Petition, Dividend Duty. [21 AlUGUST, 1900.]1 emnlOdr. 3

accepted the suggestion of Mr. Haynes,and now moved that the House at itsrising do adjourn until Tuesday next.

Motion put and passed.The Rouse adjourned at eight minutes

past 6 o'clock, until the next Tuesday.

gtit atiu)e 'ASSenib j,Tuesday, 21st Au gust, 1900.

Paprpresented-Petiin Diidend Duty At (CoIrfn-endum, irreguIlar issue at Kalgoorlie-SessionalOnlers-Obltnary: Sir Mialcolm Fraser-Obitu-ary: flk of Sae-lobur ad Gotha-FederalCommonweultb:Amiso as as Original State,Addres to the Queu-Susrenie Coont Act Amend.inent Bill, first reading-Probate and Administra.tin Uonsoiclation Bil, first rending-Urnetees La~wConsolidation Bill, first recAling-jonspiraoy Bill(workmen), first rending-Address in rely toopening Speech, debate resumed (seconddy)Arnendmenot moved (un confidence), adjourned de'bate-Adjournment (one week).

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 4.30o'clock, P.M.

PRAYERS.

PAPERS PRESENTED.By the MINISTER OF MINES : 1, Re-

port of Geological Survey, 1899 ; 2, Regu-lation under Mines Regulation Act,amendment of No. 10; 3, Regulationsunder G3oldfields Act, amciidinent of110k and 111; 4, Regulations underPublic Elementary Education Act.

By the ComrissioNsn OF CROWNLANDS:- Report of Woods and ForestsDepartm~ent, 1899.

Ordered to lie on the table.

PETITION-DIVIDEND DUTY ACT(COMPANIES).

THE PREMIER (Right Hon. Sir J.Forrest): I have received from Englanda petition to this honourable Assembly,from minling companies carrying onoperations in Western Australia. I maysay I am not in accord with the prayer

of the petition, but I feel that I oughtto present it to the House. I have readthe petition, which is in form andrespectfully worded, and I move that itbe received.

Petition (for repeal of Act) received.

QUESTION - VOTERS' CERTIFICATESFORL REFERENDUM, IRREGULARISSUE AT KALGOORLIE.

Mn. RIGHAM (for Mr. Monger)asked the Premier:. i, Whether hisattention had been drawn to certainirregularities alleged to have been comn-initted in the issue of voters' certificatesat Kalgoorlie and elsewhere.' 2, Whetherthe matter had been investigated. 3,If so, what was the result of theinvestigation.

THE PREMIER replied-i, Yes. 2,It is being investigated. 3, As soon asthe result is obtained, it will be corn mum-.caked to this House.

SESSIONAL ORDERS.On motions by the Parnnm, Sessional

Orders were made as follow :. -Business Days and Hours: The House,

unless otherwise ordered, shall meet forthe despatch of business on Tuesdays,Wednesdays, and Thursdays at 4-30 p.m.,and shall sit until 6-30 p.m., if necessary;anld, if requisite, from 7-30 p.m. onwards.

Precedence of Government Business:On Tuesdays and Thursdays, Governmentbusiness shiall take precedence of allMotions and Orders of the 'Day.

Staniding Orders Committee: StandingOrders Committee for the present Sessionshall consist of the following members,namely Mr. Speaker, Mr. Pennefather,and Mr. Harper; with leave to sit duringany adjournment, and with authority toconfer upon subjects of mutual concern-ment with any Committee appointedfor similar purposes by the LegislativeCouncil,

Printing Committee:- Printing Comi-mittee for the present Session shall con-sist of the following members, namelyMr. Speaker, Mr. Piesse, and Mr. Harper;to assist Mr. Speaker in all matters which-relate to the printing execuited by orderof the House and for the purpose ofselecting and arranging for printingreturns and papers presented in pur-suance of motions made by mnemnbers, and

Sej;8ional Orders. 31

82 Obituary. ASML. irMkl rsr

all papers laid upon tbe table, whether inanswer to addresses or otherwise.

Library Committee: Library Com-mittee for the present Session shall con-sist of the following members, namelyMr. Speaker, Mr. Pennefather, Mr.Har 'per, Mr. flhingworth, and 'Mr. Kings-muill; with leave to sit during any adjourn-ment and during the recess, and withauthority to act jointly with the LibraryCommittee of the Legislative Council.

tefresbutnt Rooms Committee: Re-freshient Rooms Committee for the present Session shall consist of the followingmembers, namiely Mr. Speaker, Mr.Wood, 'Mr. *Wilson, and Mr, Highami;with leave to sit during any adjournment,and durn g the recess.

OBITUARY-St MArWOLM FRASER.ThsE PREMIER (Right Hon. Sir S.

Forrest) : Before we proceed with thebusiness of the day, I clai, the indulgenceof hon. members to make a short referenceto the loss this colony has sustained,and the regret that I am sure that weall feel, all the people of this colony, atthe unexpected death of our old andesteemed friend, Sir Malcolm Fraser.To those of its who belong to the oldergeneration in this colony, Sir M1alcolm.Fraser's name has 1)een a householdword, for he occupied a prominent posi-tion amongst us during twenty years.He came here in the year 1870, as Sur-veyor General and Commissioner ofCrown Lands, with a seat in the Execu-tive Council and in the Legislative Coun-cil of the colony; and he occupied thatposition continuously for twenty years,until the change in the constitution tookplace at the end of 1890. 'During thattime he was Commissioner of CrownLands, Surveyor General, Colonial Secre-tary, and for a year or more lieadministered the Government of thecolony;, also for about seven years hewas the leader of the old LegislativeCouncil, which sat in this chamber.After the introduction of ResponsibleGovernm-ent, Sir Mialcolmi Fraser wentfor a short rest to England ; and Ibelieve lie fully intended to return tothis colony aind take a part in the neworder of affairs nder the change ofconstitution, but having been offered andhaving accepted the post of Agent Gene-ral in London, he remained in that

position for six years; in fact, till onlyvery recently. All of us who have badany knowledge of our old friend knowvery well that throughout the whole ofhis career he was single- minded, and didhis best for the colony. He was inevery respect a good public officer,His probity was acknowledged by every-one; and T think it is something to saythat a man held a high place in thiscountry for twenty years and no one hasbeen known or cain be found to say any-thing against him, his character, or theway he administered the departmentsintrusted to him. He no doubt liberal-ised the land laws of the country, andthe imprint of his views on land. admin-istration is to be found in our Land Act.For my part, I knew himt very well: Iwas his intimate friend the whole of thosetwenty years. For thirteen years I servedunder him; and I can say of him-I sayit with very great pleasure-thait he wasa kind and considerate man, and was oneI always had pleasure in working under.At a time like this one can recall withpleasure many acts of kindness, and Ican recall with pleasure many acts ofkindntess extended to me, not only nowand again, but always, during the thirteenyears I served under him. No one cansay anything ill of the late Sir MalcomFraser, although he occupied a prominentplace amongst us for twenty years. Manyold friends I see around moe in this Rousewere associated with him when he wasCommissioner of Crown Lands and Colo-nial Secretary; and I am sure it will bejust as regretful to them as it is to methat we shall never see him again. Theonly privilege we have left to us in regardto him is to express our regret at hisunexpected death, and to pay him. thelast respect that we shall ever have theopportunity of doing, a respect -whichI think is due to him for his long andlarge set-vices for over twenty-six yearsin the service of this colony. Yester-day, when the news arrived, the publicollices in the colony were closed for theremainder of the day, as a mark ofrespect to his memory. I do not proposeon this oceasion to ask the House toadjourn, because the late Sir MalcolmFraser never was a member of this Houseunder the new constitution. With manymembers I see around me he was netintimately acquainted, but there are many

[ASSEMBLY.] Sir Malcolm Fraser.

Obituary : [21 AUGUST, 1900.] Duke of Edinburgh. 3

of us here, I am glad to say, who lookback with pleasure to the days when webad friendly intercourse with him, andwe are glad, I am sure, to bave theopportunity of saying how much werecognise the services which be renderedto this colony, in which we take so deepan interest.

MRt. ILLINGWORTH (Central Mur-chison) : It was not my pleasure toknow the gentleman whom the Premierhas so properly referred to;i but I haveheard a great deal since I have been inthis country of Sir Malcolm Fraser, adI think hon. members on this side of theHouse will be as cordial in their desire toexpress regret on the present occasion,and to second the kindly words expressedby the Premier. These are not timeswhen it is fitting to express many words,and all I shall say Is that the good menad true who have served their countryare none too many; and when theydepart from us, we part with them withvery great regret, sad their loss isnecessarily great. I have very muchpleasure-I can hardy say pleasure-injoining in the sympathy and in expressingthe regret mentioned by the Premier.We all regret it is necessary to make thisreference; but, be that as it is, everymember of this 'House who knew SirMalcolm Fraser, and those who knewhim only by repute, will join in the regretexpressed by the Premier.

MR. A. Yk. HASSELL (Plantagenet):As a, fellow member with the late SirMalcolm Fraser, I fully indorse whathas fallen from the Premier, and I cansimply express regret at Sir MalcolmFraser's untimely end.

OBITUARY-DUKE OF SnE-COEUREGAND GOTHA.

ADDRESS OF CONDOLENCE.THE PREMIER (Right Hon. Sir. J.

Forrest): We have all heard with verygreat regret of the Unexpected death ofHis Royal Highness the Duke of Edin-burgh; and I am sure this House willextend to Her Majesty and to the Duchessof Saxe-Ooburg and Gotha and the restof the Royal Family their sympathy inthe sad bereavement. The Duke ofEdinburgh was the only member of theRoyal Family who visited Perth, andmany can carry back their minds to thetime when the" Galatea" came to Fre-

mantle. I was not here myself; I wasaway in the country engaged on myduties in those days; but I well rememberthe circumstance. I know too that theyear before, it was expected His RoyalHighness would visit this part of thecolony, and we built triumphal arches totry and do as much as possible to welcomehim; but we were all disappointed becausethe " Galatea " passed by and did notvisit Fremantle on that occasion. But Ithink the disappointment we all felt atthat time was the reason why, when HisRoyal Highness visited A ustralia a secondtime, Fremnantle was made a port of callfor Her Majesty's ship " Galatea." Westill remember the great pleasure and joyfelt by all of us-a small community inthose days compared with the populationat the present time-that a son of ourQueen had come to visit this part of HerMajesty's dominions. We cannot helprecalling to our minds that incident,because it is a landmark almost in thiscolony, the visit of the "Galatea" tous. Under ordinary conditions it wasexpected the Duke of Edinburgh wouldhave lived for many years, and that hewould not have died before his augustmother. But such is the case: he hasbeen called away sooner than might havebeen expected, ad we all regret it. Weall, as loyal subjects of the Queen, regretit, and desire to express our regret asrepresentatives of the people of this colonyin the motion which I will now read:

That this Rouse agrees to the followingAddress to the Queen:

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR. MAJESTY,

We, Your Majesty's loyal and dutifulsubjects, the members of the LegislativeAssembly of Western Australia in Parlia-ment assembled, desire to assure yourMajesty of our loyalty to Your Majesty'sthrone and person.

We desire to humbly offer to YourMajesty our heartfelt condolence in thegreat sorrow that has fallen Upon YourMajesty by the death of' His Royal High.ness the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha,and to assure your Majesty of the sym-pathy of your loyal subjects in WesternAustralia in this sad bereavement.

We desire, also, to humbly offer ourCondolence with Her Imperial Highnessthe Duchess of Saxe-Coburg and Gothaand the members of the Royal Family,and we pray that the blessing of theAlmighty my rest upon Your Majestyand yeou- family, and that you may bethereby sustained in your affliction.

34 Federation, to complete. (ASSEMBLY] AdrstoheQen

I beg, to move the adoption of theAddress.

MRn. ILLDTGWORTH (Central Mur-chison): I rise to second this motion.It is not necessary to add any words, Ithink, to the kindly references expressedby the Premier.

Question put and passed.THE PREMIER: I beg further to

move that the hion. the Speaker berequested to forward the Address to HisExcellency the Administrator, for trans-mission to Her Majesty.

Question put and passed.

FEDERAL COMMONWEALTH - ADMIS-SION AS AN ORIGTNAL STATE,ADDRESS TO THE QUEEN.

THE Srs@ans:- I understand that anarrangement has been come to that thismotion shall be taken as a formal matter;otherwise it cannot be taken now.

Tan PaRIER: I understand tbat isso.

THE SPEAKER: I1 have communicatedwith the leader of the Opposition, andhe informs me that is so.

Tuae PREMIER (Right Ron. Sir J.Forrest):- I only wish to say a few words.I beg to move:

That this House agrees to the followingAddress to the Queen, praying that WesternAustralia may be admitted as an originalState of the ENderal Commonwealth of Ans-tralia, and authorisess Mr. Speaker to signmuch address on behalf of the LegislativeAssembly, and present it to his Excellency theGovernor for transmission to Her Majesty

To the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty.MAY IT PLEASE Your MAnsn,

We, Your Majesty's dutiful and loyalsubjects, Members of the LegislativeAssembly of Western Australia, in Parlia-ment assembled, approach Your Majestywith assurances of our loyalty and sincereattachment to Your Majesty's Throne andPerson,

We humbly inform Your Majesty thatthe people of Western Australia haveagreed to be united into a Federal Com-monwealth together with the people ofNew South Wales. Victoria, South Aus-tralia, Queensland, and Tasmania, inaccordance with the Act of the ImperialParliament in that behalf; and we humblypray Your Majesty to declare, by Proclsana-tion, that on and after the day therein*appmointed Western Australia may beadmitted as an original State of theCommonwealth.

I only desire to say, in regard to thismotion I make for this Address to be

signed by the Speaker and forwarded toHer Majesty, that by an Act of ourParliament, in which this House con-curred, this question of whether WesternAustralia should enter federation underthe Commonwealth of Australia Billshould be referred to a referendum of thepeople, that the question was so referredon the 31st July last, and that the resultof the referendumn, which I have officiallyreceived only an hour ago, is that 64,a95persons voted in regard to thle matter, andthat 44,704 were in favour of WesternAustralia. joining the rest of Australiaunder the Commonwealth, and 19,691were adverse to it, So that WesternAustralia has declared, by a majority of25,013 persons, that she should join therest of Australia under the Common-wealth of Australia Act, I take it thatthe reason why I and my friend opposite(Mr. flhlingworth) have agreed to takethis matter as a formal one is thatParliament having resolved to refer it tothe people, and the people having had theopportunity of voting on the matter, andhaving decided by an immense majorityof more thanx two to one in favour ofunion, all we have to do here now is toaccept the verdict of the people. I maysay I asked the Registrar General to-dayhow many adults there were in WesternAustralia, and he informed mec thataccording to his records there were120,000; so that out of 120,000 adults inthe colony, 64,395 actually voted in thereferendum. I only desire to say, beforemoving the adoption of the Address, thatI believe, and we all hope, that thedecision of the people in regard to thismatter will turn out to be for the best.It is, of course, a6 matter in which a gooddeal of controversy has occurred. I donot think anyone will regret that fact,because it is just as well--in fact it is farwiser in matters of this sort, in any greatchanges-that the two sides of the ques-tion should be clearly and fully placedbefore the people of the colony, in orderthat they may have an opportunity of

judging which they think is the best.Therefore, instead of regretting that therehas been any controversy on this matter,and perhaps there has been some bitter-ness too, instead of our regretting weought rather to rejoice that it is so;because if the two sides of the questionare not placed clearly before the people,

Address to W Queen.

Federation, to complete. [1AGS,10. dre-nRpv

we shiall. not be so satisfied with theverdict as we otherwise would be. Nowthat the verdict of the people of WesternAustralia, has been stated, and that verdictbeing so clear and unmistakable, I hopewe all, whatever our views are, whetherwe have been in favour of or againstfederation, will now try to sink thosedifferences, accept the verdict, and putour best shoulder to the wheel to makethe colony prosperous under the neworder of things. I beg to move that thefollowing Address (to be signed by you,Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this Assembly)be presented to His Excellency theAdministrator, for transmission to HerMajesty

LEGISLATIVE AssEunrr, WESTIENAUSTRALIA.

To the Queen's Most Rzcellent Majesty.MAT IT PLEASEM YOUR MAJnSn,

We, Your Majesty's dutiful and loyalsubjects, Members of the Legislative Assemblyof Western Australia in Parliament assembled,approach Your Maj esty with assurances ofour loyalty and sincere attachment to YourMajesty's throne and person.

We humbly inform Your Majesty that thepeople of Western Australia have agreed to beunited into a Federal Commonwealth togetherwith the people of New South Wales, Victoria,South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania,in accordane with the Act of the ImperialParliament in that behalf; and we humblypray Your Majesty to declare, by Proclamation,that on and after the day therein appointedWestern Australia may be admitted as anoriginal State of the Commonwealth.

August. 1900.Speaker.

Clerk.Ma.. ILLINCIWOETH (Central Mur-

chison) . I rise with very great pleasureto second this motion. I think, withthe right lion, gentleman, that no moreneed be said on the present occasion,in view of the fact that the peopleof the colony have been appealed toand have given their verdict. As weare only representative of the people, andtheir voices having been heard on thequestion, we have now a. simple duty toperform in carrying out the wishes of thepeople, by establishing ourselves in con-nection with this Commonwealth. I doDot desire, and I think no hion. membersof the House desire, to enter into a dis-cussion on this occasion; and on thataccount I consented to have this motiondealt with as a formal matter.

Question put and passed.

SUPREME COURT ACT AMENDMENTBILL.

Introduced by Mn. JANES, and read afirst time.

PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATIONCONSOLIDATION BILL.

Introduced by Mn. JAMES, and read afirst time.

TRUSTEES LAW CONSOLIDATION BILL.Introduced by Mn. JAMES, and read a

first time.

CONSPIRACY DILL (WORKMEN).Introduced by MR. EWING, and read a

first time.

ADDRESS IN REPLY TO OPENINGSPEECH.

DEBATE, SECOND DAY.

Ma. TLLINGWORTH (Central Mur-chison), in resuming the debate on themotion for the adoption of the Addressin reply to the Administrator's openingSpeech, said: Before dealing with thequestions whichi arise. out of this Address,I have a complaint to make against theright hion. the Premier.

THE: PREMIER: Not the first time, Ithink.

Mn. ILLING-WROTH: Probably notthe first, and possibly not the last. Mycomplaint is that, by agreement enteredinto by the right bon. gentleman andmyself, with the concurrence of theHouse, it was agreed that Parliamentshould be prorogued till the 7th August.I desired, when I came to that agree-ment, to fix an earlier date than the 0th;but as it was the Premier's wish to makeit the 7th, I consented to that date.Under ordinary circumstances I wouldnot be disposed to complain of thedifference of a few days, although I saythat in courtesy, when such a change ismade after agreement entered into betweenthe leaders on the two sides of the House,it is only proper for the Premier toconsult the leader of the Oppositionbefore making an important change ofthis character.

THE PREMIER: I did not know I haddone it.

Me. ILLINCIWORTU: This matteris not important, in a sense; but underexisting circumstances I look upon it as

[21 AUGUST, 1900.] Addrem-in-Beply. 35

86 Addres8-in-Reply: [ASML.Deascoday

a most important matter, because of aquestion raised in the recess as to thelegality of this House sitting beyond the17th August. Theme was a considerabledifference of opinion-not only was butis a considerable difference of opinion-as to whether Section 52 of the Consti-tution Act carries with it authority forthis House to sit and legislate beyondthe 17th August.

THE PREMIER: I thought that wasdead.

Mn. ILLTNGWORTH: This is en-tirely a6 quest-ion for learned gentlemenin this House. I understand the Premierhas satisfied himself, from sources otherthan this colony, as to the legalty ofthe position; and if that be so, Itinkthis House is entitled to hear from himthe grounds upon which he still main-tains, against very strong evidence, thatthis Rouse is legally in session, in orderthat there may be no doubt, and in orderthat attacks may not be made uponmembers-because I have heard it hintedthat there will be attacks on hon. mem-bers for sitting in this House andlegislating. The right hon. gentlemanseems to think I am speaking adversely,but I am speaking in the interests of theHouse and the country. If there issatisfactory evidence, and I think theright hon. gentleman has obtained some,it will he well for him at the earliestopportunity to put the House and thecountry in possession of his evidence, sothat any person who may be disposed toattack us shall be hindered from so doing.But another question arises under thisone. If Section 52 of the amendedConstitution Act continues the constitu-tion of 1895, and if we are under theconstitution of 1895, then I hold thatonly under the constitution of 1899 havewomen the right to be put on the electoralroll. Yet we know that women are beingput on the roll, and it is our desire. theyshould be put on; for the question havingbeen settled in this House, it is our desirethat all adults should have the right tovote, and that their names should be puton the roll at the earliest possible moment.But if Section 52 maintains the right ofthis House to sit under the ConstitutionAct of 1895, that Constitution Act doesnot give to wom~n the right of being puton the roll; and only under the Constitu-tion Act of 1899 can they be put

on the roll, the word "male"' beingaltered by that Act to "person." Con-sequently there is a grave question ofdoubt as to the legality of the course nowbeing taken, in putting women on theelectoral roll. We are on the horns of adilemma; for if it be taken that we existas an Assembly and are continuing tolegislate under the Act of 1895, thenunder that Act women have no right tobe placed on the roll for this Assembly;or, on the other hand, if we are continuingour business under the amending Act of1899, then we have no right to legislatebeyond the 17th August. This is thedilemma which has arisen. It seemed tome that it would have been much wiseron the part of the Government anrd ofthis House to have put beyond all doubta question of such vast importance, and tohave prevented all possible cavil. Ofcourse, as a layman, I express no opinionon the legal question; but I say a doubthas been raised, and it would have beenwiser if we bad taken steps to preventany possible doubt as to whether we havethe right to legislate beyond the 17thAugust, or whether we have a right toput women on the roll. Had this Housemet on the 7th August, the proposal Iintended to make was that this Houseshould sit continuously in order to getthrough the necessary business andadjourn on the 17th August, so as toplace the question beyond all doubt.However, the Premier has satisfied him-self that we are now met in a regularmanner, and so the responsibility mustrest on the Government as to theposition in which we stand. T calledattention to this at the time in thepublic Press, and my principal objection,my only complaint against the Premier,is that at an important time likethis, when a critical question has arisen,he should, without consulting thisside of the House, take on himself toshift the date of the sitting of Parlia-ment from the 7th to the 16th August.The next question I have to deal with isthe proposal to pass an Address to HisExcellency the Administrator in reply tothe Address he was pleased to deliver atthe opening of Parliament. It will beseen, from the suggestion I maode justnow, that to say the least of it Parlia-ment is moribund, because I contend thatwhen Section 52 was put in the Consti-

[ASSEMBLY.] Debate, 8econd day.

Addres-in Reply: £21 AUGUST, 1900.] Debate, second day. 37

tution Act of 1899 it was never intendedthat Parliament should meet again andcarry on important legislation, Look atthe position in which we are now placed.We are adding six extra members to theLegislative Council; we are continuingseats which have been declared uncon-stitutional by the passing of the newConstitution Act; and we are asked now tolegis late for the expenditure of money, tolegislate on most important questions,and we are asked to continue this legis-lation when we are sir members short,when seats which ought to have beenredistributed according to the Act of1899 have not been dealt with for lackof opportunity. It seems to me that, inface of the fact that we are here takingthis action short of sir members, becausethere has been no redistribution of seatsas provided b 'y the Act, and that we areasked to deal with tbis proposed legisla-tion, the Government ought not to haveasked this House to enter upon a longlist of important legislation; much lessshould they have asked this House tosanction large and important expenditure;and it seems to me that a House whichis practically moribund, which exists onlyby the sufferance of Section 52 in theamending Constitution Act, and whichwas intended only to continue Parliamentfot special and contingent circumstances,should not take on itself to practicallyextend its existence and to initiate andcarry on this important legislation. Isay that for practical purposes this Houseis moribund-not only so, but it isabsolutely unrepresentative; because, ifrepresentative, why dlid we pass thatConstitution Act at all? We passed itbecause this House was not properlyrepresentative of the people; and weknow it as has been revealed in theFederal vote that., as far as this questionis concerned, many members in thisHouse are not in harmony with theirconstituents. How are we to hnowwhether we ame in harmony with theviews of our constituents or not? Thecountry has been clamnouring for yearsfor a redistributiou of seats, which Shouldgive equal representation to the peopleliving in the colony; and now, in faceof the fact that this House is not repre-sentative, and the House having declareditself to be unrepresentative by thepassing of the Constitution Act of 1899,

we are asked to enter on a long list ofimportant legislation. One cardinal ob-jection is that this is legislation of animportant character. Some social legis-lation may be urgent, but financial legis-lation cannot be urgent in any degree.Then, during recent days, we have hadin the public Press-and I do not thinkwe have any reason to doubt the reportin this instance, as the Press is generallyaccurate in its statements-a reportshowing that a most peculiar circum-.stane has arisen; for we have heardof a meeting having been called by theright hon. the Premier, and we haveheard that in the meeting, or if not inthe meeting we have heard it outside,that the Premier has expressed in strongterms his intention to ask for a dissolu-tion of the Assembly in the event of anadverse vote being carried on the floor ofthis House. I call attention to this,before any motion is tabled, that thisHouse has been threatened with a disso-lution, and I want to call attention tothe absolutely unconstitutional nature ofthis proceeding.

THE PREMiER: When did I say that?Mr. ILLINGWORTH: You said it

to me, at any rate, in the presence ofthree or four members.

THE PREMIER: Eavesdropping! Pri-vate conversation!

Mr. ILtINGWORTH: I say it hasbeen declared in the public Press thatcertain remarks were made by thePremier in a caucus meeting of Govern-ment supporters.

THE PRMIER: Going about the streetsraking up gossip!1

MR. ILLIN WORTH; Todd says(pages 403-4, vol. 2):

While the decision of the House upon anyquestion which is calculated to affect therelations of Ministers towards the House ofCommons is pending, it is highly irregular andunconstitutional to refer to a dissolution ofparliament as a probable contingency, with aview to influence the conduct of members uponthe particular occasion.I assert that the Premier has threatenedthis House in a caucus meeting, and hehas threatened it in private conversation.

THE PREMIER: What sort of conver-sation ?

MR. ILLINGWORTHE: It is reportedin the public Press that he has threatenedthis House, and has endeavoured to intimi-date it. I1 say that no constitutional Gov-

38 Address-in-Reply: [ASSEMBLY.] Debate, second day.

ernor-I am not speaking of our own,but any constitutional Governor in theBritish dominions -would grant a dissolu-tion under existing ciri~umstances. Wehave an Act that has been passed by theHouse altering the whole character of theConstitution, or at any rate its represen-tation; and we have this Act technicallyheld back in order that we may getcertain rolls ready, that certain personswho have rights under the Act, namelythe women, might get (in the rolls. Inorder that the rolls might be got readyfor the general election, we put Section62 in the Act of 1899; and that was themain reason, if not the only reason, whythe section was inserted, to continue theexistence of Parliament in order to dealwith the rolls and get the people on therolls.

THE PiREIERg: They are not on yet,and they will not be on for six months.

MR. ILLINOWOitTH: Therefore theimpropriety of asking for a dissolutionand threatening the House with a dis-solution-intimiidating members in theHouse and outside the House with thethreat of a dissolution which has neverbeen asked for, and if asked for neverought to be granted tinder the circum-stances of the case. If there were adissolution to-morrow, the rolls could notbe got ready. Notwithstanding that, thePremier has endeaivoured to influencemembers of the House before a motion ofwant of confidence has been tabled oranything else has occurred. He hastaken upon himself to influence membersin their decisio4l by a threat of dissolu-tion. He is welcome to all the advantageshe is getting out of it.

THE PREmiER: It is all private con-versation you are dealing with.

MR. ILLINGWORTH: It is in thepublic Press.

MR. VOSPsit: I suppose what the Presspublish is confidential, too.

Mu. ILLINGWORTH: Having dealtwith that point, I want to speak of theAddress itself. The matter contained inthe first paragraph the House has alreadydealt with. We all regret, and deeplyregret, that there should have beenoccasion for the motion. As to the warin South Africa, the death of MajorMoor is a matter of very great regret,I amn sure, to every member in the House,and every member of the community.

When we saw those gallant men in theTown Hall and bade them farewell, andspoke of receiving and welcoming themback, it was the desire of everyone inthe country that, whoever else fell, weshould see Major Moor back again. Ithas been otherwise ordained. All mustsay that he was a brave mnan, because heproved himself to be brave when, on thatday with a handful of men, he held backthe enemy for a whole day. We knowhow brave those men were, and MajorMoor was one of the bravest of the brave.We regret the fatal termination of thewar, as far as he was .concerned. Wecome to paragraph 4, the question of theAddress to Her Majesty on Federation.I am not going to open a discussion ofFederation, on the Address-in-reply. Wehave already dealt with the question andpassed it, and I feel sume the country andthis House will be satisfied now to leavethe decision where the people left it,strongly in favour of joining with ourbrothers on the other side of this con-tinent. The arrival of the mail steamersis, of course, a matter of congratulation toall who live in this part of the colony.Whether it be a matter of congratulationto the people who live in another part, Ithink it is rather not. But surely theymust have expected, after spending so vasta sum of money as we have been spendingfor years on the Frenmantle Harbour, thatsooner or later the steamboats wouldconic to this port. Although some of myfriends who sit behind me suffer in regardto this, they will have to accept theinevitable, and endeavour to console them-selves with the thought that the greatestgood for the greatest number must alwaysbe the motto on which we should legislate.I want to say juset a word about paragraph6: " The Coolgardie Water Scheme isprogressing satisfactorily." Well, it maybe so. I hope it is true, I hope it iscorrect, and that the work will be finishedwithin a comparatively reasonable time.It says in the Speech that the completionof the work is not far distant. If that betrue, and I have no reason to dispute it,although I fancy perhaps hon. membersare too sanguine as to the date, and that itis more probable to he three or four yearsyet before any water gets to Coolgardie ;still we have to accept the position whichis placed beore us by the Government.What is to be done? The Government

Addrss-n-Rply [2 AUUST 190.] Debate, second day. 39

have reappropriated a considerable sumof money which was intended for thecomlpletion of this work, possibly upwardsof £2,000,000 . What provision has beenmade for repaying this moneyP Nothingis said in the Speech of any proposalsbeing submitted, as far as I know, toreimburse the money which has beenreappropriated from this great work.Where is this money to come from?Froni where are we to get the moneyPSupposing the work is to be quickly dlone,it follows that the money will be required.But hon. members know that they haveconsented to the reappropriation of money,and that money will have to be refunded.We know the condition of the moneymarket, and we know the circumstanceswhich surround us, and the Governmentsay that this great work is progressingfavourably, that it is going to be broughtto a speedy conclusion, and when thework is done the money must be paid;but no suggestion is made as to how themoney which has been reappropriated isto be reimbursed. It may be said thatwill come later. That may be an answer,but for the present I wish to call atten-tion to the fact that, according to thestatement in paragraph 6, provisionshould be made for payment of thework in connection with the CoolgardieWater Scheme. Now we come to awhole list of things which I look on asso much padding. There is a great quan-tity of padding in this Speech. Wecome to paragraph 11, which deals withthe Government Railways, and we aretold that they have had a successfulfinancial year. Well, we are pleased tohear it; but will the Government tellus how much of the success has beenattained by the carriage of pipes for theCoolgardie Water Scheme? How muchof this success is made up in takingmoney from the Public Works Depart-ment and putting it into the RailwayDepartment, and so augmenting therevenue of the railways? I venture tosay that upwards of £160,000 or.£200,000is money of this character. While itmay appear that we have had a successfulfinancial year, and that £1,000,000 orX1,200,000 has been earned by the rail-ways, and while we must admit that therailways in doing work for us must becredited with it, we have been augmentingthe revenue of the railways by our own

public works, and therefore we cannotexpect that revenue to continue unlessthe public works policy is also continued,which means that we must have so muchmore work for the railways. This isimportant, because great complaints havebeen made of insufficient rolling-stock.A great deal of this insufficiency musthave been caused by using the trucksfor doing our own work which, accord-ing to paragraph 6, must speedily cometo an end. Paragraph 6 says the Cool-gardie Water Works are well in hand.If it can be shown, and I think it can,that this increase in the railway revenuefor the present year is largely due to thefact that we have been using the railwaysto do our own work, we shall have totake that matter into consideration beforewe congratulate the Government. Reallyone is surprised to see in the Speechparagraphs 12, 13, 14, and 15. I thoughtwhen I heard His Excellency read thisSpeech, at any rate when you, Mr.Speaker, read it to us in this House,that there hail been put. into yourhand a new geography for the Stateschools, a geography of Western Aus-tralia; because these paragraphs mentionnearly every township in the country;they are all enumerated, but it seems tome now that some omissions have beenmade. There ought to have been anaccount of something which happenedhere and something which happenedthere. Surely, in all seriousness, is it nottrifling with the country and the Houseto put this into the mouth of His Excel-lencyP Are we to understand this is alist of public works which the people ofthis country are to be grateful for, grate-ful to the Government that has carriedout these and other worksP Is aninference to be drawn that this Govern.ment is the only Governent that couldhave carded out these public worksP

Ma. WOOD: Certainly.MR. TLLINGWORTH: Of course,

because it is the only Government inpower. We have said it often thatnothing but a charge of dynamite wouldremove the Government from the Trea-sury benches; but may I point out that itis quite possible some other Governmentwould have carried out these works, andperhaps done the work better and cheaper?Here we have a long list of public workswhich have been carried out, some of

Address-in-Reply: [21 AUGUST, 1900.]

40 Address-in-&eply: [ASSEMBLY.] Debate, second day.

which have cost not more than £10; eandthis long list is read by His Excellecyand published here and right throughthe country, to show that the ForrestGovernment have been so grand andgenerous and noble in conferring thesepublic works in nearly every town inWestern Australia. What are the Gov-ernment in office forP Is it not to expendthe revenue? What do the Governmentcollect the money for but to expend itwhere it is required? What does anyGovernment exist for but to do thesethingsP This is simply, a piece ofpaddinig in the Speech.

TusE Punmnr: You do not like it.MR. ILLINOWORTE: Of course I1

do not like it. Does anyone else like itPWould anyone in the world like it? Itis a wonder the Government. have notseen that it is pure bombast from topto bottom. I want to call special atten-tion just for a moment or two, because Ido not want to occupy the time of theHouse at any great length, to paragraph16 of this Speech. We are told herethat

Ow tobeftthtadsouinfte

tion Act passed last session, my Ministers donot propose to recommend for your consider-ation the construction of many new wvorks ofmagnitude.This is a clear admission of what I havebeen arguing previously, that this Parlia-ment is moribund, that this Parliamentis unrepresentative, that this Parlia-ment admittedly has not the right togo on and expend large sumis of moneyon large and important works. Underthe 1899 Constitution Act, until theParliament is elected under that Actwe are not justified, we have no mandatefrom the people, to go into a vast amountof expenditure; yet in this very paragraphthe Government are opening up a debat-able question, an exceedingly debatableone, a permanent water supply for thewhole of the metropolitan district. Thisis a big question, and involves the expen-diture of a vast amount of money, unlessthe Premier wants to put a pipe to theMundaring Weir and bring the water thsway insta of taking it to Coolgardie.That is what I thought at frt; but Ithink it is the intention to go to Cool-gardie, because I noticed when up that

way that some pipes have already beenlai alng the route. I want to callattention to this matter. For the Metro-poli tan area we have a large representationin the House, and to start to deal with abig question of this kind in this Parlia-ment is surely out of place altogether.Why should we prevent the members wh6are to be elected under the new Act torepresent the metropolitan constituencieshaving a voice in dealing with an impor-tant question like this ? I want to makea big difference between social legislationand financial legislation. If we pass aBill in this House dealing with sociallegislation, and it is unsatisfactory to thecountry, the next Parliament can alterthe Bill without any difficulty whatever,they can amend and alter it if it is not inaccordance with the will of the people;but when we commit ourselves to a bigexpenditure of money on a. big scheme,the next Parliament is committed to itbecause of the expense already incurred,although that Parliament has had noopportunity of expressing an opinion uponit. Are we at the close of this Parliament,in our fourth year, a moribund Parlia-ment, declared so by the ConstitutionAct which we have passed, to commit afuture Parliament to a large expenditureof money, a large scheme for water worksand railways and other things, axe we tocommit them irrevocably, because it isirrevocable, to these thingsP I knowParliament can repeal anything;i but howwould it be if any of us who objected tothe Coolgardie Water Scheme proposedto stop that work and to repeal the Actunder which the work is going onP Wecould not do it.

MR. WOOD: You tried to do it.MR. ILjLINGWORTH: We tried it

before any money was expended, but notsince: we should not be so foolish. Weare mn the middle of this great work, andfor weal or woe that work must befinished. That is, I contend, a sufficientlegacy to leave to a new Parliament. Wehave not yet finished our great work atthe Fremantle Harbour, and we are sofar committed to it that we must continuethis work. These two legacies alone,which this Parliament and the one pre-ceeding it have sanctioned, are quiteenough to leave to the Parliament whichwill be elected under the 1899 Act. Toadd more expense to what the colony is

Addrss-n-Rply [2 AUUST 190.1 Debate, second day. 41

already comnmitted to is utterly and com-pletely unjustifiable. We are asked inparagraph 16 to give our assent to pro-viding a permanent water supply for thewhole of the metropolitan district. Underthe new Act, the metropolitan district hassomething like sixteen members, and arewe to come into this House, before thesemembers are elected - when the newmembers have a right under the Con-stitution, I contend, to sit here now-and before the peoplewbom thesemembers;are to represent have had an opportunityof expressing a voice on the subject, tocommit the country to an irrevocableexpenditure on a, work of this kind.? Weare not justified in dealing with such aquestion. If that is true, and I contendit is true in regard to these proposedwater works, how mouchi more is it truein regard to the works mentioned inparagraphs 17 and 18 of the Governor'sSpeech? PIThe Speech says:

My Ministers feel justified, owing to theincrease in the developtqent of the goldfieldsat Nannine and its neighbourhood, and alsoat Peak Hill and other places in its vicinity,in recommending the extension of the railwayfrom Cue to lKannine.

Ma. Woon - Your own district.MR. ILLIGWORTH: I want to say

this.. When the railway to Cue was con-structed. a certain sum of money, wasavailable, and I obtained very generouslyfrom the Premier a promise that themoney should be expended in the district,and I pleaded for the construction of theNatnine railway.

MR. Mona(;xa: Why did you doit ?* Mit. IL1ANGWORTH: Because the

money was there, it had been voted bythe House, and it was a surplus from theconstruction of the railway to Cue whichI desired to be used in the continuationof the railway in that same district.

THE PREMIER: You were the memberfor Nannine then, I supposeP

Mn. ILLINGWORTH:- I think not.Mn. GEORGE:. He has only done what

you did: changed his mind, I suppose.MR. ILLINGWORTH: I have not

changed my mind at all, This railwaywas only projected, but a Bill was passedin the House for its construction, andthesurvey was made. The rails were ordered,and were landed at Geraldton.

THE PREMIER: Not landed.

Mn. ILLINGWORTH: I was informedby the Director of Public Works that therails were landed.

THE PEIERi: Not landed.Mn. ILLINGWORtTH: Then I with-

draw that. The rails were taken toFrenlantle, and were stolen from Fre-mantle and taken somewhere else.

Mn. GEoRGE: The ship was wreckedin taking them to Geraldton.

MR. ILLINGWORTH:, The construc-tion of this railway at the time wasjustified, and the construction of thisrailway is justifiable stil, not only toNannine but right on to Peak Hill. Butit is not a question at this stage as towhether the railway is justifiable or not:it is not a question as to whether therailway to Nannine ought to be con-structed. As I said before, it ought.The Act has been passed, but at thisstage, in a. moribund Parliament, we arenot justified in expending money orvoting money for the construction of theNannine railway. The hon. member whois gigto be Director of Public Works,I am told, is smiling.

MR. WooD: The member for Fre-mantle is smriling.

MR. ILLING WORTH: You weresmiling. I contend I amn consistent inmy position. This Parliament has noright to pass any great work: thisParliament has no right to extend therailway from Cue to Nanninie. The nextParliament may he justified in doing so.I want to know how camne it that, al-though the railway was agreed to by thisHouse, the money has been lying in theTreasury ever 6inceP It was promised,and now there has been a sudden awaken-ing out of sleep at this particular stage.When I pleaded for the railway toNannine we got the, Act, it is true, butwe did not get the railway. Now we areto have the railway! Is this an attemptto purchase the electorateP

Mn. GEoRaE: Oh, no!MR. ILLINGWORTH: You would

not suggest that. We aretold themonieyis there.

MR. GEORGE: In your electoratePTHE PREmiER: As far as Tucka-

narra.MR. ILLINGWOE.TH:- As far as

Tuckanarra!THE PR.EMIER: You do not want a

railway to Tuckanarni P

Addresa-in-Reply: [21 Au(tuff, 1900.]

42 Address-in-Reply: [ASML..eae eoddy

MR. ILLINGWORTH:- I want a. rail-way to Nannine, I1 want a railway, toTuckanarra, I want a railway to BonnieVale, I want a railway to every part ofthe country, 1 want a railway to MarbleBar and to Fort Hedland; hut I say thisParliament, which is no-w moribund andhas no mandate, has no right to expendthat money.

THrE PEnmEn: Not to take a railwayto Tuckanaaa,?

Ma. ILLI&G WORTH: No; not toTuckanarra, or a yard. beyond. Of courseI may lose my seat by saying this, bat Ido not care about that. I have at fewstaunch friends at Tuckanarra,; but I amnot here to consider my seat: I am hereto consider the welfare of the country.We are told there is to be a Bill toauthorise the construction of a railwayfrom Coolgardie to Norseman. A Billfor this line was passed last session inthis House, but another place rejectedit.

. BEH PanuxaE~: The Bill was notpassed. We only passed an item in theLoan Bill.

MR. ILLING WORTH:- The money isthe main consideration in the construction.I would like to know, from members whoknow, if there is any truth in the state-ment, which I do not know, that there i s a.vast amount of machinery lying at Dundasthat has never been erected, that there is a.vast amount of machinery that is erectedthere but is not working.

Mu. GErORGE:- I know it. I cannot getmy money.

MR. MORAN: It is perfectly true.Mu. IliLINGWORTH: Then we do

not require the railway to take themachinery there.

MR. MoRAN: They want a railway totake some gold there.

MR. ILING WORTH: Supposing therailway is a desirable work-that I do notdispute, I shall not enter into that phaseof the question-this railway will run thecountry into a matter of £500,000 or£R600,000. Are we justified in committinga f uture Parliament of this colony, with amembership of fif ty under the ConstitutionAct, to an expenditure of £500,000 or£0600,000, when we do not know whetherthe people want that railway or ifot?Have we any right to do thatP Havewe any mandate to do anything of thiskind? Again, we are told in paragraph

18 that the Leonora Railway hals beensurveyed. Well, the Act for the con-struction of that line has been passed, butI contend the money has not yet beenraised, and something like £2,000,000will be required for recouping the moneythat has been revoted. I say that willexceed the capabilities of the Governmentfor many months to come. To put onthe statute book legislation which in-volves the construction of this railway,when we do not at present know how themoney is to be raised, is wrong; and Isay the House ought not to sanction thisexpenditure in its existing life. We passedthe money for the railway, but it has notbeen obtained.

Ma. MORAN: The rails for the line arenot in the country yet.

MER. ILLTNGWORTH: If this workis desirable, and I do not say, it is not-Ibelieve it is-if it is desirable to carry outthis work, then the Parliament that is tobe re-elected as soon as the rolls are readyis the Pairliament to decide whether thework should go oni nnder the existing con-dition of the money market. We havedone enough to pass the Bill, and theGovernment are not in a position to showthe House how the money for the com-pletion of the public works now authorisedis to be obtained. In the face of that,the Government propose further expendi-ture: that seems carrying things too far.We should not place on the statute bookworks which we have no means of carry-ing out, and which we have to trustanother Parliament to carry out for: us.Why not leave the other Parliament to doit ? When we come to social legislation,that is another matter. The Governmentare surely not serious when they ask theHouse to deal wvith a Municipal Bill of600 or 700 clauses.

MR. MORAN: It will have to be veryurgent.

MR. ILLINGWORTH: Surely theGovernment are not serious when they askus to deal with &Public Service BiUl; butI trust the Government are in earnestwhen they propose to give us an Arbitra-tion and Concihiation Bill.

TnrsPRFxmnu: Ah!MR. ILILINGWORTH: Every hon.

member in the House has been pleadingfor that Bill for years.

Tnn PREmiER:- We are- moribund," IIthought you said?

Debate, eecond day.[ASSEMBLY.]

Adde~sin-e py: [21AUGST,190.] Amendment moved. 48

Mna. ILLINGWORTH: We axe as far]as the expenditure of money is concerned.If we pass an Arbitration and Concili-ation Bill, the next Parliament can alterit; but if we pass a, Railway Bill, thenext Parliament cannot, and if the hon.member does not see the difference Icannot help it. As to social legislation,the next Parliament can repeal or amendit without any disadvanitage to the country.I would not object to the Municipal Bill,or a Public Service Bill if it is a goodone; but my conviction is deep and strongthat this Parliament is not justified incommitting a future Parliament to oneshilling of expenditure that is actuallybeyond our control. As far as wecancon-trol. the expenditure, we ought to leave thewhole question of public works-this waterschemne, these railways, the raising ofmoney for the Leonora Railway, the con-struction of the Nannine Railway - - allquestions of this character weoughtto leaveto the -next Parliament, because there is nohurry in regard to this expenditure. Ifwe pass these Bills to-morrow, we cannotdo anything towards giving effect tothem, although we should be taking onourselves to raise hopes and expectationsby passing such measures. If we pass aMunicipal Bill, if we pass a ConciliationBill, there are no financial effects arisingout of them; but if we pass the DundasRailway, we shall have people speculatingin laud on the expectation of that railwaybeing constructed. Indeed I have heardthat people are speculating already inland on the Nanuine line of railway, inconsequence of the proposal of the Govern-ment to construct it. By passing a Rail-way Bill we may raise expectations thatwill involve financial. profit or loss toindividuals; and if the next Parliamentrepeals the Bill, this procedure will putthe whole thing into a, difficulty. It isnot so in passing social legislation. There-fore, I say we are not justified in passingor assenting in any way to what I callunwarrantable expenditure, under thesecircumstances. I intend to close myremarks with an amendment onthmotion before the House; but I want tosay here that there is one thing -whichaffects this House and the country.A resolution was passed in favour of pay-ment of members, and people all over thecountry have been calling for this to becarried into effect. Before this Parliament

dissolves, it is desirable and I thinknecessary that some legislation should bepassed by this House, in order to referthis question to the people at the nextelection, as was, formerly suggested by theGovernment. There is no intimation inthe Address that this is to be done; butI would like to have an assurance -fromthe Government that they intend to bringin the necessary legislation on thisquestion. My only objection to the Speechof His Excellency the Administrator isthat it proposes a6 large amount of expendi-ture; that it proposes that this moribundand unrepresentative Parliament shouldcommit the country to this expenditure.I say we are not justified in committingthe country to one shilling of expenditurebeyond the,' works that are in hand. Forthat reason I propose to move, as acardinal question for the Government, inview of the public works policy they haveproposed on this occasion as on all otheroccasions, and in view of the fact that atthe close of this Parliament in its fourthyear, after an amended Constitution Acthas been passed for a redistribution ofseats, they are still pressing for moreexpenditure-in view of th is Ilam not pre-pared to support the Government; and Itherefore move, as an amendment on themotion bef ore the House, to strike out thewords in the last clause of the motion,also after the word 11Parliament'" in thesecond clause to strike out the whole, witha view to inserting the following words:

We desire, however, most respectfually toinform your Excellency that you advisers nolonger retain the confidence of a majority ofthe mnembers of this House.

THE PREMIER (after conferring withMinisterial supporters in regard to a datefor adjournment):- I beg to move that thedebate be adjourned till Tnesda~y next.

Motion put and passed, and the debateajdourned accordingly.

ADJOURNMENT.On further motion by the PREmiER, the

House adjourned at eight minutes past6 o'clock, until the next Tuesday after-noon.

E21 ANGUST, 1900.]Address-iu-Reply: