works should be
delayed.
Sir HENRY PARKES: It is the intention of my hon.· friend, the Secretary
for Public Works, to submit his public
works proposals as soon as possible after
the close of the debate which is now proceeding.
THE UNEMPLOYED.
Sir HENRY PARKES: I was asked
some clays ago whether the Government
would find shelter in the drill-shed for a
number of persons said to be unemployed,
and I think the hon. gentleman who asked
the question, and the House generally,
would like to know what the result has
been. Comparatively few persons have
sought this shelter. Last night the number at the drill-shed was 217-the greatest
number that, I believe, ha,-e been thereand we ascertained where these persons
came from. 5 came from Scotland, 23
from Ireland, 20 from England, 1 from
Italy, 2 from Qermany, 9 from America,
2 from Tasmania, 10 from South Australia, 24 from New Zealand, 33 from
[ ilfr.
Willis.
'Ike Unemployed.
Queensland, '63 from Victoria, and only
25 belonged to the population of New
South Wales.
At a later stage,
Mr. WILLIS asked the COLONIAL SECRETARY (witlwut notice),-Why, after
making a promise to a deputation from
the unemployed, he had broken it by
taking away food which he had promised
to supply for a month 7
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member is not
in order in putting the question in that
form. The hon. member is entitled to
ask for information, but his question
must be put in a respectful way, and not
as charging any hon. member with breaking a promise.
Mr. WILLIS :· I willo not charge the
hon. member with breaking a promise. I
will say that these unemployed have hacl
bread and cheese for two or three days,
they were led to think they were going to
get it for a month, and now it is taken
away from therri. I want to know if it is
taken a.way beep.use they are Victorians,
or because they are Irishmen,' or because
they are Scotchmen. If it is because
they are Victorians - 1\Ir. SPEAKER: The hon. member is not
in order in making a speech on the subject.
l\Ir. WILLIS: I want to know if it is
taken away from them because they are
Victorians, or because they are Irishmen 7
If that is the reason, then, the sooner we
get federation the better.
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member is now
making remarks he is not entitled to use.
Sir HENRY PARKES : It is laid down in
May's "Parliamentary Practice " that no
question should be put to a minister that
invoh-es a reason.
Mr. T. WALKER : Is it a fact that
food which was promised to the unemployed, and which was supplied to them,
was afterwards refused, and for what
reason 7
Sir HENRY PARKES : Does the hon.
member mean what he says 1 Does he
really mean to ask·whether food which.
was supplied was refused ~ My instructions with regard to the persons who applied at the Colonial Secretary's Office
were that if any case of proved necessity
presented itself it was to be met for a
time. I never gave any instruction, and
never intended that there should be an
··i~
£
Net-fishing in Poi·t _Jackson: [14 MAY, 1890.]
~·
indiscriminate supply of food, an1l I never
shall. Tiiis food in cases where destitution has been satisfactorily shown bas
been granted dming the inclement weather:
It was ne\·er intended to last longer, a·nd
... · it will be discontinued absolutely the clay
after to-morrow.
NET-FISHING IN PORT JACKSON.
Mr. FRANK FARNELL : I desire to
draw the attention of the Colonial Secretary to a matter which I brought under
his notice last session and t.he session
before. It is with reference to the mode
which the foreigners aclopt in catching fish
in the harbour of Port Jackson as well as
in the other waters near Sydney. They
use what is called a net, but which is
really an infernal machine in the nature
of a bastard trawl. The effect is to destroythe sp<twning grounds. 'l'heFisheries
Commission ba ve found themseh·es powerless to act in the matter, and I ask the
Colonial Secretory if he will at an early
date introduce a short bill-which I am
sure tlie House "·ould pass at once-in.
order that this state of tl1ings 111ay be
remedied~
Sir HENRY PARKES : I do not know
that I.can put forth a greater claim on
behalf of the Government than to say that
they have anticipated the hon. member,
and ha\·e already affirmed the expediency
of introducing the measure referred to.
PAPERS.
l\Iinisters lairl upon the table the following papers : Report of the Board of Inquiry into the causes
of the railvmy accident at Bathurst, together
with remarks thereon by the railway commissioners.
Report of the boa,r<l appointed to inquire into
floods in the town and district of Bourke.
Report on Prisons foi· 1589.
Report of the University of Sydney for 1689.
ADVERTISING ON TRA::VI TICKETS.
l\:Ir. CRICK : The other clay I asked
the Premier·-hadng failed to obtain a
reply from the Colonial Treasurer-for information with regard to advertising on
the back of tram tickets-who were to
get the contract, on what terms, and what
the Government were to get out of it 1
l\1r. Mc.:lfrLLAN : That was not the question the hon. mern ber asked !
J
Ecclesiastical Cour.t.
387
1\fr. CRICK : I happen to know better
than the hon. member. I put the ques~
tion to the Pl'emier himself, and the Premier said he thought the question ought
to be answered, and t.hat he himself would
answer it. I wish to know if the Premier'
is going to keep his pl'Omise i
Sir HENRY PARKES : The hon.
member does not allow sufficient time fo1~
a proper answer to Le given to so profound
a question. If the hon. merr.ber will postpone his question for a clay or two,.I will
try to get an answer.
COLONIAL ARCHITECT.
Mr. 1\IELVILLE asked the SECRETARY
FOR PUBLIC \YonKs,-Has the Colonial
Architect tendered his resignation, or does
the advertisement which appears in the
papers calling for tenders for the supervision of the public works of the colony
point to an alteration in the department
of the Colonial Architect~
Mr. BRUCE Sl\:IITH answered,--It is
intended to completely reorganise the
Colonial Architect's Department. It is
intended to abolish the office of Colonial
Architect, to call for competiti rn tenders.
for all public works-at least over £5,000,.
and probably clown to £1,000, and to appoint in place of Colonial Architect a
supervising architecL n~erely to see that
the successful tenderer carries out the
architectural work satisfactorily, and to
supervise the carrying out of the contract.
The Colonial Architect has tendered his
resignation, and I think the period of
his sen·ice will terminate in about two
months from now.
ECCLESIASTICAL COURT.
1\fr. FULLER asked the 1\fINIS'l'ER OF
JusTJCE,-In view of the fact that the
practice and pl'Occclurn of the Eccles~as­
tical Court is highly unsatisfactory, and
calls foraclverse comment from the presiding judge, 1\1 r. Justice 1\Ianning, every
sitting .clay, is it the intention of the
Minister of J nstice to introduce at an
early date a bill to n.lter and reform thepractice of tbe snid court~
l\:Ir. GOULD answered,-niy attention,
has been directed to the fact that there·
have been frequent complaints with regard
to the mode of procedure in connection
with ecclesiastical matters, such as the
-~·
:.-;1
388
Lcvnd Court Proceedings.
[ ASSEM.BLY.]
granting of probates, and it is my inter;tion to submit a bill with a view to
remedying the defects that have arisen;
in fact, to entirely remodel the course of
procedure.
Ii.
University Undergraduates.
MISCONDUCT OF UNIVERSITY
UNDERGRADUATES.
Mr. CREER : I would ask the Minister
of Public Instruction whe th er his attention
has been called to certain conduct on the
part of undergraduates at the S;,1 dney UniLAND COURT PROCEEDINGS.
versity ·~ Their conduct has been severely
Mr. 'VALL asked the Mrn1sTER OF commente:l upon. I was myself an eyeJusTICE,-Has his attention been directed witness of some of this conduct, and I can
to a case tried in the Land Court, in which describe it as nothing but the lowest larriit appeared that a squatter, who was also kinism. If such conduct were indulged
:t magistrate, raised some objection to Lhe
in by the scholars attending any of the
validating of a selection, and afterwards public schools, and it· were to become
declined to allow affidavits, made on behalf known - .
of the selector, to be sworn before him ~
~'lr. SPEAKER : I think the hon. memlYir. GOULD answerecl,-My attention ber is not entitled to discuss so minutely
has not been directed to the matter to· the· conduct of which he complains when
which the hon. member refers; but if, as I asking a question.
Mr. CREER : I was an eye-witness,
understand him, a party to the suit, who
is also a magistrate, was requested to take sir, of some of this gross misconduct on
an affidavit by some of the opposing parties the part of the undergraduates. The Goin a transaction in which he was con- vernment pay a large sum to the Univercerned, it appears to me that it would sity by way of endowment, and I think it
ha>e bien altogether. unwise for him to is only right that the attention of the
take any part in the way suggested by the Minister shonld be callPd to the matter.
hon. member.
lUr. SPEAKER : The statement of what
Mr. ·wALL: If the hon. member will the hon. member may think to be right is
make inquires he will find that the case not asking a question. The hon. gentlestands in this way : The squatter drew the man may ask the Minister whether he inattention of the inspector of conditional tends to deal with the matter in any way ;
. purchases to the fact that the residence but at this stage he will not be in order in
condition had not been complied with. On expressing his own opinion.
the case being tried, the selector himself
Mr. CREER: I am perfectly aware,
brought several "·itnesses to this magis- sir, that I am not allowed to express my
trate-the only one in the locality-and opinion as I should wish to do. I thought,
asked that. tJ1ey might be permitted to however, that I should be entitled to make
make swor'Ii.~declarations. This the magis- a few observations which would better
trate refused. I would ask the Minister enable the Minister to answer the question.
to obtain a copy of the report of the pro- 'Vhat I desire to know is whether the
ceedings, an:l upon that to institute an l\Iinister's attention has been called to the
inquiry into the case.
matter; and, if so, whether he intends to
l\fr. GOULD : I promise the hon. mem- take any action, having regard to the
ber that I will make an inquiry into the severe comments which the conduct of
·.case.
these young gentlemen-if they can be
PETITION.
called gentlemen-has provoked 1
Mr. PERRY presented a petition from
Mr. CARRUTHERS: If any comF. G. Crouch, mayor, as chairman of the plaint be mad<;! to me of a character showRailway League, Casino, Richmond River, ing that the conduct of students at the
urging the House to adopt the recom- University is other than it should be in an
mendation of the Parliamentary Standing institution i·eceiving state aid, that comCommittee on Public Works for the con- plaint will lJe forwarded by me to the
struction of a line of railway from l\:Iur- senate in order that it may be dealt with.
willumbah (Tweed River) to Lismore Every effort will be made by the Govern(Richmond River); and praying the favour. ment to assist the senate in punishing any
able consideration of the House with the students whose conduct may be calculated
view of granting the residents of The to bring disgrace upon the institution. I
Richmoud electorate this boon and relief. think it will be admitted, however, that
[!Jh. Goidd.
.··z.
Linwood Colliery.
~·
(14 l\1AY, 1890.J
in any institution there may creep in a
certain number of persons whose conduct
will be other than it should be, and the
offenqes of such persons in this particular
instance must not be visited upon the
·whole body of students. If the hon.
member will make a specific statement of
the case to me, it shall be forwarded to
the senate, and I will ask them to remove
anything which may tend to do injury to
the institution.
LINvVOOD COLLIERY.
Ordered (on motion by Mr. BURNS):
That there be laid upon the table of this
House, copies of the reports of the Examiner of
Coal-fields ancl the Inspector of Collieries on the
recent subsidence at Linwood Colliery.
ORANGE HOSPITAL.
Onlerecl (on motion by l\fr. T. vVALKER):
That there be laid upon the table of this
House, copies of the two petitions asking for an
inquiry into the management of the Orange
Hospital, together with all official minutes and
correspondence and papers, including the declarations of the patients before a magistrate.
LIENS ON WOOL BILL.
Resolved (motion by Mr. J.P. ABBO'IT):
That learn be gi,·en to bring in a bill to a!llend
the law relating to preferable liens on wool and
mortgages of stock and stations.
ADJOURNMENT.
RAILWAY ACCIDENT AT
BATIIUR~T.
Mr. SPEAKER : I have received an intimation from the hon. member for Queanbeyan that he desires to move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of
directing attention to the necessity for
instituting formal investigation, in accordance with the Government Railways Act,
into the causes of the recent railway disaster at Bathurst. Unless five hon. members rise with the hon. member, the motion
cannot be proceeded with.
Five hon. members having risen in their places,
Question proposed. .
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: I make no apology
for anticipating the debate on the federal
convention resolutions, because the matter
I have in hand is even of more pressing
importance than that subject. It must
have come under the notice of hon. members that of late .there have been some Yery
alarming railway accidents ; and there is a
feeling of insecurity growing in the public
Adjournment.
389
mind that these occurrenc'es are not properly inquired into, and that therefore
proper remedies may not be applied to
them. Before I sit down I think I shall
be able to show that there is a very
strong justification for that feeling of insecurity. It fortunately happens that this
very day a report has been laid on the
table of the House with regard to the
recent .railway accident at Bathurst, and
it proves my argument. It is very well
known that a very serious accident occurred between Raglan and Bathurst a
few weeks ago, and a demand was made·
in this Housa that that clause of the GovernmentRaih".a.ysAct applying to matters
of this kind should be put in force; in
other words, that an independent inquiry
should be made into the matter irrespective
of the railway commissioners. In order
that hon. members may understand what
that clause really is, I shall quote it in
full. Clause 52 of the Government Railways Act reads as follows :'Yhere it appears to the :Minister, either before or after the colllmencement of any such inquiry, that a more formal investigation of the
accident, and of the causes thereof, and of the
circumstances attending the same, is expedient,
he shall notify the same to the Governor, and
the Governor may, by order, direct such inves·
tigation to be held ; and with respect to such investigation the following provisions shall have
effect:(I) The Governo1' may, by the same or any
subsequent order, direct a district court
judge, magistrate, or other person or persons, named in the same or any subsequent
order, to bold such investigation with the
assistance of the assessors n·amcd in the
order.
·
Here it is strictly provided that in cases
of accident or other disaster wherein
some blame may be supposed to rest on
the shoulders of the rail way commissioners,
the lVIinister may appoint an independent board for the pmpose of making an
inquiry which will satisfy the public. Now .
what have ministers done with regard
to the recent accident at Bathurst i
Mr. CRICK : Nothing !
J.Vlr. O'SULLIVAN : They did this:
they allowed the commissioners to appoint a board consisting of subor:dinates.
The board consisted of the acting engineer for existing lines, the locomotivy
engineer, and the chief traffic manager.
These may be good men, and I have no
doubt that they are; but is it right or
proper in the public interest to allow a
390
1'.djournrnent.
[ ASSE~fBLY.] Railway Accident at Ba.th1wst.
board of subordinates to make an inqufry
into an accident which may result in bl::tme
on thnir superiorE ~ These gentlemen may
be the best in the world, and I have not
a word to say against them or against the
commissioners themselves. I do not want
it to be understood that I am making any.
charge against the rail way commissioners.
I am simply denouncing the system pursued by the present Go,-ernment of allowing the commissioners to report on railway
·
accidents.
Mr. GARRARD : The law provides it in
the first instance !
l\Ir. O'SULLIVAN : The law Lloes pro·
vide it; but it pro1·ides something more.
It provides that where the circumstances
are of such a character as to justify an independent inquiry, the Government may
appoint an independent board. ·who will
deny tba,t the circumstances of the
Bathurst accident do not justify the appointment of an independent board 1 However, I will read to hon. members the conclusions which these gentlemen, forming
the board of inquiry, ham arrived at. In
their final paragraph they sum up the
whole case, and they say :
It is clearly proved that the guard put his
brake as hard on as it was in his power to do,
but the recoil of the waggons, owing to the
steep grade of 1 in 50, was of such a sudden
nature that no other means, either spragging or
putting brakEs clown, could be effected, and
that, had their been two guards - -
And here is a slight reflection on the commis5ioners themselves for dismissing so
~any men of late from the railway service.
it would not have been avoided as the evidence of the Raglan telegraph operator proves,
who, it will be seen from his evidence, endeavoured to do what a second guard would have
attempted.
In plain words, a ~elegraph operator was
compelled to attempt to do the work that
a railway guard should have done, and
which a railway guard would have clone
if there had not been so manv uncalled- for dismissals of late from the r~ilway service. If this accident happened owing to
the absence of a railway guard, the public
ought to know whether the same state of
things is to go on. This report is by no
means satisfactory to the thousands of
persons who are in the habit of travelling
upon onr railway lines; but it is made
still worse by the Government allowing
[Mr. O'Sullivan.
the commissioners to add to •their report'
a memorandum justifying themselves.
Here is a_ peculiar state of things. Here
is a board appointed by the commissioners
to report upon this railway accident, and
connected with their report is a memoramlnm from the commissioners exonerating themselves from any blame. Does
not that show at once that an independent
inquiry should have been made in connection with the Bathurst railway accident 1
I will read SOlile extracts from this memorandum to show exactly v.'hat the railway
commissione1:s are endeaYouring to do, and
it will be secu that they are anticipating
charges levelled against them, or are endeavouring to explain away some that
have been made. The commissioners say
in their memorandum :
\Vhile forwarding this report, we deem it
necessary to allude to an attempt made at the
coroner's inquiry into the accident, to divert
attention from the main point into side issues,
with the evident desire to attack the present
railway management.
Now, I would like to ask hon. members
if this is a right statement for officials to
make iu a report-which is supposed to
be an unbiassed one-npon the recent
railway accident~ I say it is unfair and
unsatisfactory to the public to allow this
report to be made a medium for exonerating the railway commissioners, who themselves may have been to blame. They go
on to say:
One of the points raised was in respect to an
order said to have been issued prohibiting the
use of side-chains, which order has had no existence ; and a'1otber point in regard to assistant
guards not being run on the through goods
trains.
As to the first question, it is well to give an
extract from the official records of our action on
the subject of side-chains, and also the result of
a reconsideration of the whole question in September last.
Here follow a number of extracts to show
that the commissioners are not to blame
in connection with the question of the
side-chains. The fact that this report has
been made the n:iedium for allowing the
railway commissioners to exonerate themselves from all blame alone goes to show
the necessity of having au independent
board of inquiry,
provided in the Government Rail ways Act. In four pages of
printed matter the commissioners go over
the various complaints that haYe been
leYelled against them in the press and
as
Adjournment.
[14 MAY, 1890.] Railway Accident at Bathurst. 391
elsewhere in regard to the accident; and
in dealing with the question of assistant
guards they say :
. ·with regard to the question of assistant
1,,'llards, it was alsu raised without any justification. It will be ·seen from the Chief Traffic
Manager's i·eport appended hereto that no change
has been ma1le in this respect for years past, ancl
unless two brakes are run (except with local
shunting tr::iins with whieh two men are on duty,
the object of sending the second man being solely
to assist in the sh1mting operations at stations
without reference to the brake question) there
would be no ad vantage gained. Our stock of
vans is so deficient that, if we wished, we could
not supply two vans to through trains.
In their report we have the same reason
advanced by the commissioners to exonerate themselves. That is not the object
of an inquiry int.o the railway accident.
In the first place, it is .made by three
subordinates who of course are responsible
to the commissioners, and irt the second
place, it is accompanied by a memorandum
from these same commissioners, whom an
indPpendent board might have thought
were to blame in this matte1·.
Therefore
this report in the public mind will be
utterly worthless, bowernr satisfactory it
may be to the commissioners themselves. Of
course we all know that the commissioners
may not be to blanw, and I tlo not wish
for an inquiry against them, but in tho
public mind this self-defence by the commissioners will not be accepted as a satisfactory report on the causes of the accident.
Thrn, during the last few days, we have
had another fatal accident at a place called
Farley, near Maitland. Here, again, the
accident appears to have arisen from the
fact that too many railway men have been
removed. It is stated in one p<1per, and
I am given to understcmd l1y a passenger
who was in the train, that the train at the
station would have been out of the way if
there had been a sufficient number of men
to have shunted it. But a delay occmred
of a minute or so, and that delay proved
fatal.
Mr. PAUL: That is wrong!
l\'Ir. O'SULLIVAN: I am given to
understand that that was the case by a
gentleman who was in the train.
l\'Ir. PAUL : That is not a fact !
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: Paul! Paul!
"\Vhy persecutest thou me 1" I am given
to understand that is one of the causes
of the accident. If it be flO, who is to
blame 1 Is it the station-master 1 Pos-
sibly some defenders of the railway commissioners will say "Yes." Then, if it be
the station-master, who is to blame for
allowing that station-master to be there
but the commissioners themselves 1 Therefore it comes back to this : That the commissioners ought not to have the power to
make these inquiries into cases of this
ch::tracter. If it were a mere matter of
detail concerning the working of the mail
train::. or concel'ning the machinery, or
something of that kind, it might be quite
proper for the commissioners to bold an
inquiry ; but where human life lias been
sacrificed, where at least eight persons,
whose names are given in the evening
papers, have been seriously injured, it is
time the Ministry acted upon the powers
given to them by the Railways Act, and
appointed some independent board of inquiry. It will necessitate a good deal of
argument on the part of the Ministry or
their friends to satisfy the public that
such an inquiry was not demanded in both
of these cases. I haYe simply done my
duty in bringing this fJUestion before the
House. I do not wish to prolong the discussion morn than is necessary ; but I say
unhesitatingly that it is the duty of every
man who desires to have security for the
travelling public, and who desires to see a
thorough invei;tigation into an accident of
this character, to support the action I
have taken in making a demand on the
Ministry to enforce the law, and insist
upon an indep_endent inquiry.
Mr. McMILLAN: It is very hard to
say whether this motion is more ludicrous
than indecent. It is positively ludicrous;
for we know very well the oqject with
which the debate is got up. V\T e know
that there is an hon. member to address
this House after tea, and it is a pure waste
of the time of hon. members at present.
Mr. OmcK : I rise to order. Is the hon.
member in order in saying that a motion
put before the House is moved with a
deliberate intention of killing time until
another hon. member apprars to address
the House 1
Mr. SPEAKER : The hon. i!tember is
bound to give other hon. members credit
for the best intentions in everything relating to their conduct in this House.
l\Ir. McMILLAN : Under any circumstances I do not think that it is the desire
392
Adjowrnmene.
[ASSEMBLY. J Railway Accident at Bathimt.'.
of the hon. gentleman who moved the adjournment of the House to interfere with
the federation debate which will come on
at a later hour in the evening; and certainly an important debate like this should
not be inaugurated with only half an hour
for hon. mem hers to apply themselves to
it; and it is especially unfair to all the
persons connected with the inquiry. But
the whole of this is most indecent. Let
us go back to the beginning of this inquiry. Before the coroner's inquest had
been finished on the bodies of the unfortunate men killed by this accident a qu1-1stion was put on the notice-paper of this
House· asking whether· an inquiry of an
independent character woul-:1 be carried
out; and the hon. member has spoken to
this House, I believe, almost without reading the act to which he alludes. The act
lays clown most clearly the process of inquiry. It says :
The commissioners shall :
(r.) Cause the earliest informn,tion by telegraph,
post, or otherwise, to be forwarded to the
Minister.
Which they did.
(n.) Appoint such officer or officers as they may
think fit, to hold an inquiry into the matter.
(nr.) As soon as practicable after such inquiry,
send to the Minister full information of the
accident, and the report of such officers.
-<:-
·. t'>:
F ,.•
lj~'.
That they have done in every detail, and
it is only to-night that I have placed the
report on the table of this House on the
first Government business night of this
week after I received that report. Yet,
this gentleman of superhuman ability pretends to have made himself acquainted
with that report, which was only in the
l1ands of hon. members ten minutes ago,
to have looked into it, and to understand
the subject, and he can vilify the characters of individuals upon the basis of such
a transitory review. I say it is indecent ;
it is utterly unfair ; and I am sure it will
be resented by hon. members. Surely the
hon. membermighthave had the decency to
·wait until hon. members had an opportunity to read the report of these proceedings.
Again, the hon. member sneers at the report of the commissioners being attached
to the proceedings of this inquiry. Surely
the commissioners had a right to be heard
in a report to this House. Surely, if they
can theow any light on this subject by
their special technical knowledge; or if in
the- course of the coroner's inquest--of
[lJfr. McMillan.
which I will have something to say at anothertime-imputations have been levelled
at the commissioners for railways, they
should have a right to put before this
House, in a decently worded rEolport, their
own opinions upon that inquiry. Let us
look at the act, which says :
W'here it appears to the Minister, either be.
fore or after the commencement of any such in·
quiry, that a more formal investigation of the
accident, and of the causes thereof, &c,
He should do so and so.
Mr. O'SuLLLVAN: Then, I a~ right!
Mr. McMILLAN: The hon. member
is right thus far. The Minister had the
power, even before the inquiry was concluded, to appoint an independent board ;
but does that place any censure upon the
Minister or the commissioners 7 It is
purely permissive as to what course the
Minister may pursue. Last evening I
told hon. members that I would lay the
report on the table, and that I would
then state, if necessary, what course this
Government intended to take. But was
any question asked across the table to
elicit that information~ Not a single
question. Then the hon. member springs
this motion upon the House, which I say
again is utterly indecent and unfair to
the parties interested. I do not intend
toenterupon the discussion of this question.
I have taken great pains to thoroughly
sift the whole matter from beginning to
end, not merely in its general characteristics, but in its details, and when the discussion comes on, as probably it will at
another t.ime, I shall be ready to state the
case fully and clearly, and I believe satisfactorily to the House. But I am not
going to be led into an argument this
evening when the report has only just
been placed in the hands of hon. members,
and when no fair and reasonable discussion
can take place. Furthermore, this question of a separate inquiry was discussed in
Cabinet to-day. No decision I may say
has yet been arrived at, hut the moment
we have decided one way or the other I
shall acquaint the House with our decision. In the meantime I do not know
whether it will be imp_ertinence on my
part to suggest to the House that this discussion should cease. I know that it is
apparently thought necessary to fill up the
time probably until 6 o'clock this evening.
Adjournment.
[H MAY, 1890.] Railway Accicle?it at Bathurst. 393
Mr. CRICK : That is another little bit
of impertinence !
Mr. McMILLAN : The hon. member is
the last man in the House or the country
to judge of the impertinence of anybody.
Mr. CRICK: I am an excellent authority-as good as the hon. member l
Mr. McMILLAN : I now reiterate
that I will not discuss this question at the
present time. It is not fair to the great
interests involved, to the great principles
arising out of this matter; it is not fair
to the railway system which we have inaugurated, or to the gentlemen of acknowledged ability who occupy positions at the
head of that service. It is not fair to anybody connected with this inquiry; it is
not fair to the memory of those who have
suffered death that a discussion, if it is to
take place, should take place in a hurried
manner and in a House totally unprepared. Therefore I refuse to enter any
further into the details of this matter.
Mr. "\VALL : I think the hon. gentleman might have prevented the necessity
for this debate if he had stated that it was
the intention of the Government to have
an independent inquiry.
Mr. l\foMrLLAN :-I am not in a position
to do so!
Mr. w· ALL: It appears to me to be
-rushing from one extreme to another. '\Ve
have certain gentlemen at th_e head of the
Railway Department who are to constitute
a sort of departmental fetish which we are
to bow clown before and worship, and we
are not to question their action in any
way whatever, for fear some cliscredit may
attach to these gentlemen in their administration of this particular department.
Now, we are not altogether in ignorance
of the working of this department. There
are some of us who travel on the railways,
-and we are competent to judge for ourselves whether that due care and caution
is exercised which is necessary to protect
the public of this country. During the
last two or three months I have travelled
very frequent.ly by goods trains. It has
been quite a customary thing for me to
hear the guards of those trains stating that
they work seventy-five hours a week; and
I venture to say that, when men are working seventy-five hours a week, they are
:not ca.pable of discharging their duties
efficiently. In the locomotive branch the
same state of things does not exist-there
a timetable is kept; but in the traffic
branch the men in charge of brake-vans
are compelled to work seventy-five hours
a week-not in one instance only, but in
several instances. It has also come within
my knowledge that assistants have had
charge of brake-vans on what is considered
the most dangerous line in the colonythe lVIudgee line. Men who are intrustecl
with the charge of brake-Yans are supposed
to pass an examination to show that they
are qualified for the duties; yet, in the
case of the most dangerous line in the
colony, in order to redncc the expenses of
the department, these assistants are put
on-men who are altogether incompetent
to take charge of the brake-Yans. The
lives of the travelling public areendangered
in consequence of these men taking such
positions. If it is necessary that an examination should be passed, then none but
properly qualified persons should be intrnsted with the lives of the public. The
Ii ''es of passengers should not be sacrificed
in this manner. It does not require any
practical acquaintance with engineering to
know that three chains are much safer
than one: The extra men reqnired to
couple the chains have been dismissed,
simply to save expense; and the result has
brought about the accident 11t Bathurst.
No sophistry in tl1e world can prove that
one chain will hold as mnch as three. The
result of there being only one chain was,
that it was snapped by a jerl;: of the engine,
and the train recoiled.
Mr. M:cMrLLAN: The hon. member
really does not understand the matter !
Mr. \VALL: I think I understand it
as well as the hon. member does. vVhatcver may be the result of the debate in ·
the Cabinet to which the hon. member has
referred, it is absolutely necessary in a case
where hnm<in lives have been Eacrificeci
that an independent inquiry sho.uld be instituted. The officers of the department
are not going to act ~s judge and jury.- It
is necessary that this inquiry should take
place, and I trust that whatever may be
the decision of the Cabinet an independent
investigation into this, and every other
railway accident, will take place. The
commissioners may be justified in reducing
the number of men. I have no doubt there
were too many men employed before they
took charge of the dep<irtment; but I am
perfectly satisfied that when men work
·"*-.~
~
394
..
<
Acijowrnment.
[ASSE :.\iBLY.] Railway Accident at Bathurst. •
seventy-five hours a week they cannot properly discharge their duties, and this, I
know, is the case, not in one but in half a
dozen instances. I was told of a case last
night where a train at this very vVaterfall
station came into the station, the board
was up, the train could not go on, and
there was no station-master. Well, if things
of this kind occur it is only natural to expect that accidents will happen. I am in
a position to give the name of the gentleman who gave me this information.
1\ir. l\'Ic:'.VlrLLAN: Was that the fault of
the commissioners 1
Mr. WALL : It may not have been the
fault of the commissioners, but it seems very
strange that a station should be intrusted
to one man, and that a train on arriving
at a station shouJd find the signal up, and
be unable to go on, the station-master
being r1bsent. I have travelled on goods
trains myself, and I know perfectly well
that time after time men who, according
to the commissioners themselves, are considered incompetent, have been intrusted
with the charge of the brake-vans-men
who haYe not passed the necessary examination. It is just as possible that fifty
men may be killed as that one may be ;
and if it is necessary that a man should
pass an examination before being competent to take charge of a brake-van, then
only such a man should be intrusted with
the duty.
Mr. CRICK: I am certain I shall not
be deterred from saying what I ha,-e to
say on this matter Ly the virtuous burst
of indignation on the part of the Colonial
Treasurer, whose answer to everybody, and
cverytl1ing that comes in conflict with his
opinions, is that nobody knows anything
about the rna.tter hut himself. Now, the
hon. member may be a very great authority
on railway matters, hut I have yet to learn
that behind the counter is the best place
to get a rail way education, and probably
it is those who have occasion to travel a
good deal, and come into communication
with those who work these matters, who
have some opportunity of learning a little
concerning them. Of course, it cannot be
expected that anybody here is so great an
authority as the chief commissioner,
though it is clearly shown lhat since we
have had the untold benefit of the chief
commissioner's services, we ha Ye had more
accidents than we ever had Lefore.
I
[1lh. Wall.
have travelled on a few of the railways of
this colony, and I venture to assert that
the trains were never running so badly
for time as they have been since the chief
_
commissioner bas been here.
An Hox. l'i'IE:unER : That is all nonsense!
l\Ir. CRICK: I say it is correct. I
travel a good deal, and I say that it is ·a
very unusual thing for a train to run to
time. The very train that broke away
at R1tglan when this unfortunate accident
occurred was forty-five minutfls behind
time. It was the same with the train to
which the accident occurred on Monday
night-it was behind time. I ha,·e not
during the last three months travelled on
a single occasion when the. trains have
been up to time. It is evident to the
most uninitiated that irregularity of this
kind must be a great source of accidents.
\Ve are told that this debate was started
merely to put in time until 6 o'clock for
the hon. member for The ~.furrnmbidgee,
]\fr. Dibbs. I am informed that the hon.
member is within the precincts of the
House. If I wished to put in tiine I
should select a matter much more hurtful to the Colonial Treasurer than this.
Next we are told that it is unfair to the
commissioners, and positively indecent.
Is there no thought to be given to the
relatives of those wh::i were killed, by
what I apprehend to be neglect on the
part of the commissioners 1 Are we not
even to consider the thousands who tra,·el
day by day over our railway lines 1 Are
we to be mealy-mouthed, forsooth, lest
we may hurt the reputation, gcocl name,
and feelings of the commissioners1 They
thought so ·very much about the terrible
accident that not one of them thonght it
worth their while to go to Bathurst to
see about it. As to the hon. member
who has brought this matter forward, I
consider that he lrn.s conferred a benefit
on the trave!ling public. He has pointed
out that this report from beginning to encl
is simply a defence of the action of the
commissioners.
They themselves admit
that there is a case against them,_ and
that they must rebut it. In the second
-line they say :
The draw-bar which broke, and caused the
unfortunate accident, was one of the light description which was referred to when the condition of the rolling stock was under discussion
in Parliament on the 15th August last. -
Adjournment.
[14 :M:AY, 1890.J Railway Accident r:t Bathurst. ·395
Later on they say in clearing themselves :
The first minute was passed on a tour ·of inspection of the northern lines in J anunry, 1889,
when the question of the utility of side-chains
was discussed with the officers, aud the commissioners decided that side-chains should be discontinued on all vehicles fitted with the strongest
draw-gear. Chains to remain· in those vehicles
ha,·ing the light draw-gear until such gear was
replaced.
They first admit that the truck was furnished with rt light draw-Lar, so that there
must have been blame somewhP.re--if not
on the p::td of the commissioners on the
part of their officm·s. Now, the evidence
of their own officers taken at the inquiry
in Rathnrst, is clearly against them, and
they show that they feel the strength of
what is urged against them by what they
say further on :
The strain which passed through the draw-bar
due to mere haula;:;e of the load behind it, up
the grade on which it broke, did not amount to
4 tons, and from the section of the iron which
broke we have no doubt that a strain of not less
than 28 or 30 tons must ha\'C been snsiained Ly
it before fracture ensued.
They account for this by a sudden ,ierk on
the part of the carriage. Then it is very
material to show that snch a jerk look
place,; but the evidence of their O\Yn officers is a clear repudiation of that; so they
say:
\Ve cannot accept the statement of the sta·
·tion-master at Raglan, and other witnesses,
who said that no recoil occurred, as there are
four facts in the case which seems to us to render such a view incredible.
I never yet saw a guilty man in the clock
who thought the evidence was sufficient to
condemn him. Because these gentlemen
can surmise four conceivable conditions
under which such a jerk would take place,
they \Yill not believe the evidence of tl1is
man in their own employ, who would be
benefit.eel by sticking to the commissioners.
The station-master who gave that evidence
had nothing to do but tell the truth, and,
if possible. to colour it in such a manner as
to shield the commisi>ioners ; yet, he swears
twice that no recoil took place.
l\fr. GAHRARD: Suppose he wished to
shield the engine-driver and guard !
M:r. CRICK: I always look at evidence in the light of what human nature
usually docs, and I have never yet seen
a man half way up the ladder very anxious
to save the man lower down. His general
impulse is to curry favour with the man
~1igher up. _Th~n they go on-these much
injured, much maligned men, who bring
forward this Goliath to defend them here :
_ The side-chains of waggon No. 3,008 were not
·made use of as required by rules 235 and 372 ;
but we are of opinion tliat if the side-chains had
been in use they would not, nnder the circumstances of the recoil which, we believe, occurred,
haYe prevented the accident.
That recoil the station-master swore never
took place. Subsequently to this-to
show the v::ilue of the side-chains-in
:mswer to a question by me, the l\iinister
had to admit that a train much more
heavily loaded than this one, arrived at
Blackheath with the draw-b::ir broken, and
with a heavier tonnage behind held by
the side-chains. Certainly he said there
was no grade at Blackheath; but he had
to admit that there was a grade between
Black heath and U1e last station the train
left of, I think, 1 in 33. vVe do not know
where the draw-bar broke, and it is clear
that that goods train must have been held
,by the side-chains for some considerable
distance the other side of Blackheath.
'Now, it may be that even if the draw-bar
had not Lroken it wouldnot havesa\'eclthis
accident; but it is reasonable to suppose
that as the draw-bar broke when the train
was at a standstill, the side-chains would
have stood long enough at least to enable
the gua1·d and the station-master to sprag
the wheels, and so the unfortunate results
of this tenible accident would be averted.
Now, when we consider that there is only
a single line, and that mail trairn:, two a
day at the 'least, and for a considerable
distance three, are continually travelling
along it, carrying some thousands of passengers, not to speak of the very >aluable
Jives of ma,uy members of Parliament who
travel on their passes, surely it is absolutely
necessary that the utmost care should be
taken in matters of this kind. It is false
economy to cut down the working expenses by the discharge of absolutely
necessary labour. The loss of rolling
-stock alone in this accident, even if there
are no actions for which the Government
.will have to suffer, is so considerable that
the money would have paid the wages of
the necessary hands for a very considerable time. I have no wish to 11ay anything unfair to the commissioners; I have
no animosity against them ; but I am
.certain-having seen the spot-that had
the sicle-chai:us been on the train there
,•. •.._,.,.;;;+,;µ...
.,4;;;.
.· -""l""-:... - .•
.
.
~
•
QQP:(t.tiliPW
. . •Ji~' r:~
:
396
,.
--
~Ki..... ~.lt ~- '
AdjoWr-ninent.
~~
:
-~ r~
'
t
·v_;,I
.-
......".".?!~. .,.~:JH;-;l'\J'".'.'!•'!"·
-: ~,, .
..
~~ ~ ~ ~
.
.
:y,.. .. .
[ASSEMBLY.] Railway Accident
·would have been no such accident, unless
indeed the train had gone on, and the trucks
had broken away at some other place
when the mail train was following. This
report, from all the light it throws on. the
subject, is very much like the report of the
Irish coroner, who when asked the cause of
death of a person on whose body he had held
·an inquest, shook his head and said, " I
really do not know ; people are dying this
year who never died before." The commissioners should remember that a great
source of accident is the late running of
the trains. \.Vhere goods trains are ahead
of passenger trains, it should be a clear
rule that the draw-gear and all the ap·
penclages must be carefully examined at
every station, and no such train should run
underhanded. Imagine the consequence of
eight or ten trucks weighing 120 or 130
tons, breaking 1tway on the incline of the
Zig-zag and dashing into a mail train fol.
lowing. There would be no hope for a
living soul on board. This report has been
in the hands of the l\:Iinister since Saturday,
·although the public see it now for the first
time, yet if ::my one in the interests of
the travelling public asks that immediate
steps may be taken by the Minister, and
that sen-ants we pay so well should earn
what we pay them, they are told that they
are exhibiting indecent and impertinent
haste. I must run the risk of being
dubbed indecent and impertinent. Whenever I can see, as I believe I do here, a
gross neglect of duty on the part of certain officials, I shall not be backward in
raising my voice to denounce it.
Mr. GORMLY : I have heard for a
considerable time from persons employed
on the railways, that considerable clanger
of accident would exist unless the sidechains were resumed. This opinion has
been strongly expressed by persons who
are in a position to judge of the matter.
It is evident from the inquiry at Bathurst
that the cause of the accident there was
the breaking of the draw-bar, and I think
something should have been done to
strengthen those bars hefore the sidechains were discontinued. I was quite
surprised when I heard that the carriages
had but one coupling. Evidently one
coupling cannot be depended upon so well
as three. It is necessary, I think, that a
thorough inquiry should be made outside
of the Railway Department.,
[Jfr Crick.
=w:"'v
..,--·.
at Bathurst.
Mr. SCHEY : I must confess that I am
somewhat surprised to hear such harsh
words proceeding from the Colonial Treasurer whenever any one ventures to in·
quire into matters affecting the Railway
Department. It has become the habit of
the Colonial Treasurer to flout any one
who seeks for information upon these
matters. If ever a necessity existed to
know exactly what is being clone ,..,,-ith the
railways, that necessity exists at the present time. Certain am I that if the administration of the department had been
what it onght to be, and what we have a
right to expect it should be under the
new administration, the recent accident at
Raglan would not have occurred. It is
quite beside the mark for the Colonial
Treasurer to say that we are impertinent
in this matter. The hon. gentleman sits
there with a nynical smile on his face
whenever anything is said about these
matters. The hon. gentleman may smile ;
but the responsibili&y for the administration of this department rests upon the
hon. gentleman's shoulders. If any more
of the travelling public are done to death
in the manner in which those unfortunate
persons were done to death at Raglan, Lh~
responsibility for their lives will rest with
the hon. gentleman, who, after all, however lightly he may treat his responsibility,
is the head-whether the ornamental head
or not I do not know-of the departrnent.
It is perfectly certain that something
more will have to be said as to the report
which is before hon. members; I have
not yet had an opportunity to peruse it ;
but from the insight I have been able to
obtain into it from its perusal by other
hon. members I have not the slightest
hesitation in saying that, although it is so
solemnly pledged to us io contain the
truth of the matter, it is at least in one
particular absolutely false. That is a serious
charge to make, but I am prepared to sustain it here and now. A portion of the
report quoted by the last speaker stated
that a certain rule of the department with·
regard to the side-chains was not complied
with. I give that statement the most unqualified denial. I say it is absolutely
untrue. I ha Ye an inLimate knowledge of
the rules governing the department. I
speak from the experience of years during
which I served in the department. I had
to handle these things day by clay. I say
.:~-:·'
·....·.
Adjo·urnmeni.·
that there is no rule in the book dealing hundred into various matters, and I have
·with the matter, and I challenge tl1e Colo- no hesitation in stigmatising the usual denial Treasurer to produce it. There is no partmental inquiries as an utter farce. If
rule providing "for the .officers of the de- there is anything wrong with the adminispartment doing that which is contem- tration, the sub-heads of the department
plated by this report. That is a fair are responsible for the matter, and surely
statement. vVe have a right to insist that it is the greatest farce in the world to ask
when reports are laid upon the table of persons who, if any one is to blame, are
this House they shall contain the whole blameworthy, to report in a matter in which
truth, and nothing but the truth. With the question of their own guilt is involved.
regard to the reasons for a further inquiry I intend to say very few words more on
into this matter, I must admit that the this subject. If I have spoken with rather
jury at. Bathurst made their inquiry under more heat than I usually do, i-t is because·
exceptionally fayourable circumstances. of what I conceive to be the very unbe·
They had assistance from all sides of the coming position the Colonial Treasurer
question, and no less than three solicitors occupies in connection with this matter.
If, when serious matters are being dis-were present.
Mr. JHclVIrLLAN : They had the assist- cussed ; when we are dealing with a quesance of the hon. member also !
tion which involves the safety of thousands.
Mr. SCHEY : It is all very well for of people; when the lives of people have
the hon. member to joke; but before I been sacrificed, the Colonial Treasurer
have done with this question I shall thinks the subject a fit one for mirth,.
clearly fix the responsibility where it and sits with a smile upon his face, it is.
ought to rest. If after the cause of this apparent that he does not recognise the reaccident has been proved, the hon. mem- sponsible position he occupies. Of course,.
ber takes no notice of the matter, espe- it may be argued that the GO\'ernment has.
cially when it is brought under his atten- got rid of all responsibility by handing
tion in this House, he must be held blood- the railways over to a non-political board;.
guilty in respect to any futuro accidents but that is certainly a long way from the
_ of a similar character. The hon. gentleman truth. It is evident, from the attitude
may smile as he will. He. cannot avoid of the Colonial Treasurer, that he conthat responsibility.
ceives himself to hold a brief for the
Mr. CRICK: The hon. gentleman would Railway Department.
I say, however,
smile at a funeral !
distinctly, that that gentleman holds a
Mr. l\foMILLAN : Yes, at the hon. brief for the public, or should do so, and
it is his duty to see to the safety of the
member's!
Mr. SCHEY ! After all, it must be re- travelling public; and if he does not do membered that no ordinary coroner's jury that, it is for hon. members to step in and
could inquire into a matter of this kind in do what he should do without prompting ..
the manner in which it would be inquired vVe must have some further inquiry into.into by experts. It is not at all likely this matter. I have only been able to
that they would be in a position to exam- obtain a copy of the report during the last
ine the minor causes of the accident. In five minutes, and I have not had an opEngland, the example of which we are so portunity of perusing it ; but from the
fond of copying, the Board of Trade has rapid glance I have made of it, I have no
made a special provision-which so far as hesitation in stigmatising the whole of it
we could we followed in the Railways Act as one tissue of misrepresentations. I am
-dealing with accidents. I have never prepared to prove that the report contains
dealt adversely with that act. I was a several statements which are untrue, iu.
strong advocate f~r bringing it into force, that they disguise the truth, or only tell
and also for bringing from Great Britain the truth partially. What we have a
a new administrator. One of the chief right to find out, and what no coroner's
necessities in connection with a rail way jury is in a position to find out, is whether
accident is to inquire in the first instance any human foresight could have prevented
not so much as to who is to blame, as with the accident from occuning ; secondly,·
regard to the cause of the accident. vVe whether the use of any preventive meahave had departmental inquiries by the sures or appliances which are in common·
2 D
.
•...
. -~·
-
-
•·...
... -
398
Adjowrnme.nt.
'[ASSEl\iIBLY.] Railway
use, or which could be in common use,
would havehelped to prevent or mitigate the
-effectsoftheacciderrt; and, thirdly, whether
·there are any pre\Tentive measures which
may be employed to preven,t its recurrencei
That, in the interests of public safety, we
have a right to demand. There is a second
·reason why ·the ·Government have responsibility placed upon them to appoint a
special boarCl in connection with this
nYatter. It was sought during the progress df the inquest at Bathurst-and I
,say most unjustifiably-to throw the whole
'blame of the accident on t!ie hite admi:nistrntor, the hon. member for Redfern, 1\'Ir.
·-Gooclchap. The solicitor who at Bathurst
represented ·the department declared this
to the jury : that, if there is any blame to
be attached in connection with this matter,
it rests upon the late adrninistrn;tion, wh·o,
'by ·their own negligence, allowed the rolling stock upon our railways to get into
·such a condition that the combined intelligence of the department will require
several years to place it upon a satisfac·tory footing. These are as nearly as pos.. sible the words used. :I contend that that
'particular charge made against the late
. administrator is utterly untrue, other things
that have been said in the Honse notwith. standing. We owe it to the hon. member
·for Redfern, Mr. Gooclchap, and to the late
. administration, to see that the blame shall
·rest where it ought to rest., and shall not
'be shuffled off upon some one wit;hout any
responsibility at the present time. The
next reason-and a more urgent reason
still-exists in the fact that there is a
dispute at the present time as to the
authority for doing away with the safetychains on trucks. The chief commissioner
has stated emphatically through the press
that he did not issue such an order, and
that he did not authorise such an order.
'The late locomotive engineer has stated in
'the press, in an equally emphatic manner,
that the chief commissioner gave him this
-0rcler personally ; and, therefore, we h:we
a right to have a board of inquiry to determine which of these statements is the.
correct one. I took occasion to point out
in the public press some months ago the
nr.cessity which exists· for the appointment of some officers to look after the Australasian rail wn,y lines, having functions
anal_ogous to those of the rail way officers of
the'Board·of'T1·acle in·Great Britain. I say
[Mr. Schey.
Accident~t .Bathurst.
distinctly that 'the parliaments of .J\.ustmlasia will not have clone their duty to the
public, until they have .prov'icled some
special means of dealing w'ith -rail way accidents outside the administration of interested parties. Is it to be expected that 1.£
a person is placed in the box, chn,rgecl
with ·an offonce, and is asked if he is
guilty, that he will plead guilty I! Is it
not ·a great farce to have these departmental inquiries 1 Are we not, as a mntter of fact,. inquit:ing of peo1)le who ·are
charged with some neglect of duty--'" are
you gnil~y or not i" And of course the
answer comes that they ai-e not guilty.
There are many things whic.h are leading
up to these frequent accidents. We have
had fouT separate railway accidents on
oui- lines, each with fatal results, within
the last four montlts. It appears to me
in view of that fact, and in view of the
_fact that during the last twelve months
accidents on our railways ha\·e been of
more frequent occurence than they hrrve
ever been during- any twelve months previously, in the history of this country,
that the whole matter clesen·es and absolutely demands a most searching inquiry.
lt will hardly be belie1'edthat rnw menboys many of them-just admitted into
tl1e railway service, are sent out in charge
of trains, freighted with valua:ble ·human
life, and with many tons of valuable ruerchanclisc. One hon. gentlemen has told
the House that men are being worked
seventy-fl ve hours a week. I say, and I
speak without fear of contradiction, that
within the past few months not one·man,
but many men, have been upon the footplates of engines, and have acted as guards
of trains, for twenty-four hours and more,
·without any spell at all. I_ say, also, 'that
incompetent persons have been placed in
charge of important places. When we
find these things a1;e being done, in the
craving for economy, and in an endeavour
to save, we have a right to demand.that
the ·Government shall recognise its responsil:iility in regard to the administration ·o·f
the ·act, and shall d.emand such a searching inquiry as shall provide against these
occurrences in ·the ·future. In looking
through the report, I notice a number of
matters 'vhich it is absolutely necessary
should be dealt with in a very short time.
I therefore refrain from saying more, not
because there fa not a great deal more to
·"
Adjournment.
(14 .l\IAY, 1890.J Railway Accident at Batl.u1·st. 399
say which might be said, and which I myself purpose to say at an early date, but
becanse I think, even in view of the fact
that the Government have not yet arrived
at a decision-which by the way they
should without doubt have arrived at before this-and in view of the fact that
hon. gentlemen hnse not yet ·had an opportunity of pernsing the report thoroughly
-tha,t the matter will have to be dealt
with on some future occasion.
l\Ir. FRANK FARNELL: I do not
know whether the hon. member for Queanbeyan considers tha,t the alhiged oJ:\ject of
the motion for the adjournment of the
House l1as been accomplished. .At any
rate, I do not intend to delay the House
at any great length, in order to prevent
the hon. member for The Murrumbidgee,
l\1r. Dibbs, delivering his address on the
important question which is to come before hon. members at a later stage.
l\Ir. LYNE: ·what is the object of the
adjournment i
1\ir. FRANK FARNELL : I said the
alleged object.. The alleged object was
that the motion was brought up for tbe
purpose of wasting time, or giving the
hon. member for The Mnrrurn bidgee an
opportunity to prepare his speech on the
question of federation.
J\fr. LYNE: It was not clone in the Opposition room to my knowledge!
l\Ir. FRANK FARNELL: I did not
accuse the Opposition, but the hon. member
for Queanbeyan. It woulcrhave been well
if the hon. member for Queanbeyan, before
taking the step hr. has taken, had allowed
the rr.port to go forth, and be placed in the
hands of hon. members. I take it that that
hon. gentleman has actually been guilty of
what the Colonial Treasurer has termed
an indecent act, in bringing before the
House the question of the railway accident at Farley. The hon. meinber, by
what he has said, is actually anticipating
what is likely to be brought out at the
coroner's inquiry in relation to that matter.
·whenever an opportunity occurs it appears to be desirable on the part of some
hon. members to attack that non-political
body which Parliament by a large majority constituted not long ago. No better
body than the railway commissioners was
ever constituted in this colony for the preservation of the interests of the people.
If the various grievances are traced to
their proper source, it will be found tl1at
they haYe existed for years, and that it is
only since the commissioners' occupancy
of office that they have been taken in hand
and remedied. With reference to the
Bathurst accident, the hon. member for
Redfern has taken hon. members at a disadvantage, because he is possessed of a
knowledge of all the facts of the case,
while other hon. members have not had
an opportunity of perusing the report. I
have heard that that hon. member played
a Yery important part at the inquest. I
have heard that he instructed the solicitor
who appeared there, and that the whole
object of the solicitor's examination was
to cast censure on the chief commissioner,
and in a secondary manner to censure the
commissioners for rail ways. I should like
to know what mol'e could mortal man do
in their capacity as commissioners than
has been done by the railway commissioners in order to secure the safety of the
travelling public 1 With regard to the
issue of a certain order as to couplingchains, we have it stated that a deputation
waited on the railway commissioners from
the representatives of the Amalgamated
Railway Association, headed, I believe,
by the hon. member for Redfern. During
that interview it was pointed out to the
commissioners that this order for the discontinuance of the coupling of sidechains had been issned. The commissioners
expressed surprise, and said they would
hold a consultation with their officers as
to the truth or otherwise of the assertion.
The consultation was held, with the chief
traffic man.ager and, I think, the locomotive engineer. It was then found that
the order had been issued by the chief
traffic manager's predecessor, lHr. Read,
when M-r. Goodchap was Commissioner for
Railways.
Mr. ScrrEY : That is not correct !
Mr. FRANK FARNELL: However,
the railway commissioners denied all knowledge of the order. At the inquest it was
endeavoured to impose upon the chief com!
missioner that he was aware of the issue
of the order, and that he had given positive instructions for its issue. The chief
traffic manager stated that the chief commissioner had no cognisance of the issue of
the order ; and we have it stated by the
chief traffic manager in a minute which
he wrote specially to the commissioner'
..
· :
400
/,.djournment.
[ASSEMBLY. JRailway Accident at Bathurst.
I am satisfied that 95 per
that he was responsible solely for the issue smash.
of this order; and that it was simply a re- cent. of all the accidents which occur
issue of an old order which had been issued throughout the world might be avoided if
proper regulations, rules, and precautions
under the regime of Mr. Goodchap.
were observed. In spite of any report
Mr. ScnEY : That is not correct !
which may be published, I maintain that
Mr.FRANKFARNELL: Idonotthink with ordinary precautions the Bathurst
this is a fittingopportunity for hon. members accident might haYe been avoided. The
to discuss the question as it cannot be gone side-coupling chains are not required as
into in the space of twenty minutes. When an ornament; they have surely been
the proper time arrives I believe I will be placed there as an additional safeguard ;
able to rebut a good deal of the evidence and if they are not used for that purpose
o-iven and the slurs which have been cast they should be removed. Fort.uuately
~pon 'the present commissioners for rail- - I do not know that I should say proways. I believe every hon. rn&mber will videntially-I did not carry out an intenlook upon the report in a reasonable light, tion which I had of travelling from Anniand give their verdict in accordance there- dale in the train which came into collision
with ; but I agree with the Colonial Trea- at Farley; but I am perfectly satisfied that
surer, that the hon. member for Quean- if proper rules and regulations had been obbeyan has not acted in a spirit of decency served that accident would not have taken
in bringing forward the subject at the pre- place. A more abominable prnctic(3 than for
sent time. .As the hon. member for The a train to wait at a station after its time of
Murrumbidgee is anxious to delirnr his departure it is impossible to conceive. The
speech I will delay him no further.
majority of the accidents that have ocMr. WILLIS : I congratulate the com- curred ha1·e been attributable to want of
missioners for railways on having such a punctuality. The accident at Maitland
strong advocate here as the young and was owing to this cause. Had the train
budding minister. Now, when I speak, I been up to time, it would not ha1-e hapthink I shall be aLle to upset the arguments . pened. Some hon. members opposite seem
we have heard in favour of the commis- inclined to treat this nmtter lightly; but
sionersforrailways from the future minister human life ·is not to be sacrificed by the
of education, the hon. member for Central Go1-ernment frittering n,way its responsiCumberland. The time is not opportune to bility on to the shoulders of commissioners.
bring this matter before the House and the We must put the saddle on th() right
country. When the time is ripe I will horse ; and I hold that the Minister for
make one to bring charges against the com- Railways is not exempt from responsimissioners for railways which they will bility. I am aware that boys are being
have some difficulty in satisfying the public taken on in the department, while compeare not correct; but like my juvenile friend tent men are hei11g discharged with the
I find it will take a little more than twenty view to make a saving, in order that the
mjnutes to do so. I protest against these railways may pay. If the railways are
commissioners; they are totally incapable; made to pay at the expense of human life,
and the country has been saddled with an then those who have control of the departexpense which it should never have been ment should take the responsibility. I
called upon to bear. If we take the com- may mention that I travflllecl by t.rain
missioners individually or collectively we from Albury the other day, and although
shall find that they are men totally unfit my nerves are not easily shaken and I can
to grapple with this great public asset. I
stand a good deal of jolting, I was obliged
shall reserve my remarks for a future oc- to remark to the conductor, "This is not
casion, and if that occasion does not offer good enough." The car was swinging to
I will make an occasion by moving the and fro in such a manner that I am ceradjournment of the House.
tain something must have been out of
order. The oscillation was such that the
l\'.Ir. HUTCHISON (Glen Innes) : I
do not rise to attack or justify the com- glasses in the carriage were actually broken.
missioners for railways, but I wish to say The other night the northern train was
that if proper precautions are not taken delayed for half an hour, waiting for a
there will be some clay a tremendous local Newcastle train. No reason what.
[1l1r. Frank Farnell.
Adjowrnment.
[14 MAY, 1890.J Railway Accident at Bathurst. 401
ever was given why the train was late,
and when we started the driver put on
full steam, notwithstanding the sharp
curves and steep grades, the consequence
being that the passengers could hardly
keep their seats. I am astonished that
the hon. member for Central Cumberland
should charge hon. members with im·who constituted the
proper motives.
hon. gentleman a judge of people's motives, and gave him the power to discern
what is passing in the minds of hon.
men\bers 1 I am perfectly satisfied that
the so-called economy which is being practis_ed by the railway commissioners will
prove to be a very expensive system for
the colony before very long ; and I hope
that a most searching inquiry will be
made, with a view to prevent any further
sacrifice of human life.
l\1r. LA.KEMAN : I think it is to be
regretted for one reason that the Colonial
Treasurer should have .refused to enter
into any discussion of this subject. vVe
have heard three or four very violent
speeches against the commissioners, and I
do not think this is at all fair. As these
gentlemen have not the power lo defend
themselves in the House, it should be the
dnty of the Colonial Treasurer to defend
them. The hon. gentleman having, however, declined to say anything, I feel that
I ought to draw the attention of the
House to the actual facts of the case. It
strikes me that the commissioners have
been wrongfully blamed in this matter. It
has been stated by the hon. member for
Redfern, M.r. Schey, that they issued an
order to abolish the use of side-chains.
Now, if the report is worth anything, and
I believe it is a true report, it shows that
they did nothing whatever to do away
with the side-chains. The first reference
in the report as to side-chains is as
follows:The first minute was passed on a tour of inspection of the northern lines in J·anuary, 1889,
when the question of the utility of side-chains
was discussed with the officers, an·d the commissioners decided that side-chains should be discontinued on all vehicles.fittetl with the strongest
dniw-gecw. Cliains to o·emciin in those vdiicles
ltaving the light cli-aw-geai· until such gear was replaced.
Surely there is nothing there to show that
the commissioners did away with sidechains.
Mr. SCHEY : They. took them off !
l\fr. LAKEMAN : I do not think they
did. vVe have the hon. gentleman's statement against that of the commissioners,
and I believe the commissioners. The sidechains have only been taken off the strong
draw-gear; the light draw-gear still has
the chains.,
Mr. CRICK : That is not correct !
Mr. LAKEMA.N : I take the report of
the commissioners ill preference to the
statement of the hon. gentleman. As the
question of side-chains is introduced, I will
quote a little further from the report to
show that the commissioners have the lives
of these men as much at heart as have the
hon. gentlemen who have been attacking
them. The commissioners say :
Side-chains in goods waggons are a source of
danger to the working staft~ as they necessitate
the shunters and guards going between the
waggons to couple and uncouple, and for years
past rail way companies have been discontinuing .
their use. 'Yhen the whole of the waggons are
fitted with the strong draw-gear without sidechains, this work cau be accomplished from the
side of the waggon by means of a properly constructed pole and hook.
l\fr. PAUL : An order was issued by
Mr. Kirkcaldie to discontinue the side
chains. I have seen an admission by that
officer to that effect !
Mr. LA.KEM:AN: The report goes on
to say:
The commissioners on the 9th September last
had a meeting with the chief traffic manager
and locomotive engineer, and it was found that
no order of the kind referred to had been issued.
The whole question of the use of side-chains was
then reconsidered, and it was agreed :
That the present description of side-chains was
of little value, and if they were to be continued and looked to as an element of security, the arrangement and strengthening
of same would ha1•e to be reconsidered, and
that it was unnecessary to do this in view of
the proposed early adoption of continuous
automatic brakes on the goods stock.
It will therefore be seen that no order has
been given which in the slightest degree justi-.
fies the allegation made that something had
been clone by.the commissioners to reduce the
security of the traflic. The order No. 2'21,
dated 2nd July, 1889, issued by the chief traffic
manager, referred to, is a reproduction of the
following order, namely;
The staff are hereby informed that all vehicles·
fitted with the strong draw-gear are being·
marked with a cr0ss (thus X), on the buffer
beam on each side of the draw-bar on each
end of the vehicle.
'Yaggons marked in this manner are only to be
single coupled,
.
402.
Adjournment.
[ASSEMBLY.] Railway Accident at Bathurst.
In cases where strong ancl weak couplings come
together, Yehicles are to be attached by the
strong couplings only.
Please acknowledge receipt.
W. Y. READ,
Traffic ~Iauager.
Traffic ~Ianager's Office,
Sydney, 10 February, 1888.
JI.Ir. ScrrEY : That order was never
used; it was never issued in that way !
l\Ir. LAKEl\IAN: The commissioners
say it was, and as against their statement
we have the unsupported testimony of the
hon. gentleman. Rule 235 says:
·
Carriages or warrgons must be properly
coupled by the side-chains as well as the centre
couplings-no side-chains or couplings to be left
hanging down, and no one is to pass between
buffers of Yehicles, but must get O\"er or stoop
under them. The lamps must be lighted, or
remo\·ed when not required.
,. ..
I~
It is evident all throngh this report that
the commissioners acted with the greatest
care, and I fail to see why they should be
blamed for an accident with which they
could ha,-e had nothing whate,·er to do. I
will admit that my hon. friend, the member for Redfern, as the representative of
the railway men, must always keep digging at the commissioners; but I do not
think we should allow the matter to pass
without expressing our opinion on that
point. I think it is very bad taste on the
part of hon. members to blame the commissioners for an accident which has only
just taken place, before they are in a position to say whether or not these gentlemen
had anything whatever to do with it. From
what I haYe heard of the accident at
l\Iaitland I <lo not think the commis3ioners
lmd anything more to do with it than I
had. So long as railways are worked by
human agency we shnll alwaYS haYe accidents, no matter how competent those in
. charge may be. I admit that it is very
unfortunate for the com missioners that
these accidents should ham taken place
all together; but I do not blame them,
and I do not believe the majority of members of this House blame thew. I believe
the m:i:jority of hon. members are entirely
in favour of the management of the railways under the commissioners. l\Iy hon.
friend, l\Ir. Schey, says he is in favour of
the commissioners; but I must say he has
been rather antagonistic to the commissioners of late. Any one who reads this
report carefully will, I am sure, admit
that the commissioners have entirely ex[ Mr. Lctkeman.
onerated themselves in this matter. The
hon. member, Mr. Schey, has told us that
we should have an independent inquiry.
That means an expense to the country,
and I maintain that the commissioners are
the proper persons to hold the inquiry. I
do not look upon them as being on
their trial at all: I feel sure that they
are as anxious to find ouL the truth as we
are. ·what have the commissioners to do
with the agents they employ ~
Mr. OmcK : That is a mm doctrine !
Mr. LAKE:UIAN : It is the correct
doctrine. The commissioners surely want
to carry out the working of the rail ways
in the most efficient manner, aucl I beliern
that they are as anxious as we are to find
out the truth and fix the responEibility on
the proper man.
l\fr. OmcK : That is the chief commissioner·!
l\:fr. LA.KE:\IAN : The hon. mcm l1er
might as well say that we are responsible if
a man commits a murder, because we have
the power of making the la.w and should
have restrained him. I do not wish to
detain the House; but I felt it my duty
to defend the commissioners, who, I believe, have the entire confidence of the
House, notwithstanding what has been
said in two or three of the rabid speech~s
we have heard.
l\:It'. O'SULLIVAN: It seems to me
that some of the members who have
spoken on this matter misapprehend the
subject of discussion. The commissioners
are not on their trial, and all this jerky
chatter and fulsome praise from the back
blocks are utterly out of place. The Railways Act provides tha,t the Government
may appoint an independent commission
to inquire into these accidents, and the
Colonial Treasurer admits it; but because
I brought this matter before the House to
show the Government their duty, the defence they make is - lU r. i!fc::\lILLAN : They do not make any
defence !
l\Ir. O'SULLIVAN : They say it is
simply indecent. Well, if it is indecent, it
is under the hi.w, and therefore the law is
indecent. The Colonial Treasurer admits
that the Cabinet themselves discussed the
desirability of taking this course, therefore we have an indecent cabinet. If I
am to be charged with indecency because
my action was premature, then I say the
A u.strcilian Federation.
(14.
}\'L<\.Y,, ] 89.Q.
Colonial Treasurer, the Premier, and all
their colleagues are branded as. indecent
men, because they fook the. matter in
hand some. days. ago. Therefore.· the· indecency recoils like. a bo.omerang on. the
Colonial Treasurer.
Question resoh·ed in t.he negati1:e.
AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION.
Debate resumed (from 7 :&:fay, vide page
209) on motion by Sir Henry Parkes :
(1.) That thi" H'ouse concurs in the following
resolutions, adopted by the Australasian Federation Conference, on the 13th February last, at
Parliament House, Melbourne, and which have
been laid before this Assembly, namely :( n) That, in the opinion of this conference, the
best interests. and the present and future
prosperity of the Australian colonies will
be promoted by an early union· under the
Crown ; and, while fully recognising the
valuable services of the members of the
Convention of 1833 in founding the Fecleral
Council, it declares its opinion that the
seven years which have since elapsed have
de1•eloped the national life of Australia in
population, in wealth, in the discovery of
resources, ai1d in self-governing capacity,
to an extent which justifies the. higher act,
at all times contemphted, of. the union of
these colonies under one- legislative and
executi1·e government, on principles just to
the several colonies.
(b) That to the union of the Australian colonies
contemplated by the foregoing resolution,
the remoter Australasian colonies shall be
entitled to admission at such times and on
such conditions as may be hereafter ngreed
upon.
.
( c) That the members of the conference should
take such steps as may be necessary .to in. duce the legislatures of their respective
colonies to appoint, during the present
year, delegates to a National Australasian
. Convention, empo1rnred to consider and report upon an adequate scheme for a, federal
constitution.
(2.) That the following members be appointed·
delegates to a National Australasian Convention,
and be empowered. to consider and report upon
an adequate scheme for a federal constitution
fur. the Australian colonies, namely :Sir Henry Parkes, G.C.111.G.,
'William McMillan, Esq.,
Joseph Palmer Abbott, Esq., and
James Patrick Garvan, Esq.,
and that such members act with three members
to be similarly appointed. by the Legislative.
Council.
·
(3.) That the Constitution, as adopted by the
convention, together with any documents relating to such Constitutiou, be submitted, as soon
as possible, for the n.pprornl of the .Parliament
of this colony.
(4.) Tliat the foregoing resolutions be forwarded to the Legislative Council, with a message ·desiring their concurrence therein, and re-
J
.Aus.tralian Fede1·ation.
403
questing that the Legislati1'e Council will appoint thi·ee of their members to represent the
colony at the National A'.ustralasian Convention,
to act with the·four members of this House·who
hav.e. been. appointed to. represent the colony in
the said convention.
Mr. DIBBS : The future student of the
history of N e:w South Wales will read,
with some. degree of amazement that at
the early conference-or what, perhaps;,I
should. more c.orrectly call the late conference-which took place, there were certain
words which were the burden of the song
of the speakers at that conference. vVe
were told by almost every speaker that
there was a lion in the path. What that
particular lion that the speakers referred
to was, is a matter which I shall ·have to,
say something about before I close my;
addres~.
I think that the student wilr
also find, on carefully perusing the speech
which we heard last W ednesclay night.
from the Premier of this country, that.
there was another lion in the- path-a lion
standing in the path of the Colonial Secretary of.New South \Z ales; and that lion.
in the path was the ungenerous treatment
which the hon. gentleman gave to a member of this House who was his political'
opponent.. I never ap1froachecl the consideration of a speech with more seriousness in.
my life. I never felt more anxious that_in.
my own language there might be nothing
of a persomil character. I should have·
been delighted had the head of the Government-the gentleman who w:ishes to·
claim the whole honor of attempting .to
federate Australia-shown us poor people
on this side of the House that good example which his years and his position
should have induced him to show us. 1 do.
not wish what I have to say to-i1ight.
to be in the shape of a reply to the hon.,
gentleman; \Ve are not engaged in any
unfriendly deba.tc. \Ve are conside1·iug a,,.
great national question. We are engaged:·
in. a debate which will be of vast import-ance for all time. The words which. are'.·
uttered to-night will be read over and over·
again· by our cbildnm's children. Taking
that view of the matter, I fail to see what.
right the mover of these resolutions had,
to make the bulk of bis speech-fully one-.
half of it-an attack upon the leader of,
the OppositiQn. I hav.e considered whethe.~·
I should say one word in reply· to the
words. the Premier, uttered,--occupying
fully 1 hour and 2.0 minutes-in, ani
Secon.d. night.
...
i;J,
"':
•
404
Australian Federation.
.!:
[ASSEMBLY.]
attempted vindication of the national and
public wrong he did in excluding from
these resolutions the name of the leader
of the Opposition-the name of the leader
of this great party. \Vhat the Premier
has said will become a matter of history;
and if some denial were not made by me,
'it might be assumed in the future that a
charge ha1 been rnacle out and sustained
against me, and that I was powerless to
reply to it. I say again that I stand here
to-night in no party spirit. I decline to
treat this question as a party question. If
·ever there was a national question-a
question concerning not only hon. members who sit on that side and who believe
-in the views of the Premier, but also those
who sit on this side and yet believe in
-those views-this is that question. Thfl
-question, however, also concerns that section of the people which, however small or
large it may be, differs entirely from the
Premier. Those people have a right to be
heard in this debate. This, I say, is a
question which affects the whole of the
people of this country,and the whole people
not only have a right to be heard, but must
be heard before any step is taken in this
matter. This Parliament is exceeding its
-mandate. We ought not to take even a
preliminary step without the authority
and sanction of the people towards a state
of things which invoh·es the destruction of
the very Constitution under which we exist.
But I pass that by. I feel that I must
say something in reply to the charges
-which have been made against me, because
I differ on certain lines from the Yiews the
Premier bolds in regard to federation. I
supp9se that I, or any other hon. member,
may be permitted to differ from the Premier, and yet live-. If the representatives
of this colony to be sent to the convention
to be held, 1 presume, in Victoria, are all
of one mind, if they are to be merely the
obedient servants of the Premier, then they
are not wanted there at all.
RoN. ME~IBERS: Hear, hear !
Mr. DIBBS: The Premier is quite able
to state his views in any assembly in the
world. He has the requisite ability, and
lie has the coura:ge of his opinions. But I
take it that the attempt-I my so without
any bitterness of speech-to insult the
party on this side by ignoring their leader
will not tend towards that conciliatory
spirit to which we must look to bring about
[ jJf7', Dibbs.
A iisfralian Federation.
federation. I read tl1e hon. gentleman's
speeches at the conference, and especially
his speech in reply to the debate. His
reply is in my judgment the better speech
of the two. But I am sorry to say it contains evidence of personal and bitter feeling
towards a gentleman representing the
colony of South Australia, the expression
of which will go a long way to prevent
the hon. gentleman's views from being
carried out.
Mr. HAWKEN: I rise to a point of
order. It has been stated in another
place that some portion of the proceedings
referred to in this resolution were unauthorised and unaccredited. I am anxious that
the whole of our proceedings in this matter should be duly accredited. My point
of order is that it is not in order at the
present time for this Parliament to entertain in the form submitted the resolution
now before this House, because the resolutions of a certain named conference with
which this Honse is asked to concm-, and
which are em bodied in this resolution contemplate the formation of an unknown government which, if constructed, will be
calculated to disturb the integrity of this
colony, infringe on the privileges of this
House, and grant to certain named present colonies jurisdiction in New South
\Vales,, and will destroy the present power
of the representation of the people of New
South Wales, and govern Australia under
one government, which will destroy the
present existing government of New
South \Vales; also that the resolution
now before the House is unconstitutional.
l\f r. J-. P. ABBOTT : - - - -
Mr. SPEAKER: I enn dP.cide ihe point
at once. Even if the resolutions would
have the effect, the hon. member appears
to suppose this House would have full
power to pass them.
Mr. DIBBS : I was about to say that,
personally, I accept the omi::;sion of my
name from the list of representatives as
the highest compliment the Premier could
pay me. I am disposed to think that many
gentlemen on this side of the House whom
I have the honor to lead will accept the
omission in the same light. It is the
clearest possible admission, from the Premier's point of view, that be cannot se::ure
in me any but an independent representative of New South \\Tales-that I will not
truckle or bend to any living man-the
A ustmlian Federation.
[14 MAY, 1890.J
premier of the clay, or any other man living-where the interests of New South
Wales are concerned. The hon. gentleman
sought, in framing these resolutions, to
appoint gentlemen who would be quite
willing to sit in convention independently
of the interests of poor New South \.Vales.
I have dissected the hon. gentleman's
speech, and have divided it into some
twelve parts. The first portion was simply
Dibbs ad nauseam. Then the hon. gentleman dealt with the desire for a federal
rule, and gave us ~ full explanation of the
proposed federation on the lines of the
Canadian Dominion. He then referred to
his Tenterfielcl speech, and gave us a long
story as to the proposed privy council and
as to the veto of the American president.
In this connection the hon. gentleman gave
us some verbal criticisms about American
lawyers all being members of the bar.
He t.hen referred to the flag of this country. I have yet to discover whether it is
proposed that, as a federated Australia,
we should fly a flag of our own. The hon.
gentleman next cl welt npon the Chinese
scare, which he seemed to think might
seize upon the people of New South Wales
and induce them, without clue thought, to
rush into federation. He wound up-as
he is always capable of winding up-with
a magnificent peroration to an awfully
bad speech. I listened to the speech with
the most profound attention. I al ways
listen to the !~on. gentleman ; but, on
this particular occasion, as he was speaking from a national point of view I g_a,·e
him my ears to the fullest extent. I
listened, I say, to every word the Premier uttered, and the conclusion I arrived
at was that the foundation upon which
Australin. is to be federated will not be
the speech in question. Are we to take
all the speeches of the Premier which
h::we appeared in the press from time to
time-are we to take the 1<peeches made
at the conference itself in February last,
as the bed-rock upon which federation is
to he built; or are we to take the particular speech which was delivered last
\.Vednesday as the laying of the fo~mcla­
tion-stone of a federated Australia 1 If
the Premier is not capable of supplying
the country and the House with sounder
arguments for federation than he did
then, he is laying his foundation-stone with
very poor mortar indeed. I looked upon
Australian Federation
405
the speech which was to be delivered last
Wednesday night as one which should be
eloquent in argument, and not simply to
be closed with an eloquent peroration-a
peroration which might bring down, as
many perorations do bring clown, the
applause of the gallery or the House itself.
In a casfl of this kind we ought to look at
the sum and substance of the arguments
used in regard to the federation of the
colonies. \.Vhat we require in this matter
is simply solid, sound, commercial, and
political arguments as to why we should
change from our present free Constitution,
and why we should adopt the proposalas the Premier has put it in his resolutions
-for a federated Australia. I will clear
myself at once by saying I am in favour
of federation. I say I ha.-e never been
opposed to federation ; and before sitting
down I will give hon. members the proof.
I hold, as a representative of the people,
and as the leader of a large section in this
House and in the country, that I have the
undoubted right to the freest possible
opinion on any proposal, arid· to criticise
any proposal made for the purpose of endeavouring to find out a sure and certain
foundation upon which Australia may become a nation. The difference between
the Premier and myself i~, that he believes in a· federation which I believe will
be incomplete, and which will never work,
for reasons which r will mention presently.
I believe in the union of Australia, and in
the founding of an Australian nation. I
speak as an Australian, and as a native
born in this land ; and I say that if we are
to depart from our present Constitution
at all, let it be that we may have a flag
of our own, let it be that the Australian
colonies shall be bound together, and that
we shall have a united stn,tcs of Australia. That is the fnture I aspire to as a
len,der in t.his country; and I hold that
my views and opinions are of equal weight,
and ought to be thought of and dealt with
equally with those of an hon. gentleman in
this House who is not a native of the soil.
I may be entirely wrong in my views, and
I may be told that the time is not ripe to
sever from the mother country. I do not
think it is. I am not one, by any act of
ours, to do anything at present to sever
the tie connecting us with the old world ;
but I have stated in this House before,
and I have made no secret of my opinion,
Second night.
406
...
""
A nstralicm Federation. •
[ ASSE:iHBLY.]
that this colony has one of the grandest
futures any country in the world can
possess.. \Ve have a future before us
which was well and eloquently expressed
by the. Premier himself last Wednesday
night. That future. is to be accomplished
l,'.iy. the cre<ttion of the united states of
Australia, nuder one flag~ I have an ambition, as a,, native of this. country, th1tt
this country shall become a nation. The
views the Prernier g::we in regard to the
condition 0£ America., when she separate"cl
from the'old countr.y·--the figures the Premier gave, form the strongest possible
proof, to my mind, that we, in Australia,
are. stronger to-dii.y thttn the .Ameri.cans
were when they, set np their flag of independence. I am going to trespass on the
time of hon. members for the purpose
of vindicating myRelf in regard to the
speeches I have made in the pastspeeches, I say, which have nothing to do
with this debate, and which I never won Id
hn.ve mentioned bad it not been that I
have Lee1i unfairly dragged before. the
public, and statements have been made in
regard to mcwhich must be ref,utted in my
own defence. The Premier, in his endeavour to justify the action he has taken,
has been most diligent in the search he hn.s
made through the newspapers. I do not
think he could find roanyqnotationsof mine
in tl.!_e free-trade press of Sydney~ I have ·
not been very liberally treated in rnyexcursionsinto the country by having a travelling
reporter at my elbow. I think, however,
I am in a position to claim tlmt when the
leader of the Opposition speaks, to a certain· extent in reply to the public questions raised by the Premier-when he is
ende~vouring ·to elicit the proofs on the
one side or the other-he has some right
to recognition at the hands of the press.
The Premier must have put the· whole of
the staff of the Colonial Secretary at work
to search the country papers, a~d to find
what words could be dragged up-without.
the slightest reganl for context-to convict me of the charge mai:le, that I am not·
inJaYour of federation. I. am indebted to
an hon. member of the House for displaying a, very la.rge amount of energy in
gathering up the statements of public
men. on the federation question-I :nean
the hon. member for South Sydney, :Mr.
Traill.. That hon. member wa.s good
enough to give me a clipping, which,
[Mr . .Dibbs.
A w;trali_an Fedei;ation.
n.lmost in one word, is a full and complete
answer to the. Premier. If it is a full and
complete answer to the Premier, so far as
I am concerned, the extract renders the
Colonial Treasurer also utterly unfit to· go
to the intercolonial conventi.on. Bu.t I
would ask the Honse to say that the Colonial Treasurer has a perfect. right to.go to
that convention, even if he differs with.
his chief. I myself would have a perfect
right to go to the convention, even if: I
were utterly opposed to federation. I
have a perfect right to go there because, I
am the leader of the Yiews of a large
party. Further than that, if I were no!;
the leader of this large party-if I were
absqlntely opposed to federation altogether
-as the proposed change is going to
aftect me, and as it is going to affect
thousands and tens of thousands in this
country who-"may think with me, those
tens of thousands have a right to be
consulted, and have a right· to. be represented in any convention which proposes
to deal with the Constitution of this country. We have been told times without
number that it is one of the greatest in
the· world. Its freedom has been obtained ·
by the death-struggles of those who lived
before we were born. And all honor
to them. They have given us a free constitution. Bdorc that free Constitutfon
c:m be destroyed, those who differ from
the views of the Premier, and perhaps
from the extreme views I hold-those
who are against federation altogetherhave a right to be consulted. ·when the
Premier ran off to Queensland, and commenced his preliminary canter, one would
have imagined that his colleagues would
have· 1Jeen consulted. One would have
imagined that the colleagues of the hon.
member would h;we been taken into tlrn
confidence of tlie:ir chief, and that they
would have been told what he w"as about
to do-that t;hey would have heen, as it
\vere, parties to the correspondence which
was about to take place. I challenge the
Government, one and all, as to whether
they can stand up in their places, and tell
us they were taken into the confidence of
the Premier at all. The Pr~mier was
playing a lone hand. \Viii the Colonial
Treasurer say what views the Premier
had in regard to federation when he commenced his grand tour~ \Vill the Secretal"y
for Public \\T orks say tha~'.,_~rn was ever
~'"""
A ustmlian Federation.
A itstralian. Federation.
consultetl 1 These are questions we ha,·e a·
right to know something about. l will be
able to show that the Colonial Treasurer
was in. as great a fog in regar.d to the Premiex as I was myself when I spoke at
Crookwell, and when he spoke at Paddiiigc
ton and vVaverley about the same time.
The hon. member for South Sydney, Mr.
'l'raill, hcis furnished .me with an extract from my speech at Crookwell. I
will quote from it, and then I will quote
the Colouial Treasurer's speech. Perhaps
I had better read the Colonial Treasurer's
speech first, b(lcause it sounds .very much
like my own, if only the word "protection"
is substituted for "free-trade." The Colonial Treasurer is reported by the Sydney
papers to have spoken as follows at Paddington:,
At present they were striking into lines unknown before. There was a strong feeling that
a more intim:i,te union should exist between the
Austrnlasiau colonies; but they, in New South
'Vales, must first decide the struggle as to which
should be their fiscal system, for upon the fiscal
policy of New South Wales would depend the
whole national life of Australasia. (C!leers.)
Clearly showing that there would he no
federation, so far as the Colonial Treasurer
was concerecl, unless free-trade was to be
the basis of the wl1ole business. vVhat
right, I ask, has he to go to Melbourne as
a representative of this colony i \Vhat
right has he to go when we know that
one-half of the country are protectioniSts;
that fi rn of the other colonies a.re p1·otectionist; aud when he announces that there
should be no federation,. except upon the
lines of free-trade i That-is the way to
bring Harmony, to conciliate the other colonies. The Colonial' Treasurer goes on to
say:
. The question of federation was bound up in
the fiscal question.
If I had been listening to him, I shouid
have said, "HEar, liear."
What would federation be worth unless there
was that blending together·of the illdustrial'life
of the people ; there would either be no federation at all, or else a. very ridiculous system of
federation. Difficulties existed. in connection
with the J?roposal, which must be cleared away
before fed.cration could become an accomplished
fact; and the one great difficulty was that fiscal
separation which divided them from Victoria.
(Cheers.)
In another portion of the same speech the
hon. member is reported to have sa,id :
The only means of bringing about that com-plete. union whi!lh. the federationists desired,
40.7
would be to adopt.a uniform tariff; but he did
not think that it could be based on protective
lines.
·
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The colony was willing to federate; but if
federation meant. the stiffing of the principles. of
free-trade-which had made her what she was,
the principles of the great liberal party in Eng:
laud and the principles of: the greatest thinkers
in the world-then she would scout their proposed federation.
(Long and continued applause.)
The Colonial Treasurer of. this Government with views so strongly marked as
that is to go under the wing of ·the Premier ! But we have a right to know
whether the Colonial Treasurer hn.s bound
himself body and soul, hand and foot, to
vote for whate\·er his chief tells him. A
little further on the hon. member said :
But it would be impossible for any system of
- fe<leration to be carried out on true principles
unless there "\vas a uniformity in the tariffs and
free-trade bt!t,rnen all the. colonies, and this
must mean free-trade between the nations of
the world.
I cannot say "·hear, hear" to tlmt.. I
have given the House an extract.from the
hon. member's speech, a,nd I have no
doubt he \vill remember every word of it.
If there is n.ny logic in the argument of
the Premier, I ask, does he not sit there
condemned n.s being a. political imposter,
as having attempted to rouse the passions
of hon. members on this side of the House
Ly having insulted them through tlrnir
leacler, and as having done that ungracious,
unfair, and unfederal act Ly attempting to
put a, strained construction upon my wordsi
He had forgotten in the presi:iure of his
other business that his Colonial Treasurer,
while he was in Queensland, was running
wild about the streets of Paddington, and
enunciating doctrines which, according to
tlie Colonial Secretary's views last V..1 ednesday, were simply rank heresy. I was
announced to speak ·at Crookwell before
this question of federation was put into
the air.· I did speak there, and as the
leader of a party, having to spe<tk at an
important place-which I am glad to see is
to have a railway-I thought I had a right
to honestly criticise the acts of the Government; and that, spen.king on the
question of protection" I had a right to
take the acts of the Government, ancr
what they proposed to do, into consideration. On the question of protection I put
this matter strongly before the Crookwell
audience : I said that the Premier had
Second night.
......
.'
408
A iistralian Federation.
[ASSEMBLY.]
taken up this idea of federation for no
other purpose than to cast dust in the
eyes of the electors of New South 'vVales ;
to stop the tide of protection which· was
rolling against the Government. Will
anybody tell me that I was unfair in my
attack on the Premied ·wm anybody tell
me that I struck below the belt on that
occasion~
I struck out fairly at what I
saw coming as clearly as that the sun
would rise on the following morning : that
this question of federation was being
raised at this particular moment by the
Premier for no other purpose than to get
the Government out of the pledge they
gave us last December, being the outcome
of the whole conspiracy aad plot-so that
this fiscal question should not be decided,
so that the people of this country should
not have a fair opportunity of deciding
the question until after federation was accomplished. Can any stronger proof be
submitted in support of what I said :it
Crookwell than.what took place when this
House met, and when the Governor's
speech was delivered a fortnight ago 1 \Ve
then found that the engagement made
with hon. members on this side was coolly
broken, and the first subject submitted to
Parliament was the federation question.
Speaking at Crookwell, I am reported to
have used these words:
He concluded by repeating that his party
was as =xious as others to establish federation, but protection should not be lost sight of.
\Va.s it generous to an opponent to come
clown to this House on a great national
question, and deliberately mislead the
House, to mislead his own supporters by
making such statements 1 If the hon. member had taken the trouble to read the rest
of the speech, he could not, as an honorable man, have come here and made the
statement which he made last Wednesday night regarding me. In the same
speech I sa.id :
He (~fr. Dibbs) was in favour of one united
Australia, with one tariff law throughout. The
moment this was accomplished a grand future
would be opened up to the country, which would
become one of the nations of the world. Sir
Henry Parkes had given but a bare outline of
what he intended doing. Mr. Dibhs asserted
that protectionists were ready for federation,
but it would have to be based on the lines of
protection.
The hon. member will see that my views
agree with the utterances of the Colonial
[ jjf1-, Dibbs.
A ustrcdian Federation.
Treasurer on the question of federation.
If anything, the Colonial Treasurer is
doubtful about federation, while my utterances are clear antl distinct, as I hope to
live to see the day when there will be one
united Australia, with one common tariff
throughout Australia. I went on further
and said:
The protectionists were equally anxious for
federation, but not to sacrifice the principles of
protection.
I think I have now cleared away the misapprehension caused by every word which
the Premier quoted against me in referring to my Crookwell speech. Bnt I have
something more to say. The Premier
knew my views on this question of a
united Australia and on this question of
federation better than any other man in
the world. Why, he did me the honor to
publish a speech which I delivered in this
Honse-an impromptu speech, I will admit-on the Wes tern Australian question.
The hon. member sent pamphlets by the
hundred to England. These were reYiewed
in every paper worth reading in England.
Some of my friends sent me out some of
the papers containing the reYiews. I did
not know that a report of the speeches
had been sent to England. I fancy there
were many people in England who thought
that Sir Henry Parkes was a poet and a
dreamer-that he was riding on a rainbow, that 11e was dancing in the clouds,
and that there was nothing material
about him; but they did me the compliment of saying that though I had spoken
straight out from the shoulder, I had expressed the views of the bulk of the people
of New South Wales. I cut these extracts out for the purpose of reading them
to the House; and when I have clone so I
will ask the most sanguine supporter of the
Government·whether the Premier was justified last vVednesday night in dragging me
so unfairly and ungenerously to the front
on an important national question, when
he ought to have sought the aid of every
man in the House-when he ought to have
been generous to a fault-if he wished to
carry out his proposal. His action in this
matter has raised up in my mind the idea
that the hon. member is even now not in
earnest or serious in his desire for federation. When the Western Australian question was launched before this House by
the suspension of the standing orders, the
A iistralian Federation.
l14
1\IAY, i890.J
Premier delivered a brilliant oration, and
used these words :
·
I do foresee the time, and I think that time is
steadily and rapidly advancing, when the Australian .colonies will for all the virtual purposes
of a nation, be a great power on the face of the
earth.
·
I want to know whether the hon. member
differed from me very much in the views
I held in favour of one united Australia
-not as a dependency of any power Qn
earth, but one united Australia, with a
flag of our own, and able to take our
place among the nations of the earth~ On
that occasion I used these words :
If e\'er we enter into federation, or take
united action in any way, we desire that New
South Wales shall enter into conference with a
state equal to ourselves in every respect.
I said that you could not discuss the question of federation with a Crown colonythat the free and independent coloniesfree almost to the point of. separationshould meet to discuss the important questionof federation only with colonies equally
free as ourselves. I went on to say :
I can only say that I agree thoronghly with
what the hon. gentleman has expressed so well
with regard to keeping Australia for the Australians, and I am prepared to carry that feeling
even to a greater length in a practical sense
than the hon. member.
I differ entirely from the Premier in his
dream as to what the future of Australia will
be. I have a dream, and that dream is that
there will be a different form of government in
Austrnlia to what there is to-day. The very
necessities of our position-our large and rapidly
increasing population throughout Australiashow that Australia will be in the eyes of the
world a state as vigorous as the United States
oi America were in the past. I look forward to
the day when that change of government will
take place. There is no necessity to sever the
ties which at present exist between ourselves·
and the mother conntry ; but the necessities of
our national life will cause ns to spring forth
from the position of a dependency on a gi:eat
power, to the position of an independent state.
There is no crime in that. Surely my
views on that occasion were stated firmly
and· clearly-that Australia should be
bound together as one. But I pointed
out-and I believe that if the people of
Australia were polled to-morrow they
would agree with me-that when the
time comes that we do federate we shall
bind ourselves together as a power that
can be federated with the world. Then I
said:
That will be our great stepping-stone to a great
futnre, which will render Australia, at no dis·
•..
Aiistralian
Fed~rcttion.
409
tant elate, one of the nations of the world. \Vi th
this great territory, with our rnst resources, with
an Anglo-Saxon population endowed with the
energy, capi'tal, and power which our people
possess, Australia is bound to be a natioh separate altogether from the tra.mmels of any country,
even the mother country itself.
Fnrther on in the same speech I used
these words :
The granting of a free government to 'Western
Austr'.Llia will be a great and important event,
to which I hope every man born in Australia.
will gladly look forward.
Without any illfeeling or without any desire to break off immediately from the old country, we desire to have
Australia for the Australians in every shape and
form, in view of the inevitable, that at no distant elate we shall become a nation as free as
England itself.
Those were the views which the Premier
published and sent to England. They express clearly and emphatically my idea of
what federation should be, and thev would
have saved the hon. gentleman the.trouble
of searching through acres and acres of
country papers to find some words which
would suit his purpose to entrap me.
'\Vi th this explanation I lea Ye that portion
of the hon. gentleman's speech tlS unworthy of him and unworthy to be on the
records of the House. I stand here with
a strong and earnest desire-for I am a
natirn of the country, ambitious for its
future-I stand, I say, firmly on this idea,
tliat if we are to change from our present
form of government, let us bloom out into
the position of a nation instead of that of
a village. Before I proceed to refer to
the hon. member's speecl1, I may say that
I propose to drop that portion which I regard as an attack upon the party I lead,
and an attack upon myself. But I will
ask _the hon. member if he has forgotten
the magnificent speech he deliYerecl in
1884, when the Stnart Government were
parties to a conference to endeavour to
bring about the federation of the colonies~
The hon. gentleman knew that I was a
member of that Government; he knew
that I was a member of the convention
which sat in Sydney; he knew that certain resolutions were passed, and a draft
bill agreed to with the object of forming
a federal council ; and he knew that the
then colonial secretary, the late Sir
Alexander Stuart, being seriously ill at
the time, I moved resolutions in this
Chamber to bring about a federal council,
with a view to a more permanent form of
. Second night.
410
A ustrnlian Fede'ration.
[ ASSEi\lBLY.]
A ustralia'/I, Federntion,
federation. Is not this, iu one paragraph, stands there yet, and it will remain in the
a sufficient answer to the whole speech of path. Supposing these resolutions were
t.he hon. gentleman, where he attempted carried to-night, supposing the convention
to spread the feeling abroad that I was were held in Melbourne, that lion is to be
against the federation of Australia 1 In got rid of, or that lion will eat up, I hope
1884 the hon. member delivered a speech not the· members of the convention, but
opposed to the principles of federation, the federal proposals. A.re we to pull
because, whatever may be said against the clown the barriers which exist between the
Federal Council, the proposals to bring it various colonies 1 Some hon. members
into existence were as stepping-stones to say, "Y~s, of course, let us pull clown the
a greater object. There is no harm now barriers." But there is a large party in
in making reference to certain events South Australia ausolutely opposed to
which took place in the council ; and in their fiscal barriers being destroyed, as
sitting at that coui1Cil we all felt the they would be worked corupletely out of
difficulty that was brought prominently time by the Victorian manufacturers.
to the front by a question which I put There is a large party in New Sou th Wales,
to Sir Graham Berry-then Mr. Berry- also, who will fight to the death before
in which I asked, "Is Victoria prepared gi \'ing Victoria the run of the New South
to . bring her fiscal policy in line with ·wales markets.
Rox. 1\lE~lBERS : She has it now !
the rest of the colonies 1" The answer
TIIr. DIBBS : Of course she bas it now;
emphatically given was, "No." We felt
then, as the result of our delibera- but hon. members know that we are just
tions, that the grand difficulty that stood on the eve of taking it from her. '\Ve are
in our way-the lion in the path in those just on the eve of putting ourselves on alldays-was this difference between New • fours with Victoria with regard to our·
South Wales and Victoria on the fiscal fiscal policy. \'i7e are on the eve of accomquestion.
I remember the gentleman plishing that great event which, when
who was the president of the conference accomplished, will be the foundation-stone
which sat the other day-the Hon. of federation. That hon. gentlemen on
Mr. Gillies-rnaking a speech when we the other side of the table know just as
joined the rail way between :i\Ielbourne and well as I do. That lion stands in the way;
Sydney across the waters of the l\Iurray. and I want to see the man who will kill
At that time he was minister for rail- it. In all my public speeches, and the
ways; and, responding to a toast proposed speeches of other members from this side
by :i\Ir. Wright, then secretary for public of the House, who have spoken in •arious
works, JUr. Gillies used these strong words, parts of the colony, we have compared the
and they are words which cannot be present attempt of the Premier to come
ignored. Talk of federation as you will, forward as a great federationis~, with the
move the subject of federation as forward opposition he gave to our attempt, in 188±,
as you possibly can, there comes that lion to bring about a better state of things
in the path which l\Ir. Service referred to with Victoria. One and all, we haYe
-the lion which :i\Ir. Gillies put forward pointed out that federation was one of the
to one of the largest representative gather- planks in the protectionist platform. Our
ings that e\-er took place in Australia- platform was, a uniform tariff throughout
that gathering on the banks of the :i\Iurray. Australia, and then federation would be
almost an accomplished fact. That is the
1\Ir. Gillies used these words :
lio11 in the path which will have to be
A great many other things will ha>e to be
killed, and it must be killed by harder
done before we can expect federation in anything
like legislati\-e form. One essential will be an
arguments than those used the other night;
understanding with reference to a customs union.
it will not be killed by eloquent periods
That is the lion iu the path which the and perorations. We are asked to enter
statesmen in Victoria foresee. That is into a partnership with the other colonies.
the lion in the path -referred to by l\Ir. If any member of this House were looking
Service ; that is the lion in the path which into the question of a partnership in any
the Colonial Secretary, when he was in commercial undertaking, the first thing
:Melbourne, eadeavoured in a powerful he would ask would be-what are to be
speech to destroy ; but the lion in the path the terms of that partnership 1 That is the
[Mr. Dibbs.
11it:sfrcilian Federation.
(14
1"I:AY1
question we ha Ye to ask. What ·are we
to surrender to accomplish federation?
Are >vc to mako these sacrifices, especially
to Victoria, for the purpose of coddling a
mere sentiment i Let us first remove the
differences which exist between the two
colon"ies-establish a customs union. That
does not mean that we should have one
uniform tariff to-morrow; bllt it would
gi rn the people of New South \Vales some
fair play in any future arrangement with
Victoria. New South \Vales, ·with her
nomimdly free-trade policy, has stood
against the world, and has defied
Victoria.
All· the time Victoria has
been strengthening her hands, preparing
her machinery, preparing her munitions
of war, and she is perfectly ready,
when we rflmove these barriers, to walk
in and with her manufactures beat our
people. Our people in any customs union
will see that fair justice is done to our
young manufactures, to our farming interest, before we allow 'this mere sentimental idea to hecome an accomplished
fact. The Premier has told us some of
the great advantages of federation. I
. leaYe out the idea of federal lunacy, because I can see a simple way in which the
:whole difficulty of federal _lunacy can be
got rid of. Instead of federating with
another country to pass our lunatics on to
that country, it would be more honorable
for New South ViTales to establish a lunatic
asylum at Broken Hill. I think the hon.
member might well have refrained from
bringing into so sublime a question as
:Australian federation so ridiculous an idea
as that of a federal lunatic asylum. The
hon. gentleman told us that om· public
loans will be greatly _benefited. Is the
hon. gentleman going to federate our
assets i I admit that New South '\Vales
·and the other colonies with a constitution
similar to that of the United St-ates would
rank next to EnglanCl herself in their
borrowing power in the English market ;
but if we are to remain as separate colonies with separate assets, I _wr,nt to know
where the ad,·antage is to come to us?
'\~Te have no power to mortgage the lands
of this colony for the benefit of Victoria.
So far as I can gather from the hon. gentleman we are to remain as a number of
provinces, with a federal parliarilent and
with a federal executive ; and I do not
believe the hon. gentleman proposes to
189"0.J
· J1 ustralian Fedc·ration.
411
give ·up the lands ·of this colony, the railways _of this colony, the pnbli-c works -Of
'this colony, lock, stock, and barrel; to the
federation. I .would _like to know from
the Premier even now whether Ire proposes to federate the whole of the assets
of Australia, so-that our public loans·may
benefit i If we are going to ~eclerate the
loans we must ·federate the assets. Are
we going 'to hand 'the enormous assets of
this colony over to Victoria? We hear
upon one.hand, "Oh, ·no ; we only propose
to federate for the purpnse-apart from the
sentiment and the lunatic asylums-for
thepurpose of destroying customs barriers."
Then I want to know, what is to become
uf the barrier in regard to our railway
system i Are we going to federate ·the
different railway systems~ Are our rail-·
ways to be thrown info the pot? is
everything to be melted clown and hrmded
over to the pawnbroker with a view to
our getting our share of the spo~l at some
future date 1 These things will 'have to
be made clear ·to the -people. I do not
care what Padiament may do; but these
matters will have to be explained to the
electors before they sanction the giYing up
of our rights, our railways, and other assets
to the control of any amalgamated parliament. 'The Premier could give me in a
word an answer to my question. I ask
the hon. gentleman a.gain, " Does he propose a federation which will include the
assets of the whole of Australia 1" That
is a question I should like to have answered. It seemed to me to be the orily
argument which the hon. gentleman submitted to us when asking for our votes.
If that is not intended, it comes to a question of a federated lunatic asylum. There
is no other point in the whole of ·the hon.
gentleman's speech, with the exception of
his reference to the public loans and to a
federated lunatic asylum. There is no
other point I say gi-\·ing us any sound
or solid reason why the colonies should
federate. '\Vhat I want to know is : are
we to throw all that we possess into one
co-partnership, withoutknowing upon what
ground we shall stand 1 I wonder wl\at
the people -\vill tell us when we come to
face our constituents. I think they will
feel inclined tg say, "You have bargained
away our liberties, our lands, our railways,
and every ~sset we possess, for the purpose
of federating with an imposing neighbour."
'Second ·night.
ii./. -,
--~~.,--­
.t
·:Ir"
412
'
--~·-·
I.
,..,,
lo
~
t
.
A iistndian Fede;·ation.
[ASSEMBLY.]
Under these circumstances, the gain to
New·South Wales will not be worth the
candle. It is time this Parliament considered whether, in our representation upon
the convention to be held in Victoria, we
shall have men who will accept dict~tion
from the mouth of the Premier, or men
who will say, "vVe will stand up for New
South Wales." vVe want representatives
.who will be as conciliatory as men can be
under all the circumstances of the case,
having regard to the important duties
thrown upon them; but we also want men
who will represent New South Wales from
New South Wales. We do not want
dummies or trucklers. I am indebted to
the speech which the Premier delivered in
1884, for putting me on the track of
works of sLandard importance, giving us
some idea. as to, tl1e lines upon which
federation has proceeded in the past. I
was struck with the hon. gentleman's idea
of having a fedeeation upon the lines of
the Domini.on of Canada, because, speaking in 1884, he said that the Dominion of
Canada had not :been a pronounced success. We know that Canada federated in
order to obtain the assistance of the Imperial Government. The Canadian states
were compelled to federate under the
Crown because of the extraordinary difficulties arising out of the boundary line
between them and America. It was seen
that any hostile act on the part of England
to America or on the part of America to
England-any act, for instance, arising
out of the question of the Behring Straits'
fisheries-might at any moment land the
two countries in war.
For her very
exi~·tence Canada was bound to federate,
having this boundary line between her
and America-a boundary line much resembling that between New South Wales
and Victoria, perhaps at places only a
three-railed fence. That was the nature
of a boundary extending over some thouThe very existence of
.sands of miles.
Canada depended upon her alliance with
a powerful maritime state. She therefore
formed her dominion under the Crown in
order that she might have the defence
which the Crown alone could give her.
To endeavour to adhere literally to the
line.;; of the Canadian Dominion, therefore,
would be to take a course not at all
adapted to our circumstances.
Let me
point out· to hon. members what took
[Mr.· JJibbs.
Australian Federation.
place in connection with the American
federation. We were told the· other nicrht
by the Premier that twelve years elap~ed
after the American states had agreed to
federate-after the articles of confedeeation had been signed-before she established herself as a nation. I remember
the hon. gentleman reading to us-I do
not remember now in what speech-the
powerful language of George 'Washington. For twelve years after America
had separated from England she was
in a state of chaos. That state of things
exi"stecl until the union was made complete, and she rleclared herself a nation.
I want hon. gentlemen to bear in mind
that under thfl confederation proposed by
the Prernic1· we shall place the states
of Australia in precisely the position in
which America was placed during those
twelve perilous years of her existence, following upon her severance from the old
country. Jn one of the earliest speeches
which the hon. gentleman delivered upon
this question, he told us that federation
was desirable for the purpose of establishing a standing army. This is a difficulty
which loomed before me at the time as
big as the N ortl].)Jead itself. A standing
army for what 1 A standing army in
which the Imperial Government would
have no Yoice whatever, but which is to
be presided over by imperial officers ! A
standing army paid for by New South
\.Vales, and presided over by imperial
officers! Mutinous language is prepared
for every officer, because we say at the
outset that we will not allow any interference with our troops on the part of
the Imperial Government.
Are we to
ha.ve a standing army to coerce any
state which may find that it bas rushed
into this great union as young people
sometimes rush into marriage~ "Wed in
haste, repent at leisure," as the saying goe&.
Do we want a standing army to coerce a
state which may desire to get <)ut of a bad
bargain~ Under the federation proposals
by the Premier we shall have to go to
Englagd for an enabling bill ; and if we
can go· 'to England to enable us to federate,
surely we can go to England afterwards if
we find ourselves in the position of a state
dissatisfied with the federation. Suppose
that New South Wales, urged by the
powerful eloquence of the Premier, surrendered her Constitution and rights, and
A iistmlian Federation.
[14 MAY, 1890.)
joined this confederation, it would be a
confederation of the consistency of a rope
of sand, unless there. were some power to
prevent the various states leaving the
union. Suppose at the proposed convention a constitution is prepared and
adopted. Suppose that we afterwards
were dissatisfied with the confederation,
and that a party cry were raised in reference to the question. The Premier would
make a party cry of this matter to-morrow
morning if he could. I can see dots on
the horizon, which show me that he is
prepared to conciliate at least one strong
political party in New South Wales. Suppose then that New South vVales entered
this union under an enabling bill, and discovered that she had made a bad bargain,
might not the people of New South vVales,
under the influence of a party cry, turn
to the Government and insist upon being
released from their bargain 7 There is no
power on earth which could keep this
colony a member of the confed~ration one
hour after the people had determined that
our remaining in the union was opposed
to their interests.
Mr. DOWEL : What did America do 7
Mr. DIBBS: The case of America is
different. But from the time of America
separating from England until the establishment of a union, the various states in
the federation were at sixes and sevens.
They were all fighting. Although it was
stipulated under the articles of federation
that each state should provide a certain
number of troops and equip them, the
proposah~as made in the House of Representatives that military power should be
used to coerce the wavering states and keep
them up to the mark. Are we, a dependency under the Crown, about to establish
a standing army which may at any time
be turned against us 7 It was very well,
in the union of America, which was accomplishe~ under enormous difficulties,
that the :yarious wavering states, should
be brought into one powerful union. There
was power to use the union forces for the
purposes of the maintenance of the;union.
An HoN. MEMBER: At a very large
cost!
Mr. DIBBS : We know it was done at
a cost of £700,000,000, and the loss of
about 700,000 lives. But the union, once
formed as a nation, did what was perfectly right.
The union was bound to
2
E
Australian Federation.
413
maintain its own solidity, even at so
enormous a shedding of blood, and at so
extraordinary an expenditure of money.
But we, in this colony, are to be under
the Crown, and we are to have an
army with which the Crown has nothing
whatever to do. The Imperial Government can have no powers of interference;
and I want to know who is going to control the forces so created 7 The whole
question, to my mind, lies in the elucidation of these points. If we establish ourselves as the united states of Australia.if we have a flag of our own as a nationthe army created becomes a federal army,
and it may be used for the purpose of
keeping within the states those states
which join the union. But if we join a
federation under the Crown-a federation
which is to use great infiuence in Europe
and the world, we create··a, power which is
an unfair one, and which will never be
agreed to-the power of being coerced by
our own troops. The view I took after
reading the speech of the Premier is that
if we attempt to form dthe federation he
now proposes, it will be incomplete and
useless. An old writer says :
Neighbouring nations are naturally enemies
of each other, unless their common weakness
forces them to league iu a confederation republic, and their constitution prevents the differences
that neighbourhood occasions, extinguishing that
secret jealousy which disposes all states to aggrandise themselves at the expense of their
neighbours.
vVhat I would point out is this: that, excepting as to the question of defence, and
the question of dealing with the fiscal policy,
all the large issues, so far as the federal
proposals of the Premier are concerned,·afo
left out in the cold altogether; and we
shall be as much separated from Victoria
and from Queensland, under the proposed
federation-and will have, perhaps, ten
thousand more points to fight about-as
we are at present. I say that the proposal of the Premier is a partial scheme.
The federation which should be accomplished should be a federation of everything in common. We would then remove our boundaries, and the questions
of rail ways, lands, education, matrimonial
disputes, and every form of law would be
come common to the whole country. In
1884 I moved certain federal resolutions
in the House ..· vV e proposed to get over
some of the preliminary uifficulties in
. Second night.
,.,,
414'
A ustraz.ian Federation.
[ASSEMBLY.]
regard to the opposition of the other colonies by legislating upon certain points.
There is nothing on earth at this moment
to prevent the colonies from entering upon
an agreement in regard to points I am
about to name, which are points proposed
to be dealt with by the :Federal Council
Bill. The first matter we proposed to
legislate upon under a federal council bad
reference to the relations of Australasia
with the islands of the Pacific ; and that
is a pacific qnestion now. The next question was the prevention of the influx of
criminals. Surely there should be some
common agreement amongst the colonies
in regard to this matter. We can agree
to have one law in common to deal with
the influx of criminals, and to deal with
it unitedly. We can join together for the
purpose of making one common law, which
will apply to that question. Then there
is the question of " Fisheries in Australian waters beyond territorial limits." No
question of that kind has yet arisen, nor
is it likely to arise. The people of these
colonies have paid too little attention to
their fisheries, and there is no dispute
likely to arise in connection with them
which will necessitate any joint law. There
are also the following questions :-The service of cidl process of the court of any
colony within her Majesty's possessions in
Australasia, out of the jurisdiction of t.he
colony in which it is issued. The enforcement of judgments of courts of law of any
colony beyond the limits of the colony. The
enforcement of criminal process beyond the
limits of the colony in which it is issued, and
the extradition of offenders, induding deserters of wives and children, and deserters
from the imperial or colonial naval or mili. tary forces.
Then, there are the questions of the custody of prisoners, general
defences, quarantine, patents of invention
and discovery, copyrights, bills of exchange
and promissory-notes, uniformity of weights
and measures, marriage, divorce, naturalisation, and so on. All the matters proposed
to be dealt with by the Federal Council can
now be dealt with by living upon fair and
equitable terms with our neighbours, and
by making the laws common within this
colony to apply to Victoria, and the laws of
Victoria to apply to New South Wales. All
the advantages named in the items I have
read can be obtained without federation.
Even an alliance for defe~sive purposes-
[Mr. Dibbs.
Australian Federation.
upon which the whole question at this mo-.
ment hangs, because it was brought about by
the report of lVIa:jor-General Ed wards-can
he made with the different colonies, equally·
as well as if we were federated to-morrow.
Mr. SLATTERY: And still_ keep our independence!
Mr. DIBBS: Yes; and still keep our
independence. I would like to say a few
words with regard to the report of MajorGeneral Edwards. Hon. members will
have seen that I have attached considerable importance to that report, ,and on
several occasions I have pressed the Premier for explanations in regard to it. I
hold that an attempt is being made by the
Premier to terrorise over the people. That
paper of Major-General Edwards, in which
he recommended that the Chinese fleet.
should be sent down to these shores, for
the purpose of intimidating the people of
New South Wales and of Australasia
generally, is unworthy of any English
gentleman._ A strong protest ought to be
made by this House to the Imperial Government against the issue, by an English
gentleman, of what certainly appeared to
me to be a coercive letter with the object
of carrying out.a certain scheme-I refer
to the letter of Major-General Edwards,
when he told the Premier that the Chinese
admiral ought to come and show the power
of China in these waters. What the Premier said in regard to that letter on Wed- .
nesday night, and what he said in reference to the Chinese fleet being sent to these
shores, is unworthy of himself, and is unworthy of our character as Englishmen.
That this colony with its 1,500,000 people
should be afraid of the Chinese nation - Mr. lVIELVILLE : Who says we are
afraid of them~
Mr. DIBBS: Hon. members should be
careful before making such statements to
ascertain what are the peculiar characteristics of the Chinese race. They are not
a colonising race; they are a race who
actually do their utmost to prevent other
Chinese people leaving the shores of China
for the purpose of settling here. And yet
we are to be intimidated with the idea
that the Chinese Government, if we separate from England, will send a strong
power to chastise· us for our treatment of
the Chinese in days gone by. I take it
that any attempt to coerce this Parliament and these people by the publication
Aust1·alian Fedemtion.
[14 MAY, 1890.]
through the press of letters from any
British general is a disgrace to that
general; and it is unworthy of the British
empire to keep within its pale any officer
who writes such letters for such a purpose as the letter written by MajorGeneral Edwards. What I say is that
we need never be afraid of the Chinese.
The people will defend their shores against
tho whole of the Chinese nation if it is
brought against them. \Ve have a sen,bound coast, and we can band together to
defend· ourselves. I say again that it is a
shameful thing for the premier of any
country to use a coercive letter of this
kind for the purpose of attempting to
influence the votes of hon. members.
With regard to this question of federation
I have stated as clearly and emphatically
as language can be used that I am in favour
of federation. I do not believe that the
federation proposed by the Premier will be
successful; but I believe in another form
of federation, which may be a long time
coming, but whiCh may be closer than we
are aware of-a federation and union by
which the whole of Australasia shall he one
nation. I believe that in the meantime it'
is better for us to leave well alone, that it
is better for us to remain a dependency of
England, a,nd to remain an independent
state; but at the same time that it would
be wise for the Yarious colonies to enclea·voul', without each forfeiting its independence, to bring about a common form of
legislation with regard to various matters,
and even to euter into an alliance for defence purposes in the event of an attack
by a foreign enemy, or a Chinese fleet. I
have therefore given and will girn to any
proposal to bring about federation the
strongest possible support I can. I think
I have now made clear beyond question,
even to the Premier himself, what my views
are as to what federation shoul<l be, and I
conclude by simply saying that while this
may be the birth-place of the Premier's
children, or it may not, I speak as a native,
and I believe I voice the sentiments of
every Australian-born son of the soil when
I say that our ambition, our aspiration,
and our hope is to see the flag of the
Southern Cross flying, notonly over united
Australia, but over .A.ustralia united as one
grand nation.
Mr. WANT : I think I need make no
apology for addressing the House at a
Australian Federation.
415
very early period in this debate. My
reason for doing so is that I intend to
offer my most strenuous opposition to the
resolution of tl1e Premier. As I intend
as much as I can-and I nse the word in
a friendly way-to attack the speech of
the Premier, I do so at an early stage in
order that the hon. member's colleagues
and those who intend to support the resolution may have something to answer, if I
may presume to say so. I notice that
among the first words used by the Premier he said :
If there shonl<l be a party in this House who
consider it t.heir duty to oppose this motion,
who may consider it their duty to do their utmost to prevent any resolution of the kind from
being carried, I am not here to complain of their
perfect right to exercise their freedom of action.
I am exceedingly glad that he put forward
that statement, because it enables me to
take a stand on what I consider to be a.
great constitutional question without, if I
rnay say so, offending the Government»
and without their making it a party question ; and I shall be able to approach it in
such a manner that I shall not be considered.
in any way to be making a personal attack ..
I propose to deal with this question in two·
different ways. First of all, perhaps with
a professional view as a lawyer, I will proceed to show that the hon. member's speech
is almo$t not worthy of attention, to show
that there is nothing in it to support the
arguments lie has advanced, to show that
his arguments are not genuine; that the
speech-if I may say so without offenceis not what mm;t have come from his heart.
Although he may think it is a right step
to t:lke, the reasons given in his speech
for taking that step are not the reasons..
which actuated him in bringing forward:
this suhject. It seems a strange thing·
that in a country with a constitutional go-Yernment like this, in a house representing
the colony as this House does, .that we
should have sat here during the whole of
last year in peace and quietness without
disturbance, first of all up to October,
during the long sittings during which the
Opposilion behaved in a most admirable
manner towards the Government, and that
we sboulJ not have beard one solitary
word of this great constitutional question
in our own House. But, forsooth, it remained for the head of the Government to
leave the House in complete darkness as
to these proposals, and to go into a distant
Second. night.
•
£ .AWi
1,i"l'fi:)"V'
~
416
[.A~SEMBL)'..]
A iistralian Federatio1i. ·
~cl-I
...
..
...
Australian Federation.
-
might almost say a foreign coun• show the House reasons wl1y we should·
try, and announce to the people there- not federate. I shall begin, first of all, by.
not to our own people - his intention a reference to the hon. meniber's speech in
to bring about this great constitutional 1884. I had hot the honor of a seat in
change. It is an open secret and there the House then; but I have been told. 'by
was an ominous silence when the state- not less than three or four gentlemen that·
ment was made to-night, that not one of they came into this House prepared to
the hon. member's colleagues knew what support the Federal Council resolutions ;
was going to take place-it is an open but after having listened to the speech ·of
secret that not only did they not know it, the hon. member, who then addressed the
but they bad no idea of what were going :flouse in one of the ablest speeches,· I be"
to be the lines on which that federation lieve, he ever m_ade, they were so convinced·~·.·
•vas to be based when the Premier made by him that they voted against the prq~ ·
his speech at Tenterfield. So much was posals of the Government. Now, let me
that the fact that we had a speech from read what the hon member said :
the Colonial Treasurer, which has been
I do not intend to follow his speech; but I
quoted by the hon. member for The :&for- shall try to state, in as few words as I can, but·
rumbidgee, showing that the Colonial Trea- with sufficient fulness to be understood, why I
think this country would be better served, and
surer would not consent to federation if the
cause of real federation better advanced, by
the free-trade principles, which he has our having nothing to do with this measure at
so
long
and
so
bravely,
were
to
advocated
the present time. I will try to describe what,
be trespassed upon. ViTe had it stated as far as I can learn, is the position of things at
present time. From what I have said it will
boldly and plainly, not in one, but in a the
be seen that there is a much fuller growth of
number of addresses, that he would not public opinion upon this question ; that there
listen to federnt.ion unles8 it were based on has been a great progress of national sentiment
free-trade principles. But, forsooth, we · in favour of federf).tion; but that at the same
had it stated a few months afterwards by time there is still a great conflict of opinion ;
that the question is surrounded by perplexities
the Premier :
which have in no sense yet been mastered. Take
I have stated· that to the utmost of my power,
when the sen,son justified my undertaking the
course, I should still advocate the doctrines of
free-trade. I have stated, moreover, that supposing in the federal parliament a majority represented the doctrine of protection, I should
as a good citizen submit.
,..
.
I submit, with the greatest possible re·Spect to the Premier, that if these federation proposals were to be made. at all-if
he had studied this matter, and given it
mature consideration-we should have had
them announced in this House, and not in
another colony. · The mere fact of that
not being done convinces me that it was
a mere fad, taken up, perhaps, on the
steamer on the way to Brisbane, without.
being properly thought out. I think I
shall convince this House, and almost
· the hon. member himself, that he never_
intended to do anything ·of the kind, and
that nothing was further from his thoughts
until he got this celebrated letter, threatening us with an invasion by the Chinese
fleet---:that he never thought of it until
this imperial officer, no doubt a worthy
one, came down here and said, " You
must federate for defence purposes." I
propose, first of all, .to answer the hon.
member's speech.; and then I propose to
:. [¥1"'. Want.
·
·
our own population. My hon. friend, Sir John
lfobertson, who has bad so mnch to do with the
government of this country, and who has sat
through all our parliaments, is evidently opposed
to federation altogether.
Sir John Robertson: Hear, hear!
Sii· Henry Parkes: And perhaps throughout
the population of this colony there is no man of
more powerful intellect, of more capacity to
grasp large qµestions, thal\ the present Chief
Justice, and Sir Jam es Martin bas made no secret
of the fact that he is altogether opposed to
federation. He believes that federation would
be a great injury instead of a good to these
colonies. I know that that is his opinion; I
have heard it expressed times out of number.
Here, then, are two instances of men who have
occupied very conspicuous positions in the country-who, bY. their large infltience, are calculated
to lead public opinion, and who are entirely
opposed to federation.
That speech was made in 1884-only a
few short years ago ; and to-clay we find
the same hon. member without rhyme or
reason, without plan or forethought, coming into this House and asking us to ·take
this leap into the dark, and to federate
on a·basis which he tells ti"s nothing about.
.And all this has come about without con~
sultaiion with his colleagues, without consultation with the House, without the hon.·
gentleman letting us into his secrets, bu~
.•.:
..
~~·,,..·:"":.'fl?:W'. ~' ~·~· ~: f- -r.:·. ·r:·- ..·.·
r
. , ..•'"
/
.
''
'ii
.A itstralicm ·Federation.
[14 MAY, 1890.]
.keeping them until be got to Queensland.
of hon. members to something said during the debate
ta.which I have referred. It seems to me
that it was a remark very well made and
very apt to the present time. The hon.
member said :
·r would draw the attention
The fact is that it has become fashionable to
talk about federation.
That is the case now-it has become
fashionable to talk about federation.
And I think that I have shown that there is a
great difference of opinion among the best men
as to the possibility of federation.
I think there has been too much sentiment; and on this point, perhaps, I may
·be permitted to quote from the report of
the proceedings of the late conference. Sir
J. G. Lee Steere, who happened to rub
up against the Premier, said :
I think, if I may say so without offence, that
the debate that has hitherto taken place has had
rather too much of an academic character, and
has been a little too full of sentiment. ·we
should now take the more practical view of the
question. I have heard a great deal during the
last few days about federation being in the air.
I think there is a great deal of federation in the
air.· \Ve want to grasp it and bring it down to
the earth, in order that we may grapple with
it, and try to remove the difficulties which lie
in the way.
A gentleman who was just as straightforward in his utterances at the conference, let us a little deeper into the secret.
He said:
"' e have hearrl them compared to a lion
standing in the way, to an opossum, and-after
ideas had grown big at grand banquets"-to an
elephant.
These are the gentlemen whom the Premier S<tys adopted in all its entirety the
speech which he delivered· at the conference.
I believe the illustration of the mountain
would be more correct, feeling sure that on examination it will bring forth only a ridiculous
mouse.
That is what I believe it will bring forth
here. We shall find nothing more when
this thing is finished than that the mountain has been in labour and has produced
a mouse. I said just now, and I did so
advisedly-and it has been clearly and
honestly pufby the leader of the Opposition, who has been left out in the coldthat we are asked now to take a leap in
the dark with a vengeance. We are not
told upon wLat basis, or upon what principle the delegates are to go to the conven-
Australian Federation.
tion, or on what lines we are to federate~
And I would remind hon. members that
when once they send delegates to the conference, they adopt the principle, and
when the delegates have pledged the Parliament to certain resolutions, it will be no
use to turn round and say,. "We will not
adopt those resolutions." The Premier
has told us that he put ver_v clearly before
the conference the lines upon which he
proposed to proceed. These were his exact
words:
The conference under8tood wh,at I wanted, for
the motion I submitted was cn,rried unanimously,
and it was seconded by, I suppose, the most
brilliant of the advocates of protection, l\lr.
Deakin.
Now, I should like to draw the hon. me~­
ber's attention to what nlr. Deakin said.
On reading that gentleman's speech, I find
these words :
A considerable section of the Victorian public
will require to know how the new proposals will
affect their own interests before they commit
themselves to federation.
I say. the same with regard to the ·people
here. Apparently l\lr. Deakin was not
satisfied, for further on I find him saying:
But it does not alter the general statement I
have made with perfect accuracy, that the whole
of the. people of Victoria are moved by a desire
for federation, merely because numbers of them
will need, before they gh·e that feeling sway, to
see that their interests are properly p1 eservcd
and adequately protected.
That is what Victoria wants to know, and
that is what I want to know, and what
the House would like to know. Before
we pledge ourselves to this convention, let
us know what we are going to ha\-e. The
Premier, speaking of the hon. member for
The Murrnmbiclgee, and referring to some
of that hon. gentleman's speeches made up
country somewhere, said he would not appoint him to the conference because he
had expressed sentiments in favour of
separation, and he did not want any one
to go to the conference with ideas of that
kind. The exact words the hon. gentleman used were these :
"'ell, this convention is not convened for any
such purpose as that. This convention is not
convened, and gentlemen arc not asked to take
their seats upon it, to frame a declaration of in·
dependence.
In a speech delivered by the hon. gentleman himself I find these words :
'When they were in their cradles the Constitution was in its cradle, and they know nothing of
what went before, Are they likely to be content
Second night.
..
A ustral·ian Federation,
[ASSEMBLY.]
to see a rickety body such as is pourtmyed in
this bill take away their more important functions, and exerci~e a power over the most important field of legislation? It can never be so.
vVe are free. The class of men to whom I allude
have never known anything but freedom, and if
this bill became law, it is very unlikely that
they would tolerate it for a single year; when
they saw it working, they would not tolerate it.
Am I now starnling here as an opponent of federation? I h:we the firmest belief that, as time
rolls on, there must be some new relations with
the empire, or we must split and set up for ourselves.
That is what the hon. member is reported
to have saicf only six years ago, and yet
we find him now oujecting to the hon.
.member for The Murrumbidgee sitting
upon the conference because he made a
.speech which only tended in that direc·tion. I find in the letter to l\fr. Gillies,
and in the hon. member's speech the other
night, this statement :
The scheme of fecleml go,·ernmcnt, it is
assumed, would naturally follow close upon the
type of the Dominion Governme:it of Canada.
'",.
We are told that much-that we are to
haYe a constitution after the type of the
Dominion GoYernment of Cilnada. I took
the trouule to see what the Premier said
on the former occasion, to which I have
referred, in regard to the Dominion of
Canada, and I think the hon. member
will foel a little startled when he hears
the quotation, because if his views and·
intentions are genuine one can hardly
believe that he is the good citizen and
colonist we have al ways thought him to be.
This was what he said :
Now, we will turn to the Dominion of Canada.
Much has been said of the example of the federation of C:mada, and I lun-e said on former occasions that it wa~ not such a great success as
people at a distance supposed that it was. I
hold in my hand a copy of the Norlh American
Review for July last. The ability of that review
is pretty well known, and the fairness of its
articles is generally admitted. There is an
article in this number of the review which shows
us how very 'far from successful is the confederation of Canada.
I believe I am indebted to the Government of which the hon. member is the
head for a number of extracts from English papers, and amongst these is one from
a paper which is well known and pretty
extensively read-the St. James' Gazette.
It is as follows : If there is to be an Australian people, insteall
of merely a collection of small provinces, there
must be a common central government for
common purposes. It is, perhaps, not quite so
[ 11fr. IVant.
Australian Federation.
clear why the system of union should be federal.
Federalism is very much in favour just now ;
but it is nowhere a complete success, and in one
or two places it has proved uncommonly like a
failure. The excuse for ad!lpting it in the case
of a number of distinct states like those which
constituted the original American Union, or a
number of districts separated by racial and religions differences, as was the case in Canada, is
sufficiently valid ; but where you have a population practically homogeneous, inhabiting regions
not divided from one another by very strongly
marked natural or physical peculiarities, it
might at least be argued that there is no particular occasion to stereotype the somewhat
cumbrous and awkward federal arrangement.
These natural and physical differences do
not exist here, and why should we be called
upon to adopt, as a basis of government,
one which the hon. member has denounced
and condemned in the strongest terms,
and which is here described as "a cumbrous and awkward federal arrangement,"
and in the face also of what the Premier
said in 1884 in condemnation of the system
as applied to the Dominion of Canada 1
I have looked to see if there was any
other reason that the hon. member at the
head of the Government could give for
adopting these plans of federation. I find
in his speech delivered the other night
these words :
Then, again, there are the fair lands lying
out in all directions on the face of the Pacific.
It is almost a misleading term to call these
islands the South Sea Islands. Some of them
are extensive, beautiful, and fertile lands, capable of high cultivation, and capable of sustaining large populations. The~e countries must
develop steadily. They must advance in civilisation ; they must ad ranee in the acquisition of
the industrial arts, and as the result of all this
advancement there must grow up a large and
valuable commerce. To whom does that commerce rightfully belong so much as to Australia?
I thought I would look to see what the
hen. gentleman said before. Would any
one believe the same venerable statesman
uttered these words ~
The proposal itself to take up all the islands
in the Pacific was the proposal of a madman.
What right ha,-e we to take up the islands of the
Pacific? It was very fair for us to try and
get possession of New Guinea beca.use of its
proximity to th"l Australian coast-because it
belongs, as it were, to the family of the Australasian colonies; but what occasion have we to
seek dominion over the other islands of the
Pacific?
Then we were madmen if we touched it;
but to-night, with a magic wave of the
pen-with a thought passing through his
mind-we are all to join in the great
Australian Fede1·ation.
[14 MAY, 1890.]
array of madmen, and be sent to the new
lunatic asylum at Broken Hill. I listened with great pleasure to the hon. gentleman's brilliant peroration, and I listened
with all the more pleasure because the
previous part of it, to my mind, had been
deYoicl of anything in "the way of information. ·But I find in the peroration of 1884
these words :
\iT e in no way affect him or his government,
or cause him to commit auy breach of faith by
refusing to have anything to do with them. Depend upon it the best way, considering in what
a proud position we stand now-as free as any
country in the world, with power to govern ourselves, with power to maintain au attitude
which commands the respect of great nationsconsidering the proud position in which we
stand we had better avoid joining in making a
spectacle before the world which will cover us
with ridicule if we adopt these resolutions.
Now, it is hard to believe that if the
hon. gentleman had really considered this
matter he would propose to this House
that we should adopt a resolution which
would have the effect of making a spectacle of us, and covering us with ridicule
before the face of the whole world.
l\Ir. DrnBs : Was it the same man~
JHr. WANT : It 'vas Sir Henry Parkes.
Somebody has said that there was a difference between the Federal Council and this
proposal for federation. I want to know
what it is. 'Ve have not been told what
this is. vV e kno~v what the Federal
Council was proposed to do, and I find
that its objects were almost the same as
this proposal is to bring abcut. I find
that the hon. gentleman again in 1884
said this. First of all he quotes from an
article in the JYorth Americcm Review:
A very serious matter is the dissatisfaction and alarm
excited in the province of Ontario, the backbone of the
dominion, by the centmlising policy of Sir John A.
Macdonald's administration. Immedin.tely after condemning federal interference "ith the license ln.w and other
sub!ects claimed to belong exclusively to provincial jurisd1ct1011, the Ontario GoYcrnment induced the lco-islaturc
to pass stron_g rcsoluti?ns ~ensuring and protcs.ting' against
the assumption of their rrulways by the central anthority.
I quote these facts to sbo~ that in the case of
a confederation which we had been led to believe was most successful, there are breakers
ahead ; that there are sources of weakness internally, and to show more clearly how cautious
we ought to be in anything we do on this question of federation. I think that I have shown
how difficult was the work of federation, even
where the necessity for it was great-in a country which was at war, which had to enter upon
a life or death struggle to preserve its recently
won liberties. In the young republic of America
there was every inducement for federation, and
the most powerful intellects of the country set
Australian Federation.
419
to ~ork ~nd constructed a form of government
which failed. In Canada, where the conflict of
interest~ is very remarkable, where, among
?ther thmgs, there w'.ls the danger of absorption
mto the great republic on the other side of the
St. Lawrence, the inducement for a general confederation W:J.S very strong ; but after a few
years have rolled by, we find that weaknesses
show themselves in that confederation which
according to some writers, cannot last. I think
that I have shown how great aud bow difficult
is the work of fe1leratiou ; I think that I have
shown that the feeling in favour of federation in
these colonies is, comparatively speaking, newborn and unmatured, that it is to a large extent
copied, one voice from another, that it is not the
~esult of deep and continuous thought ; that it
1s not the result of t.he labours, as in America,
of the best men of the colonies.
Then the hon. member goes on to say :
The fact is, it has become fashionable to talk
about federation.
Now, I think 1 lrnal'd one hon. member
say, "This is a lawyer's speech." '\Veil,
I am dealing with arguments which have
been used for the purpose of convincing
people-for the purpose of trying to lead
them on a certain path ; and if I can show
that the whole of the speech delivered the
other night is in an exactly opposite t~e to
one delivered by the same hon. gentleman
only six yea1·s ago-if I can show that the
proposals putforward herewP.re condemned
by him with no uncertain voice only six
years ago-if I can show that the basis of
this federation is to be, as the hon. gentleman has told us in such plain language,
an abuse and a failure, surely I have the
right to argue from that that the speech
is not to be relied upon; to ask those who
have been carried away by it to·refcr to
the previous very eloquent speech the hon.
gentleman made, and then say if they can
put any reliance in the statements made in
ihe speech the other night. No one can
suppose that the high position of the hon.
member-his great knowledge of statesmanship, his knowledge of the colony, and
the deep researches he has made-will not
have an effect on other, and especially
younger men who listened to him ; and,
therefore, it is only fair, if any man can
show that that speech ought not to have
the effect which it might have-if he can
show that the facts are nnreliable, the
arguments illogical-t)lat he should resist
the attempt to force this. proposal clown
the throats of Parliament without proper consideration. There are some other
reasons I should like to give why hon.
Second night.
420
A itStralian Federation.
[ASSEMBLY. J
members should not swallow this dose of
physic wholesale. I find the hon. member
said the other night in this House :
~.·
And now, if the House will forgive me, I will
·dwell for "' moment on some objections which I
·have occasionally heard-objections that we
would be giving up the individual power and
authority and independence of N ewSouth \'i' ales.
In what way will New South Wales be less
self-governed and less independent than she is
now?
J, will give the answer to that in the words
of Mr. Macrossan, one of the gentlemen
present at the conference, who made the
best speech that was made there-the most
practical and the most straightforward.
I will tell the hon. member at the head of
the Government what New South Wales
is to give up. I will show how it was
foreshadowed by those who attended that
conference. He is not going to have it
all his own way at the convention. He is
to meet men from the different colonies,
who will fight their battles for their colonies just as hard as he will fight his. I
will show how New South Wales, in the
opinion of the gentlemen who attended the
conference, is going to be less independent, and less self-governed. This is what
Mr. 1\1acrossan said :
I believe also that power should be given to
the federal parliament-as it is given to the Imperial Parliament-to cut up, if thought necessary, the different existing colonies of Australia,
and form them into smaller states. - -
I suppose he would create us a colony
down at Manly Beach.
I consider that the colonies of Australia are too
large for good government. Some of the existing colonies, such as Queensland, South Australia, and \Vestern Australia, are far too large
for good government.
jJfr. Playford: No !
Mr. Macrossan: I do not say South Australia
only-New South \Vales is also too large.
What does that mean 1 Cannot hon. gentlemen see what is likely to happen 1 I
will tell the Premier what will happen.
South Australia will get Broken Hill and
our silver-mines, Victoria will get Rive1·ina, Queensland will take our sugar lands,
and we shall be left with a ridge of mountains and nothing else to govern. The
Premier wanted to know what we were to
give up. I find in the speech of Sir J. G.
Lee Steere, at the conference, some very
• startling facts. It has been asked whether
we are going to amalgamate all our assets
and national debts. This gentleman, much
[Mr. Want.
Australian Federation.
to the disgust of a good many of the delegates, said :
If we followed! the lead of Canada, the federal
go,·ernment would take all the customs duties.
There can be no doubt about that.
\Vould the customs duties produce an amount
sufficient to pay the interest on the public debt
alone?
He then goes into figures showing that the
joint. nati'.:mal debt of the colonies upon
which we are going to pay interest on
lower terms would amountto£168,000,000.
The interest, he says, would amount to
£6,365,000. And if we deduct that from
the intercolonial duties, which in a very
brotherly way we are going to abolish, there
will be £2,000,000 left. No attempt was
made to explain away these figures. Sir
J. G. Lee Steere pointed out that we
should have nothing with which to carry on
the government of the country. I have
endeavoured to ascertain the sources from
which the federal government will obtain
its money. We know that Victoria has
no land from which it can be obtained.
\.Vho is going to make up the deficiency
for her 1 ·I know where it will come from
-it will come from this colony. Our area
is 195,882, 150 acres. ·Of this, 26,026,057
acres have been alienated, and 17,57 4,059
acres are in process of alienation, leaving
an unsold area of 152,282,034 acres. An
area of 137,698,939 acres is under lease,
and 14,583,095 acres are ,reserved or unoccupied. The area contributing to revenue, made up of the land under lease
and in process of alienation, is 155,272,998
acres. The whole of this revenue would
go towards helping Victoria. That would
be a very pleasant way tor Victoria to
manage her government and obtain her
revenue. It was suggested some time ago
that a very good way of managing the
matter would be to let all the land in New
South Wales form a common fund for the
paying of all expenditure necessary between Victoria and New South Wales. I
believe that opinion was expressed by Mr.
Service some years ago.
Mr. DIBBS: No ; by Sir Graham Berry!
Mr. WANT: I thought it was Mr.
Service. Now, I want to say a few words
to hon. members on this side of the Romie
who, at one time, were pretty loud in
their denunciation of me when I was a
member of a free-trade ministry. I am
Australian Federation.
[14 MAY, 1890.]
·the solitary remnant of that free-trade government. I remember how in this House,
night after night, the hon. gentleman at
the head of the Government, and a great
many others who were just as staunch
free-traders, were crying out that the Government were sneaking in protection.
We had the hon. gentleman at the head
of the Government going to North Shore
and talking of "this creature protection."
I admired the hon. gentleman for it. He
·has fought the battle well and strongly.
"\Ve have stuck well together, fighting
through overwhelming difficulties. "\Ve
had to make the people of the country believe how bad a thing it would be to let
this creature come in. I ask hon. members
who profess to be staunch to the principles
of free-trade, what they mean by allo,ving
their two representatives at the recent
conference in Melbourne-the Premier and
the Colonial Treasurer-to say, "If you
like to vote for protection, we will become
protectionists"~ The Colonial Treasurer
has flaunted the free-trade flag higher and
more frequently than any other man in the
country. So much so, that I have often said
of him that his free-trade is free-trade gone
· mad. Then, again, we have had the Premier alluding to those who are opposed to
him in fiscal matters as ignorant people,
and he has talked of putting his foot down
and crushing the creature protection. But
in order to bring this new bantling into
the world-this fad in which the lion; the
opposum, and the elephant are all mixed
up-the hon. gentleman is going to sacrifice the principle for which we have fought
so hard, and is about to embrace the crea- ·
ture which he has hitherto talked of
crunching under his heel. What did these
gentlemen say in Melbourne~ If there
was a ma:jority against them, they would
embrace protection. The other day, in
Queensland, Sir Samuel Griffith, before
attending the conference, said it would
be utterly impossible, on account of the
fiscal difficulties, to attempt federation.
But when he returned from the conference
he had changed his mind. He said that
since hearing Sir Henry Parkes and Mr.
McMillan declare that if the federal par. liament liked to have protection, they
would join in, all the difficulties of the
· situation had disappeared.
Mr. McMILLAN : Where does the hon.
· member find that~
,., .
'J.~
A iistmlia1i Federation.
Mr. WANT: I find it in a speech by
Sir Samuel Griffith. I will refer the hon.
member, if he likes, to the speech in which
he himself said that if the majority were
in favour of it, he would agree to frectrade between the colonies, and protection
against the world.
Mr. McMILLAN: Sir Samuel Griffith
did not use the language which the hon.
member attributes to him !
·
Mr. WANT : I do not pretend to
quote his exact words. I give in effect
what he said. He said in effect that Sir
Henry Parkes and Mr. McMillan had determined to embrace "the creature protection."
Sir HENIW PARKES : I challenge the
hon. and learned member to find those
words!
Mr. WANT : What <lid the hon. gentleman himself say the other night i
I have stated that, to the utmost of my power,
when the season justified my undertaking the
course, I should still advocate the doctrines of
free-trade. I have stated, moreover, that, supposing in the federal parliament a majority represented the doctrine of protection, I should as
a good citizen submit; but I should still live in
the hope that that policy would be reversed.
Over and over again the free-traders have
said-I have said it-and no one more
emphatically than the hon. gentleman at
the bead of the Government-that once
we got protection we should never get rid
of it. How, then, will the hon. gentleman
live to see the clay when, having obtained
protection through a federal parliament,
we shall see the back of it 1
·
Mr. IirnLIS : We shall get a better instalment of free-trade through federation
than we are likely to obtain by keeping
separate!
Mr. WANT : Then, the hon. gentleman
ought not to be a party to sending the
Premier and the Colonial Treasurer to a
conference to profess their willingness to
accept protection. If they meant what
they said, it is clear that they intended to
accept protection ; if they did not mean
what they said, we were simply misleading the conference. If they do not mean
that, they are only attempting to mislead.
I should like to know what chance the
free-traders have got 1 I appeal to those
who have not been led away by this faclI appeal to those who have fought the
battle of free-trade, and who jeered at me
by stating that I was attempting to" sneak
Second night.
•
"422
,A ustra1ian Fe&ration.
[ ASSE_:.MBLY.]
in" protection by the imposition of a 5
per cent. duty-not to sancti0n this proceeding, and to give away at one swoop
what we have been fighting for. Dr.
Cockburn, I find, says :
But as the question of a customs union has
been so often raised, and as our arguments here
are partaking very strongly of a free-trade character, I should just like to know this-: is it the
impression of any member here that when the
federation of Australia is consummated it is to
be a vindication of the principle of free-trade?
Both the PrP.mie1· and the Colonial Treasurer sat perfectly quiet under this, and
there was no interruption. Dr. Cockburn
continues:
I take it· that any such hope is for ever past
when the federation of Australia -is consummated. " 7 hen, as a portion of that federation,
the hostile custom-houses on the borders of the
different colonies are removed, it will not be a
vindication of the principle of free-trade, but
rather the institution of a more complete system
of protection-the apotheosis of a strong protective policy. I think it is just as well that this
should be understood. The voice of South Australia has pronounced emphatically, aud by a
large majority, in' favour of that protection
without which the.history of the world presents
no example as far as my reading has been able
to show of a nation which has risen into prosperity.
1\Ir. I~GLIS : Does the hon. member believe that~
nir. WANT : No ; I do not believe it;
and the hon. gentleman at the head of the
Government does not believe it, and the
Colonial Treasurer does not believe it..
Nevertheless, forsooth, they go down on
their hands and knees alrr,ost, and say
they will accept protection, although they
do not belie\·e in it. The promisr. of tbe
Premier has been clearly giYen that if a
majority are in favour of protection he
will go away from his free-trade principles, and he will adopt free-trade between
the colonies, with protection against the
outside world. The Colonial Treasurer's
words were also "free-trade between the
colonies, and protection against the outside
world." I am certain of this, that you
cannot play more perfectly or completely
into the hands of the protectionists of this
colony than by bringing about federation.
I have already stated that our revenue
would go towards conducting the business
of ot.her colonies; and I would now like
to ask the Premier how he proposes to
deal with the question of railways 1 I
should like to know, as the hon. member
[Jfr. Want.
A iisfralian Federation.
for The l\'.Iurrumbidgee puts it, what is to
become of our assets 1 We know that our
railway revenues are amongst the largest
we possess. Hon. members know that we
have spent millions of money in taking our
lines of railway over barren country-over
mountain ridges, where there is not sufficient grown to feed a bandicoot. Do not·
hon. members know th"at our railways do - •
not pay until they reach a distance of
about 150 miles inland 1 What is to be.come of these railways if we become associated with Victoria 1 Do not hon. members know that at present we have to put
on differential rates to pre\·ent Victorian
goods coming to our towns, aucl to prevent
our own produce and wool going to Victoria7
And I should like to know what will happen if we take off these differential rates and
take Victoria into our embrace~ If we are
going to have protection at all, let us have
it fair and square; bnt I do uot believe in
a protection which will give up everything
we have, and allow us to get nothing in
return.
Our railroads have been constructed through such country, and on
such levels, that if they belong to one
common colony everything from Cootamundra downwards would go to Melbourne. The whole of our at present productive lines would carry our produce to
Victorian shores, and we should be left
with railroads over barren mountains.
The same remark applies in regard to
Queensland.
Queensland would derive
the benefit of the enormous expense we
have gone to, and we should obtain nothing in return. We should lose our lands
revenue; we should be jeered at as being a
small colony; we should have our revenue
taken from us; and, in addition to that,
we should haYe to adopt what the bead of
the Government bas termed "this creature
protection"; and all this for what1 Where
is the necessity for it~ What about the
fisl1eries, forsooth ! The .lunatic asylums
I leave out of the question. \Ve all
know, however, that this question of
fisheries arises; and to what ruarket are
we taking fish now 1 We have only onr
own markets. Do hon. members•suppose
that any one would qome to this colony
to take fish to Germany 1 Do hon. rnem·
bers think we would have Chinese fisl1ing.smacks coming in to take fish to Hongkong 1 Should we have any of these
racial disputes, as they have in Canada,
.
A iistralian Federation.
[14 MAY, 1890.]
. Aitstralian Federation.
'423
and these sectarian diRputes which they a trap, and the danger which would sut-.
have in the other colonies 1 No! What round us by federating with colonies which
outside enemy have we to face 1 \Vhat have got nothing of their own, and which
11ave we threatening us here which should want to share what we possess-if they
force· us into the dominion which the· will consider these things for half the
states have been forced into i
Hon. length of time it took the Premier to demembers all know of the troubles which liver his speech-they will pause before
made Canada and the United States fede- committing themselves to the motion
rate. We know what made Switzerland wl1ich h:i.s been placed before the House.
federate, and we know what made GerlVIr. R. B. WILKINSON : We have
many federate. It was not because of a listened just now to a Yery lond·sounding
fad ; not because they wn,nted to indulge speech; but I venture to say that when
in humbugging sentiment; but because hon. mem hers come to analyse the subthey had dangers at their doors, and they stance of that speech, they will find it is
federated, in a common danger, for their composed of sound and fury somewhat,
own protection. vVe have no such danger. signifying nothing. With regard to the
Time enongh to federate when the danger speech of the leader of the Opposition, he
threatens.
has completely relieved my mind of a very
serious difficulty. If there is a justificaHoN. MEilIDERS: No, no!
· Mr. \VANT : Time enough to fedemte tion for the action of the Preruier in exwhen clanger threatens; I repeat it. The cluding that hon. gentleman from the
only federation we would want then would convention, we have it in the speech of
be, not a federation of lunatic asylums, but the hon. gentleman to·night. I thought
a foderation simply for defensive purposes; at first, when I found that tlrn hon.
and why cannot we do that to.morrow if member had Leen excluded from the conwe require to do it 1 If we can pass a re- vention, that the Premier had made a
solution to federate for defensive purposes, very serious mistake. I thought lie had
we can also pass an act of Parliament to thrown an obstacle in the wfty of federafedetate for defensive purposes. Do not tion, by creating party spirit_: lmt the
hon. members know that absconding speech we listened to to-night., from the
debtors can, by arrangement, be taken hon. member himself, if it means anything
from one colony to another ; and that at all, means that the hon. gentleman is
judgments obtained in one colony can be opposed to federn.tion, at all events, in the
enforced in anothed And, if we are all sense in which I hone we mean federation.
to become soldiers ; if we are to have the He is entirely and distinctly opposed to a
tramp of armed men, and loud-sounding union under the Crown, and I hope we
trumpets-those glorious pageantries of ha>e not come to that state yet, when we
war--what difficulty will there be in intro- are prepared to "cut the painter" from
ducing au act of Parliament for that pur- the old country. He compares us to the
pose~ Then, when the time comes that we
American colonies when they federated.
are to be attacked by the Chinese nation, He says we are stronger than they were.
we shall have our defences all in order ; We are very much stronger; but why
and I have no doubt that if we say a few should we weaken our position by separatkind words to Major-General Edwards he ing from the old country, when we Jia,·e no
will come down and show us how to fight. earthly excuse for it~ No one Yiews
I submit I have shown that we have. with greater respect, or ho.s a, greater
everythi1?g to lose and nothing to gain. I
reverence than myself for those men who
think I ha.ve shown that we have not been framed the Constitution of the Ameritold upon what basis we are going to can states-those men who were forced
federate. The Premier would have us into rebellion.
I venture to say that
believe that we can only becorri'e a nation if those men who were absolntPly <friven
by swallowing the proposals which eman- into rebellion were present here toated from him whilst on his road to Queens- night, they would have laughed to scorn
land, and which are quite opposed to what the speecli of the hon. member for The
occupied his mind in 1884. If hon. mem- 1\1 urrumhidgee. \Ve Lase heard a very
bers will consider what we have to give great deal from the hon. member for Padup, and the danger we run of falling into dington, Mr. \Vant, as to the clangers of
. Second night.
.
~
42{
.-
A ust1·alian Fede1·ation.
[ASSEMBLY.]
· federation. We are to be absorbed by
Victoria, and by Queensland, and we are
to gain nothing. New South vVales is
to lose everything, and gain nothing by
federation. I hope before I· sit down to
show hon. members that New South Wales
will gain a very great deal by federation.
This is no doubt a question of very great
magnitude, of such great magnitude, and
so far-reaching in its consequenecs, not
only to these colonies, but to the home
Government, and to the nations of the
world, that we may well pause before
We are
we adopt these resolutions.
about to take upon ourselves national
life with all its responsibilities. We are
out of what is now a portion of the
British empire to create a nation, and
in doing that we shall not only alter
our relations with the sister colonies,
but we shall also have to take a very
different position with regard to the home
Government, and the other nations of
the world. However great these responsibilities may be, however far-reaching
and momentous the consequences of this
step may be, I hope that if the time
has come when it is for the good of the
colonies that we should federate, we shall
not hesitate to do our duty as members of
the British race to whom this grand continent has been bequeathed, and for the
good government of which we are responsible. I think that no one who has
watched the growth of national feeling in
these colonies, no one who has read the
speeches delivered by the delegates at the
Melbourne convention, or who has read
the press criticisms on them, can deny that
the colonies are ripe for federation. I go
further, and say that the colonies are not
only ripe forfederation; but we also incur a
very great danger by delaying federation.
Very many federal subjects are projecting
themseh-es upon us, subjects which must
be dealt with immediately, or we shall
have very great difficulty in dealing with
them at all. Such, for instance, as the
question of the national army and national
defence. I might tire hon. members by
shO\Ying them how very important these
questions are, and how dangerous delay
may be with regard to them. Then there
is t.he question of a uniform railway gauge.
I think it may be taken for granted that
all the colonies are in favour of a uniform
railway gauge, and at the rate at which
[.iJir. R. B. Wilkinson.
. . ·<,,:t
A ustmlian Fedemtion -
the colonies are pushing on the construction of their railways, every day's delay
will mean a very serious loss to all the
colonies. Then there is the question of
our nati<;mal debts. Every day's delay in
the consolidation of those debts will make
the operat.ion more -difficult, and in the
meantime we are losing the difference between the rate of interest at which we
could borrow on a federal security and the
rate at which we borrow money now.
With thfl exception of the debt of New
Zealand, I believe that our debts amount
to something like £135,000,000. If there
was a saving of even 1 per cent. in the
rate of interest that would mean an absolute gain to the colonies, if the debts
were consolidated, of £1,350,000 per
annum. There are other federal matterg
which are deserving of immediate attention, and which were so eloquently pointed
out by the Premier the other night. There
arethe question of the islands of the Pacific,
the question of fisheries, and numerous
other questions which are of very great
and pressing importance, and which can
be only dealt with by federal action. There
is also the question of our relations with
the home Government. Under federation
those relations would be very much si!"Ilplified, for then the colonies will speak
with ·a united voice to the home Government, which cannot mistake what the
meaning and wishes of the colonies are.
I can see very great danger of friction
arising with the home Government, particularly in dealing with the matter of Western
Australia. The action of the home Government with regard to that matter
should be suspended until federation is
It is a purely Australian
established.
matter, and it should be remitted to the
Australian federal parliament.
At all
events, great care should be taken that no
undue proportion of that immense territory should be allotted to the vV estern Australian Government, and the remainder of
the great sparsely-populated portion of it
should be handed over to the Australian
parliament to be dealt with by it, as
Canada and America treat the territories. I have stated sufficient reasons
to show that there is danger in delaying
federation; but perhaps the greatest danger of all is_ that the colonies are all
drifting apart.
The old tie of being
British subjects and British colonists,
.
;
'
Australian Federation.
[14 MAY, 1890.]
no matter in which colony residing, is
being lost, particularly in the native-born,
who are developing not only different
physical and mental characteristics, but
are also beginning to be imbued with a
kind of provincial patriotism. This was
well pointed out by Major Dane as
one of the things that struck him in his
travels in the Australian colonies. The
people are developing a provincial patriotism, and are beginning to look upon themselves as New South Welshmen, South
Australians, Victorians, and Queenslanders, rather than Australians. This
feeling must grow and be intensified by
the rivalries and jealousies amongst the
colonies with regard to trade and commerce, and by their different fiscal policies.
The longer we delay federation the more
that feeling will grow-the more the
colonies will drift apart, and the more
difficult will federation become. It has
been said by the leader of the Opposition
that we are not ready for federation, and
that we ought to prepare ourselves for it
by adopting a policy of provincialism and
restriction-that in fact we are to tax
ourselves to create interests antagonistic
to federation. And this in New South
\Vales-the free colony which is most
prepared for federation, and which has the
most to gain by it, as I shall presently
show. And these are the gentlemen who
called themselves nationalists ! They may
be Sydney nationalists. The speech of
the hon. member for Paddington was that
of a purely parochial Sydney nationalist.
They roay be Sydney nationalists, or possibly, according to their own lights, they
may consider themselves New South Wales
nationalists ; but they will never become
Australian nationalists. They talk of
nationalism, and have federation on their
lips, but in their hearts they are provincialists. Men do not gather grapes from
thorns, nor figs from thistles, and you
cannot gather federation from protection,
nor nationalism from provincialism. Mr.
Service very rightly said that the tariff is
the lion in the path of federation. New
South Wales has no lion in the path ;
then why should we tax ourselves to
increase our difficulties. -Again, it is
said that we must federate on a protectionist basis. I can hardly understand
what that means; but this I do understand-make what federal constitution
A usfralian Federation
425
you will, you must give the federal parliament control of the Customs. If we give
the federal parliament control of the Customs, what is the use of wasting time·
discussing and arranging the fiscal policy
which may be altered in the very first
session of the federal parliament i I cannot understand men talking so absurdly.
Now, with regard to the effect of federation on New South Wales, and in this
connection I would ask hon. gentlemen
to think how much of our trade now goes
to the other colonies. A large portion of
the trade of the southern Riverina country
goes to Victoria, and nearly the whole of
the trade of Broken Hill and its district
goes to South Australia. I liave often
wondered what would become of Melbourne
and Adelaide were it not for this trade.·
However, the trade goes to those colonies
and we lose control over it. How are we
to gain that control i Are we to do so by
putting export duties on silver and wool i
Are we to enact laws to compel the
management of the Broken Hill mines to
be domicil,cd in Sydney i Are we to put
import duties on the products of other
colonies sent to New South Wales i As
far as the treatment we have received
from the other colonies is concerned, we
should be perfect] y j nstified in adopting
either one of those courses. But the question is, would it pay us-would it bring
back the trade to us i No, sir. As long
as Broken Hill and Ri verina remain
where they are, so long, unless we\yant to
ruin them, must we lose all control of that
trade; and the only way in which we can
get it back is by federation. It has been
said by the hon. gentleman who has just
resumed his seat that New South "\Vales
has everything to lose and nothing to gain
by federation.
Mr. DOWEL : He is only the mouthpiece of Sir John Robertson !
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON: Precisely so. I
say that New South Wales has everything
to gain and nothing to lose by federation.
Look at the vast extent of our border line
with Queensland, South Australia, and
Victoria, and think of the enormous interests which have grown up, and are still
growing up, on that border line, interests
whose nearest ports are in the adjoining
colonies, and whose prosperity depends on
the facility with which the people can
reach those ports. I ask hon. gentlemen,.
Second. niglit.
426'..'
.Australian Federation.
(ASSEl\IBLY. J
11as any· other of the colonies interests
situated like those~
Mr. LYNE: 01}.r border line is not equal
in extent to that of Queensland !
1\Ir. R. B. WILKINSON : What I say
is that neither Queensland nor any of the .
other colonies has such large inten•sts
along its border line. 1 ask hon. members
what colony is there that will gain so
much by free intercourse as New South
Wales will, and federation mea.ns free
intercourse1 If federation means anything
at all, it means free-trade between the
colonies-that stumbling-block which is at
the bottom of the protection of half the
honest advocates of that policy on the.
other side of the House. They began with
retaliation, and now they are protectionists. But I say that federation means
free-trade between the colonies, for there
can be no real fednration so long as there
is a single custom-house on our borders.
Federation means this, and it means more.
It means that this wretched, petty, provincial, parochial system we haYe of
running our railways will be destroyed,
and that the railways will then be constructed and run in the interests of the
whole of Australia. I am not speaking
now of Sydney; but of the whole of New
South Wales, and I say this without fear
of contradiction-that New South ·wales
will never btl properly developed, nor
thoroughly prosperous until we get federation. I find that last year our trade with
the other Australian colonies amounted
to no less a sum than £21,349,606 or
£3,651,103 more than our trade with the
United Kingdom, and £14,597,601 more
than our trade with the rest of the world.
I say that we are already commercially
federated. The figures I have read show
the strength of that golden chain of commerce which binds us all together, notwithstanding the restrictions put upon our
trade with the other colonies. Remove
those restrictions, and you will increase
the trade between the colonies tenfold.
lVIore particularly will this be the case
with New South Wales, for -I find that
notwithstanding all the restrictions which
the other colonies ha Ye put upon our trade
they ha\·e had to take from us no less than
£10,701,982 worth of our produce. How
much more, then, will they take from us
if the restrictions with which our trade is
at present hampered are removed ~ I say
[.Mr. R. B., Wilkinson.
A iistralian Federation.
that New South ·Wales is too· large, that
her resources are too varied and widespread for her to be in a positioa to afford
a policy of isolation. \Ve are so dependent upon the prosperity of the other
colonies, and the other colonies arc so dependent upon us, we haYe so brgA an extent of the territory of ·this continent,
that it is a.bsolutely irnperatfre tha~ we
should have a voice, and a >ery large and
powerful voice, in the government of the
whole of Australia. It has been s:1id-I
have heard it argued outside-that federa~
tion means centralisation. Now, I assert
that federation means exactly the rcYerse.'
Federation means another redsion of the
powers of government. For umler federation the colonies will be able to take
upon themselves collectively powers which
they cannot exercise individually. Federation, in fact,. is an enlargement of the
powers of local self-government. It is
an enlargement 0£ the plan rising up
through the municipal counciis to the
diYisional or shire councils, through the
provincial parliaments to the federal parliament, which is in fact the very copingst.one of local self-government, completing
and binding together the whole fabric.
There is another great adrnntage in
federation, and it is that under it the
country districts will be more completely
represented in the Parliament. 1 ham
often considered how it would be possible
to give to the more sparsely-populated districts a better and more comfJlcte representation, and at the same time to preserve· that just and due power which
should always, in democratic countries, be
given to the majority. As a representative of a perhaps rather sparsely-populate<l
district-but a district the producti\-eness
and the capabilities of which are second to
none in these colonies-it lias often been
brought home to me how very inadequately
that district is represented in prcportion
to its importance. But I see a great
difficulty in the matter. While we preserve the population basis, how are we to
give better representation to these districts, and at the same time not do an injustice to more populated electorates~ This
difficulty would be overcome by federation. In this regard I prefer the American
system of having moderate-sized states or
provinces, each state represented equally
in the Senate, while the .representation in
.A ustraliap, ·Federation.
(14 MAY, 1890.J
the lower house is entirely regulated by
population.
J\ir. SLATTERY : But that is not the
proposal!
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : There is no
proposal before us.
HoN. ME~IBERS : Hear, hear !
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : The convention will have to d<:;termine that question.
We are not now asked to form a constitution for the colonies.
Mr. CRICK : That is just what we object to!
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON: Then, again,
are we bound by the Constitution the
delegates agree to 7
Mr. CmcK: We are!
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : The hon.
member has not read the'resolution, or he
would not say that. That is the wall
against which not only the leader of the
Opposition, but also the hon. member for
Paddington (l\fr. Want), ran his head.
We are not bound by the decision of the
delegates. The delegates are sent to frame
a constitution, which is to be presented as
soon as possible for the approval of the
parliaments of these colonies. I venture
to say that not only this Parliament, but
the whole of the people of this colony,
will yet have an opportunity of approving
or disapproving of what may be determined upon.
Sir HENRY PARKES: Hear, hear!
Mr. Cnrcrr: What power hitve we to
legislate outside of our territory 1 That
is· what the resolution means.
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : The power
to legislate outside of this country is not
given to us yet. It never will be given to
us, I hope, until the whole of the people
of these colonies adopt the Constitution
giving us tl1e necessary power. In this
respect I prefer the American to the
Canadian system of parliamentary representittion. While I say that, I agree with
the Premier in his objections to the autocratic presidential government of the
United States. This, however, is not the
time to discuss the details of federation.
. We are only discussing the advisableness
of sending delegates to frame a constitution for our approval. This is not the
time to discuss the details.
Mr. LYNE : Why is not this the time 1
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : It is not
the time, because we have no constitution
.AitStralian Federation.
427
before ·us. ·we shall ha\·e an opportunity
to discuss that afterwards. As I said
Lefore, in any constitution you frame you
must give the federal parliament the control of the Customs. You must a,Jso, as
far as my mind goes, hand over to them
the control of the national debt of the
colony, because if they have control of the
Customs they have the means of providing
the interest upon the debt-also on accour..t of the lower rate at which you will
be able to borrow money under federal
than under provincial government.
Mr. CmcK : If you hand over the
national debt you must also hand over the
securities !
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : That was
mentioned by the hon. member for Paddington (Mr. Want).
But these difficulties have been overcome in other countries. They have not only been overcome,
but adjustments have been made on a
basis satisfactory to all. It would be out
of place for me to enter now into the
details of this matter. The control of the
railways, however, I would also hand over
to the federal government, because we
should then have our railways conducted
on Australian lines. They would be run
in the interests of all Australia, and the
country districts will never be prosperous
until that is clone . The hon. member for Paddington (Mr. Want) brought forward the
question of the control of the public lands.
So far as I have been able to think the matter out up to the present time, I am
inclined to think that the federal government should have t.he control of those
lands. But the question is one of very
great difficulty, and at the same time of
immense importance. I confess that I
have not been able to make up my mind
thoroughly on the point. I would rather
give control of the public lands to the
Federal Council, than to the protectionists
of this colony.
Mr. O'SULLIVAN: That is an ungrateful
remark for the hon. member to make !
Mr. SLATTERY: The hon. member offered himself for sale, and was refused !
Mr. SPEAKER : Order. Order.
Mr. .R. B. WILKINSON: I am not
here for the purpose of bandying words
with hon. members. Hon. members know
that the remarkl:l which have been inte1·- ·
jectecl are quite uncalled for. The question
of public lands ought not to be dealt with
·
Second night.
.,,
-A iistralian Fede1·ation.
....
[ASSEMBLY.]
upon party-lines. N atio.nal defence must
of necessity be under the control of the
federal government. Every hon. member
will agree to that. I would like to say a
word or two in regard to the federal court
of appeal. In my opinion the decisions
.of that court should be final, for if we
have the power to make laws; why should
we have to refer· those laws to an authority entirely. o"\).tside ourselves-an authority which, from the very circumstances
of the case, cannot underi:itand the circumstances which have led up to the enactment of those· laws 1 . I say that we should
not be· qalled upon· to go to that authority
to interpret our laws.
An HoN. MEMBER: What authority_
does the hon. member refer to 1
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : The federal
court of appeal.
An HoN. MEMBER: Or the privy councili
Mr. R. B. WILKINSON : A federal
c_ourt of appeal would be part of the·
privy council of these colonies. I shall
say no more.on the details of the Constitution, because I think the delegates
should go to the convention perfectly untramm~lled by any instructions.
They
should be sent there for the sole purpose
of framing such a constitution as they
consider best for the circumstances of this
continent, and the peculiarities of the
Australian people. We have two great
instances of successful federation on the
part of peoples of our own race, Jn the
cases of the U nitecl States and of Canada ;
and the study of the history and the
development of those constitutions will
be of the greatest service to us in the formation of our own. I venture to say,
however, that neither of those constitutions would of itself suit our case. Our
circumstances are entirely different to
theirs. We are one homogeneous people,
one in race, one in our systems of governmentr--systems of government which only
require expansion to meet all the necessities of a federal government. The whole
continent is before us ; the whole continent is ours. We have not even an
aboriginal race, worthy of the name, to
-contend with. Never in the history of
the-wo"i·ld was there such a~ opportunity,
or will there evei· be such an opportunity,
for successful federation. All that remains for us to do is to throw away all
. [llfr. R. B. Wilkinson.
:.;· : ~..;,;·
.
~
-t.. .·""
A. ustraZian Faderatio"1i.
our petty party jealousies, all our provincial and parochial jealousies, and to approach the subject with the sole desire to
frame such a constitution as will make the
dominion of Australia the freest, the
most powerful, and the most magnificent
the world has ever kriown.
.
Mr. A. BROWN : A celebrated man
observed to his son on one occasion : " My
son, you see with how little wisdom this
people can be governed"; and if ever:
there was an apt illustration of this idea it
has been in the conduct of the Premier in
regard to the motion he has presented,
and in regard to the attitude he has assumed towards the leader of the Opposition. If the Premier had remembered
what was done in other countries in regard
to federation, he would have . found a
splendid illustration as to what he ought
himself to have done. Does the Premier
imagine that those who formed the Con-·
stitution of America were all of one
sentiment, and of one mind 1 Does he
-not know, and does not history teach him,
that the very first convention which was held
was in connection with the commercial
agreement between the states of Maryland
and Virginia 1 It is well for hon. members to bear in mind the circumstances
under which that convention was held.
It struck representative men at that time ·
that it was possible that a conrnntion
might be framed of a similar character
which might be made applicable to the
other states. That convention was called,
and only five out of the nine states assembled. But there was one man there,
conspicuous for statesmanship-Alexander
Hamffton. I believe him to be the most
celebrated statesman of modern times,
because in the short space of seven years
he did more for constitutional government,
and in moulding the character of the Constitution of America, than any other man
amongst American statesmen. Hamilton
was present at that convention, and there
was then, as there are now, ·a number of
people who represented what was called"the
States Rights Party. That party consisted
of a number of gentlemen who believed in
no federal constitution, and who believed
that the states rights of the country
should have first consideration. At that
convention nothing was done:. Hamilton,
however, issued an address requesting
that a call might be made for a further
-~
·.tfiist'ral~an Federation.
· [14· ~fAY;. 1890.]
boriventioi1 at Phiiadelphia in the following year. The states'. !'esponded to that
call, and delegates were appointed by the
legisl~tures to. take part in the conventiOm
I desire to..draw the•attention of the Premier particularlY' to. this point, because as a
· inattcr· of history he ought to remember·i't.
The anti-federalist party were· extremely
strong in the state of New· York Foursevenths of, the· people• there· were· against
any federal constitution. Hamiltom was
a. member of the New York legis]·ature;
·:1ncl he succeeded in carrying a resolution
that five· delegates shoulCl be sent from the
state· to 'the Phila.delphia convention·. The
number was subsequently cut down to
three, t~'O of whom were· notoriously op•
posed to Hamilton's object-. They i•epresented the St::tte B:ights party. vYhat did
·Hamilton cJo.1 Not what the Premier has
done in this case. Hamilton was nndis. rnayecl Ly the fact that his coHeagues were
opposed· to the· proposed constitution. I
ask the Premier now, if the· great heart of
this country were consulted, would it· be
unani'mously in favour· of the· delegates
"1ho are to be sent to this convention~
li(l:mil ton attended with his. two.colleagues
.::it ·the convention·; they voted: against him
on .e.very occasion; and; finally, when they
wei:e alarmed as to the probable res~lts of
the convention, they retired, and: found
their way back to New York, in order to
c1o there what they could· to prevent the
adoption of the Constitution by the state.
Hamilton alone signed· the Constitution
on behalf of the state of ,New York, and
lie determined to go ha.ck to the state· of
New York, and fight out· the question
there. If the Premier is earnest and sincere-even assuming· that the leader of tbe
Opposition is iri absolute contradiction and
opposition to him-he should be prepared
to take to the convention the leader of the
Opposition, and to come ba.ck, after agreeing to the constitution, and ask the citizens
of this country to adopt it.· That is. what
, Hamilton did·; it was not the legislature .
that he ]ooked to. I question whether
this Parliament has a right now to· send
repl'esentatives to take part in a constitutional conference, because the great body
of the people have not been consulted with
regard to it. It is true that the conference
is to be only a consultative assembly, and
·we will not be· bound by its decisions·;
.bu.t hi;m. members must bea·r in mincl that
2 F
"1. ustrali'an Federation:
429
when they attach their signatures to any
resolution by the conference; they wiH
practically bind themselves. fo a· resofotion
which .Pledges them to vote for. a constitution that has for its final object a
union under the Crow;n. Coming· back to
1\'Ir. Hamilton, when he proposed the• Con"·
stitution of·America, it was agreed that· the
delegates assembled; shoulcl be reprcsenta"
tives ofthepeople1 and not merely members
of the•legislatur~ ;· that certain delegates
shouTd· be appointed whose: business it
would be to aclop.t a· constitution. When
the New York delegates met. there were
sixty-ti ve; and they· were presided.. over by
the .governor of the· state. Among· the
si:xty-five delegates was Hamilton, whose
two colleagues had deserted him. 'Fhere
was a solid: block vote· against the consti~
tution of forty-five· of the delegates; and
nineteen· were in favour of it. But he• was
too· great a statesman to be put aside by
trifles, or by the· fact that some were not
in unison with him. He determined· to
take· his. stancl by the· decision of l he cowvention, believfog·that the· future· welfare
of the connt:ry was wrapped' up in that
constitution, and that its adoption was of
vital import. He facecr the opposition~
and', althougli it was led: by the two ·co]:
leagues who deserted· him at the conven:.
tion, assisted by one of the most eminent
d·ebaters of the tin1e, named Smith, when
· the· vote was taken Hamilton had a ma:jority o~ three in his fovonr. The consti~
tutio1~~\1,as adopted, and it forms part of
the present Coustitu ti on· of .America, I
give' the illustration to the Premier for application to cil:cumstances nearly similar:
Tliere is, however, thi's difference---,that tlie
leader· of the Opposition here· is not abso•
lutely· opposed to federation. The· leader
of the· Opposition has shown that he was
misrepresented .by the Premier, and we
miglit doubt whether the Premier himself
is in favonr of federation if we ~tudy the
whole history of this question. , His own
statement in this,Chamber was a very ex•
traordinary one. He said, after an experi~
ence of public life extending o.ver thirty
or forty years, " If ever I was in earnest
in my life;'' Does he doubt his own
earnestness or sincerity? vVhat reason
was there for ·making such a statement in
this Chamber? Is it because this is one
of the questions which he has· taken up
and· palmed off time after tin)e upon the
Second night.
I
430
.Australian Federation.
[ASSEMBLY. J
credulous public of New South \.Vales 1
Is it because this is one of his experiments
on the credulity of the public 1 It was an
extraordinary statement, and he cannot
complain, after making it, if his sincerity
is doubted.
Ron. members who look
at the resolution will find that it is peculiarly worded in its reference to the
seven years which have elapsed since
the convention of 1883. During that
period it appears that the Premier's views
on the subject have altered. Are we so
insane or so ridiculous as to believe that
in six or seven years' time so much national life can have been developed 1 I
have always given the Premier credit for
being an able and intellectual man ; but
I am sorry to say that in dealing with
this su ~ject he did not do justice to his
reputation. . Before the speech was delivered, I ventured to predict that when
he came to deal with the large question
of federation and its advantages he would
not occupy twenty minutes in doing so.
I listened carefully to all the arguments
he used, and all the advantages which he
pointed out would accrue from this change
in our Constitution ; and I venture to affirm that they did not occupy ten minutes
of his time, outside his platitudes, outside
his invective and claptrap. It was all
very well for the Premier at the conference to dispute Mr. Playford's statement
with regard to public opinion on this subject; but the Premier knows better than
any man that resolutions in Parliament
are frequently moulded by public opinion,
while public opinion is very seldom, if
evnr, moulded by resolutions passed in
Parliament. 1f ever there was an illustration of that fact, it is supplied by what
has occurred in this case. Where have
the public taken up this question in an
enthusiastic way 1 It is really because
they do not understand the issues involved in it that we hear cheers. when
claptrap is uttered in connection with
the subject. The Premier must realise that
there ·are two things which must come
under the jurisdiction of the future federal
parliament. The state lands of this colony
must go. That is inevitable. The railways of the country must also go. It is
all very well for the hon. member for
Balranald to say that these matters may
be dealt with by the federal parliament
without inte1fering with the prosperity
[!Jfr. A. Brown.
;;··~~--
., - -:-r-;
.
.
Australian Federation .
of the country; but I ask what is the
value of the differential rates 1 "What
are we to do with regard to differential
rates, and the trade directed to this port
if the giving up of the railways to a.
federal government would make no difference 1 Does not every one know that one
of the most important elements in the
American Constitution, one which caused
more debate than probably any other provision in it, was that one port in the country
should not haYe any preference over another. That issu~ is mixed up with the
question of differential rates in connection
with the railways, and if these are handed
over to the control of a central parliar
ment, differential rates must be done away
with, and no one port in the country shall
have a preference over another; and the
trade that belongs to the different ports
will not be brought into artificial channels,
as at present, but will drift into its natural
channel.
That is federation, and the
federation which the Premier must face.
It is admitted on all hands that this proposed change is one of the most important
that can take place in the history of any
country-a change in the Constitution. I
know of none more important. It is one
of the most se1·ious questions that the
people of this country will ever be called
upon to consider, and yet it is a question
which one hon. gentleman sitting opposite
said should be lefL to the gentlemen who
are to be sent as delegates to the conference. I differ from that altogether. I
say without he~itation, that this Parliament has a right to indicate what the
new Constitution should be, and what its
responsibilities should be.
And more
than that, I believe it would be better, if
it were possible, to get a constitution
from the people, not a constitution from
the Parliament ; because there is this difference: that a constitution from the Parliament can be changed by the Parliament, but a constitution from the people
can never be changed by the people. That
was the trouLle in connection with the
articles of federation in the American
States-that was the responsibility they
neglected. "When they first came under
their articles of federation it was a legislative enactment that brought them to-·
gether. The great heart of the people
had never been consulted, and the consequence was that, born of a common c1anger,
Australian Federation.
[14 MAY, 1890.J
it was nothing but a rope of sand and
could uot stand the strain put upon it.
When this danger was passed and the
aggregations took place in connection with
the various states, and when they made
inroads oue upon another, the elements of
a substantial character that were wanting
in the Constitution were made conspicuously ·manifest by the eminent men who
took an interest in the welfare of America;
and it was because one of the great
features in that matter was that the people
themselves, as a peoplffl, lrnd never been
consulted with regard to the Constitution.
When the Americans framed their ·new
Constitution the people were consulted,
and I ask hon. rnem hers to look at that
constitution as it is to-day. \Vith the exception of some ten or twelve slight
amendments that were made in its early
inception by the men who had as much to
do with it as anybody ·else, and with the
exception also of two or three other slight
amendments, that Constitution, framed for
4,000,000 people, has lasted with all its
elasticity, all its advantages, and all its
brightness and value, until the present
time, when it controls a nation ·of
60,000,000 people-the most wealthy nation, I believe, under the sun. The
Premier gave us a short address with regard to General Jackson and his veto of
bills. This was one of the difficulties the
hon. gentleman could not get over. Now,
he was not fair to Andrew Jackson. Hon.
members will bear in mind that Andrew
Jackson, whateYer his faults were-and
they were more apparent in the earlier
than in the· later part of his career-they
were condoned by a second and almost
unanimous popular election. 'These vetoes,
which were so detrimental to the interests
of the country, were confirmed, not by an
hereditary monarch, but by the people
.themselves. vVas it any wonder then that
-·Andrew Ja,ckson believed that he represented the people, and that all he did was in
the interests of the great mass of the people~
And what man was there who did more,
·even in his shorflerm of office, to establish
the national character of America and make
the American flag respected, despotic though
he was, than 4ndrew Jackson ~ It is true
that he was a man of aggressive patriotism,
and he was the man who first introduced
'"spoils" politics into the parliament; but
we have a lot of these in New South Wales.
·Australian Federation.
·431
No one, however, can challenge the integrity of his conduct, and in exercising his
veto he always did so in what he believed
to be the best interests of the people.
Mr; SLATTERY : The veto of t.he president is not absolute !
Mr. A. BROWN : The hon. gentleman
is quite correct; the bill may be sent back
to Parliament, and if it is indo'rsed by a
majority of two-thirds it becomes law.
But the Premier contrasted the veto of
the president with the veto of the Crown,
and he complained thatwhilethelatterhad
never been exercised for a long period, in
the case of Presidents Jackson and Grant,
the veto was exercised freely and for a considerable period. I presume the hon. gentleman is prepared to admit that in a democracy like America the power of the president is a qualified power, while the power
vested in the Crown, though it may not
be often exercised, is an absolute power,
and can be used at any moment. Therefore, so far as the people are concerned
they are very much better off with the
qualified power than with the absolute
power. I am not going to say one wqrd
which may give annoyance to any person
whose feelings and interests are identified
with the old country. I yield to no man
in my loyalty so far as the old country is
concerned. l\'Iy people came from that
country. But there is a stage beyond
that, and it is growing and growing larger
clay by day. I mean a feeling of Australian nationality ; and as the children
of the present general.ion grow up so will
the ties between this country and the old
country be gradually severed. We do
not wonder that gentlemen who come
from the old country and cast their
lot among · us should not forget the
ties of affection and association which
hind them to the home they have left, and
some of the brightest spots in their lives .
But the same feeling clings to me as an
Australian ; the same spirit animates me.
There is something in Australian sent~­
ment that should lift it above colonialism
to nationalism. The country is strong
enough now. It is as strong now as
America was a hundred years ago ; and are
we willing to admit that we are fit for selfgovernment but not fit for self-defence,
because that really is the only issue involved in nationality. I believe that if a
representation were made to . the Crown,
Second night.
4.
~·.•
...i·
~32
.Australian Fede1·ation.
[ASSEMBLY.]
.and it was fairly unanimous, of an independent sentiment from Australia, that
sentiment would be properly respected.
And now what are the responsibilities, be~.ause, aitcr all, it comes back to the question of self-defence-what are the Australian responsibilities to which we are
liable, and what are the advantages, and
disadvantages of om· association with the
mother country 1 I should be very sorry
to be considered in any way disloyal, or to
speak in a disloyal spirit; but the feeling
of nationality is very strong in me, and
with regard to the question of home;
when English, Scotch, and Irish gt>ntlemen
speak of the mother country they speak of
it as their home; but Australia is my home,
and it is in that spirit of nationality that I
address this Chamber. One oft.he greatest
difficulties in our way is that though we
are able to govern ourse!Yes we are not
able to defend ourselves. Now what are
the responsibilities in which we are in vol ved1
It is just as well to bear in mind the interests in which we are concerned, and the
responsibilities which we incnr. What
concern have \Ve in imperial troubles-in
the troub_les of the old country 1 Isolated
as we are, what trouble is likely to come
upon us, except through our imperial connection 1 That connection carries with it
a certn.iu amount of responsibility, and it
is the worst form of responsibility we can
possibly have, because it is a responsibility
without representation. A responsibility
may arise in the incurring of which we
lia>e had no voice. We may find ourselves involved through the action of some
imperial p11me minister. That gentleman
may from some diplomatic standpoint take
action which may suddenly involve the
old country and, at the same time, these
colonies in trouble. Responsibility may
be brought to our doors within forty-eight
.hours in connection with a subject in which
we are in no way concerned, in connection
.with interests with which we are in no way
identified. After all, the question resolves
itse1£:into the likelihood of our being visited by some marauder or pillager. 'Vhat
nation is likely to assault us wbile we fly
a neutral flag i If we take up an inde. pendent position, what nation is likely to
attack, to rob, or to plunder us 1 What
.does history teach us i Did not Drake,
Hawkins, and Frobisher pillage and ma_raud the peaceful Spanish colonies in ~he
[ 1fr. A. Brown.
.d ustralian .Federation.
Elizabethan period i When they returned
with their booty, good Queen Bess herself
went to Deptford to receive them, and to
take her share of tl1e plunder. History
repea.ts itself ; and under similar circumstances we might have a repetition of these
events. But what country would be likely
to interfere with us if we flew a neutral
flag 1 W oulcl Russia, Germany, or France
be likely to do so 1 I scout the Premier's
idea of any danger arising from our prox:imity to China. The latest information
we have with regard to the Chinese does
not make it appear that they have become
a courageous naLion. I remember reading in the 1'imes, not so long ago, a
somewhat extraordinary description of a
Chinese admiral, who being near Anam
thought fit to test his ability to deal with
the French in a vigorous way by sending
ashore a boat's crew, beheading a.bout 150
of his own countrymen, and sending their
heads to Pekin as a trophy, while all the
time he placed himself out of clanger by
lying low behind a mud flat. That is some
of the la.test information to hand with regard to the prowess of the Chinese fleet. I
altogether scout the idea of the Premier.
Besides, is not the commerce of these
colonies of sufficient importance to ensure
their protf!ction 1 If an illustration is
wanted, it is afforded by recent events at
Samoa. The German warships there laid
hands on the natiYe king, deposed him,
and \Vere guilty of a number of other
violent acts, inimicRl to the commerce of
at least two other nations. \Vhen I
passed through America, the question as
to whether Great Britain would interfere
to protect her commerce form ell frequent
subject of discussion. Gre'.tt Britain did not
interfere, but the American Government
interfered, and said, " "re ha Ye commercial interests which must be respected."
Hon. members know the result of the intervention which ensued. Tl;e native
monarch was restored to bis throne, the
commerce oE the country is being carried
on uninterruptedly as far as it can be, and
things are pretty well as they were under
the old regime. I admit that the view I
am propounding is a selfish view of the
matter ; but if these events took place in
connection with a semi-barbarous people
-in connection with a countrv with the
small amount of commP.rce c"njoyed by
.Samoa-that is to say, one nation laying
a
...
Aiistralictn Federatiot
.
.
'.
[14 MAY, 1890'.]
Australian Fede1·aticn.
433
violent hands upon its institutions, and
l\'Ir. EWING : vVe should have .to take
being prevented, in the interests of com- our bE)ating also !
merce, by two other nations from doing
Mr. A. BROWN : My sentiment doe!:!
further mischief, what might 've expect to not. carry me quite so far. I prefer to
take place if the large and important accept the more simple responsibilities
commerce of these Australian colonies arising out of our neut1'ality, to talrn adwere endangered~ Do hon. members vantage. of all the good we .ca1:i. derive
think for a moment that any natio11 would from our geographical situation. Nothing
be a!lowed to come here for the _purpose can better represent our situation than a
of pillaging and marauding~ I put aside circumstance of which I renlCmber readthe question of self-defence. I am sup- ing some time ago. The _exile of Louisposing that we were powerless and help- Kossuth in connection with the· Hunless~! do not believe we are; I belieYe
garian revolution will be. well rememthere is sufficient manhood in the colony bered. America was at the same time
to successfully defond us against any . passing through a period of great trial·
enemy-but supposing we were quite and trouble. Kossuth had been in the
helpless, and that a nation sent ships here midst of a similar trouble, and :·tlthough
to maraud and pillage, is it at all likely he had fought bravely and well, 'he waS'·
that, having regard to all the commercial unsuccessful. A resolution was ·passed
interests involved, other nations would in the American Senate to the effect
stand quietly by, and make no attempt to that a man-of-war should be sent to bring
interfere on our behalf. I saur th.at our Kossuth over to America. It was disneutrality would be our best protection. patched, ai1d Kossuth was brought: The
Our defencelessness would of itself be a patriotic character of the nrnn, his trials,
protection. The Premier took me to task and his oratory appealed powerfully to the-the other day for stating that he ~vas an American people. He appealed to them,
imperial federutio~1ist. I excuse the hon. not only for material, but for political
He asked for something beyond
gentleman's ·discourteous reference to my aid.
elephantine p1~oportions. But he may dis- mere sympathy. He wanted the:A\ilerican
cover thttt we are at present concerned in nation, as a nation, to espouse his cause,
an imperial federation. I do not mean the to assist him in his trouble with the·
gigantic imperial federation Lord Rosebery full weight of their political .aid. The
has talked .about-a federation including nation, under the circumstances, was disIndia, a portion of China, the Straits posed to be carried a'vay. -At that time
Settlements, welding together an infinite one of the mo.st distinguished statesmen-.
variety of peoples into one great empire. ever in America was on his death-bed,-I
That is too ridiculous. The Asiatic races refer to Henry Clay. Kossuth sought an
would themselves be an insuperable barrie1; interview with that celebrated man, and
to such a federation. That is the federa- during that i!1terview, Clay poi1ited out totion in which the Premier says he does not him that his country had no part with the·
believe. But are we not now members old world.. He pointed out that whatever
of an imperial federation-a federation in- there was in the shape of sympathy and
volving very serious responsibilities, with- support the people were prepared ·~o give;·
out any representation whateved Does but .they bad just freed themsehies from
the hon. gentleman not want to cement all responsibilities, and that it would be
that federation, and to leave us with all part and parcel of their business to keep
the rei;;ponsibility, wi~hoµt any correspond- free, so tha.t the liberties 'they enjoyed
ing advantage i Hon. members may say might be as a light i_n' the ;,vesterri ocea1?,
that we enjoy a certain amount of ad- for the civilisation of the world: ·..That
vantage in being protected by the mother was -the key-note which came fromi.the
country. Here is another phase of. the ·death-bed of that illustrious statesman;
question: Suppose the mother country en- and . Kossuth did not get the American
gages in a warfare in which she is beaten:- peorle to embark in the troubles which
because she may be beaten-:-that opens up had brought him over ·fro~n Hungary. I
a phase of our connection which deserves ask hon. members whether we' do not
anxious consideration. vVhat would be our posseHs geographical .advantages to a far
greater extent than does America, and
position u_nder those circumstances~
·
2
G
&conit niglit.
. ..
A ustrnlian Federation.
[ASSEMBLY.]
whether, with the opportunities before us,
we are going to change 1 I do not see
any necessity for a change. It is not
fajr to stoop to examine micl'oscopically
the act.ions of public men, and I do not
wish to do it. Unless, however, we are
~o get "something beyond what the Premie1·
. aims at, I do not think the game is worth
the candle. I think that what we have
to surrender and giye up, is not at all
equivalent to what we are to receive. Are
·we to give up all our adva,ut.ages, are we to
:give up our railwa,ys, our state lands, and
a large portion of our commerce 1 Is the
postal department to be surrendered 1 .Are
we to give up all our advantages and become woi·se off than we are now 1 I have
always maintained that we are little better
than a municipality, because we have no
diplomatic arrangements to deal with. If
we are to gi\•e up all the matters I have
referred to, a federal parliament will do
the whole of our business. It is of no
use the Premier telling hon. members that
it will not make any difforenco to them,
.and that Parliament \\ill be the same as
it is now. I do not mean to say that
"the Premier is deliberately deluding hon.
members, but he is telling them something which is not really true. vVe shall
not, as a matter of fact, be as we are
now, but something little better than a
large municipality. 'Ve shall give up all
our large. responsibilities ; they will have
passed to the federal parliament; and I
question whether many hon. gentlemen
will find their way back here with
salaries of £300 a yea1·. Some of them
will lose the number of their mess.
I am ,afraid that my disloyal sentimentR
will probably recoil on my head sornf) day,
but. I cannot. help saying that, as far as
my convictions are concerned, I ;:i,m a repqblican in every sense of the word. I
do not beJie\·e in monarchy, I do not believe in hereditary monarchy, and I believe
the time is fast co111ing when the crowned
heads of Europe will disappea1• from the
face of the earth. I believe that in ifty
years' time, or less, as far as Europe is
c_oncerned, there will not be a crowned
head in it. Democracy, which is the en~
lightened form of government, will govei:n
the world. This is demonstrated very
clearly in America. It is on its trial in
France, because at the recent elections-·
in which republicanism was one of the
[Mr. A. B1·own.
Ai~~tralian
llederation.
prominent questions under discussionout of 600 deputies, 400 were returned as
representatives of the republican form .of
government. Now, the future of this continent is a republic-the united states of
.Australasia. I do not want to hang on
to the wheels of federation; I do not want
to make that which is notoriously difficult
impracticable or impossible. That is not
part of my mission here to-night. I am.·
not speaking of a sentiment or a romance;
out I say this country has before her a
great destiny a;mongst the great nations of
the earth. '.!!be question is, whether the
opportunity is now come for us to achieve
her c1estiny--to erect a united states of
Australia. \Ve should have three great
objects in view. The parliaments of Australasia shoukl have before them the object
of securing not only t_beir political independence-a,nd that is' the g1:and object
they have before them--but also their
national i11dependence-not as a sentiment, not as a romance, but as a reality;.
and aboYe and beyond that, their industrial independence. I cannot see that the
motion of the Premier is likely to lead to
the achievement of these great objects,
and for that reason I shall reccrd my vote
against it.
Hox. :M;1rnBERS : .Adjourn !
n1r. K\YING : I have no objection if the
Government will agree to an adjournment.
Rox. MEMBERS : Adjourn !
Si1' HENRY PARKES: The Government have no desire whatever to press a
matter of this sort upon hon. gentlemen at
an unseasonable hour. Therefore if hon.
members t-hink the time has come for an
adjournment we shall offer no objection.
-Debate adjourned.
House adjourned at 10·43 p.m.
1Legi1J!atifle Qtouncil.
Thursday, 15 ltfay, 1890.
Papers-Mi-. Leopold Yates-The Narnl Brigade-Monopoly of Hawaiian Islands-Practice of Medicine and
Smgocy-Legislath•e Council Quorum Bill-Dower
Abolition Bill (second reading)-Divorce Amendment
and,Ext~_nsion Bill (se.cond reading).
The PRBSIDENT took the chai1:.