920 [COUNCIL.)

lcoislativc ZouuctL,Tuesday, 1st September, .19 14.

PAGEElection retrn-Soth-Eaat Province .. no92Papers, presente 2Questions:Supnso of Acts .2

Di~seportatlin of Asiatic criminals .920fli:Friendly Societies Act Amendment,nl

stages...............9_11BIS of Sale Ant Amendent, recomn . 922P'erth Municipal Gas9 and Electric Lighiting

Act Amendent Is.........92BPlant jDiseases, 21............924Rights in Water and Irrigation, 2R......935Friendly Societies. Act Amendment, returned 95Supply (No. 2) £1,450,000', 5.....950Leedervllle Rates Validation, La. ....... 9170

-Workers' Homes Act Amendment, 1 9MLicensing Act Amendment, iR........950Special Lease Enabling, It, 950lisgia Grass Tree Concession Confirmation,

21., Corn..............950Moion: Magistrates' retirement........928

The PRESIDENT took the Chair at4.3l0 p.m., and read prayers.

ELECION RETURN-SOUTH-EASTPROVINCE.

The PRESiDE.NT announced the re-ceipt of the return to a writ issued forthe election of a member for the South-Past province showing that GeorgeM1alakoff Sewell had been elected.

Tie Hon. George Malakoff Sewell tookand subscribed (lie oath and sig-ned theroll.

llAPEIS PRESENTED.

By~x the Colonial Secretary: 1, Reportoij lie admninistrat ion of the EducationEndowment Trust to 31st December,

11..2, Report of the Public ServiceComimissioner for the year ending 30th

June, 1914. 3, Return tinder the Work-ers' Homes Act classifying under theirrespective occupations the successfuld ap-plicants for Workers' Homes and Ad-xvanes for Homes (ordered on mo-tion by Hon. D. G. Gawler). 4, Cor-respondence relating to recentpolitical crisis in Tasmania. 5. Re-port of tile Department of Land-Titles for the year ending 30thJune, 1914. 6, Public Service list. 1914.7, By-laws of tile municipality of Guild-ford relating to motor and other traffic.8, By-laws of the municipality of NorthFremantle relating to motor and othertraffic. 9, By-laws of the municipality

of Leederville. 10, By-laws of the muni-cipality of Kalgoorlie. 11, By-laws ofBeverley Roads Board. 12, Papers relat-ing to the retirement of Mr. A. S. Roe,Mr. J. Cowan, and Mr. C. V. Foss.

QUESTION -SUSPENSION OFACTS.

I-toii D. G, GAWNLER. asked the Col-onial Secretary: 1, Whether it is the in-tention of the Government to temporarilysuispend the operation of the IndustrialArbitration Act, with a view of enablingexisting awvards to bhe suspended? 2,Whether the Government will considerthe advisability of also suspending tem-porarily the operation of the Truck ActT

The COLONIAL SECRETARY re-plied: 1 and 2, The Government havealready convened a conference of em-ployers and employees to consider theindustrial position,

QUESTION -- DEPORTATION OFASIATIC CRIINALS.

H~on. W. KINOSMILL (for Hon. A.G. Jenkins) asked the Colonial Secretary:1, How many convicted Asiatic criminalshave been deported from Western Aus-tralia during the past three years? 2,How many have not been deported?

The COLONIAI, SECREI'TARY re-plied: 1, 16. 2, 46.

13] 1.L-FR]ENDLY SOCIEVTIES ACTAM ENUMIENT.

All Stages.

Introduced by Hon. J, E. Dodd (Hon-orary Minister) and read a first time.

Second Reading.

Hon. J. E, DODD (Honorary -Minister-- South) [4.851 in moving the secondreading said: The Bill which is now be-fore the Ho use is a measure designed togive some protection to the friendly socie-ties during the present crisis. The friendlysocieties are allowed to fix a certainamount for contributions in order to meetthe actuarial position as outlined by the

920

[I SEPTEMBER, 1914.1]2

registrar, and as lion, members know,there are quite a large number of mnem-hers of friendly societies who have volun-teered to go away with the contingentwhichi is to be sent to the front. In addi-tion to that there tire likely to be a largenumber of members ouit of employment,and thle friendly- societies have approachedthe Government xvith a view to gettingsomec relief, that, is, by a discontinuanceof thie contributions of those who may beout (of employment or who may be goingawayv. Hopi. members will also under-stanid that Ilite liabilities of thie societiesare likely to increase by reason of thosemembers who may he selected to go awaywith the expeditionary force. We all hopethat their liahilities will not increase.Trhe societies are somewhat alarmed lestthey should not be able io withstand thecalls which may lie made upon them. Asa eonse(1uence the Government have ac-ceded to their wisli and hav-e introduced

his; small amending Bill in order to meetthem, and allow members who may beout oV employment to cease paying theircontribuitions whilst they are so out ofemployment. The registrar retains theright of restriction over societies inthis respect; that is, that they can not; do

mt as the 'y like in remitting these eon-tributions, and that hie -will take care tosee that the stability of the societies isnot endangered. With that end inview power is Oiven to the registrar toask that a levy should be mnde upon anysociely whichl may' possibly get belowwhat mnay be considered a safe marginin their finances. That is really all thereis in the Bill. There is also provision,however, that, notwithstanding any sus-pension to which any member is entitledhr reason of this measure, he shallbe entitled to full benefits just the sameas if lie had paid his contributions. l donot think there is anything else whichneeds explanation in the measure. Thefriend ly societies are almost unanimous,inl fact I may safely say that they arequite unanimous in asking that this Billbe brought into operation. But it is notto be done except by way of proclama-tion. There is no immediate necessityfor it because there are something like

13 weeks still to go in which membersneed not pay their contributions beforebeing declared unfinancial. That is theposition at present. I move-

Tfhat the Bill be now read a secondtime.Question put and passed.Bill read a second time.

In Committee, etcetera.Hupp. AV. Kingsmrill in the Chair, Hon.

J. E. Dodd (Honorary 'Minister) incharge of the Bill.

Clauses 1, 2-agreed to.Clause S-Effect of suspension:Hon. Sir E. H. WITTENOOM: Do I

understand the Honorary Minister to saythat those who go aw .ay with the expedi-I ionary' force, although they do iut coui-tribute towards thie society, will still sharein thle benefits, just tile same as those whostay behind and contributed towvards it.

Hoan. J. E. DODD: That is so. Thevlause reads as follows:-

(1) During any such suspension themember in whios-e favour it has beengranted shall not be called Uipoi tomake any contribution in resIpect ofwhich it has been granted; bitt afterthe end or determination of Lte suspen-sion lie shall, excep~t in so far as thesociety by resolution p~assed at a gen-eral mneeting or the inembers otherwisedetermines, he liable to pay all suchcontributions a~s will have become pay-able hr him but for the suts-.pension at anid in such time andmanner and in such instalments as theCommittee mnay decide. (2) Notwith-stan di mig any suspension, the memnbem-aifected shall he entitled to all suchbenefits which he would have been en-titled to if lie had paid his contribu-tionus.Hon. Sir. E. H. WITTENOOM: It

practically amounts to a temporary sus-pension.

Hon. J. El. Dodd: It amounts to a sus-pension as the society mpay determine.

Clauses 4, 5, 6-agreed to.Title-ared to.Bill reported without amendment and

the report adopted.

921

922 COUNCIL.]

Read a third time and transmitted tothe Assembly.

BILI-BILLS OF SALE ACT AMEND-ME NT.

Recommnittal./

Hon. W. Kingsrnill in the Chair; theColonial Secretary in charge of the Bill.

Clause 18-Bills of sale void againstclaims for wages:.

Hon. C. SOMME RS :I asked for therecommittal of the Bill to point out thatthis clause is unnecessary. The wageearner is sufliciently protected at pre-sent. His wages are, by law, payableweekly ot fortnightly, and if an employ-er fails to pay, the'employee can get sumi-mary' jurisdiction in 24 to 36 hours, andthe offence is punishable by imprison-merit, To pass the clause would make itimpossible to borrow on the security ofa bill of sale. If a, man lent on thesecurity of four or five horses the sumof £100, which might represent nearlytheir full value, to a farmer who hadseveral men working for him, and whosewages for the month amounted to £30or £;40, it would be serious for the lenderif their wages took priority of his billof sale, 1n the interests of the hor-rower, the clause should not be passed.It is difficult enough at present to raisemoney on this class o! security. I willoppose the clause.

H-on. D. 0. GAWNLER: I move anamendment-

'That the following words be addedto the dlause:-Provided also thatnothing in this section contained shallprejudice or affect tire title of a bonafide purchaser for value of any suchchattEels as are not in Ehe possessionl,or apparent possession, of the grantorat tile tilme of such seizure."1

The sheriff, or other officer, under anexecution seizing goods comprised in Abill of sale could follow those goodswhich were in the possession of thegrantor a month prior to the seizure.They may have been goods sold over thecounter and distributed throughout thecountry among many different prir-

chasers. The Crown Solicitor has f ramnedthis amendment, which is a reasonableone. The effect will be to protect thetitle of a bona Ede purchaier of goodstaken away by the purchaser and nolonger in the grantor's possession.

Amendment passed.Hon. V. HAMERSLEY I oppose

the clause as amended, because it wilthave a detrimental effect and "'ill be oflittle use. Many farmiers probably re-quire credit for stock, and employeesmay launch a claim for 'wages on thestrength of the stock arriving on thepremises. This will destroy any creditwhich the farmer would otherwise getin this direction.

Hon. J. F. CTJLLEN: I appreciate theforce of the arguments against theclause, but notw ith stan ding this, theclauise is just and necessary. It is withinthie power of a wage earner any dayto spoil the redress of a holder of a billof sale. He can sue for wages due andcan make his employer bankrupt, if bechooses.

H~on. D. 0. Gawler: That is for £30 orover.

Hon. J. F. CULLFN : Yes. Whileever y saving ciause of this kind mustaffe t the vailue of a bill of sale, thesame argument alpplies to rent, and noone cries out for a siaving clause forrent. If this applies to rent, why shouldit riot apply' to wages?

Hon.1 Sir E. 1-1. Wittenoom :You donrot give a hill of sale over furniture veryoften, riot like property on a farm.

Hon. J. K. CULLEN : There aremany bills of sale over furniture. If thelaw protects tile landlord, how muchmore should it protect the wage earner!It zay be said that the wage earnerhas immediate redress, but so has thelandlord. Tire period of one month isreasonable. There are numbers of firmswho p.-ay fortnigitly and monthly andwhat wo uld he said of an employee whotook advantage of the clause because onepayment was owing? Although this willaffect the value of a bill of sale, it willbring up the wage earner to somethingllike parity with the landlord.

922

[1 StPTEmMBR, 1914.) 2

Hlon. Sir E, H. WITTENOOM :Myremarks will apply almost entirely tothe pastoral and agricultural areas. Theinstances brought forward by Messrs.Sommers and liamnersley were very good.as illustrating how difficult it will be toraise money by a bill of sale if this,clause is passed. In addition to theemployees on a farm, who ma 'y numbersix or eight. the farmer often lets largecontracts for clearing and wood cutting,and he is responsible for their payment,as well as for the payment of wages. Ifa bill of saile is to be loaded in this way,there will be little chiance of obtainingloans onl this security, if before fiecould realise, all these wages could beclaimed ag±ainist him. It is a. very greatimpediment. I believe in making wragesais assured us tall he. . I have yet tolearn that there are many eases in thecountry where wvage-eaners, do not gettheir wiages when due. At thle same timethe wage-earner mast take some risk. 'IfI sell sheep or cattle to a butcher, I takehis paper, and. wvith it a certain amiountof risk. The wagie-earner risks at mostonly one month s wvages.

Hon. J. Cornell: It is a lot to a. wag,,,-earnier.

Hon. Sir E. ii. W'iTTFh TOOM: it is* lot to a pastoralist to lose £1,000 toa butcher. We all have to take somne risk.The wage-earner is fairly well protected.] f we are going to get the developmentof our lands carried out to tile extent wewish we must give every facility forIpeople to horrow on the security of what(hey own. It would be unwise to hamperbills of sale with the liability of wvages.

Hon. C. F. BAXTER : I voted for theclause last week, but since then I havelearned that if it were put on the stat-ute-book it would be a very great blowto the farming communlity. It would stopall tile farmers' dealings in stock, whichtake a very wide range. No firm ofstaniding would lake a bill of sale. Thosewho to-day enjoy tile existing privilegeswould be debarred from them. Prom thatstandpoint I cannot support the clause.

Hon. J. CORNELL: Some measure ofjustice should be extended to the worker

under the Bills of Sale Act. Under thatAct the worker has no redress at all to-day, unless the amount due is £30, ormore, when he can force the employerinito the bankruptcy court and so have hisclaun put before those of other creditors.I ani surprised at Aifr. Hamersley sup-porting tile deletion of the clause, seeing-that lie represents a farmingr constitu-ency. kMr. Sommers started out to putl

Upa splendid ease for the farmner, andended by putting up an excellent case,for the mioney-lender. Sir Edward Wit-tenooin gave us the point of view of thelpastoralist, and eventually joined issuewith 11r. Sommers in respect to themnoney-lender. I am surprised at Air.Baxter, who has taken his first politicalsomiersauilt in the Chamber. Mr. Baxter,who represents a party of consistency.com11es inlto the Chamuber and votes fora clhause, and at the next sitting Votesag, -ainst it. tiotwithstaiiding tiat t heclause has been improved by Air. Gaw-her's affenidm~ent. And it will be noticedthat Mr. Baxter hns givenuLs lno ;irgi-inets at all. :r hojie the Committee willagree to the clause. It has been saidthat it will destroy credit. 1 know thecredit that is attached to the poor iindi-vidual whto goes to the nioney-lender fora bill of sale; if he wants £20 the secur-ity required is ahott £100, and lie hasto pay about twenty per cent, interest forit. rrle proposition uder the clause isa fair one, It is mnerely that a workerShall he seunred to the extent of onciuontlws wages. rhis, we are told, willbe hiard on the employer who wants toborrow money on a bill of sale. Butit mnust be remembered that when amnoney-lender advances money to-day lietakes into consideration tile security oftie landlord, who has the first call. Isay the worker should have the first call.The farmiers, whom Mir. Baxter repre-sents, employ a large number of mnen,and the employment of those men pro-duces wealth for those employing them,To-day the worker has no redress. Theclause should appeal to everyone, fornone can deny that the worker shouldhave some justice. After all it is thegreat mass of the workers who make

920

924 [COUNCIL.]

farmers and pastoralists. and money-lenders possible. I hope members willdo a measure of justice to the workers.

Hon. H. P. COLEBATCH: I intendto vote for the deletion of the clause.The principle underlying it is wrong.It is that if the man who owes the wagescannot pay them someone else must doso. .I oppose thle clause in the interestsof the workers themselves; because if weare going to cast additional difficurltiesin thre way of the small employer makinguse of his credit we arc going to decreaseemployment. This is an attempt tothrow difficulties in the 'wvay of the smallemployers, who will have quite enoughtrouble as it is to persuade people tofinance themn.

Hon. .J. W. Kirwan: What is the good]of the employment if the melt are niotpaid?1

Hon. H1. P. COLEBATCH: But theywill be paid. There is no suggestion totite contrary. If they are niot paid, theycan sute for their wages. To pass theclause would be to offer an inducement; tothe employer and the employee to letthe wages hang up, The matter of renthas been referred to, and we hear a greatdleal of the protection afforded to thelandlord. I'n whose iuterest is thatspecial protection afforded to the land-lord? Chiefly iii $hc interest of thetenant, so that hie will not be disturbedwhen hie cannot pay his rent every week.

lion. J. Cornell : If that was the in-tention, it has miscarried.

R-on. H. P. COLjRBATCH: I do niotthink so. The operation of thie clausehas been more in the interests of thetenant than of the landlord. A personlending mioney onl a bill of sale knowstlint the hill of sale is subject to tbelandlord's claim for rent. If we aregoing to make it apply to wages alsothere are muail) cases in which the lenderof the mioney will niot know what hislimit is. He k-nows it is a month's wages,hut for how many men? He will neverknow, the limit. Therefore the clause,if passed, will result in embar-rassingpeople who want to borrow money tokeep) their businesses going. In anotherportion of the Bill we have given special

privileges to the man advancing seedand fertilisers, Why? Not in his inter-est, but in the interest of the persongetting the advance, the farmer; and Ethink 'we should be undoing much of thegood effect of that principle if we insertthis clause.

Hon. C. SOMMERS: I understood Mir.Cornell to say that if a farmer wjent.insolvent the employee would, uinder thisclause, be protected to the extent ofthree months' wages against every othercreditor. I take it, however, that if Ihold a bill of sale over farm stock andthe farmer goes insolvent, then the goodsI hold 'would niot be subject to any claimfor wages. The legal members will nodlonbt correct me if I amn wrong, butI take it that if the sale of the stockbrought less than the amount I was en-titled to, then I could claim on the estatefor the balance, and that if the sale ofthe stock brought more, then the surpluswould go to the estate. I rose becauseI do not think MAr. Cornell understandsthat position.

Clause pitt, and] a division taken withthe following result:-

Ayes .. - .17

Noes .. . . 8

Majority for_ 9

Arm~s.Hon. J. 1. AllenHon. C. F. BaxterHen. H. CarSonHon. M. Mf. ClarkeHon. H. P. OlebatchHon. F. ConnorHon. D. G. GawlerHon. V. HarnersleyHan. J. J. H-olmnes

Hon. R. 0.G ArdaghHon. 3. CornellHon. Jr. F. CullenHon. 3. E. Dodd

Han. A. 0. JTenkinsHon. E. MeLartyHon. W~. Patrick

~Han, A. Sanderson

I-In. C. SommersHon.851r N.H. Wittenonlion. 3. Duffel]

(Totter).

Noits.Hon. J. M. DrewHon. J1. W. KirwranHon. C. McKenzieHon1. H, Mllliigton

(Teller).

Clause thus negatived..Bill again reported with a further

aimendmen t.On motion by Hon. A. G. JENKINS

Bill again recommitted for the purposeof further considering Clauses 3 and 17.

924

[1 SEiPT2MBE;at 1914.] 2

In Committee.Hon. W. Kingsmidl in the Chair; the

Colonial Secretary in charge of the Bill.Clause 3-Amendment of Section 6:Hon. A. 0. JENKINS: I move as an

amendment-Thaot the following words bea added to

Clause 3:-"Provided that it shall besufficient for the purposes of this sec-tion if the bill of sole states that therate of interest shalli be the currentbank rate for the time being."

A similar provision to this is containedin all mortgages taken by financial insti-tutions. The mortgage instrument doesnot provide a rate of 7 or 8 or 61/2 percent., but provides that the mortgagorshall pay whatever the current bank ratemay be for the time being. The courseis one which suits both the borrower andlender, and inflicts no injustice on any-one. As I have indicated, the principalis not new.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Ihave not had time to look int this amend-ment. InI fact, I was not awvare that itwas to be moved.

R~on. A. 0. Jenkins: I gave you a copyof it last week.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Un-fortunately, the copy has been mislaid.Howvever, after hearing the amendmentread, I cannot perceive say objection toit. If both parties agree that the rateof interest shall be the current batik rateof interest. I do not see how anyone couldtake objection. I am of opinion, how-ever, that under the Act as it stands atpresent at bill of sale containing that pro-vision could not be registered.

Hon. D). G. GAWLER: Section 6 ofthe Bills of Sale Act sets out , amongstother things, the necessary facts whichmust be stated in a bill of sale in orderthat the bill of sale may be valid. Itwould he a sufficient compliance if thebill of sale stated that the bank rate ofinterest for the time being was to apply.I see no objection to the amendment.

Amndment. put and passed, the clauseaq amended agreed to.

C'lauyse I 7-Amendment of Section iS,Bills of Sale Amendment Act, 1906:

Hor. J. J. HOLMES: I move as anamendment-

f/jot in Subelause (b), line 3, t/hewords "before or" be struck out.

There are several classes of merchantsconcerned with the farmer: the merchantwvho deals in seed wheat, the merchantwho deals in fertilisers, the merchant whodeals in jute goods, and the merchantwho deals in the necessaries of life. InIaccordance wvith a general lionourablc u n-derstanding. these merchanlts haove allb.een supporting the farmers during thepast season, and indeed for several years.If we allow the words ''before or'" toremain in the chie thtIle effect will bethat we shall give protection to the seedwheat merchant, to the fertiliser mer-chant, and to the jute mnerchant, but notto the merchant who sup~plies the neces-saries of life. That is not a fair thjing.If thle proposal were to protect the seedwheat, fertiliser. and jute merchants forthe future, it would be right; but to givethe clause a retrospective operation fortheir benefit is not fair. There is nowin existence the Government Seed WheatBoard, which agrees to supply the farmerwith seed wheat, fertiliser, and so forth,to tide him over a period of stress. Ihave a copy' of the contract which isentered into between flie Agricultural De-partnient and the farmer in this connec-tion. and even in that contract all themerchants are protected. There are, how-ever. hundreds of cases in which one mer-chant has supplied the farmer with seedwheat, another merchant has suppliedhim with fertiliser, and a third merchantwith stores. I do not think it is a fairthing- to benefit one section at the ex-pense of another.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Itdoes, not matter much nowv what anmend-ments are made, because I am sure themeasure in its present form will not beacceptable to another place. The clauseis drafted to protect merchants as wvellas the Government. The Government andthe merchants have heen acting in unison.Every' penny advanced to the farmer hasbeen advanced in this way. Assignmentshave heen registered and there has not

925

926 [COUNCIL.]

been notice of intention. There was nottime. In South Australia, where theydeliver seed wheat to farmers by way ofrelief, it is done through district councils.They do0 not take a bill of sale over agrowing crop. but the amount of thevalue of the seed wheat is a first chargea,,aiiisl the crop. We are not going asfar as South Australia; we are simplya~sking- Parliament t o relieve us of theobligation of giving notice of intention.

Hion. J. 3. HLOLMES: I amn in accordwith the legislation passed in South Auis-tralia, but not in accord with the legisla-tion it is proposed to pass here. Wepropose to make it ret rospective. If thewheat board had supplied all the wheatand fertilisers and stores, there wouild beno ohjeetion to the clause, but the wheatboard has only supplied a portion. Iunderstand the whole of the advance bythe Government is M9.000, but we cal]take two merchants in this country andprove that they have advanced a qularterof a million of money.

lion. A. G. Jenkins: The merchantsget grood profit for what they advance, theGovernment do not.

B~on. J1. J1. HOLMES: The hon. menm-ber u-ets good profit for what hie does, andsurely he would not deny it to others.

Hon. A. 0. Jenkins: You want to treatthe merchants the same as the Govern-inent, and they are not entitled to it.

Hon. J. J. HOLMES: The hon. mem-ber would not be a part ,y to obtaininggoods under false pretences, because thatis what it would mean.

Hon, J. DUFFELL: Judging by theremarks made by the Colonial Secretarythat another p~lace will not aecept thismeasure as it has been amended, and be-cause of the fact that it is a contentiousmeasure, we could well afford to let itremjain in aheyanee for six months, Therei,, at the present time an honourable un-derstanding between the Chamber ofCommerce and the Government's repre-sentative. Air. Sutton, in regard to whatthis clause would effect. I contend thatthis is not the time to discus% contentiouismnatters. What would be the position itthe merchants got their backs up andsaid. "We wvill not allow any further

credit." There would be chaos immedi-ately. There can he no more seed wheatrequired for six months, and taking thatinto consideration, together with the factthat an honoorable understanding exists,why should we go on with this measureany further, especially in the light ofthe remarks of the Colonial Secretarythat the Government will not accept theamendments, which have been made bythis House?

Hon. J. F. CULLEN: T am a littleconcerned as to whether Mr. Holmes andMr. Duffell really represent the attitudeof thie business p~eople.

Hoji. J. Otfell: I have been in con-sultation with thenm.

Ron. J. Cornell: Mr. Holmes repre-sents the squatters.

Bon. J. 5. Holmes: I represent allsections of the community.

lIon, J. F. CU.LLEN: These gentlemensay that there is an honourable under-standing and they recognise fully the factthat the Government have taken whatpurport to be ample securities for theadvances they have made. The businesspeople who have been helping the farm-ers know welt that the Government havetaken what is believed to be ampleseecurity, but the business people look atit in this way: the Government havestepped in as representing the whole ofthe p~eop~le. not some competing businesshouse, but thie whole of the country. TheGovernment have stepped in to do some-thing that business men could not do tosave these farmers from absolute ruin.Would the position lie better if the Gov'-erment said, "Let themn go"?V But theGovernment step in as representing the1)eople and declare that they will dotheir part to save this section of the com-mnunity. Will it mend matters to refuseto validate securities that were given to[lie Government and that the businesspeople knew all about? The duty of theHouse is to validate t-hese agreements.

Hon. V' HAMEUSLEY: Air. Cullenseems to misunderstand the p~osition, As1%r. Holmes has pointed out, the buisiness;houses throughout the State have ad-vanced a hundredfold what the Govern-ment have advanced towards keeping the

M

(1 SEnrmitnn, 1914.]92

settlers on the land, but a great manywould not be there but for the relief theGovernment have given to them. Thefirms, except for the honourable under-standing referred to, have no security forwhat they have advanced, except the grow-ig crops. The Government hold security

all the time; they hold] the security of theland. They decline to grant transfersand take away any chance the men haveof obtaining money from financial insti-tutions. And the Government are not inat position to advance stores and goods tokeep these men going, on the land. Inthis measure the Government have triedto g-et still further security and it looksas if advantage were about to be taken ofthlose men who are entirely in the handsof the Government. I am not supportingthe amendment, because I believe that thealteration already made to the clause isall th~at we desire.

Hon. H. MINTLLINGTON: I will sup-port the clause as it stands. I find I havebeen looking in vain for friends of thefarmers, and as a farmer myself I amnot satisfied with the representation I amgetting- from some of the alleged farmers'representatives. It has been pointed out,or lion, members have endeavoured topoint out, that the Government must re-ceive the same treatment as merchants.If they insist upon it, it will amount tothis: that the only friends the farmershave left, the Government, will wihdrawtheir sulpport, So far as the merchantsare concerned, they are in the businessfor wvhat they can get out of it, and what-ever business the merchants do with thefarmers is done with their eyes open.Whatever transactions the merchants havewvith the farmers are purely businesstransactions and the merchant is wveillable to protect himself, On the otherhand, the Government purely assists the.farmers. If the same concessions are tobe given to the farmers in the future ashave been given in the past we must havea clause of ibis nature.

Hon. J. J. HOLMNES :The SeedWheat Board only deals with people onthe land who are in destitute circum-stances. Men on the land comparativelywealthy a year ago are in very preeari-

ous positions to-day:- They* are uipagainst a bad season, anid the merchantwho supplied wheat to the farmer orfertiliser to the farmer wvhen he wvas wvelloff a year ago was content. If we areto protect the advances made by theSeed Wheat Board we should also pro-tect the merchant who has made the ad-vances to the farmer.

Hon. A. SANDERSON: Graduallythe object of the Government has becomeclear and no doubt the Committee willnot consent to the clause. The ColonialSecretary has told the Committee thatthe Governmicnt are not prepared toassent to the amendment. tUnder thesecircumstances we shall hear nothing fur-ther of the Bill. As to this particularclause I am in accord with the remarksof ',It. Holmes. The Government haveearried on operations with their eyesopen and nowv they come to Parliamentand seek to protect themselves as againstmembers of the community wvlo areequally interested.

Hon. Ri. J. LYNN: I would like to con-firm what MT. Holmies has said from theFremantle merchants' standpoint. Theyconsider the wvords should be deleted, andno bill of sale should be retrospective.The claumse should be deleted. Why in-terfere with existing agreements? Ifany agreement is entered into and ad-vances made by mnerchanits they arc en-titled to security just as much as timeGovernment.

Amendment put and a division takenwvith the following result:-

AyesNoe

Majority for

AYES.

Hon. J. P. Allen lion.Ho.. C. P. Baxter Hon.Hon. 14. Carson Her.Hon. MI. M4. Clarke Ron.Hon. H. P. Colebateb Ho..Hon. J. Dfll Hon.:Hon. D. 0. Gawler Ho..lior. J. J1. HolmesHon. R. 3. Lyn

9

7

E. McLartyW. PatrickA. Sanderson0. M. SewellC. Sommners

StrE. H. WittenC. Mc~enzie

(Teller.)

927

928 COUNCILKI

Nosus.Hon. R. 0. Ardagh Hon. A. G. JenkinsHon. J. F. Cullen lion. J. W. KirwanMon. J. E. Dodd lion. H. Millingtonlion. J. M. Drew Ronn. J. Cornell

Hion. V. Hameraley (Teller~

Amendment thus passed.Clause as amended agreed to.Hill again reported with a further

am ci'din t.

13 ILL - PERTH MIUNICIPAL GASAND ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACTAM ENDMENT,

Received from the Assembly and reada first time.

1MOTION-MAGISTRATES' RETIRE-MENT.

Debate resumned from the 4th Auguston motion by Hon. H. P. Colebatch ,"That all papers relating to the retire-muent of Mr. A. S. Roe and Mr. JamesCowan, reslpectively. be laid upon theTable of the House," and upon theamendment moved by the Hon. J.' J.Holmes that after "Cowan" the words"and( Mr. C. V. Foss" be inserted.

Tile COLONIAL SECRETARY (Hon.J. Al. Drew-Central) [5.59]: Mr.Colebatch in moving the motion-

The PRESIDENT: Is the lion. mem-ber speaking to the amendment or to thewhole question?

Thle COLOMTAL SECRETARY: Tothe wvhole question.

Hon. H. P. COLERATCH: Would itfacilitate matters if, as mover of themotion, I accepted the amiendment?

Thie PRESIDENT: That can be done.Bon. H. P. COLEBATCH: If the

amendment were put and carried, themotion as amended would be before theHouse. and the Colonial Secretary couldreply to thle whole.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY:There is only' one lie dealing with thew-hole of the retirements, and the amend-mient is, unnecessary.

The PRESIDENT: I think I had bet-for. put the amendment.

Amendment p)ut and passed.The COLONIAL SECRETARY (Hon.

J. 3f. Drew-Central) [6.3]: The Hon.Mr. Colebatch, in moving the motion, saidtha~t hie had been influenced in his actionby the belief that all injustice had beendone to the civil service, and lie addedthat jhe civil service had been shamefullytreated over the matter of appeals. Thatstatement had no bearing whatever .onthe motion, but it has been made and itcalls for a reply. I wvould point out tolion. members that thle Government havespared no effort in the direction of facili-tating the hearing of appeals. Civilservants some three years ago were anx-ious that the personnel as to the chair-manl of thle board should be changed;the Government accordingly introduceda Bill to Parliament with that object 'inview. alid the Bill became lawv, and theresult was that the President of theArbitration Court became the Chairmanof the Court of Appeal. There is nodoubt that there was some delay in thehearing of the appeals. It was impossi-ble for the President of thle ArbitrationCourt to deal with the appeals and alsowith the wvork of the Arbitration Courtas well. Each civil service appeal dealtwith one man, whereas the business ofthe Arbitration Court dealt with largenumbers of men, consequently the Presi-dent of the Court had to give priorityto Arbitration Court business. The de-lay in the circumstances wvas, therefore,unavoidable. It 'was foreseen by theGovernment. but the fact that it wasforeseen was not, I contend, sufficientreason to deter the Government from in-troducing legislation and( bringing aboutthe refonm which was effected. Comn-mienting onl the retirements of Messrs.Roe nnd Cowan, the Hon. Mr. Colebatehsaid that it looked as if an attempt wvere.beiing made to deprive the service of theprotection extended to it uinder the Pub]-lie Service Act. The Hon. Mr. Cole-hatch contended that Section 66, dealingwith the retirement of public officers,provided that an officer was entitled toretire from the service if hie desired todo so, after lie had reached the age ofsixty. That is quite correct-there is

928

[1 SEPTEMBER, 19,14.]92

no denying it-and the Government havenever attempted to take tip any otherposition. There is little doubt also thatSection 66 contemplates that after officer,have reached the age of 60 years thematter can be reviewed by the Govern-ment as well s by the officers themselves,If, for instance, after the age of sixty;an officer wishes to retire hie can do sowithout in any way forfeiting his rightstinder the Public Service Act or tinderthe Superannuation Act. Then onl the-Government side, the Government can.also retire a public officer without in anyway reflecting upon his integrity or-upon his efficiency. Under that Act twas quite different when an officer was-under the age of 60 years. The mattercan only he investigated under Section47 of the Public Service Act dealing withflismnissals or removals, or under Section56. which deals with incapacity. It isevident that in dealing with officers ofthle age of sixty,' Section 66 was framed'having in) view tile provisions of thePensions and Superannuation Act. Un-der Section 10 of the SuperannuationAct, assuming that an officer is super-annuated, or granted a pension allow-ance on retirement from office, before the

e of sixty is reached, he is. liable tohc called upon to fill any public office,or situation under the Crown for whichhis previous public experience renderishim eligible. If hie declines to acceptsuchi offic and it is available, and isoffered to him, his right to any pension orallowance ceases from that moment. See-tion 66 confirms this provision, and itenables anl officer to retire at his will afterthle age of sixty, without jeopardisinghis rights. We contend that if an officerhas thiat ight to retire at the age ofsixty years, the Government also havethe right to retire him, if they thinkfit.

Hon. D. G. Gawler: Where does theComumissioner conic in; hias he not torecomimend?

The COLONIAL SECRETARY:There miust of course be a re-omnmenda-tion from the Public Service Commis-sioner, and there was a recommendation

in this case. Section 66 is also carefulto reserve to the Government. the powerto superannuate, as the hion, iMlr. Gawlersuggests, onl the recommendation of thePublic Service Commissioner. In inda-vidual eases, where the health or abilityof the offiteer is called in question, theCommissioner would have the duty ofreporting to the Government as to the

saeof affairs after due enquiry. Therecan be no doubt that it mtmst rest with theGovernment of thle day to decide uponany qJUestion of general policy. Theoiction of the Commissioner surely ean.inot be questioned if thle Government de-cide to review any set of officers when theage contempilated by the Public ServiceAct and also by the Superannuation Actis reached. Anid if lie gives his recoin-niendation after that age is reached forthe retirement of a public servant not onlaccount of any demerit onl the part ofany individual officer, hut on account ofthe policy laid down it cannot be saidthat hie is aetinj inl ant', way iiosis-tently wvith the Public Service Act. Thelion. Mr. Colebatch wvent on to speakabout the aim of every British-speakingcommunity being to place members ofthfe Bench above temptation and want.and suggested that such practice hadproved admirable in thle war of renior-ig them] from Criticism. I may say thatimisbfar as funds have permitted thatpractice has been followed in WesternAustralia. The magistrates of thisState, however, are in the same positionin this regard as the rest of the publicservants. It is imiposible. in a countrylike this, with a small population, topay a.s generously as they do in muchlarg-er populated Siates. But the amountsp~aid are in p~roportion to those paid tooilier public servants, in any, event, thepresent Government have done nothing inthe direction of reducing the salaries of

t in stay of the State. Any mag-istrate ret iring in accordance with thegeneral p~olicyv of the Government wiltrecive all the benefits to which he isentitled. If somic magistrates have hada short term of service, and there aresome who have had, the fault surely doesnot rest with the Government? The lion.

929

930 [COUNCIL]

Air. Colebatch went on to say that theAttorney General had app~arently over-looked the fact that Air. Roe was a legalpractitioner. As a matter of fact theAttorney General did not overlook that,but drew attention to it, as will be ob-served from the file, when I place it onthe Tfable of tie I-louse, which I proposeto do at the conclusion of moy remarks.If is abundantly clear that Mr. Roe's easewas considered, together with the ques-ion of policy as regards the age of civil

servants. The hion. Air. Colebateb in-forms is that lie submitted tile motionbecause lie was entirely dissatisfied withthe answers given to [lie quest ions re-trardi ug the matter. Air. Colebatch pro-bably anticipated, from the manner inwhlich lie had prep)ared his questions, thatthe answers would show that Section 66of the Public Service Act had not beencomplied with. There never was any) de-sire onl file part of [lie Government tohide what has been done. Months ago,when 'Mr. Troy was retired, it was knownthat it was the intention of the Covern-nient to consider the question of retiringall magistrates when they reached the ageof sixty years.

Hon. U . G. Gawler: He was 66.Thle COLONIAL SECRETARY: The

question of filling Mr. Troy's positionn'aq held over until the whole of themagistrates who had reached the agereferred to could be dealt wvitli together.In due course the question was considered.and it was deemed adi'isable to revijewthe position when one of these officersreacehed the age of sixty. The Commi's-siotier was duly seized with the wishies ofCabinet. He was; given to understandwvhat the question of the general policywas.

Honl. J. F. Cullen: So that is the ex-planation ?

Hon. D. G. Gawler: Was there norecommendation ?

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Andhie took action accordingly.

lion. J1. F. Cullen: He was acquaintedwith the wishes of Cabinet first?

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Ihave said hie gave a recommendation.The lion. Mr. Colebatch pointed out

[hat there was a recommendation, and,that Mr. Cowan, although over 65, wasrecommended to be retained, and claimedthat the -recommendation .that Mr. Roeshould be retired. althIongh only 621/,was for no other reasoni than thatlie was sixty. There is no in-consistency in the position. It istrue tile Public Service Commissioner wasreferred to, and did grant his certificateunder Section 68, withi regard to its beingdesirable for Ali. Cowan [o continue inthe service. bat such certificate expressedthe opinion of thle Commissioner in re-gard to anl individual case, and withoutregard at all to the policy' of the Govern-ment. It was subsequently brought tohis knowledge that the Government de-sired to adopt a certain course, and hetook no responsibility' whatever in recomn-mending in accordance with the generalpolic y wvhich had been laid dIown. Therehave also been statements with regard toir. Dowley and Mr. W. Cowan. What

right, the lion. Mr. Colebatchl asks, hadthe Government to anticipate any recoin-niendation from the Commissioner? Thefacts of the case are these: Mr. Cowanquite recently reached the age of sixty,and it became the duty of the depart-ment to draw his attent ion to the mantter,in accordance wvith the pol1icy whlich hadbeen propounded by the Government.The Government wvould have consideredMr-. Cowan under that policy' , but just atthat period lie was under a very con-siderable personal anxiety of a familynature, and it was decided that no actionshould be taken. Subsequently it wvasdiscovered that Alr. Dowley would reacha similar age about the end of this year,and the Public Service Commissioner re-comnmended Cabinet to refraini from deal-ing will, Mr. W. D. .Cowvan's positionuntil [lietwo could be considered together.The Government have made no secret ofthieir intentions to place pirofessional menlon the bench. That policy was regardedwith favour by previous Governmients.The Government were desirous of givingeffect of the policy, and to bring it intooperation, when Ihie magistrates attainedhie age of sixty years, and to retire them

and place professional men onl the b)ench-

930

931Li SEPTEMBER, 1.914.1

H-on. J. F. Cullen: And laymen in the-Arbitration Court.

Sitting suspended from 6.16 to 7.30 p.m.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Be-fore tea I was pointing out that the Gov-erment had made no secret of theirpolicy, to place professional men on thebench., and also that that policy has beenaccepted by) previons -Ministers. Ofcourse the anomialyv exists in the case of11r. lloe "'ho "'as a lawy' er, but it will beunderstood that there "'as a general policyof ret iremnt at 60, and his case mustbe considered from that standpoint. Thehoi. Ilr. Colebatch said that lie had nottouched on the question fronm the point-of view of the cost to thle Public of pay' -ingr a pension to one man and a salaryto another. It can he assumed that theGovernment did not lose sight of thosepoints. The offiers had in any event theright to retire when they reached the age'of 60, and if they had retired then a pen-sion would have had to be paid to them.'The hion. -Mr. Holmes's speech showedthe amount of consideration the Govern-ment may expect from some lion. mem-bers of this so-called non-party House.It showed bias and venom, I liust say,in a very marked degree. The speechwas not merely abusive; it was charac-tenised by the imputation of the basest ofmotives without a shadow of evidencebeing given in support of it. He stated-that the reason Mr. Roe was retired wasthat lie had fined the Minister for Workssome years ago for a breach of the law.lie said the reason Mr. Dowley had beennotified that lie would be retired at theend of the year was that he had im-prisoned pilferers onl thle wharf at Fie-mantle who were members. of a large'association. 'Would the hion. member,dare to say that outside9 He wvould notdlare to do so. and if lie would not dareto say it ontside it is cowardly to usethose expressions within the prcincts ofthis Chamber. The speech was not aocriticism; it could not be classed as vitu-peration;. the only way in which I can de-scribe it is to 5a ,y that it was the languageOf the ale-house and of the racecourse

spieler. but I say it without casting anyreflection on the hion. member in that con-nection. He said members of Parliamentshould have free access to departmentalfiles; that they' should be able to go tothe heads of departments and demanoIany file in possession of the Government,and inspect that file. This shows just whatknowledge (hie lion gentleman has of themanner in which the civil administrationis carried on throughout all civ'ilised com-munities. There is absolutely no prece-dent for suich a course in any part of theBritish dominions, and I maintain itwould be a dangerons power to give, evento members of Parliament, it might beof nveat personal advantage to them to beable to peruise some of those files, and nodout it WOUld suit the bon. gentlemanadmirably if lie could see somle of thefiles in lire departments, The lion. meni-her said, "I will not tolerate tile system."I would be glad to know what action thelion, member intends to take. I am surewe will he in no way frightened by hisbluff and bounce. He declares that areign of terror exists in the civil service.

Bion. J. J. Holmes: I repeat it.

The CO'LONIAtL SECRETARY: Hementioned tlhe State steamers and theRoyal Commission appointed in con nee-lion wvith thle same, the appointment otmianager and the manager's qualificationsand then he dealt at some length withthe Auiditor General. One would thinkthat the lion. member was dealing witha no-confidence motion ag-ainst the Gov-erment. You, Mir. President, admittedthat you were allowing him plent 'y oflatitude, and I hope you will grant methe same favour because I intend to pur-sue him in his devious wanderings. Iwant to discount his sweeping and un-suipported statements and to shoiw lie hasno claim to be regarded as a friend ofthe civil service, and hie is the last manlinlWestern Australia who should speak ofa reign of terror existing in connectionwith the civil service of this State. It isniecessary' that I should supply evidencein order to SUplport thle attitude I havetaken up because Mr. Holmes's state-ments have beenr scattered broadcastthroneliout the community. They have

932 COTJNCIL.J

been published in the Press and no doubthave been believed by a great number ofpeop~le. I would like to know who is thisnew-found Solon who is criticising theadministration of the civil service of theState, and I would lik~e to kiiow whetherhie is qualified to adopt the role of censorof the Government in connection withtheir administration in this particulardirection. I dispute Mr. Holmes's quali-fications. Hie was Minister for Works in1901, and hie created a reign of terror inthe civil service-a reign of terror with-out parallel in the history of the civilservice administration.

The PRESIDENT: I think the lion.member is verging on the personal.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Wellthe lion. gentleman accused my Govern-ment of creating a reigni of tenror.

The PRESIDENT: Two wrongs donot make a right.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Iwvant to prove that the hon. gentlemancreated a reign of terror in the civil ser-vice during the time lie was a 'Minister ofthe Crown, a malter of three or f ourmonths, and, if necessary. I will move anamendment to permit my' self to do so.

The PRESIDENT: No amendmentwill permit of abuse.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Wewere accused of creating a reigni ofterror, and I wvant to prove wvithout in-dulging in abuse, that the hon. gentlemanctreated a reign of terror when lie occu-pied a ministerial position in 1901. Thelion. member proceeded to chop down twoworthy civil servants. He suspended thegeneral manager of railways wvithout ade-rinate cause, and a board of inquiry ap-poiiited by his own Government reinstated(hat gentleman. and ultimately boughthim out with an honorarium of £1,000.Then lie drove out thle nder-secre-tary-

Hon. F. Connor: How often did hiesuspend them at that price?

Thle COLONIAL SECRETARY: Thelion, member drove out the under-scre-Iarv. To quote his own words, he said-

Next I had to deal with Mr. AlpinThomsqon. As he had been 22 years inthle service I had to handle him as

gently as I could. The next thing thatcropped up was the appointment of a.secretary to assist me in my office. Imade inquiries and I found one whohad been in the ser-ice and who was acapable and qualified man.

Now this chivalrous champion of the civilservice proceeded to rout Mr. AlpinThomson who had been 22 years in theservice and had six mouths previously,onl account of lisk good conduct and effi-ciency, been given a rise of £50 a year.Who did the lion, member put iii his.place? A mni who had been dismissedf roin thle railway service for manipulat-ilg cash, and who had also been guiltyof disgr-aceful conduct. The lion. Mr.Holmes wvas publicly charged-

The PRESIDENT: I do not thinkthat has anything- to do with the motion.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Then-I will move an amendment if necessary.The lion. 2,entleman was allowed consider-able latitude.

The PRESIDENT: I ani allowing youto make any reply to thle remarks niadeby the lion. Mr. Holmes iii his speech.You will confine yourself to that.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: I amendeavourinig to prove that the lion. gen-tleman is not qualified to criticise theCovernment in eon nection with thle civilserv ice administration.

Hon. J. j. Holmnes: You prove thatthe Government have not created a reigniof terror.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Thelion. inember accused us of inconsistencyin connection with the public service ap-

pintIments, and I wvant to show that heis not qualified to criticise anyone, letalone the Government.

Hon. J. J. Holmes: It wvould take morethan you to prove that.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Thelion. gentleman "'as accused of using thisman as a pimp and the only reply he hadwas, Is thle information correct?" Thenlie spoke about the late manager of thesteamships. He condemned the appoint-ment. but the capable and qualified manhie appointed as a confidential tindersecretary was, as I said before, nothingbetter than a low down pimp and a cash

932

(I SnrTEnn, 1914.] 3

nmnipulattor. That is not all, and I wishto say that all may remarks are bearingonl the administration of the civil service.Mr. H-olmies, who has been gallantly de-fendinug the service here, appointed to thevacancy a manl from outside the servicein defiance of the Public Service Act, andthis was pointed out to him at the time.lie p)assed over a manl who is now secre-tart-' for railway' s, and who wvas entitledto the position vacated by Mr. Thomson.P~rotests were raised onl every side andthe newvspapers of Perth-I have seenthe files-commnented strongly against hisaction and ultimately the confidential sec-retary' lie appointed' was kieked out ofthe service. A board of inquiry was ap-pointed, and the report of that hoard wasto the effect that he wvas not a fit andproper Person to be the confidentialofficer of a 'Minister of the Crown. Yetthe hion. gentleman hais the effrontery tocriticise and condemn the Government inconnection with certain appointments.Then lie referred to the Commissionappointed to inquire into the State steam-ship service thus-

These gentlemen have done service tothe Ministers instead of to the Slate.Already one of these Commnissioners isbeing pushed for~ward. Instead of rc-porting to the Governor be. with hiscolleagues, reported to the Minister.Whether he received promotion or notI do tnt so v. but the fact remasins thatlid is now Under Treasurer in thisState. The oilier Royal Commissioner,who is assistant Pubilic Service Coin-mnissioner. is entitled to promotion andthe position is dangled before him. Heis entitled to it for rendering serviceto th~e Minislrv in defiance of the in-terests of the State.

The hion. gentleman proceeded to call thisplain language. It may he plain Ian-gnage. but it is certainly not brave lan-guage; it is the reverse of brave.

Hon. J. .1. Holmes: It is my honestopinion.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Thelion. gentleman has assailed these publicservanlts from the fortified castle of Par-liament. He should have had the courage

to go outside and say it, but he has not.These wvords imply that these two par-ticular servants are venal, corrupt, andhave sold their hionour and bartered theirmanhood for the sake of promotion. Thatis what the lion. gentleman said in effect;his words plainly implied that they hadsold themselves to the Government. Itis plaiii language, but it seems to me itis a gross abuse of the privileges of thisHouse. Even the Auditor General didnot escape his shafts. He insinuated thatthe Auditor General is under the maligninfluences of the Ministry. He said if theAuditor General's salary has to comebefore the Colonial Treasurer for rati-fication that power should he taken away.Every school bo y knows that the AuditorGeneral's salary does not come beforethe Colonial Treasurer for ratification,and that it does not come before Parlia-inent even for ratification, but that it isalread 'y provided for under the AuditAct. Although the lion, gentleman hasbeen a Minister himself hie apparently isnot awvare of this fact. I shall now leaveMr. Holmes and come back to the motion.

Hon. W. IV'ing-smill: A significant con-fession.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Iwish to express in a few words the at-titude of the iAlinistr 'v in regard to thesuperannuation of 'Mr. Roe, Mr. Cowan,and Mr. Foss. The Government are prL-pared to take the full measure of respon-sibilitv in connection with those retire-ments. What has been done has been donein consonance with the general policylaid down in respect to every officer.That policy mavuy not be acceptable to'Mr. Colebantol and Mr. Holmes, or evento at majority of the House, but thisHouse has no right whatever to inter-fere in matters of policy. It does notrepresent the people. It representsmerely a minority of the people. TheHouse that represents a majority hasoffered no objection. It is in sympathywith the policy of the Ministry in thisparticular direction.

Hon. F. Connor : Why are you here ItYou should resign.

933

934 [COU(NCIL.1

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: IfMr. Colebatch and Mr. Holmes want thepolicy changedl, they must first changethe state of parties in another place. Itis hopeless for them to attempt tile taskhere.

Hon. W. Kingsmill : Not in the least.The COLONIAL SECRETARY : Mr.

Colebatch said the Government had vio-lated the Public Service Act. Hf this isso, the public servants referred to Will beillegally retired and will have theirremiedy. He said it Nvas also stated bymembers of the House that Captain Harewas illegally retired. Captain Hare hastaken no action. I am sure, if hie badhad any grounds for action, he wouldhave appealed to the law; but hie has notdone so, and consequently the action ofthe Government stands upheld. Wehave no objection to the production ofthe papers. They are all contained inone file. I brought them with me and Ishall lay them on the Table now.

Hon. H. P. COLEBATCH (East-inreply) [7.47]: As the Minister hasagreed to the motion and done all I de-sired he should do, it is not necessaryfor me to say anything further thanthis: throug-hout my remarks in tablingthe motion I accepted it as a fact thatall that had been done had been done inpursuance of the policy of the Govern-menit. I desired this information be-cause it is my right, and the right ofdn ' member, to attack that policy if we

donot agree with it. I disagree with thepolicy of the Government in determiningto retire all public seirvants at the age of60, because I think it is detrimental tothe best interests of the public-theColonial Secretary' may not agree withme in th is-detri mental to the interestsof the civil servants and the justice dueto the civil servants, and because, not-withistanding What the Minister hassaid, I am still of opinion that it is con-trary to both the letter and the spiritof. the Public Service Act. Having gotthe information, that is all I desire.

Question put and passed.The Colonial Secretary laid the papers

on the table.

BILL-PLANT DISEASES.

Second Reading.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY (Hon.J. M. Drew-Central) [ 7.48] in movingthe second reading said : This is anamendment of thle Insect Pests Act. Thetitle has been altered to that of PlantDiseases Bill. The main object is togive the officers of the AgriculturalDepartment greater powers than theynOW possess. It is advisable that Ishould point out the difference betwveenthis measure mid the existing. legisla-tion. In the first place, we are takingpower to deal with neglected Orchards.At present we have no such power unlessthere is specific evidence of disease.Neg-lected Orchards have been proved tobe a menace to the fruit-growing indus-try. They are a danger to the orchard-ists who make their livelihood by grow-ing_ fruit, and a menace also to those wvhohave invested money in the cultivationof gar~ns and who keep those gardensscrupulously clean, whereas others leavedead fruit lying about, wvhich is a pro-lific cause of the spread of disease. TheBill enables action to he taken in orderto suppress this evil. The owner of aneglected orchard will be notified, andin default thme staff of the Fruit Indus-tries Commissioner iay step in and dowhat the owner of the property has hiesi-tated to do. Under the existiiw Actthere is no power to comp~el orchardiststo clean up) fallen and decaying fruit,unless it can be proved to be affectedwvith ai specific disease. There is nodoubt manyv orchardists collect time fal-len and decaying fruit. For them suchlegislation as this is unnecessary;but there are others who do notobserve the practice and, therefore,it is becomnnig necessary for the Govern-ment lo take action to compel them bylegislation to do the right thing. Thepower wvill be needed to deal with thefruit fly, which is commencing to spreadin districts ad 'jacent to the metropolitanarea. Then we seek to enforce the strip-ping, on days to be specified. This onlyrefers to non-commercial fruits such ascitronelles and several oranges and

934

[1 SEPTEIMER, 1014.] 3

lemons. The object is to prevent themfrom carrying over for the fruit fly dur-ing thle winter months. The proposal isthat fruit shall be stripped on a parti-cular day in each year. Another provi-sion prevents the storage or carriagewithin the State of secondhand fruiteases. These are stated to he the dis-semtinators of disease to a large extent.Cases containing affected fruit areemptied and very, often sent into clean,districts, with te result that disease iscreated in that locality.

Hon. W. Patrick: I thought the Rail-ways refused to carry any but newv cases.

'l he COLONIAL SECRETARY;-There are other means of communicationthan that of the railways. For instance,a "'al may come into the City, purchasefruit and take it into the country, w herehe opens the case and, having consunjedhe fruit. sells the case to someone else.

A further alteration provided for in theBill renders the destruction of pruningscopULItlsory onl all orchtadists. There isno lawv to-day to render it necessary thatthey shall do so. Many (10 not destroythle prunings from grape vines, bat placethem in heaps, where they become thebreeding grounds of pests. Power isagiven to compel the destruction Of allpruhlings. 'We also provide that depart-mental officers shall have the right toquestion vendors as to where the fruitwas obtained. Moreover, provision ismade for the registration of fruit shops,markets, and auction rooms, in additionto Orchards and nurseries. The object isthat the department may have a recordof the names and addresses of those whoairc selling frut. in order that They mayarrange for an inspection, when it seemsdesirable. Those represent the whole ofthe altered provisions. I move-

"That the Bill be now; read a secondtlme.Hon. Sir E. H. Wittentom : Is this

all original legislation, or is it takenfrom another Act?

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Itis taken from the Insect Pests Act, andI have simply dealt with the alterationsand additions.

On motion by Hon,. E. M. Clarke, de-bate adjourned.

BILL-RIGHTS IN WrATER AND)IRRIGATION.

Second Reading.D~ebate resumned from the 26th August.Hon. 11. P. COUBBATCH (East)

[7.57]: 1 air beginning to feel a verytender solicitude for this unfortunateBill1. In its original conception alli ts good intentions were over-shadowed b 'v party slhihholeths-ab-solute Ministerial control and Minis-teriail dictation. the abro.-ation ofthe freehold principle, and confisca-tion of private rights onl a large scale.Session after session t his House hasamended the Bill so as to make it a rea-sonable, a workable, and a just measure,only to Anid onl each occasion that thehurried prorogation of Parliament hasrendered its work useless. At the closeof the session of two years ago we wereinvited to a farcical conference in thevery last hours of the session-farcical Isay because we were told at the outsetthat unless wve agreed to a new Bill whichnieither House of Parliament had everseen--it would be impossible for themeasure to proceed. Last session wye re-duced our points of differences-as theMinister has exlplained-to four, andmany of us indulged hopes that a con-ference would result in a satisfactory ar-rangement. Suich conference was ren-dered impossible because of the decisionof the Speaker that this House could notpress a request for an amendment to amoney Bill-a decision of which I desireto say nothing further than' that it wvascontrary lo the decision of the previoussession at, this same Bill, and contrary tothe decision of last session regarding an-other money Bill-the Fremnantle Im-provement Hill. Such is briefly the pausthistory of this measure. What is to beits present fate! We are told that thesession is to he brought to a close in aday or two, and here we have a Bill ofseventy -nine clauses that has only justreached its second reading stage. TheM~inister will tell its that after the ex-

935

936 [COUNCIL.]

perience of the past twvo sessions mem-bers should be familiar with the pro-visions of the Bill, and ready to dealwith it promptly. I must rewind'him that since last session therehas been a general election to thisHouse, which has resulted in sevennew members being returned, at leastlive of wvhom represent constitu-encies more or less directly interested inthis measure. In two of those con-stituencies the electors rejected sit-ting members who had voted withthle Government on this measure,and returned candidates who sup-ported the view taken by themajority in this Chamber, wvho had pre-viously insisted upon amendments. Butthe Government seem to lhve no regardfor the will of the people so emphatically'expressed. A deliberate attempt wvassought to persuade the people of theHarvey district-the people most imme-diately concerned-that the action of thisHouse wvas responsible for the hanging.up of the irrigation wvorks in their dis-trict. Not only the Minister, bitt alsothe Chief Engineer for Watet Supplyand Irrigation went down amongst thesepeople and submitted schemes to them.With what result? The water users andintending water users turned dIown theproposals, not by a mere majority, butpractically unanimously. Then the elec-tion came along, and again by a greatmajority the Harvey people rejected theGovernment candidate and returned Mr.Clarke, who had taken a prominent partin pressing the amendments desired bythis Chamber. It is idle to contend thatthis result was not obtained on a popularfranchise. The water users and intendingwater users of Harvey are almost withoutexcejption Legislative Council electors.They have told the Government Jplainlyw'lit they wvant, and the Government re-fuse to give it to them. I, do not intendto discuss the merits of irrigation-weall admit them. But I must again sounda note of warning against thoughtlessexperimenting. It is matter of commonknowledge that in the State of Victoriathe Government, out of a total loan ex-

p~enditure onl irrigation of seven and aquarter millions sterling, have been com-pelled to write off over two and a halfmillions, debiting to the general taxpayerthe interest and sinking fund on thatlarge sum of money. Notwithstandingthis, the different undertakings in thatState still fail by £150,000 per annum tomeet the interest alone on the remainingfour and a half millions. In the Stateof California thie actual cost of irrigationundertakings has exceeded the officialestimates by twenty million dollars-orbetween four and five millions sterling;and both Victoria and California haveadvantages front the irrigation point ofview-particularly in the matter of thelarer local consuming population-thatwe do not possess here. Personally, asthe result of some study of this questionand frequent discussion on the spot withpeople interested, I am satisfied that theproper course for the Government tohave pursued was to introduce a Bill ap-plicable to one particular irrigationscheme, and to make a success of thatbefore tryitng to give this measure ageneral application. In the district ofHarvey everything is in readiness forsitch a scheme. We have the land andtlte men. The Government might wellhave put throughi a Harvey irrigationBill, specially drafted to meet the re-qutiremients of that place. They couldthen have submitted to the land ownersthere a scheme for their appro-val, and, treating the matter asone of national concern, might wellhave undertaken that the estimatedcost should be the maximum costso far as the settlers were concerned. Nobig irrigation scheme was yet put in bandwithout initial loss; and by confining itsoperations to one scheme the State couldhave faced such loss, if it had arisen,wvithout such a drain upon our resourcesas has resulted in Victoria from a policysimilar to that wvhich the Governmenthave embodied in this Bill. Howvever.the Government have chosen to disregardthe emphatically expressed wishes of thepeople most concerned, and we arc againfaced with the respotnsibility if dealing

[1 SEPTEMBER, 1914.]97

with this Bill in anl altogether inadequatetime. As for the four amendments al-ready alluded to by the Minister, thereare two to which I do not attach verygreat importance. Had a conference. beenheld l6st year, I feel sure members ofthis Chamber would have been willingto abandon the proposed amendmeits re-garding the beds of streams. The amnend-ments made in another place on that sub-ject will, I think, fairly meet the case.Then we hare the provision in regardto thle disposal of land thatmay he acquired by the Ministertnder this measure for the purpose ofirrigation. The Bill provides that suchland may be leased. This House desiredthat the land should he either leased or-sold at the discretion of the Minister.Apparently the Minister-usually soanxious for arbitrar 'y power-is afraidin this instance to trust himself with dis-cretionary' power. As far as I am eon-,cerned, the clause may now pass as itstands. A further demonstration of thefutility of the leasehold principle willdo no harm? and it will be an easy mat-ter for another Government to secure thedesired amendment so that freeholds canbe granted. So far as the other twoamendments arc concerned, I hope thatthis House will insist upon them. The,one relates to the extent of the operationof the measure. The Bill would applyit to the whole State, whilst our amend-ment would make it applicable to irriga-tion districts only. I think the principlethe Government should proceed onl isthat where they are not in a position todo anything th emselves, they should notinterfere with private people who aredoing something. In the present- stateof the exchequer I do not think it likelythat the Government will be able to domuch in the way of irrigation expendi-tore. In several parts of this Statethere are private people running smallirrigation works from streams unsuitablefor general use, and it seems the heightof folly to hamper them by demandingthat they shiall pay license fees, and berestricted in their operations. It hasbeen objected that if Part I. of thleBill is confined to irrigation districts it

may remove from control portions ofstreams the waters from which are re-quired for irrigation purposes in anirrigation district. In order to meetthis objection I have framed an amend-ment of which I informed the Ministerlast Thursday. It is in the form of aproviso at the end. of Part III.: "Pro-vided that, excepting as it applies toartesian wells, and to rivers, streams,water courses, lagoons, lakes, swamps, ormarshes the water for which is requiredfor irrigation under Part IV. of this Act,'this part of this Act shall apply only toirrigation districts constituted and de-fined uinder section 27 of this Act.'' This,I thinki will meet the nbjection alreadyreferred to, and give the Minister andthe contemplated irrigation boards all(the power they require. It. will aisoleavepeople in districts unsuitable for generalirrigat ion to go on with their smallundertakings without interference. Theother amendment I trust the House willinsist upon is the substitution of theword "either" for the word "bath" inthe first line of Subelause 3 of Clause79. I think this House will insist onreserving to itself the right to veto regu-lations. I do not hesitate to charge thepresent Administration w,,ith an over-whelmaing desire to legislate by means ofregulation. I could furnish dozens ofinstanees of this, but the very latest willsuffice. A day or two ago the Govern-ment promulgated regulations under theElectoral Act, one of which required theelectoral registrars to transfer namesfrom the Federal rolls to the State rolls.Thle Act gives no authority for such aregulation, hut apparently no one hasany, power to interfere with it. Thereare three other small points to which Iwould like to direct the attention of theHouse. In Clause 22 there is a provisoto meet the case of necessary works forthe maintenance of artesian wells. Isthe period of seven days long enouigh tomeet the case of the owners of artesianwells in the north? Then, in Clause 58,Subelause 10, we find a provision thatseems to have heen inserted in error.The Bill as originally drafted gavepower to control the flow of artesian

937

938 [COUNCIL.]

bores, but it was deemed expedient toeliminate this, and I think the subelauseI have referred to should also go oat.Lastly' , in regard to Part IX. which dealswith accounts, I have nO fault to find-with this part of the Bill, but lion, mem-bers. who have read the Bill will under-stand that in certain circumstances it iscontemplated that the Minister shall exer-cise all the functions of the board. ThisPart orders tile board to provide ac-counts and submit themn to theAuditor General, etcetera. All I de-sire is ain assurance that the samewill apply to the Minister whenhie is exercising the functions of aboard. I d0o not know that it is neces-sar 'y to submit an amendment, becautsethe Trading Concerns Act which waspassed last year will cover it. If sothat will satisfy me, With the few altera-tions which I have suggested I have verymuch pleasure in commending the Bill.I think if we can pass it we ought todo so, because I am sure, in thle districtof Harvey in particular, much good -willresult. I have much pleasure in support-ing the second reading.

Hon. J. F. CULLEN (South-East)[.8.2] :In moving the adjourn-ment for Mr. Colehatch I recog-nised that he had charge of thearguments when the Bill was lastbefore the House, and I am glad to findthat he'lhas mar-k-ed out a moderate andreasonable course on which I think hothIHouses of Parliament can come together.I am certain that the present definitionof river bed is a big improve-ment onl the original proposal. The mnat-ter has beeni so safeguarded that I thinkthat part of the Bill can he ac-cepted as it now stands. With re-gaird to the tenure of laud, if 1 readthe Bill now aright it will nottrouble me mutch. The Government takesoptional power to lease the land. I haveno objection to that, but I do not recog-nise in that that thle Government divestsitself of the pow.er to dispose Other-wise of the land, so I am willing tolet that go, regarding it as purely oneform in which the Government maybe able to deal with this land, and a

form in which they will find itentirely futile to try to deal with.I have only one other point to re-fer to. I want to impress on the:House the need to insist on the lastmentioned change in the Bill; that is withregard to retaining power for eitherHouse to control regulations. Theargument pLut forward against thisis most illogic al. The Colonial See-retary and other Ministers say thatsince two Houses are necessary to make-a law two Houses should be neces-sarny to prevent a misapplication of the,latv or a wrongful extension of it..T1hlese are the two things that mighthappen under regulations iii the hands ofa particular -Minister. He maight bymeans of regulations, try to legislate, orhie might misapply the legislation. Iwvant to show how illogical it is to saythat because two Houses are necessaryto make a law, it should require bothHouses to preent the Government mis-applying the law or wrongfully extend-ingo it. If they want a logical statementof the question it is this :Since twoHouses are necessary to wake a law twoHouses are necessary to apply thle law.An alternative statement of that is,that since one House can preventParliament making a. Iaw', much moremnay one House prevent the misappli-cation of the law by mecans ofregulat ions. I hope the Colonial Seere-tary wvill see thant his argument in entirelyilloc-ical. and that this House is impres-serd with thea danger that threatens it. AGrovernmnent with certain fads will tor-ture an Act of Parliament to carry outthose fads and say "Let the aggrievedgo to the Supreme Court to gset it up-set. 7' I "ea a far simpler way to get itupset, and that is to insist that eitherHouise shall *have power to preventthe misapplication of the law thatthe legislature has passed. W"hat acostly process it would be to go tothe Supreme Court and fight the Gov-ermnent! The thing is preposterous.However, I hope this Hlouse will adoptthe course suggested by Mr. Colebatchand accept the suggested amendment,especially as Ministers themselves put

938

[I SEPTEMBER, 1914.] 3

it into a very important Bill and passedit into law. I heartily support the see-ond reading of the Bill,

Hon. 8. Al. CLARKE (South-West):[5.22] : For many years I have takena live interest in this question of irriga-tion, and I was one of the persons in theSouth-West who, in order to acquaintmyself with the suabject as much as pos-sible, took advantvige of a trip T madeto the Eastern States to investigate the"matter. The Government of Victoriawere kind eInough to place a motor carat my disposal, and. also the services ofthe Engineer of Water Supply in that:State, who had instructions to give meall the information I askcd for. I se-xtired plans and the report of one of thebiggest schemes iii Victoria, namely, thatat Goiilburn Valley. In short, I gath-ered a great deal of information. It isa most extensive scheme and beautifullycarried out, but unfortunately irrigation-was conspicuous by its absence. It con-:sisted of a block of land at least 12. milesby 24 miles, and the report whic~h I had,set forth that there had been spent uponit one and a half millions of money, and,since that time I believe the amount hasbeen increased to something like threemillions. All this shows how cautious-we require to he. Coming to irrigationin Western Australia I would say thateoonditipns here are not like the conditionsin the other States. There are very fewlarge streams here, and not a great quan-tit 'y of land which will lend itself toirrigation by gravitation. That being the,ease it does not follow that an Act whichwill suit a State like Victoria will suit-the conditions in Western Australia. Tathis connection I wish to say that thoughthere ate these huge schemes in Victoria-one does not see much of irrigation. Inthat vast scheme which I saw, there werehundreds of miles of water channels, andthle main off-take was a stream 100 feetwide and running 6 feet deep, but.,strang to say, in my travels through itI only saw irrigation in three places.In Western Australia I have learned alot since the Bill was first introduced, andamiongst other things I hiave found thatirrigation is one of those matters tb-at

must he gone into carefully. Lookingover somie of the lucerne plots as I havedone, I have found, when water has beenused on those plots, yon. have not reachedthe complete scheme, for the simple'reasonthat there are always difficulties in dieway, such as couch grass, sorrel, etc, Wefind that niany of the patches which wereirrigated several years ago are practi-cally abandoned at the present time, andall this emphasises the fact that it is oneof those things you want to he very care-fuI about. Since I first offered opposi-tion to these proposals-an OppositiolLwhich Mr. Colebatch has so ably sup-ported-I have been through the South-West and the general opinoin there was-that none of the existing rights to set-tlers should he interfered with until suchilime as the water was required for thebenefit of the l)LUblic at large. In severaldistricts I went through they endorsedmy action to the utmost. The Harveypeople were much annoyed with me in the'first instance when the Governmentdropped the Bill, but, as has beenremarked by Mr. Colebatch, I se-cured a majority at Harvey on theoccasion of miy recent election. Ihave before me now a letter from theprincipal society-the Citrus Society-in that district advising me that the Gov-ernment should compromise in such away that it will suit them and suit theother parts of the province -which I re-present. I submit that the South-Westis [hie principal plac where irrigationis going to be carried on. The societysuggest that there should be a compromisein the directionI which Mr. Colebatch hasindicated. They say with regard to the]iatural waters they do not want anyinterference with the streams, and I donot think there is a single place in theSouth-West where they would consentto have an irrigation scheme with theexception of the Harvey River, and inthat particular case, the whole of tha~triver for miles belongs absolutely to theCrown, and there is nothing to preventthe Government at any time, subject to[he amendments already made in this Bill,getting to work and creating an irriga-tion scheme there. I am only voicing the

939

940 [COUNCIL.]

views of the electors I represent. Imay be permitted to read the letterwhich I have received from the Wellin0-tonl Agricultural Society; it is as fol-lows:-

At a committee meeting of the Wei-lington Agr-icultural and Pastoral So-ciety, held to-day in Bunhbury, I wasrequested to communicate with you inreference to one very important clausein the Irrigation Bill which should beamended to prevent unnecessary inter-ference with private rights. It is con-sidered that the Irrigation Bill shouldcontain only such provisions as aresuitable to the conditions and circum-stances of the locality where it is in-tended to apply, and that Part III.should be so amended so as not to ap-ply to any lands or streams, etc., out-side the district of an Irrigation Board,nor ally streams, etc., below the catch-ment area inl the district of an Irriga-tion Board which cannot he used asfeeders for thre catchment reservoir.Clause 4 is apparently obtained fromVictoria, New South Wales, andQueensland, where the conditions areentirely different from the conditionsof the South-West of Western Aus-tralia, where in the winter season aver ' large portion of the land pur-Chased by' the present owners consistsof streams, lagoons, swamps, etc.d (o not want to labour the question. I

want to support the Bill, but at the sametime to leave the settlers in the full en-joyment of the privileges, which theynow have, to use the water for irrigation,conditional of course on their not inter-fering with the rights of those situatedbelowv them. 1 wvant these people to goon experimenting and this is their wish.With regard to interference with ordi-nary riparian rights, I am aware that theGovernment wish to control these streamsin order to prev'ent litigation. Inl thisconnection, I want to say that one personwho was very much in favour of thisBill and of the Government controllingthe streams Volunteered to me the otherday that he thought the majority of thepeople lhad enough commnonsense not toget into litigation over this matter and

that they would settle their differencesamongst themselves. Onl this particularstream they did have tvo or three tilts,hut at the same time they are absolutelyunanimous now that they could fix it upamongst themselves and that they did riotwvant any interference from the Govern-mnent in this respect. A great deal hasbeen said about the stream at the Narro-gi'n brook. There was litigation over thatbut I think now both. parties are sorrythey ever touched it am more thanever satisfied that it would be against theinterests of all concerned to do anythingin the direction of controlling thesewaters by the Government. These peoplewill fix thingas up1 amongst themselves.Take the Serpentine, for instance. It isa case in point. I think that there aresome 14 or 15 settlers there. There is onegentleman down below whoi is not usingthe water for irrigation purposes and%%vho, I think, objects to it. The samething applies to the Narrogin brook, forthe litigants there will settle thingsamongst themselves. The verdict of thepeople in the South-West province, withthe exception of Harvey, is that it shouldhe left alone until such time as the lands,are wvnnted for irrigation purposes. Theamendment which is already madewill meet the case, so that no watersoutside that irrigation area shall ever beinterfered with until they are requiredfor public purposes. I am delighted tofind that [he Government have come tothe same view that we hold in regard tothe Bill, which is that the people shouldhave the right to the veto that is in thene'w Bill. When these amendments,which are to be moved by the bon. Mir.Colehatch,are inserted in thoeBill, I thinkit w'ill be as much] as is required for thepresent. There is this point, that theGovernment do not kaow as munch aboutirrgalion as many of the individuals whohave heen at the game. Therefore I say,let them make a success of one smallpatch, and then I am perfectly certainif they do make a success that the set-tlers in their own interests would be will-ing later on to give the Government thePower that they are now asking for. Ido not like to find fault, but if any hon.

940

[I SEPTEMBER, 1914.] 9.

member will go down to the State farmand would refer to what has t-ranspiredthere they will find that the "rich lucernepatch" is not now a rich patch oflueerne, but to a great extent a patch ofcouch grass mixed with some other grass.It is no use disguising the fact. I couldgive in detail instances of where they area positive failure. It is idle to say thatthe reason is so fid so. It is a failure,110 matter what the reasons are, andshows want of knowledge in the matterof irrigation. I want to support thesecond reading of this Bill, hot I hopethe Government will see their way togrant the concessions indicated. Theqiiestion. of vesting the whole of thewaters in the State as a preliminary Ishall certainly oppose. I shall be lpleasedto support those amendments that are tobe moved by the bon. -Mr. Colebatch.

Hon. A. SANDEIfRSON (iMetropolitan-Suburban) [3.38]: 1 suppose we willhave to go through the tedious Th;rce ofthe Qovernment introducing a highly con-tentious measure at i time when we wishto assist them, and when they muust wishthemselves to he devoting the whole oftheir attention to the administration ofthe country. It is quite obvious fromwhat the hon. Mr.T Colebateb and the]ion. Mr. Clarke have said, for both maybe considered to be authorities on thematter to a large extent, that they haveinken up a certain stand with rezard toseveral or fiese clauses and are preparedto discuss. them at considerable length.

I-on. J. W. Kirwan: They havechlanged their minds as a result of thereceut elections.

Hon. A. SANDERSON: Mvf hon.friend has even more recently come fromthe elections than the lion. menrber whohas interjected. He has come with thisatthor ity.

Hon. J. W. Kirwan: He has climbed,dawn.

Hon. A. SANDERSON: He hasniot climbed down, h.le is prepared to dis-cuss the Bill clause by clause. Here wehave had the Bills of Sale Act,' the PlantDiseases Bill, and now we come to theRights in Water and Irrigation Bill. I

Would venture to say, and I want to im-press it Upon. the leader of the Rouse,that at the present juncture, without wak-ing things worse than they are, no onecan appreciate more than the ColonialSecretary himself the importance of care-ful administration of the affair of thiscountry, without any further Acts of Par-liaiment except those which are absolutelynecessary to enable the Government tocarry on. I would he prepared to rejectthe measure without hesitation in thesame way as the Plant Diseases Bill andthe Bills of Sale Act Amendment Bill,freely admitting that they are questionsof some importance, and that in othercircumstances possibly it would he ad-vantageous to put them through with orwithout amendments. We bad the as-surance. of the leader of the House, aswe had last week, thmat hep wished to carrythrough the urgent business of the coun-try as quickly as possible, that the generaleleclions had been fixed, and yet we arecalled upon to go through the solennfarce of passing the second reading ofa Bill, knowing perfectly well that thereis niot the slighltest chance of the Govern-inent Putting it through. I do not knowthat any appeal I ean niake -would in-fluence the leader of the House, so I amgoing to ask his supporters if they can-not see the force of thie argumentand if they will riot appeal to him tohave done with this. I do riot wish totouch on the critical state of affairs, be-cause I amn convinced, and every day con-vinces me more,' that there is no one moreacquainted with the seriousness of theposition of affairs than the leader of theHouse himself. We have members whoare supporting the Government and towhose utterances they doubtless attachgreat weight, at any rate &. great dealmore weight than mine. If this Bill goesinto Committee there are two members atleast who have spoken on the secondreading and who represent a considerablesection of the community and who havespoken with personal knowledge of thedistricts affected, who will hare a gooddeal to say on the clauses. We knowperfectly well that when we get into Corn-

94.1

fl42 [COUNCIL.]

mittee they will, 1 will not say wrangle,but discuss the measure, clause by clause.1, at any rate, cannot be accused of hav-ing delayed the business of this countryduring the last few weeks. I have beentemupted on more than one occasionto give utterance to my thoughts, but Ihave refrained. The only thing .I havedone is to assist so far as I possiblycould, and .I think the leader of theHouse will do nie the justice to say thatI did assist him in getting through ameaI~sure which lie declared, rightly orwrongly, was essential for the Govern-nient in order that they might meet thepresent position of affairs. I stronglysupported him, practically giving him ablank cheque in connection with twoBills which hie said. and 1. took his assur-anice for it, were essential for the Gov-erniment of the country. Can lie say soon this occasion? here is a Bill whichinvolves expeniture. Does the lion.mneier think that the present momentis opportune to bring forward a measureof this kind involving further liabilitieson the credit of the State? It is quiteobvious that I ant unable to effect myobiect without the assistance of thesesupporters of the Government. I sin-cerely trust thiey will use menus whichthiey have at their command in order toprevent the House and the Governmentfrom wasting their time. They knowperfectly well thie position of affairs.Everybody here, even the man in thestreet. is able to form some opinion ofthe present position. If the Governmentwill insist on dragging us into a highlytechnical aiid highly contentious debatesuch as we have aklreatdy had in the Billsof Sale Act Amendment Bill and willhave over the Plant Diseases Bill andsuch as we shall certainly have over thisRights in Water and Irrigation Bill, Ishall certainly vole against the seconidreadiiig, and if we get into Committeethe Government will have only themselvesto thank for a serious waste of time.

Hon. J. CORNELL (South) [8.411:It is with a certain amount. of diffidencethat I rise to speak to the Bill. I be-lieve I Smn correct in saying that this is

the first occasion on which I have spokenon any stage of this Bill during the threeoccasions which it has been before theHouse. The lion. member who has juistsat d]own has referred to the introductionof the Bill as a solemn farce. I hopehe Fore I resume my seat to chiange thatsolemniity into a little hit o~f liiniowr. Itmust be taken into consideration thatthis Bill was introduced before the pre-sent crisis evenuied in -Europe. I takeit that the Afinistrv has deemed it ofsuielnt iniportahlce to proceed with itdespite the gloom by which we are sur-roundedl at the present time. Probablyit is also necessary to lprovide a littlepowder and shot to meet that issume whichis paving the wayv for the lpeacefnl pass-mg of the Bill. The action of this Housereminds me very mutch of the 'retreatfrom Kabnl, with the exception that therewas one man left to tell thie story. Evi-dently there is not on this occa sion goingto he any man left here so far as theopponents who have op)posed it rightthrough the piece' are concerned. Iaccused the lion. 'Mr. Baxter this after-noon of turning a somersault, and T nowreciprocate so far as those arrayedagainst thme Bill hefore us are concerned.Tisg Bill in the past was more bitterlycontested and mnore bitterly fought thaneven the celebrated Arbitration Act. Butthis Bill, so far as I am concerned, andthe lparty with which I am identified, hasnever been muade a part ' Bill and I amfree to vote as I think fit and have beenfree to (10 so ever since it was flirst intro-

(d Wed. There arc certain clauses of theB,ill which have heen opposed throughtwo sessions. The Bill, to nse a familiarterm. has been slaughtered in Committee-there are imre ways than one of killinga Bill in this House. I think it reachedthe stage of a conference and Mr. Cole-batch in his very graceful back down-

Hon. H. P. Colebateb : I have nothacked down at all. The Bill is exactlywhat we have tried to make it all aloiig.

Hon. W. Kin gsinill: He is very an-noyed because we will not throw it out.

Hon. J. CORNELL : Mr. Colebatebreferred to Part III. of the Bill dealing

.942

[I SEPTEmBEJI, 1914.] 4

with the beds of watereourses, and saidhe was prepared to waive it had it goneto another conference. Though I havestuck to the Minister in charge ofthe Bill right through the piece, I intendto divide the House on tis measure if1 canl get another supporter.

Hon. H. P. Colebatch: Do not youwant it -now?

H-on, J, COBNELL: I do not want it,but I wvant to show to the country intheir true light its so-called representa-tives and their hurried retreat from theposition they took up.

Hon. H. P, Colehatch: They have notdone anything of the kind. We are pre-pared to pass the Bill in the form wewant it.

Hon, J. CORNELL: Coining to theleasing of irrigable land, I do not thinklion. members who have opposed the Billright through will say I am wrong whet.I assert that they have backed down, andabsolutely too.

Hon. J1. F. Cutler1 : Be thankfnl if yonget something.

Hon. J. CORNELL: I nra thankfulfor nothing. T admire consistency. Wehave two bows -with which to fighbt at theelections-the bow of consistency for two7sessions in opposition to the Bill, and thebowv of inconsistency-n death-bed re-pentaiiee at the eleventh hour.

Hon. W. Patrick: A rainbow.Hon. J. CORNELL: The question of

leasing land was fought in season and,out of season. The opposition rangedtgain st the Bill endeavonred to make thetenure freehold.

I-on. H. P. Colehatch: That is wrong'H~on. S. CORNELL: When they did

not succeed in that, the4y were preparedto malke it optional. lea-sehold or freehold.

Hon. W. Patrick: That statement isincorrect. We always had the alternativeproposal.

Lion, J1. CORNELL: I do not want torefer to Flausard and take tip the time ofthe House. Since I entered thisChamber I have only once referred toMa nsard.

Hon. W. Kingsmill: But you havefilled a lot of it.

Hon. J. CORNELL: And I will fill alot more. That occasion was in connec-tion with the Electoral Districts Bill, andI am sure opponents of this Bill do notdesire me to refer to Hansard on thisoccasion and to use their own argumentswith which to choke them. I think theywere satisfied with my quotations from11ansard on the last occasion, and do notdesire me to again use their own argu-mnents as anl answer to what they have putforward. This question of leaseholdversus freehold has been fought consist.catty. and I would like to see it foughtconsistently to the finish. Now, however,lion, members back down and the verythin veneer-a pin would not be neededto scratch it-is that they are preparedto give this away because they think thatthe people who take leasehold willnot be successful. This is a verythin argument. Hon, members whohare now climbed down could haveeasily climbed down when the Billfirst came before the Chamber, andtheir pessimism would have had a chanceto he converted into optimism as the mea-sure could have heen in operation 18months ago. There is another provisiononl which hon. members intend to insist,anti that is the veto of regulations. Mr.Cullen has said he thinks it imperativethat the Council should insist on eitherHouse of Parliament being able to dis-agree with regulations.

Hon. J. P. Cullen. You will admireConsistency, will you not 1

Hon. J. CORNELL: Yes, if it werepractised when other Governments werein power. It was never practised be-fore, and this House has not insisted iiithe past because it had no rights in thisdirection. Since 18.98 the matter of thev-eto of regulations has been optional.Section 11. of the Interpretation Art pro-vides that both Houises of Parliamentshall disagree with regulations. and Air.Cullen has questioned the leader of theHouse on his logic, and stated that eitherHouse should be in a position to dis-agrTee with regulations. It takes bothHfouses to make an Act of Parliament;this House cannot make an Act of Par-liament without the conrrence of the

943

944 [COUNCIL.]

other, or vice versa. When both Houseshave concurred on a piece of legislation,why should one House be able to disagreewith a regulation framed by the Admin-istration q1

ion. AF. Hamersicy: Because it is notlaw.

Hon. J. CORNELL: it is because hon.members are finding out that the Govern-mnent now in otice can get over the doingsof (his Rouse and] the checking of theirlegislation by thie passing of regulations.That is wiliy they want the power. Ifthis Honse had insisted on this rightwhen other Glovernments were in power,there might have been some consistencyin its attitude, but it did not insist be-cause the Government iii power previ-ously looked through the same kind ofspectacles as members here did.

Ion. W. Patrick: Thiat is all rubbish.

Ron. 3'. CORNELL: It may be.Hon. W, Kingsinill: It is amusing,

a' tyhlow.lion. J. COR-NELL: i am pleased that

I am amiusing some members. I have notheard of this House having disagreedwith a regulation made by any Adminis-tration which preceded the Scaddan Gov-eirniment.

Hon. AV. Patrick: Ohllion. J. CORINELL : And until my as-

sertion is refuted 1 will stick to it.Ho0n. IV. Iiingsmill: There was Wil-

son's regulation under the Education Act.i-on. J. CORNELL: The State steam-

ers would never have been established-lion. F. Connor: And a good job too.Hon. J. CORNELL: That may he so,

but there are many other things whichwould never have been established. Thereare the State sawmills.

Hon. P. Connor. A good job too.Hon. J. CORNELL: Yes, so far as

the people the hion. member representsare concerned, but probably not a goodjob so far as the people w1hom I endea-vour to represent are concerned.

Hon. WV. Patrick: A fine job for thefinances, at any rate.

Hon1. J. CORNELL: But where theshoe pinches is that the Government havedone by regulation much which theycould not do by legislation, and this is

cutting into the trousers' pockets of manyof the people whom some hon. members.here are sup posed to represent.

Hon. F. Connor: They will get to theMeats presently.

Hon. J. CORNELL: And if the Scad-dait Government get another tease of life,.a lot. of those people will not have seatsin their trousers at all.

lion11 WV. King-smill: Much less in.Parliament.

lion. J. F. Allen: Why not take theirtrousers from them?

I-Ion. J. CORINEIL: Then some of'themi ins be had uip for having no visiblemeans Of support. I will divide, theRHouse on) this question and I appeal tothe Minister-

Hon. W. Patrick : To oppose his ownBill.

lion. J. CORNELL: Not to back downone iota. He has you in a corner now.)-ou are apiologising and trying to glossit over, and I hope lie will stick to hisguns.k

Hon. J. F. Cullen : Even if he loses theRill?

Hon. .1. CORNELL,: And thar he wvillforce a division on all clauses, becauseI am satisfied there is either a divine in-spiration-

lion. F. Connor: I rise to a point oforder. The lion, gentleman has said hehais yo"in a corner. If hie addresses.the House through1 you. MrIT President, we%%ill Linderstand him. hut whom does heniean when lie says he has "you" iii acorner!q

The PRESIDE-NT: The lion. niemberwill address the House through tie Chair.

Hon, J. CORNELL: If 1 have notmade myself clear, I desire to say thatthe leader of the House has bonl. memberswho have consistently opposed this Billiii a corner.

Ron. H. P. Cohebatch: Not a memberof this House has opposed the Bill.

Eon. J. CORNELL: And I hope hewill keep them in the corner, and remem-her die old adage that once an enemy be-gins to give ground do not give any, andlie will eventually give the lot. So faras the fate of th Bill in this House isconcerned, it appears there will not be

944

[1 SVwmMnsn, 1914.]94

much difference whether it is passed orlost, except this, that if it is passed wewill he able to point out to the people towhom we will appeal in connection withthe elections for another place shortly,t hat a big section of this House were re-sponsible for irrigation not being appliedduring the last two years.

H7on. WV. Kingsil~l: You will do thatAnyway.

Hon. J. CORNELL: And that it -wasonly on a death-bed repentance that they

-areed to the Bill being passed at all.No doubt mny remarks are irritating to alot of hon. members. I will let 11Mr. Allenoff and absolve 1dm from all sin. I amniot directing my remarks to hion. mem-hers who have just been returned to theHouse.

Hon. .J. F. Mllen : Then we are not iiithe cornler?

Hon. J. CORNELL: I hope those lion.members have not been touched by thedivine inspiration or by the party lashwhich has broug~ht about this somersault.

lion. .7. J7. Holmes: It is (he new in-flutence being felt.

Hon. Fi. Con nor: What do you meanby "somersault"?

Ron, J. CORNELL: The hon. memberhas seen more than one circus andought to know. I have nothing moreto say except to tell hion. membersthat. had the y followed the lines of Con-sistenev and fought this Bill to bhe, lastditch, as I expected them to do, 1 wouldnever have got up to speak. I leave thematter entirel y in the hands of thie Mlin-ister, and hope he will insist on the Billas printed being agreed to.

Hon. D. CG. GYAW1LER (M~etropolitan-suburzban) [9.11: 1 wish to say onlya few words on one aspect of the Bill,namely, the definition of "watercourses" asinterpreted uinder thie judgment de-livered by the Full Court in a recentease, shortly referred to by Air, Clarke.That judgment wilt have a, rather seriouseffect on the Bill. A particular case wasbroughlt in conniection with the NIsarroginBrook, and T understand there are manyother streams in Western Australia simi-lar to the Narrogin Brook. It was heldby the Full Court in that ease that the

Narrogin Brook was not a watercourse.If that is so, and there are many othersuch streams in Western Australia, itseems to me that the definition of "water-course" in the Bill will require consider-able amendment before the Governmentcan bring those streams under the oper-ation of the measure. I pointed it out tothe Solicitor General, and lie admits thereis a great deal to be said for this, butunfortnnately it is now too late to gointo the qutestion of amendment. TheChief Justice held that the brook was awatercourse; but the evidence beforehint showed that, although the stream ranat certain times of the year, still in placesit (lid not have a definite channel. But hesaid hie thought he could apply the Eng-lish decisions, where definite c~hannelsand banks were necessary, to the con-ditionis of oin Australian watercourse,and lie thought there were sufficientindications of a watercourse about thisp~articullar brook to enable him to ar-riveat a decision. The Full Court said thatwhereas the Chief Justice very rightlyhad been guided by the English decisions,still on his own shbowing this was not awatereourbe, nd they hlcd that lie -waswr~ong in declaring it to be a water-course. In these circumstances I. sub-mit that the definition of "watercourse"will have to be Considerably altered be-fore any of those streams can come tinderthe operations of the measure. There isanother point. Part of the definition of" watercourse" is that it flows in a naturalchannel. One of thep grreat features ofour brooks is that many of them do notflow in natural channels, by' reason ofthe fact that. many owners have guidedthle streams in their own direction bycutting and widening and deepening thechiannels. Strictl 'y speaking such a chan-nel is not a natural channel within theleg,,al definition of the word. One of theunfortunate owners, bringing an actionuinder his riparian rights, was not al-lowed to .succeed, and therefore lie isnow thrown back on the position thatreallyv if the stream was a watercoursehe would be better offtiunder the Billthan without it; he would have more

945

946 [COUNCIL.]

advantages under it than uinder his ordin-ary riparian rights. I have the sameknowledge of the Bill as Mr. Cole-batch has, and I am quite prepared to gothe lenagth he has gone, even at the riskof having it throlva up at mne bhat I amclimbing down. We are told that thisHouse should compromise, and directlywe do that we are told that we areclimbing down.

Hon. J. W. Kirwan: Why did youdelayed the passage of the Bill for twoyears.

lion. D. G. GAWVLER: When wecome, as has been suggested, to our rightsenses we are told we should not do any-thing of the sort, but should still go onobstructing what they call democraticlegislation.

Hon. J, W. Kirwan. Why did younot climb down two years ago?

Hon. D. G. 6-AWLER: Mly friend istaking a weak and childish view of it.I am prepared to take the risk beforemy constituents of climbing down on themeasure. All 1 am doing is meetinghon. members in a fair compromise, andif they do not recognise it as that I amprepared to leave it to my' constituents.I have nothing further to say in regardto this. I am prepared to follow Mr.Colebateli's lead and endeavour to makethis a workable Bill. In regard to thefeeling of the country, it must he remnenm-bered that the Government took carethat the Bill and all that the Council didin regard to it should go before thecountry at the last election. Yet we findthat the ver~y district where the Bill wasmost needed unhesitatingly returned Mr.Clarke.

Hon. V. HAM-EESLEY (E1ast) [9.8]:At the risk of taking uip a little time Ido not intend to remain in my' seat whenaccused of being prepared to support theBill by climbing down. It only makesme feel that the Bill requires a very muchcloser scrutiny than wve have given it..I understood that we wvere to have noncof these contentious measures brought be-fore us, that we were not to have thisBill dealt with in the closing hours of thesession. Yet when it is suddenly lauinched

upon us we are accused of climbing downbecause we evince a desire to do our bestto meet the Government; and Mir. Cornelltells us of the great disappointment hewill feel if we pass the measure, andthat rather than see it passed by us inan amicable spirit hie would he inclinedto divide the House Upon it. It makesme feel th t we must go very carefullyinto the details of the measure, and notaccelpt the assurances of Air, Colebatchand Mir. Clarke and others, that the Billis all right. Personally, I was quite pre-p~ared to go as far as possible in meetingthe Government in their desire to get aworkable measure before the country.But i wish to warn bon. members thatright through this measure arc clausestaken from the .Queensland Act, particu-larly those referring to the artesian bores,which are not likely to give satisfaction.I can produce correspondence fromQueensland warning the squatters of theWest to accept none of those clauses.Those clauses were allowed to get intothe Queensland Act in the belief thatthey would prove workable, but after avery brief experience of their effect thesquatters organised deputations to theGovernment asking to have the sectionsdealing with artesian bores excised fromthe Act. Those sections have been foundunworkable and detrimental to many in-terests, particularly the pastoral. Werequire irrigation in the South-Westernportion of the State, hut I do not seewhy we slhould rashly embrace the arte-siani wells throuighout the lengthb andbreadth of tihe State. These artesianwaters provide opportunities for p~rivateenterlprise to spend thousands of poundsin the further development of areas whichprobably the Govern mernt wvill be unableto handle for some years to come, andby exercising control of them the Gov-ernment -will only interfere with thosewho may wish to put down artesian bores.and wvill certainly hamper them in otherdirections. T do not see why duties shouldhe taken on by the Crown which arelikely to interfere with the pastoral in-terests as they have done in Queensland.In Victoria the commissioners, as Mr.

946

[1 SEPTEmBE, 1914.] 4

Colebatch announced, have found it neces-sary to write off huge sums of money:.

a(d one of the most recent acts of theVictorian cOmumissioners was to recoin-mntd that the Government send away forexperts to show their people how to growvegetables. It was claimed that theChinamen in Victoria could show themhow to do that without sending out ofthe country to America and elsewhere forexperts. Something of the same kindmay eventuate here after we have spentmillions of money on the schemes. Fromthe reiiiarks which have fallen from thosehon. members who twit us with, havingclimubed down I recognise that they willbe disappointed if the Bill goes through.1 am prepared to join with Mr. Cornellat every stage and on every clause onwhich hie cares to divide the House.

Hon. 'W. Kingamill: This a doublesomiersauLlt.

Hon. V. HAMEIRSLEY: It is no som-ersanit at all. Every time there is adivision in regard to artesian hares T willdo my best to delete the clauses fromthe Bill, beenause I recognise that theyhave been deftrimental in Queens-land, and there is no necessityAin include them in this measure.T was cinite prepared to forego anydivsc.sion of this Bill, and to obviateally watsting of the time of this House;hut T will not calmlyv sit down and betwitted with being aI somersaulter, orwith elimlbing down, or with anything ofthat sort, There is no doubt about theattitude of Mr. Cornell. He hopes thatthle Bill will not get through the House.because its rejection is going to be oneof those sweet little dishes 'Mr. Cornell'sparty are going to present to the electors

shrlwhen another Chamber is to gobefore the country. The 'y want to createsome screen for the purpose of hidingsomnething that I am not quite sure of;they evidently want to make use of theUpper House as a screen for some short-comings with which we are not concernedat present.

Hon. J1. W. KIRWAN (South) [9.16].1 am one of the members who havetaken an interest in this Bill since it

first came before the Chamber, althoughthe electors whom I represent are notimmediately concerned with the measure,inasmuch as it would not affect them inany material way. However, I have seenthe operation of irrigation works inother parts of the iorld, and I havefelt it my duty, "k a member of thisHouse, to (d0 my utmost to assist theGovernment in having the Bill passed.In my opinion it is a great pity that somuch of the -waters of Western Australiashould be running to waste in the sea,and I have recognised that this Ministryis the first Ministry iii Western Australiathat has mnade an attempt to save thatwealth for the people of the State. Iam extremel 'y pleased to observe thatsome members of this House are nowapproaching the Bill in an altogetherdifferent spirit from that which they dis-played when the measure was previouslybefore the Chamber; and I trust that,as the result of the spirit in xvhich thosemembers are now viewing the proposalsof the Government, some arrangementwill be arrived at by -which this Bill willbe placed on the statute-hook before the.session closes. -I hope that this is thelast we shanll see of the Irrigation Bill inthis Parliament. I would like, however,to point out what a pity it is that a,similar spirit was not displayed duringthe last couple of 3-ears. The Govern-ment, dturing the p ast two years, havegiven way on a number of Tont

think it is some 17 points upon whichthe Government gave way, while membersof the Opposition in this House wouldnot give way on one particular point.I am pleased indeed tol*see that thosemembers have altered their minds in thatrespect. What is the cause of thatspirit of compromise which has beenshovn? P r may be that tile elec-tion which has taken place i-n the Harveydistrict, where this Bill was particularlydesired, has had something to do with thechange. I do notice that a very com-mendable change of spirit is exhibited inthe speech of Mr. Clarke, as well as inthat of iMr, Colebatch. I regard theattitude they arc now taking uip on thisquestion as an acknowledgment that they

947

948 COUNCIL.]

have been wrong all along in their op-position to this measure, as an admissionthat by a spirit of uncompromnisinghostility to the proposals of the Govern-ment on soile of the points referred toby Mr. Colebatch they have unjustifiablydelayed this measure for two years, andthat thie criticism which has been levelledagainst them is absolutely justified.' Mr.Colebaich has given way, no matter howvhie niay rcpresenit it, and I amn Very gladthlat hie has done so.

Hon, H. P. Colebatch: On two pointsonly.

Honi. J. W. rURWAN: He has cometo a sense of reason which lie has notdisplayed during the last couple of yearsin this House. I congratulate those hon,members that even at this late hour theyhave conic along in at spirit which, pro-viding they give way on some furtherpoints, muay possibly result in the savingof the Bill. I do not know what willultimately he done, what attitude theGovernment will take in this matter; butT do hope some arrangement will bearrived at for saving the Bill. I can-not, however, but express regret at thedelay which has occurred. I can sym-pathise with what Mr. Sanderson hassaid-this Bill will meanm a good deal ofexplenditure when it is brought intooperation. We all know that at thepresent Junctnre the expenditure ofmoney in all directions is bound to belimited, Possibly, if the Bill be passed,the bringing of the mneasure into operationmay he delayed for a year, or two years,or possibly many) years- Let us hopethat thie crisis will soon have passed, andthat the muedfsure may be broughtpromptly into operation. But whetherit be soon, or whether there be a longdelay, those who are in the district par-tieulnarly concerned will know who isresponsible for the delay. The responsi-bility rests on the majority of the mem-hers of this House who have up to thepresent so strenuously opposed the givingof legislative effect to certain proposalsupon which now those hon. members, Iam glad to see, are ready to agree withthe Government. I trust that somearrangement will be come to by which

the Bill will be passed during the currentsession; and all I can say is that I sin-cerely regret that such an arranigementwas not arrived at a couple of years ago,in which ease possibly the Bill wouldnow be in operation and we should havein several parts of this State a verydifferent condition of affairs from thatexisting at the present limne-a very muchbetter condition.

Hon. E, MicLARTY (South-West)[9.23] :I shall not delay the House formany minutes. I support the secondreading of this Bill, but I regret thetone of somie of the speeches; deliveredto-night. A. spirit of compromise is be-ing shown. Last year there were some20 points of difference between the twoHouses; and another place gave way on,I think, 17 of those points. Now we aredown to merely four points of difference.The Bill has been broug-ht forwardagain in a greatly improved form; andI trust that members of this House areprepared to mneet the Government, or tomeet another place, so far as they rea-sonably can, mid endeavour to bring themleasuire into effect. I regret very muchthat any hon. member of this Houseshould think it his duty to twit other hon.inembers--who have taken a great dealof trouble in order to arrive at a com.-promise-with climbing down after de-laying tie passage of the measure for thepast, two years. Personally, I am quitesatisfied that the electors of this Statethank this House for the two years' de-lay. The Bill to-day is a very differentBill from that which we had to considerwvhen it was first birought before thisChamiber. AtL that time the measure wasnot acceptahle to the people concerned,and I veniture to say that the same Billbrought before the House to-day wouldviot be acceptable either. The peoplewho are most closely concerned in themailer desire that the Bill should beeither improved by this place or else re-ject ed altogether. For my part I amnanxious to see the measure passed, be-cause I believe that it is required, at allevents in the Harvey district, where thep~eople are anxious to have an irrigationscheme, i that district enor-mous sums

M

[1 SEPTEMBER, 1914.]94

of money have been expended in theplanting and production of citrus fruits,and some of the orehardists there coin-plain that they are unable to carry ont heir industry successfully without theaid of irrigation. For that reason I am

axious to assist those people; and Ishould have been pleased if the measurehad, in the first instance , applied only tothe Harvey and Collie districts. I amsure that the Harvey River and the CollieRiver Would engage the attention of theGovernmvent for a very long time to come,For my own part I do not tare a strawabout the irrigation question, because Ibelieve it is going to prove a source ofexpense, and wvili mean heavy additionaltaxation. I. am confidenit that it is notgoing to prove the sucecess that the Gov-ernmnent anticipate; and I ean bear outwhat Mr. Clarke has said, that in manyinstances where private enterprise liesembarked on irrigation it has not provedIsuccessful. I myvself know of many in-stances of failure. However,' in defer-ence to the wishes of iny constituents. tshall support the Bill, and as regards thefew points of difference which remain1, hope a reasonable compromise will beLarrived at. I do not wish to twit an-other place, if thmey accede in soem littledegree to the wvishes of this place, withehittibimig down and stultifying itself. Ido0 not think that is the spirit in -whichlegislation should be carried on in thisChamber, and to my mind certainslpeeches which we have heard this even-ing are most regrettable. Certainly,some of the speeches had no bearing onthe question at all, bait leaded merely tocreate a feeling of irritation and to setone part 'y -against another, for whichtheire is no nleed at all, seeing that thisis not iii any way a party question. Itis a qulestion concerning the progress ofthe country generally. Surely hion. mem-bers should take a different view, andIgrive credit where credit is due to thosewho are prepared to concede a. little inorder to have the Bill passed. I do notpropose to labour the question. I shallsupport the second reading; and,. as Isaid before, I am quite sare that the de-lay which has taken place-if this House

[35]

has been the cause of that delay, whichI am not prepared to admit-has beenbeneficial, The delay has done a greatdeal of good, and the Bill in its presentform will prove much more acceptableto time comninity. WVe know that the ex-I-erience of Victoria and other States isthat irrigation has not been a greatSuccess. I know that in New SouthWales a ,year ago it was the general talkthat enormous amounts of money hadhem wasted iii irrig-ation. The generalopinion in that State was that the moneywould never be repaid. I am satisfiedthat thiose who take an extremnely san-guLine view of what is going to resultfrom irrigation here will be disappointed.E ven at the'present timne people on thelaud are taxed to such an exteut that they

eantfly develop theirpretisand if this irrigation nieasure i goingto lead to further taxation I think theywill wish that they had never heard ofirrigation at all. However, for the sakeot that one piarticular district where irri-gratiou has already been started, I hopethie Bill will be persevered with. Ifirrigationi is a success in (lhe Harvey dis-rict, then irrigation works should next

bea started on thie Collie River. Later on,P t[lie Government have the money-and

I think the clay is far distant when the,)'will have it-irrigati on, if successful, canhe extended to other parts of the State.I have pleasure ini supporting thle secondreading Of the mneasutre; and, so far asI i able to, 'r shall endeavour to bringabout a reasonable compromise.

The COLOINiAL SECRETARY (Hon.J, MN. Drew-Central-in reply) [9.301:It is not i mmxv desire to delay flte con-sideration of this Bill, I wish it to gointo Committee as soon as, possible, and Iwias ini hope that we Would have madesonie progress with it to-aught, but thisis impossible.

Hlon. C. Sommers: Sit on.Hon. W.~ Patrick: There is plenty of

riaie.'lime COLONIAL SECRETARY: I

wish to relieve some hon. memibers of animpression which prevails that the Billas submitted to this House represents the

949

.950 [COUNCIL.]

ideas of the Government on the questioniof irrigation. It does not represent theviews of the Government. It is an effortto compromise with the Legislative Coun-cii. There is no doubt about this, or oftile fact t hat the Government haveelinbed down and climbed down consid-era hIy. There were 21 amendmentsmfade by (lie Legislative Council last ses-siion., and[ the Clovernment g-ave way on17 of them. hut this Rouse refused tobudge one inch, and insisted on the wholelof them. It was the intention ofthe IHouse to call for a conference withanother pla~e. but it was found lateroin that it was impllossible, owing to theStandingt Orders of anothter 1)lace, toarrauge that conference. At any rate theGlovernment have g-one a longr way itiordler to meet the Legislative Council,and the initroduction of this Bill in theformi in which it is no0w presente] is an;earliest of the desire of tile Goovernmentlo see this: measure placed oni thie statute-book. Personally I mayv say I have ap-~proached several miembers and haveasked them to give the matter deep andseriouis considerationi, and if lpossihle tomiee the Governicnt. They- have pro-mised M at they will do so, and I believethey wvilI lkeep their word when the Billgoes into Committee, If one of thea mend ifii] s proposed by Mr. Colehatchis azeed to. it will mnean a very seriousinterference with onle of tile prineiplesof the measure. We will not get what tmeCove rnments of New South WVales, Vie-I aria, and Queensland have, In thoseSlates thie righits in intural waters arevested in the Crown, but if thle amiend-mnent is carried it will mnean that therights in natural waters will only vestin the Crown in districts declared to beirrigation districts.

Hon, W. IKingsmnill: In districts wherethey want the irrigation.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY:This is a very drastic alteration to theBill, and will interfere with its useful-ness to a very large extent. I am notiii a position to state that the Govern-nient, if they can secure the whole ofthe Bill with the exception of those por-

tions to which Arr. Colebateb will pro-pose amendments, will refuse to acceptthe measure, but I may say that Mr.Cotebateb's amendments must be the ir-reducible minimum. That is tile position,amid later on, I feel sure that no mnatterwhat party are in power thle Govern-muent will realise the necessity for intro-ducing legislation, that is, providedthe amendments aire accepted, to rest therights in natural waters throughout theState in the Crown.

Question put and passed.Bill rend a second timne.

BILL- FRI END bY SOCIETIES A CTAM ENDMENT.

Returned from the Assembly withoutamendmnent.

BILLS (5)-FRST READING.1, Supply (No. 2), £1,450,000.2. Leederville Rates Validation.3. Workers' Homes Act Amiendment.4. Licensing Act Amendment (No. 2).5. Special Lease Enabling.Received from the Assembly.

BILL-RiNOIA GRASS TREE CON-C ESSION CONFIRMATION.

Second Reading.Debate resumed from the 26th Aug-

ust.Hlon. W. KiNOS8MILL (Metropolitan)t

W941 ~hen I moved the adjourn-nment of the debate on this Bill until to-day, V it was not wvith anly hostile initen-tion or any unfriendly feeling towardsthe measure, but it was simply due tothe fact that the Bill was laid beforethis Chamber without any informationwhichi we might expect to have placedbefore us when considering a measurewhich involves the granting of a Stateconcession to a prflvate individual. I doniot blame the leader of the House forthis, because I find by reference to thleprop~er quarters that the Bitt was intro-duced in very mauch the same way inm an-other place, that the members were left

930

[1 SEPTEMBER, 1,914.]95

in ignorance of what this strange sub-stance is. Hon. members, on lookingat the plans laid before this Chamberwould be forced to the conclusion thatthe Kingia grass was a hidden sort ofgrass, from which it was proposed tomanufacture certain articles. Again,and this is a more vital point, as hion.members will realise on reading the Bill,this measure proposes to give to a certainindividual the exclusive right to cut thisKingia grass tree on certain Crown landsto the extent of 500,000 acres. If 500,000acres comprised the whole of the Crownlands on which this production grows, itwvould be a very serious step indeed forthis State to give to one person the ex-.elusive monopoly of nil the Kingia whichexists in the world, because this parti-cular plant does not exist outside ofWestern Australia. The leader of theHouse, when I asked him, was absolu-tely unable to give any information asto the area over which this plant grows.It should not be left to a private mem-ber of this House to have to make in-quiries of this nature. When the Gov-ernment bring down a Bill dealing witha private concession to a private indi-vidual, they should be able to deal withit as these Bills are dealt with in themother of Parliaments. When a Bill ofthis sort is introduced into the House ofCommons it is introduced as a privateBill. It has to go through a certain statui-tory form, and one of the processes is astrict inquiry by select committee.

l1on. WV. Patrick: Kin gin is a black-boy, is it not?

Hon. W. KLNTGSMILL: It is not.The Colonial Secretary: A kind of

blackboy.Hon. W. KINOSMILL: It has no re-

lation to the blaekboy.Hon. F. Connor: What is itlHon. W. KINGSMLILL: I should not

be asked what it is. bitt the questionshould be put to the leader of the Housewho introduced the Bill. It was dis-covered in 1818 by Phillip King whenhe made a landing on the shores ofAlbany harbour, and in the book of hisvoyages he mentioned that it occurred

from Albany to the Swan River. As amatter of fact it exists over a larger area.hon. membhers who take an interest ingardening will realise what I mean whenI1 say it is moire nearly allied to the treegarden plant known as the dracoena thanto a blackhoy, and indeed it is very muchlike a dracoena in appearance. The struc-ture of the front of the tree is altogetherdlifferent from the strulcture of the black-boy. The Government could not keephumour out of this discussion, becausethey have provided in the agreement thatihe concessionaire in the fAiness of hisheart is to allow any "Person to cut andremove any Kingia grass tree growing orbeing upon the special lands for usesolely for domestic purposes or for fuel."I can understand anyone using One Ofthese Kingia trees to JLUt a fire out, butfor the life of me 1. cannot understandunyone endeavouring to make a fire withii. becauLse onle of the points which makeit valuable is the non-inflammability ofthe si~bstance. The giving away of theright to private individuals to use thisus fuel is distinctly humorous. TheGovernment have shown a particular l ackolr desire to inquire into rhis matter whichis most peculiar. 1 do not wish. for amoment to say that this concession shouldnot be granted. As a matter of fact, Ithink Under the circumstances the con-cession ought to be granted. I under-stand the concessionaire has spent a greatdeal of time and a considerable amountof money in his researches, and if weare to give him the right ovet a fair pro-portion of the land which produces thisplant, I do not think we shall be doingwrong. What the area available is hasremained a mystery. When the leaderof the House was unable to answer myqunestion, T made it my business to inter-view someone, who, I thought, wouldknow, and the most likely person was Mr.Canning, district surveyor for Perth.That gentleman was able to give me theinformation I required. He inf ormedme that the Area which produces thisplant can be put down at 1,500,000 acres.'so that in handing over 500,000 acres, weare really giving away one-third of the

951

952 [COUNCh.j

total to the gentleman who, by his enter-prise, has brought the matter forward.I do not say that this is an unfair thingto do, and I am going to support theBill, and 1 support it with more pleasurebecause 1 suspect that owing to thefailure of the Government to make thisa State industry there must be somemoney inl it. Everything else that theGovernment have touched has proved eacha costly failure, that as they left thisalone, it must be a good thing. I shallsu1pport the second reading.

Hou. J. F. CULLEN (South-East)(9.48] : Will the Minister tell us whether-lie is only dealing with Crown lands andthat this tenant is not to hinder thetaking- up of Crown lands for improve-mnent purposes? If so, how on eairth is

hie going to get anything out of the Kingiagrass.

Hon. J. CORNELL (South) [9.49]:In speaking onl the second reading of thisBill 1 do not intend to do so at any length,nor do I intend to touch onl the botanicalside of the question as has been dlone bymy friend, Mr. Kingsmill. Upon the in-troduction or the passing of this Bill inanother place more than one manl in threposition to know the value of this par-ticular grass approached me, and pointedout that no dacta had been given to an-other place, and neither hans it been given~to this House, as to the comimercial valueof the product. I might say in passingthat the information which was suppliedto me camne fromi people who, I thinik,were representing- a firm of Germans. 1all not, however, going- to stress thatpoint because I amn not quite sure aboutit, 'it was pointed out to ine that theindividual referred to in the Bill, Mr.Benjamin, had spent some £3,000 in con-ducting experiments. The House canl restassured that after this expenditure Mr.Benjamin has come to the conclusion thatthere is something- fairly good in theproject, otherwise hie would not be pre-pared to enter into an agreement such asthat -which is embodied in the schedule.I have been informed that there is no-thing Pow in Kingia grass, and that ithos besn nsed for varione eommersia'

purposes in South Australia for the pasL16 years.

Hon. W. Kingsroill: It does not existthere.

Hon. J. CORNELL: The gentlemanwho supplied mne with the informationholds a fairly high and responsible posi-tion in this State, and lie told me that thesupply of Kingia, grass in South Auis-tralia is now very limited.

H-on. W. Kingsmill: It is, very limited.Ron. J. CORIKELL: And that the

Government in that State will niot allowit to be garnered on Crown lands, Ithas also been pointed out to me that thegum from the grass tree has real-ised up to £C12 a ton on the Londonmarket, and that some of the other pro-perties derived fr-om this tree arevauable stains, spirits, wood tar? nd th-eresidues make tire finest paper pulpknowui, Diun. wemnbers wvill agree with)nie whenl I say that we are taking onlsomnething which probably is loaded? andin passing this Bill we may be doingsomething unjustifiable and which maybe hurled against this House and anotherplace in the near future as a g-reat errorof judgment. 1 am niot giving miy per-sonal opinion, hat 1 hat of other indi-viduals possessing knowledge of the sub-jecl. It has also been pointed out tome that the gum from this grass can heused in the making of motor tyres.

lion. W. Kingsimill: There is no0 gumin it.

Hion. J, CORNELL: Tflit is the point.Mr. Kingsnnll says that it does not con-tain gum, while mly source of information,who holds a responsible position andknows what he is talking about, declaresthat it does.

Hon. E. 2[eLarty: I do not think thatit does.

Ron. 5. CORNELL: Mr. MeLarty willagree that the products of this grass areniot known to ally member of this House.They are only known to those who havetaken a scientific interest in it, and ex-perimnted with it. It has also beenpointed out that it is believed there isno limit to the demand for that gum.Mr. Kingsm ill has pointed out that a

952

[1 SEPTEMBER, 1914.]93

million and a half acres of land on whichthis grass grows are available, hut itmust be taken, into consideration that theconcessionaire who is mentioned in theBill has applied for a third of this area,and in the most favourable centres near-est to transport and wvhere the facilitiesfor garnering will be the cheap-est. Tile concessionaire will bein such a position that he may prove adetriment to others entering on the enter-Jprise- I for one am not prepared tosupport a Bill which will have for itsobject the passing over of a huge portionof the Stale to a con cessionaire, and ingranting a concessionaire half a millionacres in this State, J sayv that the Houseis doing something it should not do.Wheni we take int o consideration thefact that the schedule which contains theagreement provides that other areasmay be taken up, and that is likelyto follow on the granting of thisconcession, it will be seen that the arealo lie worked can be greatly enlarged inthe near future. It is also pointed outin the schedule that the concessionairemust be spend £5,000 on the concessionwithin two years. .I~t appears to me, thatIbis House is agreeing to the passing ofthe Bill with its ey* es closed. A body ofmen who have already' spent £3,000 inexperiments, and wvho are prepared tospend another £5,000 inside twvo yearsknow well what they are entering into,and I think there is a pretty good thingin store for them. They are paying forthis concession £6250 a year in rent, and6d. per ton royalty. The returns are tobe made quarterly. I do not want toworry hon. members by going throughtile whole of the Hill and the schedule.Mly only object in speaking on the secondreading is to enter a protest againstBills coming down for the alienation ofa large portion of our territory, the re-sources and possibilities of which arepractically unknown to those who areasked to pass the legislation. It will bea good thing if this concession turnsout, as many others have turned out, abig financial gain to those who haveentered into it, hut it must prove to a

certain extent a great loss to tile Stateby reason of the devastation of ournatural resources. If that time shouldcome, whoever may happen to take aninterest in the industry, will see that I,at this stage, recorded my protest againstsuch a large portion of our territorybeing alienated.

Hon. A. SANDERSON (Metropolitan-Suburban) [9.55] :This plant growswithin a few yards of my front door. Ihave examined it carefully during thelast 20 years, and anyone who likes to lookup the records in Western Australia willsee that for eight years people haveknown the Kingia grass tree, and haveexperimented wvith it without result.

Hon. W. Kingsmill : For nearly 100years.

Hon. A. SANDERSON: I am alwaysonl the safe side, as my friend knowvs. Sofar as I understand this matter, like allconcessions, it requires careful considera-tion. Here we have someone comingalong proposing to utilise thle Kingiagrass tree. I think we ought to be veryglad to find that it can be turned to aprofitable account, and if the concession-aire makes a success of it wye ought notto hegrudge him the profit. As forgiving *away a whole concession, that isa matter which requires the attention ofthe Lands Department who are familiarwith thle areas over which the grassgrows, and thc Government, doubtless,have been able to protect themselves toa certain extent. There is no necessityto give away a whole area, but what Iam afraid of is that there is some ignor-ance, not only onl the part of the House,hut on the p~art of the Government, be-cause apart from the Kingia grass, withregard to the lands used solely fordomestic purposes or for fuel, it will benoticed that the schedule states "providedthat thei right hereby conferred shall notextend to other species of Xanthorrhoeathan the Kingia grass trees for any pur-pose whatsoever." This is not Xan-thorrhoea at all. At least I may repeatwhat Mr. Kingsmill, who is recognisedas the standard authority in this Cham-ber and outside also has said. At any

953

fl54 COUNCIL.3

rate, anyone who has seen the Kingiagrass tree and the blaekboy will not havethe slightest difficulty in distinguishingbetween the two, so I hope the Mlinisterwill give us a little information on thesubject touched upon by different mem-bers. Assuming that everything is inorder, I shall be very glad to support ameasure which promises to add what wevery much require in this country,namely some new industry developing thenatural resources of the country.

Hon. E. AT. CLARKE (South-West)[101]: I have pleasure in supportingthe Bill. This tree is not a blaekboy atall, neither does it contain one particleof gum, so far as I understand it. Mlanyof the trees are slim things, no biggerthan a man's leg, but if you attempt topush one of them over you will find youare up against the wrong tree. You maybend it, but it is simply a bundle of wires.and will immediately spring back. Imaintain that these trees have been ma-turing and rotting for tens of thousandsof years, and the sooner they are turnedto some commercial purpose the better.There is not the slightest fear that theywill not grow up again. I say more powerto the man who embarks onl such an in-diislry. I want to see every' man who lhaethie courage to take uip an enterprise ofthis character meet with success. Werequire plenty more people of the sort tocome here and embark on such undertak-ings. When we hear the opinion ex-pressed that it is to he hoped the indus-tr ,y will be of no use to the exploiter, Ihave no patience with such remarks. Inreg-ard to the area covered by the conces-sion, it is a mere speck on the map, whileonl the other hland you cant see theseKingia grass-trees coniniencing Ut theother side of Kcltnscott and extend-ing right away down to the Augusta.The supply is almost unlimited, buta great portion of it is onl privateprop)erty. Take, for instance, the coun-try from Kelmscott down to the M1urrayRiver; nearly the whole of that throughwhich the railway passes is no longerCrown land. It was granted many yearsago to a company of which Mr. ThomasPeel was manager. It goes away right on

down the coast, ase far as you like, and forthe information of hon. members I maysay that some of these trees are nearly30 feet in length, and inside is a verydense core. But they are not the ordinaryblackhoy, nor do they contain any gum.We have seven or eight varieties of theordinary blaekboy, but this is not one ofthem. We do not want any dog-in-the-manger attitude. We require that everyone of the things lying useless should beturned to account, and the man whoereates wealth out of what Iiiis hithertobeen useless, and thereby gives em ploy-menit to others,' is deserving of every suc-cess as the result of his efiter prise. Ihave pleasure in supporting the Bill,

Hon. F. CONNOR (North) [10.5]:Like the hon. member who has justspoken, .1 support the Bill. I would sup-port any such Bill on fair lines. UnlikeAfr. Cornell, I cannot see that because theindustry may become a monopoly itshould not be encouraged at this stage.If the good of the country is taken intoconsideration and the usefulness of whatnature has given us, the Bill ought to belooked upon with favour.

Hon. J. Cornell: Why give all to thosefirst in?

lioL. C. F. Baxter: There are millionsof acres of it.

i-on. F. CONNOR: Tkp hon. member,like a great runny of us, depends for hisexistence on the minting industry. DOnot we give to the miner what he gets ontof the -round?

Hon. J. Cornell: But we limit the areaof a gold-mining lease.

HRon. F1. CONNOR: But the areacovered by these trees is unlimited. Weare only doing the same ina con nectionwith this as we arc doing in connectionwithI the gold-mining industry which isrepresented by the people who rule thiscouintiry to-day-the mining Government,the muining Parliament, the mining peoplewho run the State. We cannot do toemuch to hell) people who are preparedto launch out in new industries. If wegive this syndicate the concession-thereis not much of a concesion in the Bill,and I fancy the concessionaire must hesomewhat of a fool-and. if they do make

934

[I SEPTEMBER, 1914.)95

a success of it, why should we begrudge

themq Why should we not help the peo-

pie who put their money into it? The

abuse we have heard from a seeton in theHouse comes with very, bad grace.

HUon. J. Cornell: I have a free band.

I-Ion. F. CONN OR01: And a free tongue.We cannot do too much for these people.Anybody who will come along And pro-duce capital to open up the country isdeserving of our assistance. We do notwanit to give them monopolies and makepresents to them, but if they are pre-pared to expen~d their money here theyare the people whom it is our boundenduty to assist and encourage in the bestway we can. 'It is the principle whichwe should support, It seems somebodyhas coine along and said, "Here is ause-less piece of country, good for no otherpurpose; we will utilise it and producefrom it wvealth by which the country willbenefit." They offer to produce wealthfrom useless country, and surely thatought to be suflicient. I find myself sup-porting the Government for the first timein my life, and in so doing I am oppos-ing one of their staunchest supporters.Our duty should he to encourage enter-prise to the best of our ability. Everymovement which has for its object thedevelopment and utilisation of the pro-ducts which nature has given to the Stateshould be supported. Here is one par-ticular product which we are told isunique. The ground on which it is grow-ing is of no ulse-

Hon. E, At. Clarke: The poorest of thepoor.

Hon. F. COIN-OR. And yet we findwhen people come here to develop andutilise it they meet with opposition.

'Hon. J. Cornell: It was once said thatthe sand-plain was no good for wheatgrowing, yet it is now turning out someof the best.

Hon. F. CONNOR: Welt, why doesthe bon. member oppose this concession?I am afraid the hon. member's argumentis so forcibly in favour of the Bill thatit is uninecessary to say more about it.

Hon. C. F. BAXTER (East) (10.13]:Every hon. member is seized with the factthat an opp~ortunity has arrived when wecanl turn what has been termed a uselesstree into some account.

Hon. J. Cornell: You know nothingabout the subject.

Hon. C. F. BAXTER: I know moreabout it than does Mir. Cornell, especiallywhen hie says that the plant is growingin South Australia. Why, it is practi-cally unheard of in South Australia. Healso said that one of the by-productswas gum. 1 venture to say that no gumcan be found in the Kingia grass-treeunder any test. The plant is really anuisance, and we ought to be glad to getrid of it. We find a gentleman preparedto expend within J5 months £2,500 in theerection of a plant and the establishmentof a. new industry; iu addition to that,twelve months aftervards be is to spendanother £2,500, and on top of this he isto supplement the revenue by h650 perainium, and pay a royalty of 6d, perton on this particular plant. I do notthiak we need look any further than thatthe plant has been worthless in the past,.and is, now bein g turned to good accont,and that it will mean the establishmentof an industry bringing in a revenue tothe country. I do nut think we shouldhave any hesitation in passing the meas-nrc through.

Hon. W. PATRICK (Central) [10.16]:Notwithstanding the eloquence of my hon.friend Mr. Connor, and the hon. Mr.Baxter, I certainly am not going to votefor the concession of half a million acresto anyone until I know something aboutthe subject. ] know nothing whateverabout the Kingia grass, but f must saythat if any one with the name of Benja-Min wants it, there Must be money in it.Before a Bill of this kind is broughtbefore us, involving a huge area like this.which may prove valuable, I think weought to know something more about it.We ought to know what area would beinvolved.

Hon. J. Cornell: The hon. Mr. Basterhas asserted that it is limitless.

Hon. W. PATRICK: If the proposalhad been for 50,000 acres at the outside.

9 5 -5

054] [COUNCIL.]

I might have been inclined to consider thequestion. I shall not vote for giving aconcession of half a million acres to anyone, upon wvhiclh there is a plant aboutwhich I know nothing. There is a bigsuim of money in it, or a gentleman ofthe name of Benjamin would not haveajpplied for the concession.

Hon. E. MeLARTY (South-West)[10.1S] :I think the beol. Mr. Cornell,'wvlm has always the interests of the work-manl at heart, must lose sight of the factthat the Bill will give employment to ainumber of men. There is a great an-ber of law nlow who are walking theroads with packs on their backs, if theyare fortunate enough to have packs, wvhowould, perhaps, be better employed incutting this king hlead blackboy. as wecall it. They are now wvalking about ask-ing the settlers to keel) them from starv-ing. This particular class of blackboy isusually anl indication of poor land, andthe only use for it, a purpose that I havefrequently used it for myself, is to makea flooring of stables, sheds, and so forth.It will last for years. It is a very toughkind of substance and will last onl a stablefloor for a very long time, and is alsosprinigy under foot for horses.

Hon. W. Patrick: Do you saw it?Hon. E. MeLARTY: No. The trees

are round and they make a very goodfloor. I1 agree with the ]lion. Mr. Baxterthat an industry of this kind willI bringrevenue to the State. I am quite satis-fied that the gentlemen wvho have beenasking for the concession of half a mil-lion acres will have very little difficulty'in sup)plemien tinug that area by a con-siderable anmount from Private owners.No one has thought of making use ofthis tree in the past, and the land that ital-Ows Onl is of noe value wvhatever. Be-sides giving- employnmen t, this industrywill tend to implrovc the country. Wherethe blackboy' s grow thickly' on the landthere is ver little rasadtemr

you clear it away the better it is for theland, and the better does the grass grow.I shall support the Bill.

T hi e COLONIAL SECRETARY(H-on. J. M. Drew-Central-in reply)

(10.20] :It is not necessary that Ishould say much in support of the Bill.It has already received the support ofthe majority of the House. Until themleasure was placed in my hands, I hadnever previously heard of Kiugia grass.Since then, however, I have made in-quiries and have discovered that in thepast it lius never been put to any com-mercial use. This gentleman, however,haes come along and thinks that he willbe able to putl it to profitable commercialuse. I do not think, by reason of thefact that we may imagine thint lie willmake big profits out of it, that we shouldstop this concession. This plant hosbeen growNinlg in Western Australia forages, ever since the State was populated,and '10 one has attempted to put it toany commercial use. I think we shouldgive this gentleman anl opportunity ofdoing something with it and should behighly delighted if he proves successfuilin his venture. We are granting him noland at all. We are not giving him oneacre of land. We are simply grantinghim the right to remove the Kingia grassfrom 500,000 acres of land. We are giv-ing him the same kind of right that isenjoyed by the pastoralists, who have theright to graze the land, and the sameright as that enjoyed by the woodcutter,who has a license to cut timber off Crownlands. We give this man the right toremove the kiagia p-ass, that and no-thing more. As soon as he removes theplant the land wvill be open for selection,.and if it is required for selection, andit contains still more of this plant, hewill be given instructions to clear it andPave the way for selection.

Hon. V. Hamersley: Do you lose thegazing rights while lie is cutting on it9

Thne COLONIAL SECRETARY: No.if it wvas a pastoral lease before, we canlpass over the land to the lessee of theKingian grass concession, but lie must getthe consent of the pas~toral lessece. If hiedoes that there canl surely be no objec-tion. The license is to clear the Kingiagrass tree from p~astoral leases, timberlenses, and saw mill permits, having anlaggregatte area of approximately 500,000acres. It is also provided that so far as

q.56

[I SEPTEM IBER1 1914.) 5

these lands are the subject of any re-serve, timber lease, timber concession,saw milling permit, or any other lease,concesioin or license whatsoever from theCrown, the right granted shall be exer-cisable only with the consent of the Min-ister, the lessee, concessionary permnitholder or licensee, as the case may be.The holder of this license may also selectin a manner satisfactory to the Minister,land other than the land that is the sub-ject of the agreement, niot being the sub-ject of any reserve, conditional purchaselease, or pastoral lease, etc. Srhat is,' ithe cannot come to terms with the pas-toral leaseholder, the Mainister may granthim the right to select other lands whichare not in pastoral or timber leases, orany other form of lease in substitution,to the extent of 500,000 acres. Person-ally, I can see no objection whatever to[ile Bill.

Qtnestion put and passed.Bill read a second time.

In Committee, etcetera.H7on. W. Kiagsmill in the Chair, the

Colonial Secretary in charge of the Bill.Clausews 1. 2, 3-agreed to.Schiedule:lon. A. SANDERSON: 1 hope the

Minister will give us some light tIpofl theclause which provides [liat the righthereby conferred shall not extend toother species of Xarithorrlioea than theKingia grass tree.

The C OLONIJAl, SECRETARY:tOther concessions hav-e been granted inrespect to the blackboy, and it is desiredt hat they should not clash.

B-ou. J. CORNELL: 1 desire to movean aniendment. to Clause 1 of theschedule, namely-

T'har in line 16 the ward "flve" be.sirud.: out and "two" inserted i lien.

M1y reason for moving the amendmtent isthat I am still satisfied that this Houseis niot conversant wyithi the area uponwhich the Kingia grass tree grows inWestern Australia. Mr. Baster saysit is unlimited and the hon. Mr.Kiugsmill has also said that it iscontained in about a niillion and

a-half acres. I think 200,000 acresis a fair start for this gentleman. Ifmembers will read the schedule down[hey will find that lie is not restricted to500,000 acres, and that lie can secnreother areas and can cut or reserve theright to remove the grass tree from pri-vate freehold lands.

The Colonial Secretary: He cannot ex-ceed 500,000 acres.

Hon. ,J. CORNELL: It says that the areashiall be 500,000 acres. The Bill grants

lie concessionaire 500,000 acres. Threemionthis after the ratification of the agree-ineat, lie may tak;e 10,000 acres more,which would not be subject to this clause.The position in connection with this con-cession will be as in connectioii withev-ery timber concession, that the coace-smonaire will seek other avenues, just asthe timber companies have been doing,and exploit Crown areas easy of accessaind of good quality, and then eventuallyfall back onl his own concession. I think200,000 acres is a fair slice to give awayto this gentleman.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Itin not know how thle lion. member pro-poses to amend anl agreement which isahread 3 in existence, and which is sub-mnittcd merely for ratification. It has tobe either accepted or rejected. If theclause is amended to make the area200,000 acres, that would probably be re-garded as a suggestion to the Governimentto go further into the matter-, to recon-sider it, anti to endeavour to -make anl-other agreement but it kills the Bill.

FHon. W. Patrick: There is no greath urry'.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY:There are certain conditions imposed onthis gentleman by reason of the grant of500,000 acres, if the area granted isreduced to 200,000 acres, his expenditurewould have to he proportionately de-creased. Afr. Coniell errs in his state-nient that the concessionaire can get more[lien 500,000 acres: all he can do0 is tostihatitute other land for some lie maylie alread 'y holding. He will never havemore than 500.000 acres, though he mayhjate less. If lie selects other land, he

957

95S [COUNCIL.]

has to give up a certain proportion ofhis area under this Bill; and if he wvantsto go outside his area of 500,000 acreslie cannot trespass on any land heldeillier tinder conditional purchase orpastoral or timber lease.

Hon. W. Patrick: He can go all overthe State and take 10,000 acres here andthere.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY: Yes.

Hon. W. Patrick:- That means lie pickstie best of it.

Hon. E. lil. CLARKE: There are tensof thousands of acres of the area to begranted on which none of this vegetablegrows; none whatever; and it is abso-lately necessary that the concessionaireshould have a large area, because a greatdeal of the country is absolutely barren.lion. members should bear that in mind.

Ron. J. J. HOLMES: I hope Mr.Cornell will not press the amendment.Apart from the possibility of this plantbeing of some commercial value--as towhich there is considerable doubt-thereis the possibility of getting a large areaof Crown land cleared of a uselessgrowth, and so preparing it to growsomething useful. The right to begranted uinder this Bill extends only tothle grass tree, We know what the valueof the sandal-wood industry has been tothe State, and I hope that possibly thegrass. tree industry. may turn out some-thing the same.

Hon. J.: CORNELL:- I am sorry to dis-agree with the Colonial Secretary, but Icannot read the schedule as hie reads it.My reading of it is that an area 'of500,000 acres is granted to the conces-sionaire for 21 years, and that withinthree months of ratification of the agree-nient he tnay select further land, subjectto the approval of the Minister, in 10,000acre blocks. If he makes application forone 10,000-acwre block and the Ministerapproves of it, the block will he granted;and then the concessionaire may applyfor another 10,OO-acre block, and thatmnay also be granted. I recognise thatthe effect of passing the amendmentmeans the staying of the Bill, that theHouse has either to accept the agree-

mieut or drop the Bill. But there can beno harry for passing the Bill. We shallre-assemible in nine or ten weeks' time,and during the interval inquiry can beniade, and a truer appreciation of theposition obtained. Anyone objecting tothis portion of the agreement must eitherswallow it or adopt the course I havetaken.

The COLONIAL SECRETARY:Whent I first read the Bill 1 came to thesame conclusion as the hon. Mr. Cornell.I thereupon wrote a minuite to the Solici-tor General and asked him to explain thisportion of the measure, and have re-ceived the following opinion from him:-

Within three months of the ratifica-tion of the agreement, the licensee may,with the approval of the Minister,in lieu of getting permission of thepastoral lessees, etc., select otherCrown lands, which are not tinder pas-toral or timber lease, etc., in substitu-tion for so much of the landscomprised in the 500,000 acres asare under lease. In other words, thelicensee has the option for threemonths to take up in lieu of and byway of substitution for such of theconcession lands as are comprised inpastoral and timber leases (which canonly be entered with the consent of thelessee) other waste lands of the Crownwhich are not the subject of any pas-toral or timber lease, etc.

Hon. F. COINNOR :The leader of theHouse has introduced a Bill and astauinch supporter has opposed it, andthe Minister acknowledges that his sup-porter is right in opposing it. Whereare weI What sort of a way is this topass legislation I

Amendment put and a division takenwith the following result :

AyesNoes

316

Majority against .. 13

AYES.

Hon. F. ConnorHon. J. Cornell

Han. W. PatrickI q Teller).

95S

[1 SEPTEMBER, 1914.]09

lion. Et. G. ArdaghHon. C. F. BarterHo.. H. CarsonHon. E. M. ClarkeHon. H. P. Colebatchlion. J. 14. DrewHon. V. HamersleyElam. J. J. XohnesHon. J. W. Xlrwan

Nose.

lion.Hon.Hon.Hon.Hon.Hon.Hon.

C. McKenzieE. MoLartyH. MillingtonA. Banda..on0. M. SeweillC. SommoersJ. F. Cullen

(Toerc).

Amendment thus negatived.Schedule put and passed.Title, Preamble-agreed to.Bill reported without amendment, and

the report adopted.

House adjourned at 10.48 p.m.

1coip;Iativc tssciniiy,[tuesday, let September, 1914.

Papm presented..............96 1Leavea of absence..............959standing Orders Suspension............sBUis: Supply (No. 2), £1,450,000, .ll star .. 959

Osborne Park Trmway Purchase, returned 980Foodstuffs Commission, returned ....... 80Bunbury Motour'lus Service, returned .. 081Agricultural Bank Act Amnendmsent retuned 981JElctoral Act Amendment, retuned 081Oeruldton A cultural and Horticulturci

Society's Inad, 1n...........081Friendly Societies Act Amendment, all stages 981Leedervlfle Rates Validation, all stages .. 981workers' Homes Act Amendment, all stages 082L'censfIngc Amendment, all stages 983Road Cosue discharged. . ........ 86special LseEnabling, Corn., BE......988

Adjournment, special............987

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 4.30p.m., and read prayers.

PAPERS PRESENTED.By the Minister for Mines: Return of

exemptions pranted during the yearended 30th June, 1014.

By the Premier: 1, Report of admin-istration of endowment trust nder thePublic Education Endowment Act. 2,Correspondence relating to the recent

political crisis in Tasmania. 3, Report ofPublic Service Commissioner for the yearended 30th June, 1014.

By the Attorney General: 1, Amend-ment of Supreme Court rules. 2, Newregulations tinder the Electoral Act,1907. 3, Annual report of the Depart-mient of Land Titles.

By the Minister for Works: 1, By-laws of the Beverley roads board. 2,By-laws of the municipalities of Kal-goorlie, Leederville, North Fremantle,and Guildford.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE.Onl motion by Mr. LAYMAN leave of

absence for twvo weeks granted to thehon. member for Claremont (Mr. Wis-dom) on the ground of urgent privatebusiness.

STANDING ORDERS SUSPENSION.The PREMIE R (Hon. J. Scaddan-

Browuleili-Ivanhoc) moved-That for the remainder of the session

the Standig Orders be suspended toenable inessages from the LegislativeCouuncil to be taken into considerationon the day on which they are received;also, so far as to admit of the report-ing and adopting of the resolutions ofthe Committees of Supply and Waysand Me ans on the same day on whichthey shall have passed those Commit-tees.Question passed.

BILL-SUPPLY (No. 2) £1,460,000:

Message.Message from the Governor received

and read recommending appropriation inconnection with the Bill.

Committee of Supply.The House having resolved into Com-

mittee of Supply, Mr. Holman in theChair,

The PREMIER moved-That there be granted to His

Majesty on account of the service of

959