Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

WEDNESDAY, 5 SEPTEMBER 1906

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Questions. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 573

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.

.WEDNESDAY, 5 SEPTE11BER, 1906.

The SPEAKER (Hon. Sir A. S. Cowley, Herbert) -took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

QUESTIONS. ARTICLES IN "SILVERWOOD GAZETTE.

Mr. LESIN A ( Glermont) asked the Secretary for Agriculture-

!. By whose authority is 1Ir. Benson, Fruit Expert, contributing a series of articles to the .silve1·wood Ga:dte, a journal partly owned by the :YiinisterP

2. Is it with his consent and approval that persistent and unfair attacks on the prinmple of co-operation, in connection with dairying work and bacon manufacture, are being made in the }Jages of the same journal~

3. Is it because the advance of co-operative production in these lines is interfering with the prospects of the Silverwood Dairy Factory Company?

The SECRETARY JWR AGRIGCLTURE (Hon. D. F. Denham, Oxley) replied-

1. l.Yith my permis~ion :J.Ir. Bensou \\Tote two articles of deep interest to agriculturists.

2. I have no knowledge of alleged attacks, nor have I been consulted.

3. I refer the hon. member to the chairman of directors of the Silverwood Company concerning the affairs of that company.

SILVlmWOOD DAIRY FACTORY COMPANY.

Mr. LESINA asked the Secretary for Agri­culture-

1. Is he cognisa.nt of a contract being entered into between the Gympie Co~operative Dairy Company and the Silverwoud Dairy Factory Company for the purchase from the latter of the dairy plant at uympie?

2. ·what is the amm~ut of the purchase money, and what report, if any, has been made upon the machinery?

3. Has he any objection to table the report for the in!orrnatiou of members?

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE replied-

1. The \Vide Bay Co-operative Dairy Company, Limited, have purchased the factory at Gym pie from the .t-~ilverwood Dairy Factory Company, Limited.

2. The amount owing to the ~Ieat and Dairy Board is £1,150 Os. 6d.

3. ~o special report has been made, but I have no objection to Jay on the table of the House the latest report on the factory and IJlaut.

MR. THmrsoN's WoRK ON DAlRYIKG.

Mr. LESI::"JA asked the Secretary for Agri. -culture-

1. Is he aware that Mr. Thomson, Dairy Expert, is issuing a work on dairying, and that he h; canvassing private firms for adverttsements in connection with the _publication of the tlame ~

2. Is this being done with the co-operation or cog­nisance of the .tl.gricultural Department r

Th€ SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE replied-

1 and 2. The Dairy Expert has authority to issue a work on dairying, but he has no authority to canvas for advertisements, neither am I aware that he is doing so.

AGREEl!ENT WITH THE AUSTRALIAN PASTORAL CoMPAKY.

Mr. LESINA asked the Secretary for Public Lands-

l. With respect to the secret agreement between the Lands Department and the Australian Pastoral Com­pany, recently laid upon the table of the House, is it a fact that the first suggestions in the direction of a sub-

stitntion of land in large blocks, for the one-fourth of the leases of the company's runs the Crown was entitled to resume under the J .. ct, came from Land Commissioner Barlow?

2. Has the department any knowledge who first suggested such a substitution to 31r. Barlow?

3. 1Yas the whole transaction cut and dried before the comp11.ny's definite proposals, contained in their letter of 17th December, were received:

4. If it was not, will the :J.Iinister be good enough to state how it came about that the letter from the department accepting the compa.ny's proposals was dated 19th December-i.e., only two days after the date on \Vllich the company's letter \Yas written~

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS replied-

1. It is incorrect to call this agreement a secret one. The arrangement in connection with it \vas in no degree less open than the proctJdure ordinarily adopted when making resumptions.

2. The first suggestion in the arrangement proceeded from the Assistant l-;-nUer Spcretary, then chief clerk.

3. The letter of 17th December containing the com­pany's definite proposals embodied tue agreement that was arrived at in a meeting between the company's representative., and those of tht~ department.

SETTLli:RS PIWli GREAT BRITAIK. Mr. FORSYTH (Garpentaria) asked the Sec­

retary for Pnblic Lands-1. 1:rhat area of land has been set aside for intending

settlers from Great Britain? 2. lrhat number of selectors have applied, and what

area bas been taken up?

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS (Hon. J. T. Bell, Dalby) replied-

l. 3i,3:,3 acres. 2. The latest report is that one portion has been

applied for. A. large number of inquiries have been made.

SUPPLY. REsniPTION oF Co1DIITTEE.

FINANCIAL STATE11ENT-RESG11PTION OJo' DEBATE.

Question-That the sum of £300 be granted to defray the salary of the aide-de camp to His Ex­cellency the Governor-stated. * Mr. KENNA (Bowen): There is a large range of subjects covered by the Financial Statement, but I do not intend to go over a great deal of the ground. I propose to refer to a few feature of the Statement with which I am better acquainted and with which I am most intimately concerned. A great deal has already been said during this debate wit.h respect to the policy of the Govern­ment in foreclosing upon central mills. Last evening I listened attentively to the lengthy dis­course 011 the subject delivered by the hon. mem­ber for Mackay, Mr. Paget; but while I have an open mind on the subjPct, I must confess that I could not find any strong ground for an impeach· ment of the policy carried out by the Govern­ment in regard to those mills. As far as Dr. lVIaxwell is concerned, I think hon. members know pretty well the views I have all along held with respect to the appointment of that gentle· man; but I do not consider him or his interests in this matter. He may be no more than the instrument of the Government, the 1Esopian fly on the wheel, which believed it created the dust that the wheel was turning up. I think, and have thought all along, that a mistake was made in appointing him., I think Dr. Maxwell has not justified his appointment. But that does not pre­vent me believing in the policy the Government have adopted, <tnd which Dr. Maxwell is the instrument for carrying out. I hope that will be clearly understood by hon. members, and that nothing that I shall say will be construed as sympathising with Dr. Maxwell, but will be

Mr. Kenna.]

574 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Suppl,y.

taken simply as approving of the coursA the Government are pursuing with regard to these central mills.

Hon. R. PHILP : Are you in the confidence of the Government?

Mr. KENN A : No, I am not in the confidence of the Government ; but in the light of what has taken place, and reading between the lines of the Financial Statement as well as what has appeared elsewhere, I think it is fairly easy to discover what is the intention of the Govern­ment.

Mr. LINDLEY : Do you approve of depriving people of their lands?

Mr. KENN A : Yes. On a former occasion I went exhaustively into the central mill question. Having visited most of those mills, having conversed with the farmErs and mill direc­tors, and having also made myself intimately acquainted, "o far as I was ahlf·, with the working of the central mills, I came into this House and rlelivered a pretty exhaustive address on the subject. These are the words I used in concluding that address-

In my opinion, the only remedy for many of these mills is absolute foreclosure .. 1 do not like using the word, and I do not like to think that the State should deal harshly with any body of people, but considering­that the land speculator has shown no mercy to the tenant when he has not fulfilled his conditions, so I think the Dtate in dealing 'vith the landowner should apply the sa11,e business method and foreclose. What I say does not apply to all central mills. I refer par­ticularly to those south of Childers, and to Pleystowe, J:llane Creek, and l>roserpine. 1Vhat is necessary is, that the co~operative principle should be restored, and I think I am right in sa,ying that the furthm· the co~operative principle has been departed from the greater the failure has been. The more the land specu­lator ha:s been allowed to intervene between the cane­grower and the Government, the worse the position has tJecome. I do not like forceclosure, but I can see no other way out of the difficulty for the canefarmer, unless he is going to be a bond slave for the rest of his !He.

Further on I said-Under any system of foreclosure that is practicable tbe

interest of the canegrower must be considered in this respect, for many of these grower::; have bought their land subject to mortgage, and they have actually paid off the price of their land, and it would be absolutely unfair tor the Government to take possession of such men's land and tell him that he has got to purchase the land over again, when in some cases be has paid the whole, hall, or a qua1·ter of the price of the land to the landowner-in any foreclosure that would be very harsh, and I would not advocate it. [A.n hon­ourable member: Are you,1in favour or foreclosure in this respect?] Yes; in certain instance; but the Treaw surer should credit the men I have referred to with what they have paid to the owners. [An honourable member: The present Treasurer has not done that.] I do not believe tllat the Govern1nent have any intention to cripple any of these farmers, and if any foreclosures take place, I am sure that the Government will g1ve them credit for the amounts they have paid. [An hon­ourable momber: They had !L chance to do that in the case of the Moreton mill.] I do not know about that; but I can say that if I was a farmer in that district I would not feel afraid of the action of the Government in this respect. That is the policy I have always advocated with regard to the central mills, and it is because I believe that the Government are working along those line~ that I am in sympathy with their action with respect to central mills. It has been said that there is a great improvement in the condition of those mills. No doubt there is a considerable improvement. I. have here a table showing the comparative results in the season 1903-4 and the season 1904-5 which may be of interest to hon. members. I do not think the Government claim, and I do not think that even Dr. Maxwell claims, that he is responsible for the improvement.

Mr. LINDLEY: He would claim anything.

[Mr. Kenna.

Mr. KENNA: Possibly. But I do not think the Government would claim that they are responsible for the immense improvement which has taken place in the position of those central mills. It is freely admitted that there have been good seasons, good prices for cane and good prices for sugar, and that in every other way the circumstances have been advantageous. But whatever the result may be, I dare say the Government, with that aptitude all Governments have in taking credit for improved positions to which they are to some extent parties, will freely admit that the circumstances have been most advantageous. Taking the increase in the num­ber of growers in the case of each of the central mills in the season 1904-5 as compared with the season 1903-4, I find that there has been an increase in the case of North Eton from 63 to 80 ; Racecourse mill from 112 to 132; Gin Gin had no crushing in 1903-4, I think, and the statistics for that year are not available for purposes of comparison; Isis has been stationary at 45; Marian increased from 98 to 117 ; NI:oreton in­creased from 119 to 171; Mosman from 57 to 85; Mulgrave from 45 to 46; Bauple decreased by 1-from 45 to 44; Nerang remained sta­tionary at 2G ; Plane Creek increased from 91 to 115; Pleystowe decreased by two-77 to 75; Proserpine increased from 7G to 90. In those 8 mills there was an increase of 177 growers. I have also figures showing that the cane supplies in those 9 mills increased by 143,750 touR, while the increase in the sugar manufactured in 10 mills was 18,352 tons. It is quite possible-and this is a feature of the case that I accentuated in 1904-that most of those mills were suffering from the insufficient cane supply, and that any policy that would be likely to increase the cane supply offering by the growers would be of advantage. But I am getting ahead of my subject. What I want to point out is that there has been an agitation afoot during the last month or so from people who are protesting against the foreclosure policy outlined by the Government. Now, I have care­fully read the names of those who are prominent in that agitation, and it seems to me that a great many of these alleged canegrowers must be growing cane in Queen street, because they are the names of well-known Queen street people.

Mr. LINDLEY: They represent 90 per cent. of the growers, thongh.

Mr. KENNA: They represent the very class that I think has been the ruin of the central mills-that is, the land speculators.

Mr. LINDLEY: The principal man-JYir. Reid­is one of the biggest growers for the Moreton mill.

Mr. KENNA: Does he grow a single stick of cane himself?

M:r. LINDLEY: He leases his land to people who grow cane for him.

Mr. KENNA: He grows very little himself. Mr. LINDLEY: He employs the men who do it. Mr. KENN A : There are undoubtedly some

farmers in this agitation, and I believe they have been terrified into believing: that the Government propose to take from them the farms they are cultivating.

Mr. J!'ORSYTH: They have received the notices· Mr. KENNA: I will come to that directly.

That well-known word " conllscate" is a fine­sounding word.

Mr. FoRSYTH : It is a socialistic word, too. Mr. KENNA: It is heard more frequently

from that side of the House than from this. If we endeav0ur to impose a tax, we are told it is confiscation. You cannot confiscate unless you take illegally and give nothing in return. The land monopoly tax is referred to as a confisca·

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 57&

torv tax. All taxation is more or leAs confisca­tory, but it is not really confiscatory inasmuch as it gives something in return for what it takes.

Mr. LINDLEY: What does the land monopoly tax give in return?

Mr. KENNA: What do all taxes give in return? Protection, security, and the thousand and one benefits than Government give. One must look at the whole history of these central mills as a business arrangement entered into some years ago by the Government, as custodians of the taxpayers' funds, >tnd by a number of cane­growers who were desirous of erecting mills by borrowing money from the Government upon easy terms as to interest and repayment, in order to save themselves the profits on the manufacture of their cane into sugar, and to pay themselves a bigger price for their cane. The original intention was departed from, and I venture to scty that right from the very start the Government-whether this or the previous Government-have a! ways dealt most liberally with these people.

Mr.-LINDLEY: Whers does the liberality come in? They had the security all the time, and were paid interest.

Mr. KENN.A: The liberality comes in in this way-that, if the Government had stuck to the strict letter of their contract, they could have foreclosed years ago on many of the mills. Possibly it might have been better if they had foreclosed in the first instance instead of letting matters drag on as has been done.

Mr. LINDLEY: Where does the liberality come in if you have the security?

Mr. HAMILTON: The security was vanishing, was it not?

Mr. LIXDLEY: No; it is improving every day. Mr. KENNA: If the security has been im­

proving, so also has the indebtedness been in­creasing, and to a greater extent, and the Government have been getting into a worse position. I charge the late Government with being too lenient-too loose-in their adminis­tration of the central mills at the beginning. We know the optimism of the leader of the Opposition. In his usual easy-going fashion these mills were allowed, by his administration, to get into the most precarious position. That position w"'s serious, not so much to the large landholder, who had pledged his land to the Government, as to the small grower of cane, who has been between the nether millstone of the Treasurer, as the lender of the money, on the one hand, and the landholder, as the seller of the land, on the other. The mills were designed to enable co-operative groups of far­mers to borrow money from the Government to erect sugar-mills, and so long as the Govern­ment dealt with co-operative groups of genuine farmers, so long was the policy a success. The most successful mills are those where legitimate groupR of farmers have entered into a compact with the Government. The most successful, I think, have been the Mossman and Mulgrave mills, which have never made default in respect of interest or redemption, and I think they are also the hest instances of co-operative groups of farmers. The process was this : Landowners who did not intend to grow a single stick of cane saw a loophole in the Act by means of which they could make money. They asked the Go­vernment to lend them money upon the security of their lands to erect sugar-mills. I know that in some instances that land was not worth more than from 10s. to £1 an acre before the Govern­ment advanced that money. When the money was advanced the mills opened, and that land was worth from .£5 to £10 an acre. That unearned increment, due to the investment of the tax­payers' money in the mill upon that land, in­stead of accruing to the Government or to the

taxpayers, passed into the hands of the land speculators. Many of those landholders cut up their land into farms after the mill had been erected, and sold it to farmers, subject to mort­gage, at the enhanced price. That was done while the deeds of the land were in the posses­sion of the Treasurer, and the farmers paid to the landholders in instalments, in many cases in the form of a royalty, upon every ton of cane they grew.

Mr. MACARTNEY : At what value was it mortgaged 'I

Mr. KENNA: It varied in different cases. I think at the Proserpine it was valued at abont .£3 an acre, while the prairie value was not more than £1 at the outside. In the case of Pleystowe it was mortgaged for .£4 an acre, although the prairie value was about .£1 an acre, and in many instance" it was sold to the farmer at .£10 an acre. In many of these central mills the land­ownero received from £5 to £10 an acre for their land, which was subject to mortgage, or were receiving rent year by year, whilst the Go­vernment were not getting <)ne penny in the shape of interest or redemption from the mills. On this mortgaged area, which was generally

the land surrounding or adjacent to [4 p.m.] the lllill, a lot of land was held idle

because the landowner could not get the price he wanted. At Proserpine mill to-day, although the mill was erected in 1898 or 1899, there are adjacent areas of land upon which never a stick of cane has been grown. They have been held by the landowner because he cannot get the price he wants. It was laid down in the Sugar \Vorks Guarantee Act that an adntnce could not be made to a mill until sufficient cane was grown upon the land to warrant the mill being erected. If that pro­vision had been insisted upon, the central mills would have been in a very different position to-day. Mills of 5,000 or 6,000 tons capacity were erected when there was only 700 or 800 tons of sugar available in the crop which was in sight. The result was that they started the first year with a loss, the next year they had a loos, >tnd, owing to the failure of the adminis­tration at that time in not seeing that sufficient cane was planted to warrant the erection of the mill, they have been encumbered with a debt ever since. Then came the problem how to get cane from the mill. On the one hand you had landowners keeping out of cultivation extensive areas adjacent to the mill, and on the other hand you had the mill half starving for want of cane. Then came in the non-mortgaged shareholders. Outside the mortgaged area farmers took up land cheaper than they could get it in the mortgaged area. In the case of Proserpine they took up homesteads and agricultural farms outside the mortgaged area at 2s. 6d. or 15s. an acre, while £5 to .£10 an acre was being asked on the mortgaged area, and started to grow cane. To get that cane in, tramlines had to be erected with money borrowed from the Government, or paid out of the proceeds of crops. In many cases these tramlines ran through mortgaged lands adjacent to the mill held idle by landowners.

Mr. LINDLEY : Some of the land was not suit­able.

Mr. KENNA: A considerable quantity was not suitable for growing cane, as will be seen from a return made in 1900 ; but, on the other hand, I have seen land near the mill not produc­ing cane, while the mill was put to the expense of erecting tramways to bring in cane from out­lying areas, these trams traversing cultivable mortgaged land lying idle.

Mr. LINDLEY: In several cases the mill was put on the worst land.

Mr. KENNA: There have been manv mis­takes mad~; with regard to these mills. "There

Mr. Kerzna.]

Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Suppl_y.

were five central mills erected in the Mackay electorate-possibly because 2\Iinistera were representatives of that electorate-with the result that they were all fighting each other for the bit of cane which was grown. They could not get sufficient cane to keep them going at their full capacity, because there was not sufficient grown.

Mr. PAGET: But the extension of the ::\Iackay line has caused " greater supply.

::\Ir. KENX A : Of course, the extension of the Mackay line has brought large crops of cane down to these mills, but I am speaking of what was practised in the past. It was a good thing for the farmer, bec~use he had the choice of four or five mills all competing for his cane, and he got good prices. But it was not a good thing for the Government that five mills should have been jammed into one particular district, while large sugar districts like Burdekinand .Johnstone River have been left without a central mill at all. The central mills, bad as the administration has been, have undoubtedly been beneficial in the dis­tricts in which they have been erected, because they have kept up a standard for the price of cane, and kept private mills up to "' fair standard also. I think another mistake was made in ever ereoting central mills at all south of Childers. Those have been some of the worst instances in the past, because, cane being a tropical plant, frost and other causes make canegrowing in the Southern parts of the State a precarious business. Everybody must admit that there has been an accumulation of trouble in regard to the central mills, which has now come to a head, and a very stringent and radical policy is necessary if these mills are to be preserved, and the grower is to be taken out of the difficulty in which he ha, been un­wittingly placed. \Vhen the landowner cut np his land, and sold it to farmers, he allotted with each farm that he sold a nmnber of shares. The hon. member for :Mackay last night spoke of those sharee as a concession.

Mr. PAGE'r: Not as a concession at all-as part of the bargain.

Mr. KEXNA: As a concession- I put the words down at the time. I will give an example of the conc,.,s;on they got at Pleystowe. There were 60,000 shares in the company. The land­owners--:\fr. Long and the Cook Estate-allottf·d the shares in this proportion : 'l'he farmers be· tween them on the mortgaged area held jointly 2,000 shal'es, while the landowners retained 58,000 shares for themselves. That was the sort of concession they gave to the farmers. \Vhat concession did the landowners give to men who did not bny from them, but rented the mort­gaged land from them subject to a royalty of ls. a ton? Taking 15 tons of cane to a ton of sugar, and 1s. a ton royalty--

Mr. LINDLEY : Eight tons to the acre. Mr. KENN A : The statistician says 15 tons. Hon. E. B. :FOTIREST: You don't know what

you are talking about.

Mr. KENN A : At some mills it is 8 tons of cane, and some 7.

:JI/Ir. LINDLEY: Yon meant 15 tons to the acre. Hon. E. B. FOHREST: You don't know the

difference between the two. Mr. KENt\ A: As the hon. gentleman says

so it must be so. But with half a dozen mem­bers interjecting frequently round me it is quite disconcerting.

The CHAIRMAN : I must ask hon. members not to interrupt the hon. member for Bowen while he is addressing the Committee.

Mr. KENN A: I do not object to interjections if they are to the point and made one at a time. What about the concession in the way of shares to these landowners who lease their land at 1s.

[Mr. Kenna.

a ton royalty, and take 15 tons of cane to the acre? It would mean that they were getting 15s. an acre rent for this mortgaged land.

~Ir. P AGET : 15s. an acre. Hon. E. B. :FoRREST: You are very much

mixed. 2\Ir. KENN A : No ; you will see before I sit

down. Of course the hon. gentleman is a director of the Colonial Sugar Refining Corn· pany. That explains a very great deal in?eed.

Hon. E. B :FoRREST : It does not explam any­thing of your ignorance.

Mr. K~NNA: If it does not explain my ignorance, at any rate it explains the hon. gentleman's interest in what I am saying.

Hon. E. B. :FoRREST: You have never made a bigger mistake in your life. I don't care a rap about it, and don't mind what you say about it. I do not care what the Government do. They can take the lot of the mills, or do what they like.

Mr. KENN A: I shall have something to say about that before I sit down. At these central mills there arose three different cla~ses of p~ople. 'l'here was the landowner, who, in many cases, did not grow a stick of cane, who mortgaged his deeds to the Treasurer, but leased his land, subject to the mortgage, to the farmers, and got the enhanced value for that land. Then, on the other hand, there was the farP1er and landowner who had retained the bulk of his shares in the company and the mill. Then there was the farmer on the mortgaged area, who had bought his land subject to mortgage-out of whose industry and crops the profits of the mill were made, and the indebtedness to the Government had to be paid off-and he only received a small number of shares in the company compared with that held by the landowner. Then out­side the mortgaged area arose another group of farmers, known as the non-mortgaged farmers, who grew cane for the central sugar-mill, had no shares in the mill, in some cases got the same price as the mortga~ed farmers, and in other cases was subject to differentiation. This is how the policy would have worked out if it had not been interfered with in respect to Plevstowe. The landowner had not grown a sticlc of cane, bnt appropriated the best billets in connection with the mill. He had 58,000 shares. He controlled the mill, and ran it as he plea"ed. The farmers had 2,000 shares. Out of the farmers' crops the land, at its en­hanced value, had to be paid for ; the indebted­ness to the Government had also t.o be paid, because it could only come out of cane; and after the farmers had, by their exertions, paid off this enhanced value and the indebtedness in the shape of interest and redemption, they would get two sixty-thousandths share in the mill, and the landowners, who were not growing a stick of cane, would get fifty -eight-thousandths. That is exactly the position as it was at Pleystowe.

Mr. LnmLEY: That is only one mill. .Mr. :FUDGE: It is a sample of the lot. Mr. K:BJNNA: You cannot lay down any

hard-and-fast law that will apply to these central mills, as the conditions vary at different mills. \Vhat I say is that in so far as the landowner or the land speculator was allowed to intervene between the Government and the canegrower, and to destroy that co-operative principle upon which these mills were originally erected and designed--just in so far as that they have been a failure. Now the position of the non-mort­gaged grower, when the indebtedness for the mill had been paid off, wa. this : He had pro­duced large quantities of cane, supplied the grist for the mill, and when the mill was paid off he got nothing. He had no interest in it at all. He was simply an outsidecanegrower, who came in to supply a sufficiency of cane for the mill

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] S1tpply. 577

-that was starving for want of cane, and in return for his exertions he got no share in the mill. It is evident that, from the very beginning, if you take the statistics a' I took them two years ago, that when these mills were erected before the dne precaution had been taken to see that a sufficiency of cane was grown to justify their erection, in almost every case they proved failurP,, or I will modify that statement Ly stating that those mills where the most cane was grown at the time the mill was erected, have been the most successful. lVIosRman and lVIulgrave were mills which had a considerable area of cane in the ground before the mill was erected, and the$e rn1lls have been the most succe>,,sful. Proserpine, N erang, Moreton, and other mills which I could mention, were instances where expensive mills were erected with an insufficiency of cane to keep them going. \Vhat is the result? You had a large expensive piece of machinery that Rhould be workiog for five or six months in the year at any rate, crushing cane and keeping going, because every moment that the central mill iR lying idle when it should be working is a loss, and every ton of cane tbat it does not crush that should have been put through is lost to the mill. That is the position-an insufficiency of cane, leading to the mill getting into debt. And the greatest blame that can be laid against the late Administration was that they did not pursue that line of pc>licy that would ensure that exten­sion should be made in tbe cultivated areas and a sufficiency of cane supplied to those mills that were starving for want of it. Had that been done in the first instance and no mill erected until a sufficiency of land was put under cultiv,,. tion, and had the Government of the day insisted on the clause of the Sugar \Vorks Guarantee Act which made provision that fmm year to year after the erection of the miils additional areas should be put under cultivation-if these things had been done then the central mills would be in a better position to-day than they are. I quoted from Hansard of a couple of years ago, and showed what I recommended as a remedy for this manifold evil-that was, that foreclosure should take place. I also pointed out that in fore· closure the farmer should be the only person to consider. The land speculator, who did not grow cane, was neither here nor there. He had his opportunity and he did not take advantage of it. (Hear, hear!) He has had the cream of the thing up to date in the shape of selling his land at a price which it could never have realised if the taxpayers' money had not come to his rescue in the shape of a mill. He took tbe enhanced value for the land without growing a stick of cane, and he is tbe person whom tbe Govern­ment should not consider very seriously as against the men growing cane and paying off their liabilities. I suggested at that time that tbe Government might foreclose upon the whole of the mortgaged areas and release those farmers who were growing cane, because the land, as land, is no good to the Government as security at all. The Government have money invested in the miils and they cannot get tbe money out of the land ; they must look to the cane grown upon that land to get their money back. It is out of the profits of the cane that the interest and redemption which the Govern­ment expect to receive is to come. It would be a suicidal policy, therefore, for a Government to foreclose in snob a way as would militate against the carrying on of cane production. Tbe cane is the substance in w hicb their interest and redemption lies. Tbis is tbe line of policy I ad vacated, and it is onE' that must have oc.cnrred to anybody who made a study of the subject. It was suggested to me by many canegrowers who had made a study of tbe thing. That line of policy

1906-20

is first to take steps to increase the cane area, and, secondly, to adopt a policy that would put under cultivation those idle lands which are held for high prices in the vicinity of the central mills. Now, I take it in pursuance of this policy to provide more cane for the mills, which are starving for want of cane, the Govern­ment h:tve been hroup;ht jamb up against the idle land near the mills. To get more cane otherwise would be by tbe extension of tramlines to outside areas. vVell, tramlines are expensive things, and it may be possible to get additional cane without the Government being called upon to pay too bigh a price in the shape of heavy cost for tram extension. This is the problem that any Government or anyone charged with the adminis­tration will have to solve. \Vhy is the land adjacent to the mill with an obligation to grow cane not put under growing cane? \Vhy cannot that land be brought under cultivation? There is only one thing to be done, and that is to fore­cloce upon the whole of tbe mortgaged area, and to release the land of tho•e farmer• who have been carrying out their work of canegrowing, who have been rloing their duty to the Govern· ment and to the mill its-elf, and to then take these mortgaged areas that were not producing cane in the vicinity of the mill, and to see that they are brought under cultivation.

Mr. LIXDLEY : That is confiscation. Mr. KENNA: It is not C'mfiscation. The

men who originally owned that land entered into a business arrangement with the Government to mortgage their land for certain considerations. They offered to pay interest and redemption on the cost of a mill, and to cultivate so much of their land.

i\!I. LnmLEY : And they carried it out. 1Ir. KJ~NN A : They did not fulfil these

tenns, and any Governtnent acting in a busines~ way would be perfectly justified in taki11g such steps as would bring that land into its sphere of obligation.

l\1r. J. LEAHY : There are cases where they planted cane and the mill would not take it. Tbat happened at Dulong.

Mr. KENN A: They could not take it because thev had no tram. \Vho did it-old directors?

Mr. LIXDLEY: No, Dr. l\Iaxwell. Mr. KENN A: Dr. Maxwell has only been in

charge for two or three years. Mr. ,J. LEAHY: That is a long time. Mr. KENN A: It takes eighteen months to get

a crop out of the ground. It is quite possible that to erect a tmmline to Dulong-I do not know the locality myself-might make it un­profitable for tbe Government. The tramline would cost a good sum. Of course I am not one of those wbo believe you can lay down any hard· and-fast rule and apply it to the whole of the central mills.

Mr. J. LEAHY: Yes, you close down in every case.

Mr. KENNA: Ko. I know there are caRes where to forecbse without subsequent release would be a real hardship, but what I like about it, so far as I can p;ather of this policy, is that tbe Government are not going to foreclose and confiscate people's land promiscuously. I do not think any Government in its senses would do sucb a thing. For the sake of political capital some hon. members are assiduously so\\ ing it wide, in order to rouse the farmers, that the Government are going to seize the whole of (he mortgaged farms whether they have all com­plied with the conditions or not, and turn them adrift. The Government that would do such a thing as that would be committing suicide so far as these mills are concerned, because the f&rmer is their asset.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICL'LTURE: The Treasurer has no intention of doing that.

Mr. Kenna.]

578 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

Mr. KEN:!'\ A: It is evident that if they do that they will lose their interest and redemption. Anything which will interfere with the growing of cane by the legitimate farmers, whether on the mortgaged or unmortgaged areas, would he suicide and confiscatory of public money which had been invested.

Mr. PAGET: That is what we know. Mr. KENNA: Then if you know it, why

don't you preach it and not disseminate the doctrine that the Government are going to pro­miscuously seize all this "land, like private mort­gagees might do, and turn these men adrift?

Mr. PAGET: I did not preach that doctrine. Mr. J. LEAHY: How did Dr. Maxwell come

to square you? Mr. KENNA: Dr. Maxwell did not square

me. If the hon. gentleman had been in the Chamber earlier to-day he would have heard my opinion of Dr. J\Iaxwdl. It has never altered. I regard Dr. Maxwell as being like an .tEsopian fly on the wheel. I say that any policy of foreclosure that will not make provision for the continuance of the canegrowing by the legi­timate farmere, is a policy that would stand in itself self-condemned, and any policy of fore­clooure that will not have for its subsequent aim and object the bringingintoculti vation of idle land upon the mortgaged area capable of growing cane in the vicinity of the mill, would also be a fntile policy. I do not think the Government are going to absolutely foreclose, and turn these men adrift. I believe they have something up their sleeve to do afterwards. That is apparent to anyone reading between the lines of their public utterances, and that something is not in any way disadvantag·eous to the farmer, however disadvantageous it may be to the land speculator, who has been livinr; and trading upon the farmer and not doing his duty by providing that suffi­ciency of cane w hi eh has been the main cause of trouble in the central mills. Hon. gentlemen opposite must understand this. I say that no hard-and-fast rule can be laid down. I know some land speculators who live in the ol<l country and never grow a stick of cane and just draw their "divvies." I know others who grow a bit of cane and lease or sell the balance of their mortgaged land. I know other persons, again, who put the whole of their mortgaged land under cultivation. I am not going to say that a policy that will suit the one case is a policy that will suit every case. ·what I gather is this : \V here the original landowner himself has been a canegrower and has carried out his obligation to grow cane for the mill, he is just in as good a position as thA farmer who ha~ bought land from him. These farmers in the morl gaged area have been in a precarious condition. They had to purcha8e the land from the landowner at an enhanced value. Ta,ke the case of the Proserpine farmer. He has to pay .£8 or .£10 an acre to the landowner and he cannot get his deeds. After he has paid off this land holder he has to turn round and pay off .£50,000 or £60,000 of indebtedness to the Government, and all of this

has to be squeezed out of the bit of f4.30 p.m.] cane he grows. Supposing the Go.

vernment foreclose on these mills, and that after foreclosure they should release those farmers who have been doing their duty and growing cane, and supposing they made provision that the land capable of growing cane should be brought under cultivation, would they then not have, without additional expense, a larger f!Uantity of cane produced for the mill? If those mills were kept working up to their capacity their future would be absolutely assured. The only thing that I can see which would militate against the future ot the central sugar-mills is the neglect to pursue this line of policy. A mill which turns out 700

[Mr. Kmna.

tons of sugar, but is c11pable of turning out 6,000 tons, should be made to turn out G,OOO tons. Any policy which follows along those lines must necessarily be a good policy not only for the Government who are interested in the mills to ~he extent of the interest and redemp­tion, but also to the farmers whose interAsts are locked up with the success of the mills. I would not be a party to anything which would inflict a hardship upon the farmers who are legitimately growing cane for these central mills. I have faith that the Government have no inten­tion of doing anything of the kind. Jf they had any intention of inflicting any hardship on those farmers they would get no support from me.

Mr. MACARTXEY: How do you explain the notices?

Mr KENNA: I do not expla.in the notices. I do not profess to explain anything, but am simply pointing out that in my view the fore­closure is merely a means to an end--namely, to strike off the bonds with which tbe limbs of the farmer who is carrying out his obligation are cumbered, and at the samP time to make such provision as will insure that the land which is not doing- its duty to the mill shall do its duty.

J'llr. ::\IACARTNEY: \V here does co-operation COlll8 in?

Mr. KENN A : I will tell you where co-opera­tion comes. Supposing the Government foreclose, and they say to the legitimate farmer, "You are the oa,negro wer who is providing cane for the mill, and it is to you we must look for the interest and redemption money "; supposing they bring under cultivation the idle land in the neighbourhood of the mill, disband the share­holders and break up the company, what is going to happen afterwards ? Two things may happen. One is that the Govemment may retain these mills, and work them as State sugar-mills, and I am not so sure that that would not be the best policy for all concerned. The other alternative policy is to foreclose on the mill and the land, with the ultimate object of handing the mill back to the canegrowers.

Mr. J. LEAHY : Upset the laws of the country, and let the Treasurer be a law to himself and everybody ehe.

Mr. KENNA: No, you do not upset any laws. \V hat I am endeavouring to point out is that the policy which I have suggested is the vE'ry best policy for the farmers who are growing cane.

Mr. J. LEAHY : Are you dictating the policy of the Government ?

Mr. KENNA: No, I am not dictating any policy, and the only thing I feel proud about in the matter is that the lines I laid down two years ago are the lines upon which the Government are now working. And I would now throw out a suggestion to the Government with regard to an equitable way of dealing with this matter in the event of the mills being handed back to the far· mers. The man who has contributed most cane to the mill during its career is the man who has paid· most to the Government for interest and redemp­tion, and the man who has contributed the least cane to the mill is the man who has paid least to the Government in the way of interest and re­demption. Therefore, it seems to me that if the Government are going to hand back the mills after foreclosure, it would be a very good !JOlicy to apportion the shares in proportion to the quantity of cane contributed by individual growers.

Mr. MAOARTNEY: 3hould not a policy of that sort be initiated by a Bill?

Mr. K:Kl'\NA: Such a policy seems to me to be a step in the direction of restoring the co­operative principle upon which those mills were erected, and it has also this ad vantage : that they would no longer have to deal with the inter­mediary, the land speculator, but would deal

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 579

directly with the canegrower, to whom they would say, "In so far as you have contributed to the payment of interest ~tnd redemption so far shall you benefit." I think that any policy that is pursued should be in that direction, that we should adopt a policy which will enable the Government to take into consideration the diffi­culties of the entangled and complicated ques­tion, without inflicting hardship upon anyone wh:> is a legitimate and desirable settler on the land, and to act in a way which will encourage furcher settlement in the neighbourhood of the central mills. 'When the leader of the Opposi­tion was speaking yesterday about the id]., bnrl awng tne railway~ he said he was in favour of buying it. I interjected, "Supposing the owners

·would not sell, or wanted too much," and he replied that he would "take it from them." That is what the Government intend to do, as I take it, with respect to the central mill lands on which they will foreclose. They practically say to the speculator, " If you don't carry out your obliga­tions, it you won't grow cane upon those areas as you promised to do, if you have broken your obligation to pay interest and redemption, we cannot be blamed for enforcing our rights." Surely as business men you cannot blame them if they do enforce their rights.

l\:Ir. J . .LJ<JAHY : And claim their round of flesh? That is a nice policy.

Mr. KENN A: I do not think that any busi­ness people, or any financial institution. which was conducted on anything like business lines, could at this stage of the matter do very much else than foreclose upon the mortgaged lands. I believe that any sound, business-like financial institution would have foreclosed on them long ago, and it would possibly have been much better for the farmers who are growing cane iu those areas, and much better for the Government who are interested in central mills to the extent of £500,000, if snch a policy had been adopted long since.

Mr. J. LJ<JAHY: You are a Shylock. Mr. KENNA: I have now done with the central

sugar-mills, and l propose to refer to another matter which is connected with the depart­ment presided over by the Minister for Lands. I wish to give expression to some ideas I have in connection with the settlement of people on the land. I am very glad to see that so much pro­gress has been made in that direction during the past year, but I still think that we are losing settlers that we should be keeping in the State, and I am of opinion that this is largely due to the centralisation of the Lands administration in Brisbane, which causes delay to settlers who wi,h to go on the land. These delays might be ol,viated or lessened if something were done in the way of decentralising the administration, and I would suggest that a scheme should be adopted which would obviate the sending of all correspondence to Brisbane to lay on the table of the Secretary for Public Lands, or the Under Secretary or other Lands officials, that would greatly facilitate settlement. At present all details have to percolate steadily and slowly through a number of officials, and each applica­tion has to take its turn for consideration by the Mimster or Under Secretary. I suggest that for the purposes of land administration the State should be divided into three large districts -Northern, Central, and Southern-and that a high commissioner for lands should be appointed to take charge of each of those districts, and attend to all the detail work which has now to be done in Brisbane. This high commissioner, with his local knowledge, would probably facili­tate considerable settlement on the land. I have known men who have come to my own district with £100 or £200 which they had saved by hard labour, and who have selected a piece of

land, have to wait twelve months, and longer than that, before their applications were dealt with. In the meantime they are walking about idle, because perhaps they could not get work. Such delays are vexatious and irritating. I must, however, say that, so far as I am personally concerned, any business which I have had with the department has been very satisfactory. Still I see the trouble arising from the present centralisation of everything in Brisbane, and that it is necessary to devise some process of decentralisa!;ion if we are to facilitate the settle­ment of people upon our lands. Another trouble t.h~.t. T finf1 l.n v~::u:n-.ooi- +--; ~..,~,.i rv~~+-)"~~~-1.. :_ .Ll~:~

Selectors tak~ np land i''it ,;,;;:-b·~-;-;; -~ro-~gh; precipitous localities, where there are no roads, and the whole onus of providing roads rests npon the local authorities. The roads are in a dreadful state in many parts of my district, and for a man to select a piece of land and to have no road over which to take his produce to market is like taking up an island in the Pacific. ·where there are l•.rge blocks of land thrown open at the one time, the l'I'I.inister has always been willing to add the cost of constructing roads to the price of the selections. That is very good so far as it goes; but what about the man who takes up a block of land by himself, and when the price obtained will not bear thA cost of making a road ? Those are the people for whom provision ought to be made.

The SEcRJ<J'rARY FOR PcBLIC LANDS : 'iVhat about the local authorities?

Mr. KENN A: ThB local authorities say that they cannot get sufficient rates out of the land to justify them in making a road. They s<:<y that, if the Government will make the road and hand it over to them, they will keep it in repair :1.fter­wards. I can see the formidable obstacle there is to land settlement between the Government on the one hand and the local authority on the other. The result is that there are either no roads or else they are in a wretched, heart· breaking condition.

The S.:cRJ<JTARY FOR PuBLIC LANDS : Y on must admit that no previous Government has ever given such facilities for road-making as we have.

Mr. KENNA: I freely admit that. I am not at all nnmindful of an interview I had with the hon. gentleman, only the other day, when he readily consented to construct a road to a large area of land now being opened, and to add the cost of the road to the price of the land, and the offer is being taken advantage of.

Mr. BARNJ<JS : Generally in the electorates of friends.

The SJ<JCRJ<JTARY FOR PUBLIC LANDs : Abso­lutely untrue. (Laughter.)

Mr. KENNA: If the hon. member for Bulimba will go to the Lands Department and point out that be has a large area of suitable land in his district, I think he would be welcomed with open arms, and roads will be readily con­structed to that land.

The SJ<JCRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: vV ell, I can promise the road, though I do not know about the open arm?. (Laughter.)

Mr. KENN A : That. is so far as large blocks are concerned ; but where small areas are thrown open, a formidablA obstacle has to be surmounted. The local authorities say they cannot afford to make roads, and that it is not fair to tax people hundreds of miles away to make them. The farmer cannot get his produce to market, or he has to do it over heart-breaking roads.

The SJ<JCRJ<JTARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : I shall be very glad if you can suggest anything.

Mr. KENN A: I suggest that, in so far as roads are an absolute necessity in settlement of the land, and inasmuch as the Government are the most interested and get the largest amount of

Mr. Kenna.]

580 Suppl,y. l:.ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

revenue from the settlement of people on the land, whereas the local authorities only get a very small amount of rates, that the Government should construct the roads and then hand them over to the local authorities, and leave it to them to keep them in order. I desire to see the lands of the State closely settled, but these two defects that I have alluded to-the long delays before persons can get possession of the land after they select it, and the difficulty in regard to roads­are always going to retard settlement to a greater or less extent. I am sure the Minister will understand that the suggestions I have made have been made in good spirit.

The SECRETARY FOR PuBLIC LANDS : Hear, hear!

Mr. KENNA: Personally, I have had nothing but satisfactory relations with his department. I am not growling about the department; but in pursuance of its policy of settling the lands the f!Uestion of roads is one of great importance, and it must get very close consideration if this policy is to proceed successfully and be carried out in its entirety. * Mr. TOL}IIE (Drayton ancl Toowoomba): I desire to say something in connection with the Financial Statement and various other matters before this vote is agreed to. In common with hon. members who have spoken on the other side, I regret very much that the Treasurer is un­able to be present owing to illness. I mn sure that every hon. member sympathises with the illne,Js of any other hon. member, and that sympathy is a cc en tuat.ld when, as in the case of the Treasurer, that illness is due to Gverstrain on account of the work done in connection with the aLtvancement of the State. The Financial Statement is cer­tainly one that causes a large amount of gratifi­cation to those who are interested in the welfare of the State. Throughout the whole Statement there is a dominant note of jubilation that Queensland seems to he on the high road to pros­perity. I am not going into the f!Uestion of whether that is due entirely to the good administration of the Government, to the bene­ficent seasons we have experienced, or whether it is due to the energy of those engaged in industrial enterprises in the State, because I think a meed of praise is due both to the Government and to the people of Queensland who are working so assiduously to develop the resources of the State, and the good seasons have materially assisted them in their efforts. The feature that strikes us particularly in con­nection with the Statement is the fact that the revenue exceeded the estimate of the Treasurer by something over .£200,000. '.rhe greater portion of that amount is due to the increased amount returned by the Commonwealth '.rrea­surer. Then the Lanrls Department has also materially added to the increased revenue, and so has the Hail way Department. Certainly as much money was not received from the Lands Department as in the previous year, but the excess of the previous year was largely due to sales of land by auction.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LA"DS : You are making a comparison with the estimated revenue?

Mr. TOLMIE: Yes. In regard to the fact that we have received more from the Common­wealth Treasurer than was anticipated, there is every reason to think that the estimate of our Treasurer is likely to be more correct than the estimate of the Commonwealth Treasurer_ We are more conversant with the conditions that prevail here. vV e know that in every field of industry progress is being made ; we know that that progress is resulting in greater returns to those who are engaged in those particular industries, and that those people are spending a greater amount of money than they would other-

[ Mr. Kenna.

wise do. They are in a position to spend more than they could two or three years ago, con­sequently they will be »ble to buy more dutiable goods ; and, despite the fact that the Federal Treasurer has advised the Queensland Treasurer that he will receive less this year, I believe we shall receive more through our Customs revenue than is anticipated. In connection with the revenue that has been derived from the lands­which is put down here as an increase of £9,000 from auction sales and £29,000 on account of rents of selections-I only intend to deal with the latter amount. The results of land selection this year have been exceedingly gratifying. I make that statement more particularly for the reason that I am not in sympathy with the. methods adopted by the Secretary for Lands in regard to the settlement of people upon the land. I have stated my objections to those methods both here and elsewhere.

The SECHETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : Are there any other objections besides the f!Uestion of price?

~fr. TOLMIE: It is only the question of price that we differ upon ; but apart from that, I desire to say that the result has been most grati­fying so far as settlement is concerned. The Minister has been most assiduous in endeavour­ing t.o secure settlers, and that he has succeeded so well is a matter fnr congratulation, and he is entitled to every credit for his success. But I differ from the hon. gentleman so far as the price of the land is concerned. It seems strange to me that the policy of the Government in connection with the settlement of our State lands is altogether different from their professions. I, in stating the position, make no attack on the Ministry. They say their desire is to give the people cheap land, and for that purpose it is necessary that large owners should be taxed to

such an extent as to cause them to [5 p.m.] throw open their lands for the pur-

pose of settlement. If it is neces­'ary that people should have cheap land, it is all the more necessary that the Government should set a good example in that direction. I have been watching the progress of land settlement in Queensland for a considerable number of years. I live in a community which has been built up by people who have settled cm the land. It is regarded as one of the finest districts in the whole of Queensland-! might go further, and say in the whole of Australia-and that com­munity has been built up absolutely by these persons, who had opportunities of securing very cheap land under the homestead clauses. I think it would be well for Queensland if she would revert to the practice which obtained years ago, and give people an opportunity of ·getting the land as cheaply as they possibly can. I know at the present time the policy of the Go­vernment-it has been laid down by this House, and in carrying it out the Government are not to be blamed-the policy of the Government has been to force up the price of land as much as possible. Only the other day the Minister threw open for selection some 20,000 acres at Maida Hill, in the Dalby district, for selection in England, at prices ranging from 16s. Sd. to £2 3s. 4d. an acre. Most of that land is hilly scrub country ; .£4 an acre would not clear some of it ; perhaps double that sum would not clear the rest.

Mr. BAR~ES : They will ask for a refund in five years' time.

Mr. TOLMIE: This land is thrown open from 16". Sd. to £2 3s. 4d. an acre; and yet, if a private individual on the Darling Downs were to charge .£3 an acre for land that is absolutely treeless, and in which a man could put his plough before he put up his fence, we should be told that that man is trying to extract too grean a price

Suppl_y. l5 SllPTE::IiBER.] Supply. 581

altogether. I wish to emphasise that point, because it shows there is a difference between the profession of the Government with regard to cheap land and the policy they are carrying out. I hJpe that that policy will be changed at an early date, so as to give the people an oppor­tunity of getting land under the Homestead Selection Act. The Minister will tell us that men to-day can get land under homestead selection. I quite agree with him because, in looking through the report of the Lands Depart­ment, I find that agricultural farm settlement has increased on the previous year at the mte of 86 per cent., and homestead selection has increased 26 per cent. It is quite possible that the Minister might on that found an argument that the people prefer taking up agricultural farms rather than agricultural homesteads. Under the conditions which have obtained that is no doubt the case­that they do take up agricultural farms-because land is first thrown open in agricultural farms. After some considerable time it may be taken up as unconditional selections, and after it has become infested with noxious weeds of all descriptions it is probable then that it will be thrown open to homestead selection. I tried to improve that position last year, when the Land Bill was going through this Chamber, by making the reversion to homestead selection automatic­that any land thrown open as an agricultural farm for six months, and not taken up either as an agricultural farm or nncondition!tl selection, should be open automatically to home•tead selection. But the sense of the Chamber was against the motion when the Government opposed it, and, as not infrequently is the case, when that happens the motion hac! no chance of being carried. I think that Queensland will do better if we make the opportunity of getting upon the land as chea-p as possible. I recognise that there are men who are prepared to pay a high price for the land. There is also the class of man that the Minister endeavoured to cater for last year-the man who is absolutely penniless and spending most of his time stand­ing at the street corners, without employment, and not of his own free will. Between these two classes there is the small man without capital, who, if he had an opportunity of getting land cheaply, would become a selector. Those who are acquainted with land settlement in Queensland will bear me out when I say we never had a better Land Act on our statute-book than the Act popularly known as the single man's Act, under which there wa" scarcely any residence required on a homestead selection. Young men took up the land and went to work and earned money to fence, and by and by, when they thought of settling clown and making homes for themselves they were in a position to do so, and they are the backbone of Queensland to-day.

Mr. :B'ORSYTH: \Vhat Act was that? Mr. TOLMIE: The Act of 1868. In regard

to land settlement, it has been pointed out by the previous spAaker that it is necessary that there should be some decent.ralisation in connection with the department, but I am not altogether in accord with him. I think the Lands Depart­ment have been endeavouring to make land available for settlement as quickly as possible, but they were handicapped for want of means, and now that the country is in a prosperous condition, I hope that handicap will be removed. We have only to turn to the excellent report issued by the department, and read the report of the Chief Surveyor. He points out that it has not been possible to secure the survey of land sufficiently rapidly for the people who desire to take it up, and a great amount of discontent and irritation is caused by delay, which, perhaps, prevents people from going on the land. I think the suggestion which he has made, and

which is one which has been advocated in this Chamber, is an excellent one-that the Govern­ment should ha\ e as strong a staff of surveyors as necessary, in order to get land ready for settlement in advance. People then know exactly where to go for the land, and there is no delay.

JYir. J. LEAHY : And put them on land where they can live. .

Mr. TOL:\1IE: I have no doubt the depart­ment is endeavouring to do that.

Mr. J. LEAHY: Irrespective of electorate altogether.

Mr. TOLMIE: I know that some land on which settlers are going is of such a character that they will have to work very hard indeed if they intend to live. The Government have been restricted in the nnm ber of men they can employ in connection with the survey staff, and the consequence is that Queensland is losing surveyors, and there is not sufficient men to carry out the work of the department, but that can be rectified to some extent by employing as many surveyors as it is possible to get in Queensland. Reference is made in the State­ment to railways in these terms-

It is pleasing to note so marked and rapid an im~ prove men t ; and a few years more of :::uch progress will make our railways directly profitable, and may enable us to lower fares and freights to the advantage of our producers without imposing fresh burden~ on the general taxpayer.

I take a somewhat different view to that state­ment. I am very pleased that the time has arrived when the Government i; in a position to improve the condition of these employeeo, and to increase the salaries of public servants, but I think we also ought to give oorne consideration to the vast mass of the people who are outside the public service, who are contributing the money by which the Government is enabled to improve the condition uf the public service. Instead of waiting for a few years to reduce fares and freights, some effort should be made ao early as possible to reduce those charges. It may be said that there are districts in Queens­lancl--and it is quite true-where people to-day would willingly P«Y four or five times as much to have their stuff carried, as those who have the benefit of railways are doing, but that does not make the keenness of competition less felt among producers, because when there is a large amount to be carried on the railway~, the produce at that particular time often happens to be cheap, and the farmer is not getting the return for his produce whieh many people imagine. I find that, in every bnsine''', the cheaper you can make the conditions under which it io carried on, the better it is for those engaged in it. People will purchase more if the price is less, and the people of Qneenslancl will purchase more of our railway facilities if the price is reduced. An instance came under my own observatwn where a cheap excursion was being run from Toowoomba to Brisbane ; the fares were very low indeed, and whereas an excursion on the previous Saturday did not produce £30, this particular train, which was run 30 or 40 per cent. cheaper than the ordi­nary train, produced something like £130. I trust that the Minister for Hail ways will, in conjunction with the Commissioner-because I supfJoSe the Commissioner has the matter largely in his hands -come to the conclu,.ion that it is desirable in the interests of the people of Queensland, as well as of the department, that the fares and freights should be lowered before the close of the financial year. A certain amount of gratification has been ex­pressed that the public debt of Queensland is no greater than it was-that the Government hav& been able to carry on up till the present time without increasing the indebtedness of the State. It has been pointed out-the Minister

Mr. Tolmie.]

582 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Suppl:IJ·

for Railways said yesterday-that the fact that the ind~btedness has not increased is not always an indication of progress. Every business man in this Chamber knows that if he has oppor­tunities of turning money over remuneratively it pays him to borrow money, and if the State has opportunities of turning money over re­muneratively then the State should borrow. \Ve have been for many years directed to New Zealand as a State where ideal conditions pre­vail, where progress takes place every year under all sorts of conditions, and yet, notwith­standmg the fact that New Zealand shows a surplus this year of something like £750,000, which is the total of surpluses of past years, it has been found necessary to borrow £1,000,000 every year. I am not an advocate of borrowing money when it cannot be remuneratively em­ployed, but I think that money can be remuner-atively employed now. ·

The HOME SECRETARY: It is always borrowed on that assumption.

Mr. TOLMLE: Yes, but when it is bor­rowed it is sometimes unremuneratively em­plo~·ed. It is to the credit of the Ministers sitting on the Treasury benches to say that if they borrow money it will be employed re­muneratively and not unremunerativel.v. It is pleasing indeed to see in the Treasurer's State­ment reference to the prosperity of Queensland. \Ve are told that production is increasing, and that is apparent to every one of ns. I know that it is apparent to me, as a resident of the Darling Downs, that production is increasing in every field of industry. It is particularly noticeable so far as dairying is concerned, in connection with the pigraising industry, and in connection with wheatgrowing. Iamnotso closely acquainted with the conditions in the sugar districts, but from the statements made in the public Press, and by members in this Chamber, there is no doubt that this is a record year so far as the production of sugar is concerned. Mining is also reported to be in n very prosperous condition, and we have only to glance at the statistics of live stock to see tbat the pastorol industry is once more emerging from its period of very long depression-that the flocks and herds are increasing, and, what is better still, that the price of wool and tlw price of meat are being maintained, giving the people engaged in these industries once more an opportunity of getting on their feet.

:i\Ir. J. LEAHY: The price of meat is higher than ever it was.

Mr. TOLMIE : Everything is improving all over Queensland, and I am sure the people of the State will be glad to know that every industry is improving. Much has been said with regard to federation, and those who have spoken spoke in a disparaging way of federation. I admit, in common with others, that the conditions that have been created are not such as we believed would be created. I admit that the financial aspect of the situation is one which gives cause for grave concern to the State Governments, and more particularly to the Government of Queens­land, but still I will not go to the extreme length as has been gone by many people here in saying that it would be a good thing for Queensland if we could get separation ttgain. I ad vacated federation strongly, and, although I am not alto­gether satisfied with the conditions existing to­day, I think it would be a bad thing for the States of Australia if they became separated again after having become once joined. \Ve have of necessity to put up with inconveniences in the beginning, but the time will arrive, I am sure, when these grievances will pass away ; and if we in Queensland occupy a minor position to. day in regard to federation, I say with all confidence­and members of this Chamber will bear me out

[Mr. Tolmie.

in this-that the day is coming when Queens­land will occupy the foremost place in regard to federation. We have the best resources and the most magnificent State in the whole group, and it requires onlv fuller development "'ith an increase in our population to put us in the premier position with regard to the States of the Commonwealth, and that day is in store for Queensland even although we have to suffer to some extent now. Turning to the Estimates, I see that it is ~trtted that some alteration will be made in regard to the income tax-that there is to be an exemption of salaries of £160. I am glad to kn0w that there is that exemption, but I tbink there shonld be exemptions in t.he salaries of £200 and over. 'l'his is a point I want to emphasise. It has not been refened to by the Trea,surer, and probably it has escaped his notice. If the men getting between £200 and £300 do not . get any exemption at all, then they will be penalised to a greater extc•nt than they were last year. If those men were in tt better position this year than last year to pay the tax, no excep­tion would b8 taken to their cases, but they are not in a better position, and they have to bear an additfonal burden this year, for some reason which I cannot understand.

Mr. PAGET : There is an exemption up to £100. Mr. TOLMIE: It says nothing about that in

the Statement of the Treasurer. Mr. PAGET : 'rhat is so. There is an exemp­

tion on all salaries between £200 and £300. That is what I am assured.

Mr. J. LEAHY: The Statement does not say so. :Mr. TOLMIE: I have not received that

assumnce, but, if it is as the hon. member states, then there is no ground for complaint. If it were not so, then it would not be just. I am pleased indeed to see that increased grants are being made to several of the deserving institutions of the State, such as the hospitals, schools of art, and kindred associations. But there is one point I would like to emphasise in connection with this, and that i,; that since the House met last year the Government have thought it desirable to create what thPy call three base hospitals. vVe all know the bitterness of feeling engendered in this Chamber during the debate on the Hospitals Bill which was introduced into this Chamber last year, and it w<ts pointed out very strongly then not only by private members but also by members of the Cabinet thernsel ves, that thecityof Brisbane was not entitled to any special grant as a base hospital. Why there has been a change of front since Parliament closed up till the present time is something that requires explanation, and I dare say the explanatiOn will be given at a later period.

The HmrE SECRETARY: The ar,;rumcnt was that Bl'isbane had no more claim to- it than cer­tain other towns.

Mr. TOLMIE: Yes, that was the argument, that Brisbane had no more claim to it than certain other towns. But now Brisbane gets a Christmas­box in the shape of a grant as a base hospital, then there is £1,000 for Townsville as a base hospital, and £1,000 for Rockhampton for the same pur­pose. TheBe two places have been put down as base hospitals in addition to Brisbane. In establishing base hospitals there ought to be some grounds for such establishment­some reason that will appeal to our intelli­gences as reasonable men why one hospital should receive discrimination in its favour­why there should be any discrimination at all. I raise this point now because it is a matter that will create discussion when we come to the consideration of the ques­tion on the Estimates. I was glad to hear the leader of the Opposition express himself as he did with regard to the establishment of a university in Queensland. vVe will have an

Suppl;IJ· [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 58:3

opportunity of discussing that subject at a later period, but the fact that he has made a declara­tion in favour of a university will materially assist in coming to an early conclusion on the matter. I am pleased to know that the Orient subsidy is being continued. So far it has proved an excellent service, and I believe that in the fnture it will prove of still further service. It would be still better if we had, as previously, a Torres Straits service between here and Great Britain. (Hear, hear!) I was pleased to hear the way it was alluded to by the leader of the Opposition, and I believe the sympathies of the Government are also in that direction.

Hon. R. PHILP: \Ve want more than sympathy. \Ve got sympathy last year, and nothing eame ~~ .

Mr. TOLMIE: I hope that now that the sym­pathy of the Government has been shown in that direction it will lead: to a more effective expres­sion before the expiration of the ye>tr. Although I was probably not very much interested at the time the subsidy was granted to the British India Steam Navigation Oomp~ny on the insti­tution of the 'l'orres Straits service between Queensland and Great Britain, and I was not able to take as great an interest in the matter ae I am now, I watched the effects of that serYice on Queensland, and I believe the direct comnnmica­tion between Queensland and Great Britain made Queensland an independent entity. If we are going to remain an entity, and get considera­tion in the minds of the people across the seas, we must have the direct communication between here and the mother country. Our desire is to get Queensland better known to the civilised world, and for many reasons it would be satis­·factory to others, and satisfactory to ourselves. The subsidy paid to the British India Steam Navigation Company was not very great, and I believe we received fair value for it. If the Government will take the matter seriously into consideration and endeavour to estabiish relations between some company plying directly between Brisbane and Northern ports and the home countries, then queensland will reap greater advantages than is equivalent to the sum we have to pay in the particular amount of subsidy. In order to develop the State cneof the best possible means is that suggested by the leader of the Opposition-by estrtblishing a system of immigra­tion once more. We know that Queensland was never so prosperous as when she had a stream of people- an influx of fresh blood-coming in from oversea. Since immigration has declined we have become stagnant, at any rate in Queensland.

Mr. MANN: It wrts the .£10,000,000 that made Queensland so prosperous.

Hon. R. PHILP: The hon. gentleman was not born then.

Mr. TOLMIE : I do not know if the member for Cairns took a particular interest in Queens­land at that time. Amongst the immigrants who arrived here twenty years ago we have some of our finest colonists. They have established them­• elves on the land ; and if we can induce the same class of men to come here and follow their example, it will be a good thing for Queensland. In regard to that, I think the 0ld land-order system of 1886 should be revived. \Ve ought to be in the position to offer them a piece of land to call their owo, and settle on, and make a home­stead of it. \Ve could do that under the land­order system of 1886.

:Mr. ,J. LEAHY : You mean 1876. Mr. TOLMIE: You are right. I mean 1876.

"Those are the class of people I am referring to. It is true only about 25 per cent. of

[5.30 p.m.] them settled on the land, and per­sonally availed themselves of the

privilege of the land order. But I know that .some who failed to do so at first, afterwards

went on the l::tnd, and became good settlers. Many of those people came here, paying their own passages,etnd bringing a little capital with them, and they endeavoured to assist in develop­ing the State in other ways besidea land settle­ment. If we can get a similar class of men to come here now, and take up land, paying for it with land orders, it will be a good thing for Queensland. There is one other matter on which 1 should like to say just a word or two, and that is the amount of money which has been placed on the Estimates for advertising Queensland. The amount is not very great-something like .£3,000-in addition to what has already been appropriated for that purpose; but with that .£3, 000 the Government will be able to tell the story of Queensland as it has never been told previouslv, and that may be a means of inducing people to." come to the State. \Ve suffer at the pre· sent time because the re.oorces and attractions of Queenshnd are unknown outside. I know of no other State in Australia that is comparable to Queensland so far as resources, and climate are concerned. In none of the other States have they such a quantity of good land as we have in Queensland, and in none of the other States have they such mineral resources ae, I believe, we have in Queensla:1d. All we Wdnt is to be able to settle our lands and develop our mineral re­sources. If we do that, progress will continue to be made. But we cannot get people here unless we make known to people who are living away from Queensland that we have such great re­sources to be developed, and this .£3,000 for advertising will do much in that directimJ. I know that at the present time various depart­ments at·e endeavouring to advertise and make known the attractions of Qneenshtnd. I had occasion, during tbe recess, to apply to th_e Minister for Lands and the N[inister for Agri­culture in connection with this matLer. I had received a letter from a gentleman in New Zea­land askin,;: for information concerning Queens­land. I forwarded that letter to the Lands Department, and that department forwarded literature to New Zealand. Subsequently a similar request was made to me b~ gentleman in B~llarat, who had previvusly lt ved on the Darling Downs, and had spent some yea:·s in QueensLmd. This gentleman wished too?t:::m information about land settlement, and stat1stws referring to this State, so that he might speak of Queensland in the Ballarat district, ae he was desirous of seeing some of the young men of .that district come to this State, Both the :Mmtster for Lands and the Minister for Agriculture sup­plied my requirements in that case, in order that the attractions of Queensland might be made known in another State. I have nothing further to say in connection with the Statement, except that I am gratified to know that Queensland is in such a state of prosperity at the present moment, and that with the good season we are promised that prosperity is likely to continue. * Mr. BAR TO~ ( Carnarvon): I am very pleased with the contents of this Budget Speecll. Such a Budget we have not had here for a considerable time, and the information it contains wiil do a great deal to help Queensland. It shows that our Premier's intelligence is as vigorous as ever on behalf of the people of Queensland. I am pleased to notice that certain members­! do not like to be at all nasty, but I refer to those gentlemen who at one time were

·called the "stinking fish" party-have come to recognise the value and capability of the present Administration. They did not seem to acknow­ledge it before. I believe that the blllk of the people of Queensland feel pleased with the way in which the ship of State h:::s be.en navigated. A great deal has been sa1d w1th regard to sugar. In fact, the whole time of the

Mr. Barton.]

584 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

Committee has been taken up with the discussion of that subject. \Ve don't grow sugar in our dis­trict, as we are sweet enough alread!'f. (Laughter.) vVe go in extensively for fruitgrowing, and I believe land devoted to fruitgrowing will produce as much as the "ame area devoted to any other industry. The same remark .applies to tobacco-growing. I am very pleased indeed to note from the speeches of some hon. members that they have arrived at the conclusion that sugar can be grown by white labour. It is a pity they did not discover that sooner, as it would have saved hours and hours of useless talk in this Chamber. \Vith regard to all the different industries, we hear the same cry about the labour difficulty. But it will be found that the labour difficulty will regulate itself when tho>e industries are established. Directly we get population, and the industries are established, the labour difficulty will regulate itself. The pastoral industry is an important industry, and it was never in a better condition than it is to-day. I can remember the time when cattle were bought at £1 5s. and £1 7~. 6d. per head, and now you can get as much for a hide without the bullock. The agricultural industry is going ahead by leaps and bounds. In fact, I do not think you can mentmn any industry to which that remark does not apply. The great highways of the State are now paying remark­ably well, and I think that is largely due to the close settlement which has taken place for some time past. I believe it will be found that close settlement will be the means of making our rail­ways pay a great deal more than you have any idea of. As regards the finances of the country, we have just a little taste of the good things we may expect in that direction. I believe that under the careful leadership of the Premier we have a very prosperous future in front of us. * Mr. MANN (Cairns): The Financial State­ment is one which I believe will give general satisfaction to the people of Queensland. But there are one or two matters omitted from that Statement which Northern members would have been please.d to see included. One matter I wish to ref(lit\ to is the fact that no steps have been taken to establish an old age asylum on the lines of the Dunwich asylum in Northern Queensland. Last year a very influential deputa­tion oi Northern members waited upon the Treasurer, and urged him to establish an old age asylum in some central position in Northern Queensland. \Ve consider that it is a great hardship to bring people from K orthern (~ueens­land down to Bri9bane away from their homes and their relatives. If they happen to recover, they have a difficulty in getting back to the far North and far \V est. Moreove1·, the bringing of people from N ormanton, Cairns, and the far vVest down to Brisbane must be a very heavy expense to the Government, so that they would have been wise had they taken steps to establish an old age asylum in some central position in Northern Queensland. Another matter in regard to which I should have liked the Treasurer to take some action is the endowment to shire councils. I believe that many shires in the South could do very well with­out any endowment, but a good many of the shires in North Queenoland-I might mention in par­ticular the Barron shire, in my own district­have an enormons territory and a sparse popu­lation, and it takes them all their time to rub. along. They can hardly afford to employ any labour. One of two things should be done to assist them : Either they should be allowed to collect rates on Crown lands, or they should be subsidised to some extent. If the Govern­ment have got vacant blocks to which roads are made by the shire council, I think it is only fair that the Government should pay a

[Mr. Barton.

fair share of the cost of making those roads. Several members have mentioned the question of the Torres Straits route. I have received letters from various bodies in my district urging me to support that route. The Northern people got no benefit from the subsidy to the Orient Company, and we believe that it is only fair that the North should share to some extent in the prosperity of the State, and that we should get a service, even if it is only a monthly one, via Torres Straits. I understand the Government intend to open up negotiations with a certain company for cold storage on boats calling North. That will help matters to some extent; but the people of North Queensland will not be satisfied until they get a direct line of steamers to the old country vi<Z Torres Straits. Another matter that I des1re to bring up is the question of the railway rates. The senior member for Drayton and T<~owoomba dwelt upon the heavy railway rates in the South of the State. If the hon. gentleman lived in Xorth Queensland he would find tbat the people are very well served in the South. For instance, in the matter of excursions, the return fare from Toowoomba to Brisbane is 2s. Gd. for children and ils. for adults. The return fare between Atherton and Cairns-a distance of only 68 miles-is 7s. Gd. for children and 15s. for adults. Seeing that the revenuP­from the railways is increasing by leaps and bounds, the Government might very well in­struct the Commissioner to go over the scale of charge'l on the Cairns Railway, and see if some substantial reduction cannot be made. A depu­tation waited on the Commissioner when he was in Cairns, and he promised that as soon as ever the railway was earning 3 per cent. he would reduce the rates. Now, if it is a fair thing to make the people of Cairns wait for a reduction in the rates until the rail way is earning 3 per cent. over and above interest on the cost of construction and working expenses, surely it is a fair thing to make the people m the South wait for low fares until their railways earn the same profit. I do not believe in the North being penalised in any shape or form. The only argu­ment I have ever heard advanced by way of excuse for the extortionate rates that are charged on the Cairns Rail way is that, through the blundering of certain politicians, the railway cost so much. If it had been surveyed and built properly, it would not have cost half what it did ; and to-day, inRtead of having to pay 25 per cent. more tbotn the rates charged in the South, we Gbould have bPen paying something like a decent rate on our railway.

Mr. FORSYTH; 'fhe line should have gone to Port DouglaR instead of Cairns.

Mr. MANN : The ban. member does not know anything about the country.

Mr. Fonsn'H: I have been in Port Douglas, where you have not been.

Mr. MANN: I have been in Port Dou(\"las more than once. Most hon. members on the other side seem to think that I have just been born, and that I have not had time to have a look around yet. I can tell the hon. member that I know as much as he does about either Cairns or Port Douglas. I do not think the railway should have started from Port Douglas. There is a range to cross just the same as in the case of Cairns, and Port Douglas labours under the additional disadvantage of having no har­bour. I maintain that the railway should have been taken up the valley of the Mulgrave instead of to the Barron Falls, and thence over to the Atherton Scrub. By that route a larger area of land would have been opened up, and the line would have been built at half the cost. On the question of the Atherton Scrub, it may not be out of place if I lodge my grievance against the Lands Department in regard to the enormous prices they

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.j Supplg. 585

have been asking for land there lately. The hon. member for Toowoomba dealt with the matter, and pointed out rightly that scrub land costs an enormous amount to clear. Th~re have been some small blocks--three, I think-sold lately on the Atherton Railway for something like £7 an acre. It will cost at the very least £4 an acre to clear that land so that it can be put under grass or maize. That means that it will cost the farmers at least £11 an acre. The staple crop at present is maize ; you can take the average crop us 1 ton to the acre, and the average price £5, which means that the annual return from that land will only be about £5 'm acre. I am only supposing one crop in the year. Of cour"e in exceptional years it is possible to get two crops, but at the same time it is too much of a tax on a man to charge bim £11 an acre for land that he can only get such a small return from. There is another lot of land to be thrown open, I believe, for which the department intend to charge £2 per acre ; but on top of that they are also to be charged for the timber on the land. That is a very i'ood thing, because I have heard it stated in this House>-I think by the hon. member for \Vide Bay-that land was sold in his district for £2 an acre, off which the settler sold the timber to the value of £5 per acre. It is a mistake on the part of the Government to give away such a lot of valuable timber ; but I think the case might be met by the Government allowing the people to go on the land as soon as pos"ible, allowing them to sell the timber off the land; for I claim that, if a man has got to fell and clear scrub in order to cultivate the land, it is better to allow him to sell the timber than to barn it. I do not wish the Government to give the timber to the selectors for nothing; they should be allowed to sell it on payment of a royalty. ·while on the question of the Atherton lands, I would like to urge npon the Government the importance and necesHity of opening those lands in the vicinity of Lake Ea~ham by a rail­way. It is no use throwing them open to selec­tion without a railway, because they are 10 miles from the present line over a road that is unfit for vehicular traffic. Heavy scrub still overhangs the road, and it never gets pro­perly dry in a wet sen,son, and the cost of taking maize from the land that has been thrown open to the railway would be something like 15s. a ton. I would urge upon the Government the advisability of connecting those lands as soon as possible with the Cairns Railway by means of a light tramway or railway. If that is done, I am satisfied the land will be readily taken up. Only tb.e other day a Mr. Vance, the representative of a group of men on Charters Towers, was up there, and he is highly satisfied with the quality of the land. If the Government construct a railway, lam satisfied that the whole of those scrub lands will be taken up in a very short period, and settled by a sturdy population. There has been a great deal said during this debate on the subject of immigration. That is a question upon which I hold strong views. I have been an immigrant myself, and know all about the conditions so far as agricultural labourers are concerned. Before we enter upon any immigration policy, I am of opinion that we should be very careful. During the "eighties," although the leader of the Opposi­tion said I was not here then-I was, as a matter of fact-thousands of agricultural labourers were brought out here, ostensibly to engage in agricultural pursuits; but it is a well-known matter of history that nineteen-twentieths of the agricultural labourers who were brought out never went near the farms or plantations at all, for the reason that they could get better pay and more congenial work on cur railway lines. The first and second sections of the Cairns Rail-

way were built between the years 1886 and 1890, and for about three years there were as many as 1,500 men employed on that line. I am satisfied that 1,000 of those men were newchurns just two or three years out from home, and the bulk of them were agriculbral labourers. They would not go near tbe sugar plantations for the reason that the houro were too long, the food was inferior, the pay was too small, and the housing accommodation wa.s also inferior. Many of those men may have gone on the land afterwards, but I think the majority of them are working to-day on our public works, or fettling on the rail way lengths ; a great many of them went home, and a still greater number went to \Vestern Australia. I came out as an agricultural labourer, anrl, after six months' experience on a sugar plantation, I registered a solemn vow that I would nenr work on one again.

Mr. PAGE'!': You are on your own now. l\Ir. :iYIANN : Yes, I am on my own now, and

I made the money to go on my own on public works, but if I had stopped on a sugar plantation working for £1 a weAk, I do not think I should ever have been in possession of a piece of land of my own. (Hear, hear!)

.Mr. ToLMn;: Better give men selectirms. Mr. MANN: Yes, that would be better.

Before we talk of bringing out agricultural labourers to work in tile canefields, we must have better conditions and better pay, and we tempt those men to come out with the promise that after they have been here a few yeara it will be possible for them to get a piece of land and make a home for themselves. (Hear, hear!) In the old country, since I left it, the conditions are very much better for farm labourers; and, if we te'll them exactly the conditions prevailing here, I am satisfied we will not get the best cla•s of agricultural labourers to come to Queensland, because they prefer the old country,· where the hours are better and the pay more regular. There yon engage for six months, and you lose no time. I have known men meet with an accident, and be laid up for six weeks, and no deduction was !llade from thPir pay, although we hear so much about our vVorkers' Compensation Act out here. The leader of the Opposition said we should bring people of this class out to settle on our sugar lands, and he urged the Government to do that. But the hon. gentleman knows very well that, unless the Go­vernment erect more mills, they have very little land adjacent to sugar-mills on which they can put those men. Only the other day I was making inquiries about a piece of sugar land in the Cairns district that I wanted to buy. 1 t had been growing cane for something like twenty­five years. It was fairly good land, and was cleared, but the price asked was £16 an acre, so that for t.he 20 acres I would have had to pay £320.

Mr. FORSYTH: \Vhy, yon are a regular capitalist.

Mr. MANN : I did not say I had the money -that wao the price I was asked. Now, to put that land under cane would cost at least another £320 bv the time the cane wa,; fit to cut; and I ask hon. members if we are likely to get men with £600 to come from the old country to take up 20 acres of sugar land. The thing is too absurd.

Mr. J. LEAHY: Cannot they get assistance too? Mr. MANN: The assistance you can g-et from

either a private mill or a central mill is an advance for which you are charged at least 5 or n per cent. Now, 6 per cent. on £600 wonld be a very big amount for a working man to pay, when he would not only have to pay down one­fifth of the purchase money, but would havP to buy horses, drays, harness, implements, and all that sort of thing. The only men who could

lJfr . .il[ann.]

-586 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

settle on terms like these would be men who are already farming in the old country, and I do not believe we will get them to come out and start farming in Queensland. Unless we make the conditions in this cnuntry such that a man will write home glowing ac­counts to his friends that he is doing well, immi-

grants will not come out. If a man [7 p. rn.] is doing well here, he constitutes

himself an immigration agent by writing home thPse letters. People will only come out here when they are shown that our conditions are better than those at home. I am in favour of bringing immigrants out, not by false promises, but by letting them understand what they are coming out for; and it io not so much the duty of the Government as the duty of those who own large areas of sugar lands. If they had gone a.bout the business of finding labour for the sugar-fields in a proper manner, we would not be faced, as we are at the present juncturt', with the shortage of labour which they say exi"ts. The senior member for Mackay read out a great number of figures last night, and I will just read a few which I have here showing the amount of white-grown sugar produced in Queensland since 1902. In 1\)02 we had 12,25! t.ms; in Hl03, 24,406 tons; in 190!, 39,404 tons; and in 1905, ii0,897 tons of white­grown sugar. It is estimated that this year there will be 125,000 tons, or more than do.uhle what there was last year. If the people growing sugar had in the first yearJl gone in for a larger amount of white labour instead of waiting almost for the expiration of the time for the kanakas to go away, we should never have had this trouble. Land which is farmed systematic· ally is, as a rule, three parts under cane, and the fourth part under preparation for a crop of .plant cane. If these farmers, when the federal regulations first came into force, had planted one-fourth of their farms each year with white 1:;tbour, the white labour problem would by this time have been solved, hut they did not do anything of the kind. The hon. senior member for Brisbane North, on the Address in Reply last year, boaBted that there was only 2 per cent. of the cane in the North grown by white labour. Now, any man in this Honse who makes a boast of that description evidently does not know the conditions prevailing there now, and whilst I sympathise with those people who have~ shortage of labour, to a certain extent their trouble has been largely brought about by their want of fore· sight.

Hon. E. B. FORRES:je : They ought to have you there to tell them what to clo.

Mr. MANN: I have given them that advice repeatedly. There is another factor which mili­tates agai~st the canegrower. For instance, when I wnte home to mv friends in Scotland I have to tell them I am growing cane for the ·Colonial Sugar Refining Company and get 13,. 7d. a t~m for it, while at the ::\Iulgrave mill, only 8 mrles away-where inferior cane is grown owing to the fact that three-fourths is grown on river flats where the density is low­they get £1 Os. 9d.

Hon. E. B. J!'oRREST: But you forgot to tell them the reason why-you won't tell them that.

::\1r. MANN: I do tell them. I understand the position better then the bon. member with all hi" knowledge of sugar, because I have grown it. The only reason is that the Colonial Sugar Refining Company want to make big ·dividends out of sweated sugar-growers.

Hon. E. B. :FoRREST : You know that is not true.

Mr. MANN: I know it i£ true. The whole of North Hambledon was taken up by white farmers when the Colonial Sngar Hefining Company bought it, and now there are only

[M r .. ilf ann.

about five, and two-thirds of the land which was growing- cane when the company came there is out of the hands of the farmers.

Hon. E. B. FORREST: All through men like you.

Mr. :M:ANN: I don't want to quarrel with the hon. member, because I am the only farmer on North Hamhledon who is not now in the hands of the Colonial Sugar Refining Company.

Hon. E. B. FORREET : Do you call yourself a farmer? The farmers won't own you.

:.Vlr. MAN:'{ : I am not going to argue upon that.

Hon. E. B. FORREST: You had better not; we know all about you.

Mr. }IANN: The sugar people •hould not go to the Government for immigrants until it has been proved there are not enough men to carry on the indu~try in th8 State and Commonwealth. The leader of the Opposition said one man from the other States was worth two from the old country, who had no kn·Jwledge of agricul­ture in Queensland, and I believe that is so. In order to get a suitable class of labourer for our lands, the farmers must be prepared to pay a fair rate of w"ges, and to do that they need to get a fair amount for their product from the mills. It is no use saying the farmer should make things better for his employees, if he is prevented by the low price of cane. Now, to let the bon. member for North Brisbane see that I am not the only one who thinks the Colonial Sugar Refining Company is not giving the farmers a fair price, I have a cutting from a newspaper called the T1'inity Times, which I will read to the Committee. This is a meeting of Hambledon farmers held in Cairns this year. It says-

Other members also pointed ant that the farmers under the C.S.R. Company were far worse oft" than before federation .in spite of the increased duty, and that the whole of the benefit which should accrue to the grower under federal legislation went to the C.S.IL Company, leaving the f:.trmer to shoulder the increased cost of labour under the new conditions.

Hon. E. R. FoRREST: The man who wrote those words knew that it was a lie. You know that it was a lie yourself.

::\fr. ::\1ANN: I do not know that. The CHAIRMAN: The hon. member for

North Brisbane is distinctly out of order in say­ing that th8 hon. membH is reading something which he knows to be a lie. I ask the hon. member to withdraw that remark.

Hon. E. B.l!'oRREST: I will withdraw it if I am compelled to do so by parliamentary usage, but all the same I know what is the truth.

The CHAIRMAN: .Order! The hon. gentle­man should withdraw the remark unreservedly, and not Cjualify it.

Hon. E. B. FORREST: If you compel me to do it I will do it. But I object to withdraw a thing of that sort when I know that it is a deliberate lie.

The HOME SECRETARY: Order, order! The CHAIR;yiAN: I did not catch the obser­

vation which the hon. gentleman made. I ask him to withdraw the remark unreservedly.

The HOME SECRETARY: I understand the hon. member for North Brisbane to say that the hon. member for Cairns knew that statement is a deliberate lie.

Mr . • T. LEAHY : Do you rise to a point of order?

The HOME SECRETARY: I rioe to a point of order.

Mr. J. LEAHY : 'vVhat is your point of order? The HO:YIE SECRETARY: My point of

order is that I think the hon. member for Brisbane North did not withdraw his assertion. FJ;e did not obey your direction.

Mr. J. LEAHY: That is not a point of order. It is mere s ta temen t.

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 587

The CHAIRMAN : I must ask the hon. member for Brisba,ne Xorth whether he did not unreservedly withdraw the statement or charge that he made. Ho~. E. B. FORREST: I would like to know,

·before I do anything of the sort, what the hon. member for Cairns means. Is he making that statement of his own knowledge, or has somebody told him?

Mr. MANN: I was reading an extract from the Press.

Hon. E. B. FORREST: I say again that the man who made that statement to the Press is a liar.

Mr. J. LEAHY: That is not out of "order. Mr. MANN: What the ban. member for

North Brisbane says does not trouble me, because I know he is a bit hurt at hearing the truth, and the only argument he has is to get up and say that it is a lie. I have been growing cane fur "the Colonial Sugar Refining Company, and I ought to know what the conditions are, and if men in a meeting "say that sort of thing, and it is printed in the Press, I think it is a fair criti" cisrn on the methods of the company. I claim that until we get better conditions, cheaper land, and better prices for cane. it is impossible for us to get suitable labour from the old country. Hon. members talk about the unreliable white men in the canefields, but I believe it is largely owing to the fact that farmers are not able to pay a good price for their labour. The hon. member for Mackay last night read a lecture to the working men on what their behaviour in the canefields shoulrl be.

Mr. PAGET: I did not read them a lecture at all.

Mr. MANN : He made some remarks about the position, and what they should do under the circumstances. I believe that men who go into the canefields should try and give a fair deal for a fair wage, but I am oppo8ed to the idea that there was never trouble in the canefields until the white worker went into them. That wns the idea to be got from the hon. member's remarks.

Mr. PAGET : Certainly not. Mr. MANN : \V ell, I am glad to hear the

hon. member confe;s that there has been trouble in the e:anefields before.

Mr. PM!ET : I did not confess it. Do not try and twi.st mv words.

Mr. MAKN : I am not twisting your words. 1 have heard it said that there may be trouble with white labour in canefields, but "r have not heard of white men hunting their employers through the fields with cane knives. I am told of an em!Jloyer who, when he went throuo-h the field, said "Good morning" to one of the kanakas. This boy wae a newchum, and did not know what had been said to him, and thought he had been insulted. He told his countrymen, and the consequence was that they gathered round the farmer and gave him a good doing with sugar-cane and chased him oat of the field. (Laughter.) Now, white men will not do that. At the same time, I claiw that if a white man gets a fair trial he will be more satisfactory in the canefields than any horde of savages we might bring in here from the Pacific Islands.

:Nir. P AGET: That is what I wish to see. Mr. MANN : A great deal has been said

about the policy of the Government in regard to central SUj5ar-milh. I do not want to go into that questwn very much, for the reason that in my ~istrict the mill is in the haJJPY position of havmg more cane than it can cope with. Up till this year they nevE'r took any cane from any area. outside of what is mortgaged to the mill. I thmk the ground work of our central mills is one that might be seriously considered to see if we are going the right way about manao-ino- these mills or not. Everyone knows in c~n~ection

with these mills-!md Mulgrave 'is no exception -there has always been trouble over the management of mills owing to the fact that the directors-perhaps like any other body of men -try to serve themselves best at the ex­pense of everybody else. I have been told by the growers at the Mulgrave mill that some of the directors put in large quantities of cane w hi eh has little or no sugar in it. One grower told me that a certain director had a variety of cane that had no more sugar in it than hoe-handles. That is the feeling in that district that has been created amongot the growers, and it is accentuated by the fact that the farmers who are directors can get their cane cut first-they can get their cane cleaned and trashed whenever they like-to the detriment of other growers. The Government would be well advised if they never parted with the control of the mill. I am glad to see that they have taken the worst mills under their wing, and I hope they will give the canegrowers a fair deal. The trouble in the past has largely been caused by large sums of money being given away to the directors to spend. They built tramways perhaps to their own places at big expense, leaving the ether people who mortgaged their land to the mill without a tram way or means of getting cane to the mill. That is a policy I want to press on the Government to put a stop to, or rather the Government should build trams out to the lands that are mortgaged to the mills that is suitable for cane, and get these people to grow cane as they ought to do according to their agreement, and if they do then the mills might be a qualified success. I say "qualified" advisedly, and for this reason: Many of these milh were put in the wrong place-in country which is not naturally adapted for cane. It was a rni,takefor the Government to allow people to establish mills there. There is only one such mill in the South that ha¥ been a success-namely, the Childers mill. I am anxious to see the mills made a success of in the Se>nth for this reason : That there might be no excuse for the Treasurer to refuse to build mills in localities suitable for canegrowing. I think the Treasurer made a mistake last year in not advancing the money to the people of the Johnstone River to build their central mill. I think the central mill in C:1irns does far better than the mills in the South. If we had four or five paying mills in the North, we would not be b10ught face to face now with the difficulty in connection with the scarcity of labour, and the scarcity of population in theN orth. There has been a good deal said about this question of the bonuB, and how it is going to affect the growers. As a sugar­grower, Mr. Paget spoke last night on the sub­ject, and I interjected that the difference in excise to be paid next year-that is, £4 instead of £3-was designed·to assist the white grower as against the coloured grower. I say that the action of the Federal Government in doing that meets with the approval of every man who be­lieves in a white Australia. (Hear, hear!) To­day the coloured grower is in as good a r>"osition as the white grower. He naturally does not want to give over his coloured labour, and the reaBon is apparent. The average cost of a newchum kanaka to the farmer would only be about 15s. a week, while the lowest rate you would get a white man for would be something like £1 16s. a week. That being so, the coloured grower would enjoy £3 protection, and be in a better position than ever he was before, and he was desirous of having a continuance of those good times. They want protection and they want the kanaka as well. I believe in giving protecti"on-in protecting sugar up to the hilt-so that we can have a g-ood population on

Mr.Mann.]

588 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

our land ; but I do not see the use of Australians paying heavy protection for coloured-grown Bu~ar when we might have coloured-grown sugar imported from abroad instead d having it grown hen, to the detriment o£ the State. If I h_ad my way, there would not be one penny protec­tiOn g1 ven to the worst class of coloured growers, that is the coloured men' who employ coloured men themselves. I will give a ca'e in point. At Greenbills, in the Cairns district, 30,000 tons of cane came off there last year. Every ton of cane was grown by Chinese labour. I figure it out, roughly speakittg, that that cane would be worth £:l0,000, which is estimating it at £1 per ton. ""Without exaggeration, I say that Greenhills wonld give fifty families a gross income of £600 off the area of land on which that cane was grown. That being so, I think it would be better to have fifty families of our own race anrl colour settled there than to allow it to go over into the hand' of Chinese who simply hoard up their money and go back to China as soon as they get sufficient money to enable them to live there.

Mr. J. LEAHY: \Ve have plenty of land besides that, but the people will not take it up.

Mr. MA-;\/"N: The hon. member only shows his ignorance when he says there is pienty of land. I say, without fear of contradiction, that unless there are more mills built, you cannot get a piece of land in the Cairns district where you can grow cane to oupply it to a mill.

Mr. J. LEAHY : Cairns is not Queensland Mr. MANN : It is worth forty Bulloos. Mr. J. LEAHY : The only sam pies we see from

there are useless. Mr. ::YIANN : There is one thing I will say,

that however useless I am I was never mean enough to turn my back on my country--

Mr. J. LEAHY: You never had a country. The CH.URMAN: Order, order! Mr. 2\IANN: Nor to say a word against the

place I came from. I do not want to go into this sugar question at any greater length, be­cause I think it has been pretty well thrashed out by the senior member for Mackay, and what· ever else he may be I say that that hon. gentle· man has a thorough and intimate knowledJe of the sugar industry only that he looks at it f;om a black point of view and I look at it from a white­labour point of view.

:Mr. PAGET : Not altogether. Mr. MANN: \Veil, perhaps not altogether. I

will say that the hon. gentleman has always been a fair fighter in the House, and if he has got leanings towards black labour, perhaps I should not blame him because there are a lot of people who have the same opinion as he has with regard to black labour, and they think that we ca,tmot go in for successful sugar-growing without it. The hon. gentleman, when speaking last night, said that Dr. 11»:xwell, when he first came here, was of the opinion that the white man could not profitably grow cane in North Queensland with white labour. I do not wonder at Dr. Maxwell l>aving that opinion, for the rea>on that when he came here almost every man who met him in the street-auctioneer,, shipping agents, and all the usual fraternity who hang around the town living on the sweat of other people­were not willing to let the black labour go, and they rigged up meetings and told Dr. Maxwell that without black labour sugar-cane cnuld not be grown. Dr. Maxwell has been some years in Queensland now, and he can say that the climate of North Queensland, although it may be a shade warmer than the Sunth, is one that white men can work in. I will leave the sugar question now, and touch 011 one important matter which concerns my own districu, and that is the matter of the police. I am sorry to have to mention the matter, but the conduct of the

[ i~f r. jjf ann.

police at Cairns for some time past is something that has caused a shock to the whole community. Instead of the police being the protector-' of the people, they have been the reverse.

l'dr. PAULL: There is a good man there now. Mr. MANN: There is a sub-inspector at Cairns

who has caused more trouble than enough. I believe he has not left the Cairns districu yet, or he harlnot, according to the last word I received from there. The people there think that a man who made such terrible blunders as he has should not be left there to corrupt the new body of men who go there.

The HmiE SECRETARY: Is it correct that he is still there?

Mr. MANN : Yes; he has not been shifted yet. The people of Cairns blame him for the whole of the Le V aux blunders that occurred there, and which I intend to bring up at another opportunity.

Mr. PAVLL: Sub .. inspector l\Ialone goes to Cairns thi" week.

Mr. l\IANN: The officer ·I refer to should have been shifted from Cairns long ago. The whole business showed that a terrible amount of blundering was done, and the police were failing in their duty in not arresting the man or in following up the clue of the man who murdered Peter Lumberg. They are a bit too smart in other cases. A girl there had a misfortune, and they had no hesitation in arresting her on a charge of wilful murder, though the evidence showed there was no criminal intent.

The HOiiiE SECRETARY: \V hat case was that? Mr. l\IANN: I do not want to 111ention the

name unless it is kept out of Hansard and the PresF. This girl made a slip and she was arrested. An inquiry was held, and the inquiry exonerated the girl from any criminal mtent. Then, at a later date, the police arrested the girl for wilful murder. Now, in our Police Force we shoulrl, as far as possible, have a body of men that would be a credit to the State, but instead of that it seems as if their hanfls TtlUst be against everyone but those who can believe in what they do.

JHr. LESTNA: It is not the police at all. It is the rank incapacity of the Home Secretary.

Mr. MANN : 'rhe Home Secretary cannot be responsible for everyjack-in·the-box who commits som8 indiscretion. Another case of gross inhu .. manity on the part of the police is the case of the leper who was taken away from there. There was no preparation made to ensure him even the slightest degrAe of comfort. The men who were responsible for that should not only be censured, but they should be kicked out of the force. \Vhile we have men like that in the Police Force it is usele'" to expect the people of any district to have any respect for them. As a matter of fact, my own opinion is this : that in Cairns you will hardly ever find a man convicted on the evidence of the nolice alone. \Vhatever else may be done, I hope-the Commissioner of Police will set a good example and see that the Police Force is kept free from any taint of suspicion. I am sorry that the Premier is not here to .. night. I was sorry to hear that he was sick, and can only express the hope that he will soon be well again and "ith us once more.

Mr. FORSY'I'H (Carpentaria): I quite agree with the hon. member who just resumed his seat in h1s remarks about the absence of the Premier. Every single member of this House, I am sure, is sorry that the hon. member is not in his usual place. I am sure that I express the sentiments of every member when I say that we hope that before long he will be back again in his accustomed place once more. He took a great interest in financial matters, and as this is the time of the year when we are discussing financial matters, I know that he will feel sorry that he is unable to be here listening to thee

Suppl;y. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Snpply. 589

·debate that is taking- place in connection with his Statement. \Ve heard a great deal last night and to-night in connection with sugar.

The senior member for lVIackay, Mr. [7.30 p.m.] Paget, gave u" a very able and in-

structive speech on the subject, and anyone who reads it will pick up a great deal of useful information. The whole debate seems to have centred upon sugar. But there are other things to he considered in connection with the :Financial Statement. \Ve h:we heard a great deal about federation, and that is a somewhat com­plicated subject which one could expand to a con­siderable extent. No matter what may be our idea as to the best policy to adopt in order to insure to Queensland her fair share of federal revenue, it seems to be impossible, notwithRtanding that several conferences have been held to consider the question, to arrive at a proper conclusion, so that the 8tates, and Queensland especially, may get what they are justly entitled to from the Federal Government. However, I believe that before very long some arrangement. will bo made in connection with this matter, becauee it must be settled during the next four years, before the Braddon clause expires. I think we can con­gratulate the Government and the country upon the :Financial Statement which has been laid before us, showing, as it does, a very large increase in revenue from the various depart­ments during the past twelve months. I am exceedingly pleased that the Treasurer has left out of his Statement this year, wh'tt he has invariably put in his Statements in former years, and that is statements which are intended to show how extravagantly and badly managed the country was under the old Government as compared with the administration of the present Government. The hon. gentleman has !eh out completely all such remarks, and I think he has displayed very good taste in doing so. It is quite suffi­cient for us to discuss such matters immediately after a change of Government has taken place, but I do not think that discussion should be con· tinned for four years. \Vhat we have to do now is to discuss things as they are. The revenue for the year is particularly satisfactory. It shows an increase of no less than £218,000 over the estimate of the Treasurer. And if you take the expenditure, I am sorry to say that you will alw find an increase there. \V e are all pleased to see an increase in the revenue, but we do not like to see an increase in the expenditure. The expenditure last year exceeded the Treasurer's estimate by £48,000, so that, taking both revenue and expenditure, the hon. gentleman was out in his estimate to the extent of £26fi,OOO. \Vben I remember how the Hon. the Trettsurer criticised the Treasurer of the late Government when he was out in his Estimates, one is very much tempted to criticise an estimate such as that which was made last year, but I have no desire to do that. The fact only shows that no matter how carefully a Treasurer may work out his J<jstimates, the conditions of things may so change during the twelve months as to quite falsify his anticipations. Last vear the hon. gentleman estimated that we should have a deficit at the end of the year just closed to the extent of £42,000, and be proposed on that occasion a land monopoly tax, which he calcu­lated would bring in sufficient money to cover that anticipated deficit. As a matter of fact, instead or having a deficit of £42,000, as was forecasted, we have a surplus of £127,000, and that without the land monopoly tax. The Treasurer is quite honest on this matter, and says his estimate was by no means an accurate one. The bulk of that surplus is not due to any special economy on the part of the Govern· ment, because, as a matter of fact, their expendi­ture was somewhat. higher than was estimated.

The expenditure for last ye:o.r was £144:000 more than the expenditure for the prevwus year, and we are not in a position to-night to ascertain exactly how that £144,000 is made up. \Ve know that one big item which helped to make up that amount was the restora­tion of salaries to public servants who had been retrenched under the Act of 1902, but that was only an amount of £GO,OOO. Though the 8pecial Retrenchment Act took away £95,000 in 1!J04-5, t.he amount actually paid by the Government was only £GO,OOO, because we got back £3G,OOO in another way. There is, therefore, the difference of £80,000 to be accounted for, and it is >carcely vossible for us to determine how that is made up until we are in possession of the Auditor­General's report. The amount of revenue received from the f'ommonwealth Government has caused a considerable amount of discussion in the course of this debate, and the Treasurer very truly says that the amount he received last year over and above the sum estimated by the Federal Treasurer was almost sufficient to account for the total amount of his surplus of £127,000. \Ve got from the Federal Trea­surer £120,000 more than he estimated would be returned to Queenoland. I quite agree with our Treasurer when he savs he believes that the revenue from the federal authorities this year will be greater than it wa'~ last year, be~ctnse our various industries are expanding. The :B'ederal Treasurer estimates that his revenue from Customs and Excise this year will be less than it was last year, but I believe he is just as much out in that estimate as he was in hisestim.>teof revenue from the same dOurce last year. The total amount received from Customs and Excise was £80,000 more than he estimated last year, and I hope we shall receive a larger sum from the Federal Treasurer this year than we did for the year just closed. The revenue we received from taxation shows au increase of £12,000 above the etsimate, the land rev.cnue an increase of £38,000, and the revenue from mining an increase of £3,500 over the estimate. The revenue received from our railways, which is the main factor in connec­tion with our finances, shows an increase over the increased amount anticip"ted by the Trea­surer of no le's than £45,000. Thus it hap­pens that though he was out in his estimate of revenue to the extent of £218,000, fortunately on the right side, he was able to show a surplus. The Federal Treasurer anticipates that this year the revenue from Customs and Excise will be some £33,000 leos than we g-ot last year. I believe the consensus of opinion among members of this House is that the Federal Treasurer is wrong in his estimate. I certainly believe that his esti­mate is likely to be exceeded. They certainly are, if the revenue for the first two months of the year are to be taken as a criterion of what he will receive for the whole twelve months, because the revenue tor those two months is £14,000 more than he received for the same period last year.

The HOME SECRETARY : There are exceptional circumstances in connection with that, of course.

Mr. FORSYTH: Yes, there has been a con­siderable amount of unrest in connection with the fedaral tariff, and a great deal of money has been paid in Customs and Excise duties by people who took stuff out of bond thinking that the duties were to be increased, and this, of course, may tell later on. But whether that is so or not, we cannot get away from the fact that the federal revenue for the first two months of the year is particularly satisfactory. \Vith regard to the Post and Telegraph Department, I would point out that under our own control it never paid, but during the last year we administered that de­partment it came very close to balancing income and expenditure.

Mr. Forsyth.]

590 Suppl,y. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

The HmrE SECRETARY : It was short about .£30,000.

Mr. FORSYTH: K o, I do not think so. But I see that last year the loss on the Postal Depart­ment was no less than £59,000, and a somewhat unsatisfaebry feature of this matter is that it is anticipated that the loss this year will be about £80,000. I shall explain the reason for that later on. There is one matter in connection with this department that was mentioned by the Treasurer, and that is the introduction of penny postage all over Australia. I quite agree with other hon. members who have referred to this matter that it is not at all necessary that we should have the po•tage in Australia reduced told.

The Hol\IE SECRE1'ARY: It is absolutely un­called for.

Mr. J!'ORSYTH: It is absolutely uncalled for, and it will mean a loss of £40,000 to Queens· land for the year, but, as penny postage will only be in operation for nine out of the twelve months of the current year, it will affect us this year to the extent of £2H,OOO. \Ye shall not lose the whole of the £29,000, because there will be an expansion of business in connection with the Post and Telegraph Department, but it is estimated that we shall lose .£17,000 on stamps. I most emphatically assert, and I believe it is the opinion of the majority of hon. members, that it is a most unfair thing for the J!'ederal Government to force a further burden upon people of the State at a time when it is strug· glin~; out of its financial difficulties.

l\Ir. J. LEAHY: No; not on the people-on the Treasurer.

Mr. FORSYTH: If we have a loss of £20,000, £30,0000, or £40,000, that amount will have to be made up some way or another.

Mr. J. LEAHY: If we do not pay it in one way, we shall have to pay it in another.

Mr. J!'ORSYTH: Qmte so; but the trouble iB that it will not fall equally upon all. For in­stance, banks and large trading firms, which have a la''"e amount of postage', will benefit, whilst the working classes, who do not pay per­haps more than 10s. or .£1 a year in postages, will suffer from the change, as they will have to contribute towards making good the deficiency. In order to make good the loss, we may ulti­mately have to impose further taxation.

Mr. RYLAND: One penny in the £income tax on large incomes will do it.

Mr. FORSYTH : The hon. member seems to be always thinking of a gradu>tted income tax and a land tax, and it is a pity something is not done to relieve him of his trouble in that con­nection. I want now to refer to the revenue increases in connection with the State depart­ments. The Treasurer expects an increase of .£12,000 in taxation. That is made up of an increase of .£23,000 from stamp duties, a decrease of £5,000 from income tax, and licenses were under the estimate by £5,000. The receipts increased over the estimate from the Lands and Mines Departments by £41,900. The reason for that, according to the Statement, is that the Government received something like .£9,000 from auction sales more than the esti­mate, and about .£30, 000 more from rents off selections. Then mining showed a very large increase over the estimate. Railways showed a large increase of about .£45,000, made up prin­cipally on the Central and Southern and Wes­tern Railways, which showed an incrt•ase of .£49,000. Miscellaneous receipts were very much the same as last year. ~o far I have been dealing with the Estimates for the year as against the previous year. As a rnle we take the figures year after year when we are dealing with questions like these, but I shall only compare this year's revenue with last year's, The receipts from the

[.M~. Forsyth.

Commonwealth showed an increase of £105,00(} this year; taxation increased by about £40,000; land revenue decreased by £28,930. Of course, we know that i~ due to the lesser amount receivf'd from anction sales. Mining increased by 1"8, 000. I am surprised that mining should not have in­creased a grea.t deal more in view of the great activity in all parts of the State in that industry. Every day leases are being taken up, and this is one of our biggest industries. The great feature in connection with the t:ltatement is that the re­ceipts from the State departments all shnw great expansion. Last year our railways showed the very satisfactory increase of £125,000. The in­crease in revenue last year as compared with the previous year wa'! nu less than .£258,000. No wonder the Treasurer had a surplus! Yet, in spite of that large increase in revenue, his surplus is only £127,000.

Mr. J. LEAHY : On his EstimatEs he would have a big deficit.

Mr. FOR::3YTH: That is so. His estimate W&'" exceeded by £218,523, otherwise there certainly would have been a deficit. Of course we got a much larger sum back from the Commonwealth than was anticipated, but over tho,t we have no control. But the reveoue from the State departments increased also by no less a sum than £153,000, what is most satisfactory not only to the Treasurer but to e;·ery hon. mem­ber. \Ye can see that all our departments are expanding year after year, owing principally to the magnificent seasons we have had during the last three or four years. If the people were only left alone to work out their own Hal vation in their own way, with a few more good seasons there is. not the slightest doubt that the financial position of Queensland would be one of the best in Australia. A few years ago we were financially in a bad way owing to the bad seasons. There was little produce coming in, the railways were going back year after year, and in almost every department there was a falling off. Now we find that we are in a splendid position owing to the good seasons. I want to refer for a moment to the last year of the Philp Administration-1902-3. The revenne derived by the Goverhment during the year that has just closed was greater than the revenue in that year by no less than .£327,000, whilst the expenditure was .£8, 000 less that year than it was last year. Yet, in spite of that fact, we only had a deficit of .£191,000. The total amount of extra revenue recmved hy this Go­vernment during- the last three years is £464, 00(} more than Mr. Philp received his last year. The first year there was a small deficit, then there was a small surplus the following year, and last year showed a surplus of .£127,000. Yet the surplus over the three years only came to £129,000, in spite of the £464,000 they received as compared with the Philp Government in the year 1902.3. Where has all the rest of the money gone to? I leave the Home Secre­tary to tell us. Taxation showed an increase last year of £39,000, made up of an increase in income tax of .£11,000 and stamps £31,000, whilst licenses decreased by .£2,000. The esti­mate for the year 1906-7 from taxation is smaller. Income tax is down for .£260,000. \Ye receivt>d a little more than that last year, but, of courae, it is proposed to exempt all incomes under £160, which is estimated to reduce the re­ceipts by £25,000. I am exceedingly pleased to see that such an exemption is proposed, be­cause that is the exact amount which I suggested, when speaking on the Address in Reply, should be exempted. That will allow working men in receipt of £3 a week to escape. The Treasurer expects to get .£20, 000 by changing the incidence of the tax in other directions, so that he estimates he will lose £5,000. While I entirely Rgree with the pro-

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 591

posed exemption, which is practically based on the exemption in force in the old country-which shows that we can get a good many good ideas from the old country-I think that the exemp· tion should have been made to apply to all in­come". The Treasurer proposes to exempt £120 on all incomes between £160 and £200 per annum, but I would h:we preferred seeing bim follow the example of New South vVales or even of New Zeabnd. In New Zealand there is an ex­emption of £300 on all incomee, and in New South \Vales they exempt £200. I think that, whether a man has £300 or f3,000 a year, he should get the same exemption of £160. I am sorry the Treasurer is not able to be in his place, but I am sure one of his colle"gues will convey the message to him, that it would be a good thing if the Commissioner for Inc<)me Tax would take the trouble to see exactly how it would work out if an exemption of £160 was granted in respect to all incomes. Althom;h such an ex­emption must affect the position to a considerable extent, yet with the great expansion of business and increase of revenue which we hope will con­tinue, next year we can change the Aco and give an exempdon all round, no matter what &he in­come may be.

:M:r. KERR: And still you voted for the poll tax.

Mr. :FORSYTH : The hon. gentleman knows that it was entirely against the wishes of the late

Government to impose an income [8 p.m.] tax at all, but it was necessary to

make financial arrangements. It was only put on for a certain time-two years and three months-and then if it was possible to dispense with it altogether it would have been a good thing to do. The hon. gentleman com­plains about the poll tax, but the provisions in regard to it were most liberal, because if a man said he was not able to pay 10s., all he had to do was to explain to the Commissioner, who would let him off. There were thousands of men let off who said they had not the money, and besides that there were 30,000 or 40,000 men who got off and did not pay at all.

The Hmm SECRETARY: There were only 55,000 assessable.

Mr. FORSYTH : If you consult the "Vital Statistics," which will give you the number of men over twenty-one years of age, as against the number who actually paid, you will find there were thousands of men who never paid at all­apart altogether from the men who told the Commissioner that they could not pay the 10s. Now, according to the hon. member for Cler­mont, the first or second year after the present Government came in they were not half as good to the working men as the late Government.

l\fr. LESINA : They chase them yet; they are trying to collect it yet.

Mr. FORSYTH: The late Government said the Commissioner had power, without referring to the l\Iinister, to say: "If you cannot afford 10s. we will let you off a! together."

Mr. RYLAND : The Commissioner never refers to the Minister.

Mr. FORSYTH: \Ve know the Minister has nothing to do with it, but it is a remarkable thing that we find the Commissioner serving summonses all over the country on these poor wretches for the purpose of getting the 10s. poll tax. I cannot understand how a man who was so humane in 1902-3 that he would let every­body off who said they could not afford to pay the 10s., should at once become a Shylock, and say, "If you do no& p:ty up we will put you in gaol."

Mr .• J. LEAHY: He was not paid for his humanity then.

Mr. FORSYTH: Perhaps not, but it is a most remarkable thing that they should now

want every single "sti ver" they can wring out of those unfortunate people. One would think that they would have allowed every outstanding amount in connection with the old poll tax to be buried once for all.

:'.lr. ::V!ANN: A lot of people escaped the tax who could well afford to pay it.

Mr. FORSYTH : And it is quite possible that some people now escape the iax who cannot afford tn pay it. I recently read the rPp<)rt of a debate in the old country which showed that the loss there caused by evasions of the income tax "mounted to a :,rood many millions a year. Parhaps the same class of people are in Queens­land to-day, people who won't pay a shilling more of income tax than they can possibly help, and if they can evade the Act by a wrong return they do not mind. The Lands Depart­ment has some £30,000 less this year than last year. The estimate for the ypar wa' £520,000, and they got £38,000 more, buo the actual amount received is some .£30,000 less, and this is explained by the fact that there is not the same amount coming in in con­nection with auction sales that took place last year. There is one pleas.;nt feature in connection with the Lands Department, and that is that agricultural farm", homesteads, and unconditional selections have increased to a very large extent. From these three sources the amount actually received was some £13,000 more than last year. The revenue from agricultural farms has increased very largely this year. and eve-ry shilling of that money is g·oinginoothe Trea­sury. I always understood that the policy of the Labour party was that no land should be sold, that the land should be nationalised and leased to the people ; but we find that under this wonderful Labour Government £80,000 a year is received from the alienation of land.

Mr. BoRROWS: There is no other possible mode of selection.

Mr. FORSYTH : I am not discussing the question of selection, hut where the money is going to which comes from selection, and if you want to carry out the policy of not putting money into the Treasury in connection with the sale of the assets of the State, not a single shilling should go into the Treasury at all.

Mr. BoRROWS: Give us your own views. Mr. FORSYTH: I have given my views on

thio subject on almost every Budget Speech I delivered in this House. I spoke about it in 1899 when I came in the House. \Vhen you sell land and put the proceeds into revenue it is just the same as a business man doing this: When he strikes his balance at the end of the year, per­haps he has to show a loss of £5,000. But he has a piece of land which stands as an asset in his books; be sells that land and puts it down to revenue, and the consequence is that he shows his accounts are square. That is a system which is absolutely wrong.

Mr. J. LEAHY: No, that is not correct ; we havA got the land still.

Mr. :FORSYTH : Yes; but not this land. Mr. J. LEAHY: You have got it to tax, if

necessary. Mr. BuRRows : You never opposed the sales

of land. Mr. J<'ORSYTH : I do not oppose the sale of

land now. The hon. gentleman does not under­stand the argument. I should like to see every acre in Queensland sold; but, while I firmly believe in the sale of land-and the more WP sell the better-the proceeds have no right whatever to go to the consolidated revenue.

Mr. LESINA: You opposed the Proceeds of Land Sales Bill.

Mr. FORSYTH : I never opposed the Lands Sales Bill. I will vote for it to-morrow, because I believe land is better in the hands of private

Mr. Forsvth.]

592 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supp1,1J.

people than in the hands of the Government. ::'\ ow the proceeds from auction sales of land is no longer to go to revenue; it is to be utilised in some other way. If we want to carry out that policy to its proper end, all money from the sale of land should be laid aside for some other purpose, because you are selling your capital. In my first speech in the House in connection with this matter, I ad vacated that all moneys from the sales of land should go towards the reduction of our national debt.

Mr. RYLAND : It does not reduce it. Mr. FORSYTH: No, it does not reduce it,

because it goes into revenue. One thing I am pleased to see is the large amount of land taken up by grazing farmers and homestead selectors, and it has caused a big increase of rent from that source. The rent received goes into revenue, as it properly should do, because the land is not sold, but only rented. When we add the Lands and J\Iines together, the amount shows an in­crease of £23,000 this year. Although Lands shows a decrease of £30,000, the actual net reduction in the Lands and :\lines Department is some £2:1,000. Of course we cannot draw comparisons between the figures of this and former years, because the amount of money that has gone to revenue from auction sales is very small. I have taken out the auction sales for the last ten years, and simply left the normal revenue derived from the land, and I find that the increase since 1895 is only some £40,000. That is far too small. Why is that? Of course, it stands to reason that as we sell our lands-I am speaking of the land that is taken from the pastoralist under the Act of 1866, 25 per cent. of which has fallen in-we receive a larger revenue from grazing farms and grazing homesteads. I think the Minister will agree with me that the total increase in ten years from our land revenue, exclusive of auction sales, is only £40,000.

The SECRE'fARY FOR PUBLIC LA~DS : Do you include agricultural farms ?

Mr. :FORSYTH: Yes. The total amount, including pastoral runs, occupation licenses, and grazing farms, but exclusive of auction sales. Taking away again the auction sales for 1U05 we get £461,000, and this year, when we take away the auction sales, over £501,000, a difference of £40,000. The point I want to make is this : ]<'or the past two years there has been no reduc­tion in rents, yet the amount received from pastoral rents in thg aggregate for ten years is steadily decreasing. I will take a cycle of ten years. Of course, there may be an odd year when there was an increase, but in that time there has been a steady decrease generally in the amount received from pa.storal rents. \Ve cannot expect anything else, because a rreat deal of the land is being taken away from the pastoralists every year. More land under pas­toral leases is falling in, and is being opened up again as agricultural farms or grazing farms, as the case may be. Last year there was the enor­mous area taken up as grazing farms, agricultural farms, and agricultural homestead selection, amounting to 2,273,000 acres. One feature which stands out very strongly is that the rentals of these grazing farms has increased by nearly £100,000 in ten yearB. In 1895 we r€ceived £92,000 from the rent of these farms, while last year we received £193,000. That is a very satis­factory increase. There is no getting away from that. It is only right that the revenue should increase to· a larger extent from the very fact that we received such a buge increase of rentals in selections as against the amount we received in 1895. The amount we received in 1905 was £193,000. I believe that is ta matter that is worth looking into.

[Mr.Forayth.

The SECRE'fARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : I want to know what deduction you draw from that?

Mr. FORSYTH: The deduction is this: that the rentals from pastorallessees is decreasing. vV e know that a great dettl of land is taken away from pastoral lessees every year.

The SECRETARY JWR PUBLIC LA~DS: And there iS a great deal leased back too.

J\fr. FORSYTH: At the same time, while the pastoral rents have decreased the selection rents have increased to an enormous extent. But, in spite of the fact that the selection rents have increased by £100,000 in ten years, the whole in­crease from land rents last year was only £40,000.

The SECRE'fARY FOR Pt:BLIC LANDS: On that statement of the case, the deduction is obvious.

::Yir. FORSYTH: \Vhat is your d0duction? (Laughter.)

Mr. P. J. LEAHY: The rents have not gone down, taking them all round.

Mr. FORSYTH: The land taken away from the pastoral]e,oee is given to the grazing farmer at higher rents, but in spite of that the total increase is only £40,000.

The SECRETARY l<'OR PUBLIC LANDS : A lot of that land was leased back to pastoral lessees.

Mr. FORSYTH: Last year there were 35,000 square miles of country on which no rent was paid, as against the year before. This is what I was leading up to, and I only wanted to find out what the :Yiinister for Lands was going to say. \Vith regard to that 35,000 square miles of for­feited country-an enormous block-I would only like to say that if it is not re-leased, it should be. If the Minister cannot lease it at one price, he should lease it at another.

The SECRET.\RY J<'OR Pt-BLIC LANDS : Will yon come along with a price?

:!\Ir. FORSYTH : I may tell the Minister for Lands that in dealing with these figures I am not criticising his department in a carping spirit. I am just pointing out that although the selec­tion rent has increased by £100,000 in the last ten years, the total increase from land is only £40,000. I telieve the hon. gentleman is doing his level best to get that area of forfeited land re-leased. The more land that we can get re-leased the better. The hon. gentleman will agree with me that it is infinitely better to have the land occupied, no matter at what rent, than not to have it occupied at all. I am sure that the hon. gentleman has a real interest m his department.

The SECRE1'ARY J<'OR Pt:BLJC LANDS : A great deal of the land you refer to could not be re­leased at anv price.

Mr. FORSYTH: I would not be so unreason­able as to think you could get a good price for it ; but I say you should re-lease it at some price.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : A great deal of it you could not re-lease at any price, even with a bonus.

Mr. FORSYTH: I presume there is a good deal of it can be re-leased. As a matter of fact, on account of the dry season, a great many people took up a considerable portion of land in my electorate. They wanted relief country, so that they could shift their stock on to it for the time being. However, the position is that we are not receiving as much of revenue from our land as we should be receiving. In my own electorate there are thousands of square miles of country lying idle; and if you cannot get 5s. per square mile for it-as the people do not want it at that price-it would be better to reduce the rent.

The SEOltETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: \Vhat is the use of reducing the rent if they do not want it?

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Suppl!J. 593

Mr. l<'ORSYTH: They do not want it if they bave to pay 5s. per mile for it; but they might be willing to pay something smaller.

Hon. R. PHILP : They can go across the border and get it for 1s. per square mile.

Mr. FORSYTH: I hope the Minister will look into this matter and see if there is any chance of getting any more rent than he is get­ting at the present time. The revenue from the railways shows an increase of £125,466 m the past year as against the previous year. I cer­tainly did not think-and no more did the Treasurer-that we were going to receive such a huge revenue from our rail ways as we have received. In spite of the big increase last year, the Ti-ea>urer expects to get a still bigger in­crease next year. ,J udgin;:; by the two months of the financial year which have gone by-if we take that as any criterion-there is no doubt that he will get the amount of money ·he anticipates from that source. I am sure we all hope that the good seasons will continue and that he will get that increase. I think he will get more from the pastoral country this year than he did last year. Now, comparing the revenue he received last year with the revenue for 1902-3, he received £327,000 more last year than was received in the last year of the Phi!p Government. The late Government, in their last year, received a very small revenue indeed from rail ways, because of the drought. In the last year of the Philp Government the revenue from railways was £1,245,000, while this year the present Government received £1,1\34,000. That is a difference of £289,000. If we take the estimate for this coming yPar as against the last year of the Philp Government, then the revenue for 1~06-7 will be £404,000 more than that received from railways in the last year of the Philp Government. Is there any wonder, looking at the revenue from this department alone, that they should have a big surplus? And yet we see that in spite of that estimttted increase the Treasurer only expects to have a surplus next year of £3,000.

Mr. LESINA: That represents an increase m taxation.

Mr. FORSYTH : There is an increase in taxation, an incl·ease in rail ways, an increase in mi•cellaneous services-an increase from all the departments, including an increase from the Federal Go,·ernment as well. In the coming vear the Treasurer expects to get £404,000 more than the Philp Government got from the same source in their last year. ::'\ow, if we had £404,000 extra revenue from our rail ways in the last year of the Philp Government, instead of having a deficit of £191,000, there would have been a nice little surplus. I only want to say that the railways' revenue is the principal revenue which has helped the present Govern­ment more than anything else.

Mr. P. J. LEAHY: It is the only explanation. The Hmm SECRETARY : The only explanation? Mr. P. J. LEAHY : Practically. Mr. FORSYTH: In the face of the figures I

have given I w_ould like the Home Secretary to tell us how it is that we have not got a larger surplus than we have ?

The SECRETARY l'OR RAILWAYS: '\Vhat about the expenditure on railways?

Mr. FORSYTH : The expenditure on rail­ways was £50,000 more last year than it was the year before.

The SECRETARY FOR RAILWAYS: And this year it will be a good deal more.

Mr. FORSYTH : The expenditure has nothing to do with the late Government '\Ve have got the particulars of the £112,000 in­creased expenditure for 1900-7, but we have not got the particulars of that £144,000. I

1906-2P

have no objection to the increase at all; but I would like to point out that, if the Trea­surer's estimate is realised, this year's revenue is the largest that Queensland has ever had in any year. If that is so, why should we only have a small credit balance of £3,000 ?­the biggest revenue on record, and yet . only .a surplus of £3,000 ! For that re_ason I th:n~ hrs Estimates are too low, that he rs too pessrmrst10. I really think there will be a bigger revenue. For the two months which have passed we are £50 000 better off than we were last year, and six times that amount-if we can take the two months as any criterion of what we may expect for the whole year-would give us an extra amount of £300,000. I do not think for one

minute that we are going to get [8.30 p.m.] £300,000, but indications are that

we are likely to get a great deal more than last year, and that instead of having a surplus ot £3,000 we shall have a much larger sum. The Federal Treasurer anticipates that he will return to the State some £112,000 ·les~ this year than he did last year. As I have already pointed out, we are £14,000 ahead of where we were last year for the first two months of the year, and I hope that w!ll continn~. Th~re is one very pleasing feature m connectwn wrt~ the railway revenue, and that is that the condi­tion of the Northern Railway has Improved. For some time the Central Railway has topped the Northern Railway, and last year it brought in £19,000 more revenue than the Northern Rail­wav.

Mr. KERR : It will bring in more this year, too.

Mr. FORSYTH: No, it will not bring in more this year. I believe the Northern Raihyay will show a larger revenue, because there IS a large quantity of material will have. to go over that line to build the Cloncurry Rarl way, and on that account that line will pay better. The normal increase in the revenue from the Northern Railway appears to be very good­£7,000 for two months more than the Central­and I trust it will continue. The loss on the Bowen Railway is really appalling. The whole of its revenue for the two months already gone was £150, and for the same period last year it was £371\, and yet some hnn. :nembers talk about goin~ in for an expensive railway there. M~. KERR : If it were extended it would pay

better. Mr. FORSYTH: My impression is that if it

were extended it would be worse than it is now. The total expenditure for the year was £8,000 more than the expenditure for 1902-3, and the secret of the surplus is that the Government had £327 000 more revenue. In former financial debates we have heard much strong criticism of unforeseen expenditure--that is to say, e_xpendi­ture in Rxcess of the amount voted by Parliament. The present Government had sinned in that re­spect to the extent of £48,000--that is to say, they spent £48,000 more .than the House_ granted. A most peculiar thing m connectiOn wrth the Trea­surer's estimate for this year is that _in spite of ~h.e fact that our industries are expandmg, he antiCI­pates that the total revenue for th~ year '':'ill be less than it was last year, and _that 1s not srmply because we are going to recmve less from the Federal Treasurer. The hon. gentleman expects to get £112,000 less from the :Federal Treasurer, but he also anticipates that the revenue from some of the departments will be less than it was last year. One of the items in which he expects an increase is license". I stated last year that I did not expect that the estimate he then made would be realised, a.nd the hon. gentleman has increased the amount this year by £2,000. That is not a large sum, but it is very doubtful whether he will get it. The Government expect

Mr. Forsyth.]

594. Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

to lose £5,000 income tax, and £7,000 or £8,000 from stamps, to get a small increase from licenbes, to lose £20,000 from the Lands Depart­ment, and to lose a considerable sum from mining, as compared with what they received last year. \Vhy they should expect thi; decrease in revenue fron1 1nines I eannot understand, seeing that mining is flourishing to a very great extent, and that large areas of land are being taken up under lease. I•'rom raihnys the Government expect to get £115,000 more than was received last year, and on the whole revenue they anticipate a falling off of from £12,000 to £13,000_ I do not think that w!ll be the case. Of course there are factors which upset our cal­culations, one of which is the condition of the federal finDnces. The Federal Treasurer esti­mates that be will return to (~ueensland from Customs and Excise £33,000 leEs than we received last year, and that in the agg-regate we sball receive .£112,000 lEss. The way in which that decrease is made up is as follows: It is estimated that the Customs alld :Excise re­venue will decrease hy £33,000, and the postal revenue by £13,000, which makes £4fi,OOO. Then the Federal Government are going to expend a great deoJ more money this year, the total incraased expenditure amounting to £500,000, and of course Queensland has to bear the brunt of that. On new works they are going to spend £21,113 more than last year, and on defence £15,526. Increased expenditure for the post office will be £7,000 more, the sugar bounties will amount to £113,700 more, the electorc,l expen­diture to £7,200 more, <tnd other expenditure to £3,000. If you add roughly the amount we are going to lose through decreased revenue to the amount we shall lose through tbe extra Pxpendi­ture, you will find that it comes to £112,000, which is the estimated decrease in the amount to be returned by the FedEral Treasurer t•> this State. Now I come to the prcposecl ~xpendi­ture for this State during- the current financial year. There is an incl·ease of £52,000 to public servants_ I do not think any hon. member objects to that increase, and person"Jly I am of opinion that all those who have been getting low Falaries for a long time are justly entitled to increases when the Government can afford them. The only objection I have to the present proposal is that there are a very large number of men in the public service at the present time who are getting a little more than £200, perhaps £208 or £210, and they are not to get an increase of a single shilling. There is no reason why those whose salaries do not exceed £200 should get an increase, while those who are receiving a few pounds more than that amount should be passed by. I know of men in the service at the present time who are getting £208 or £210 per annum, and who have not received an increase of a single shilling for the last nine years. Is that a fair thing? I hold that all men should be tre»ted fairly, and I do not think it is fair that men in receipt of such small salaries should be passed by when they have not had a single increase for eight or ten years. The smaller paid men in the ser­vice should receive an increase, and I hope that the Government will try to give the officers I refer to a little increase. I do not object to the item of £5,000 for the advertising of the State, or to the increase of £14,500 in the subsidies for hospitals, or to the increase in the vote for the E<lucation Department. I do not think £5,000 is a very large sum for advertising the 1:'\tate. Canada, spends £200,000 a year in advertising, and see what they are getting for that expenditure! Last year they got 175,000 immigrants, which is practically equal to one­third of our whole population. What is the consequence? Canada is one of the most pros

[Mr.Forsyth.

perous countries in the world to-clay, and the .Federal Budget shows an enormous surplus of between £1,000,000 and £2,000,000. 'l'he people who g•) there as immigrants are settled on the land, railways are built for them, and the various industries of the State are in a flourishing condition. The whole country is going forward by leaps and bounds, and that is the result to a la1·ge extent of themagnificentsystemof immigra­tion that has been in force there for many years. Every year huge numbers of people are going to Canada not only from the British Islands and from Europe, but from the United States. I think last year there were between 40,000 and 50,000 people who went from the United States, became naturalised, and settled down in Canada. \Ye have land here equal to any land in Canada -far better, in fact, having regard to the miser­able climate they have. They have winter for half the year, when they cannot work at all. Here it is quite different, and what are we doing? \Ve are simply standing back and doing nothincc. \Vbat is this £5,000 for advertising the re~ources of the State? It is a mere bagatelle. \Vhat we want is to put on £20,000 or £30,000, or, as the leader of the Opposition sug-gested, £W,OOO. So long as we get the right class of people to come, we cannot spend too much money in this direction. I read in the papers the other clay that Professor \Vallace-I think of Glasgow-said that be was pr,lpared to send out 100 Scotch farmers to New South \Vales if they. could get land equal to that at J\Iyall Creek. \V e have land better than any land at l\Iyall Creek, and far cheaper. The hon. member for Toowoomba referred to the fact that land is being· sold in the Dalby district at prices ranging fn•m llis. to £2 3s- 4d. per acre, which has to be cleared, when there is land practically treelee• and fit for tbe ploug-h to be had on sorne of the hrge estates on the Darling Downs for £3 per acre. That land should be acquired. If the owners are not prepared to accept a fair price for the land, th&n they can appoint one arbitrator, the Governmfnt can appoint "nother, and, if they cannot agree, then the price can be fixed by an umpire. That is a very much better and fairer method of acquiring that land than by practically confiscating it. If there are hundreds of thousands of acres of that land available and suitable for settlement we should get it. The Secretary for Lands told us that ;{5,000 acres have been set aside, under the scheme of the Land Act of last year, for selection by people in the old country, but that so far there had only been one applicant for one selec­tion, although he was of opinion that there would be a good many applicants before long. I do not believe that scheme will work at all. \Vhat we want to do ib to send men home to explain the conditions of land settlement in Queensland to the people there. Let us send home six or a dozen men, pay them good salaries, so long as they are competent, ann let them travel round the country delivering lectures, with limelight views, and all that sort of thing, so as to bring before the people what this country is really like. \V e can never expect Queensland to be the place it should be till we have four or five times our present population. The Govern­ment should spend money freely. I do not be­lieve in bringing out people who will swell the ranks of the unemployed. \Ve w:tnt men of the stamp of those that Professor \Vallace spoke of. He said that each of those men would bring with him £500, and that would mean the intro­duction of £50,000. \Ve want men who will employ labour, men who will help to develop the resources of the State, and bring traffic t'o our railways. We should devise some system by which the magnificent resources of the State can be advertised not only in Great Britain, but in

Suppl,y. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 595

Europe, and especially in Germany, because the German farmers are among8t the very best we have got. \Ye should spend money freely in inducing men of that class to come out, and, if we inaugurate a Torres Straits mail service, then they could be dropped at the various ports down the coast. That would be a first-class thing for Queensland. I think some system will have to be adopted whereby railways can be built to lands which are not available in the sense that if men go there they can get their produce carried to a market. I have spoken strongly on this matter because l feel strongly. This State will never prosper as it should until we adopt some such system as that in forcA in Canada. Canada is one of the most prosperous countries in the world. They are building 10,000 or 12,000 miles of rail way there at the present time, and all that means the employment of enormous num­bers of men. The consequences are that wages are good, the country is prosperous, and the wealth of the country is being increased by increasing the produce from the land. \Ye want to do the same thing here, and I hope that the Government will not be satisfied with spending £Ci,OOO. That is a paltry sum. It should not be less than £20,000. I have no doubt a scheme can Le devised whereby immigrants can be brought out at a low rate, and, as the leader of the Opposition suggested, snme of that money may be refunded. The Hon. the Treasurer informed us that the number of arrivals last year exceeded the number of depar­tures by 1,200. ·what is 1,200 people? We should have 20,000 people coming here every year and adding to the wealth-production of the State. Queensland was never more prosperous than when considerable n urn bers of immigrants were coming here. I am pleased to seo that the endowment to hospitals is to be restored to £1 10s. in the £. I do not think anyone will object to that. \Vith reference to the Police Department, which is under the control of the Home Secretary, there is no doubt that we hav~ not sufficient police for the whole State. I understand that fifty additional men are wanted, and yet provision is only made on the :BJstimates for ten. How can we expect the force to be maintained in a state of efficiency if it is allowed to be undermanned? Then there is another matter in connection with the Police Force to which I called attention last year-that is the police horoes. \Yhy is it that there is only an amount of £1,000 placed on the Estimates for the purchase of horses? The Home Secretary wos recently near my electorate, and I can n-sure him that probably one-fourth of thau £1,000 could be utilised in my own district. At Burketown, Normanton, and other places, the horses belonging to the police are practi­cally broken down through old age. There were 959 horses belonging to the force at the com­mencement of the year, and at the close there werfl only 922, despite the fact that £500 was put on the Estimates last year for the purchase of horses. If a case of cattle-stealing or illegally branding takes place, what is the use of sending police on a journey of perhaps 200 miles if they have not got good horses ? The criminals are well mounted, and in order to put down crime of that kind, the police must be equally well mounted. I saw the Burketown police come in from the Leichhardt, and the horses were all practically broken down. The policeman told me that they wPre twenty years old, and they were simply deadbeats. As a matter of fact, there was only one horse in Burketown a few months ago, and that was a draught horse for bringing in water, all the other horses being away on patrol. That should not be. The police should have the very best horses obtain-

able, and I hope something will be done in that direction. The Commissioner says in his report-

For the police needs of the Rtate the force is under­manned. J'Iany applications for men, both for new stations to be opened and for reinforcement of estab­lished :::.tations, have been received, and I have been constrained to ask that provision may be made for an increase to sLrength.

Yet provision is only made on the Estimates for ten men, although there are new stations being opened all the time. Then he says with regard to the horses-

Great need ex1sts 1m· suitable remount horses, which are difficult to obtain, and then onlyatveryhigh prices, owing to the extensive and continued purchases by buyers for Eastern markets.

Horses are in many install(~es complained of as being old, worn-out, and insufficient in number, but this is a. matter I hope to rectify shortly, if sufficient funds are available.

But funds are not available. Another matter that the Commissioner calls attention to is the condition of some elf the police buildings. He says-

::"lfany police buildings in the State, owing to the pre­valence of economical views, have fallen into disrepair, and a considerable amount of work in the way of re­pairing, painting, etc., has thereby been rendered neces­sary.

I think it is a great mistake to allow those economic conditions to apply. \Vooden buildings especially deteriorate greatly unless they are pair.ted every two or three years, and it is wasting money, and not economy, to neglect them. 1'\ow that we have so much money in the Treasury, I hope something will be done in this direction.

lYir. KERR : At some places there are no build­ings at all.

Mr. FORSYTH: I come now to the question of direction taxation. \Yhen the Home Secre­tary was on his travels a few months ago he said that the amount of direct taxation under the present Government was a great deal less than under the late Government. He pointed out that for the two years 1901-2, there was 2s. 6d. less received per he.td of the popul~tion from direct taxation than during tbe years 1904-5. That is perfectly correct; but does that show that the present Government have increased direct taxation? I am sorry that the hon. gentleman on that occasion did not explain the position of affairs, because if he bad he would have seen that the State for the last year paid a great deal more.

Mr. KERR : That was explained. Mr. FORSY'l'H: \Yhen you are out in the

country yol'l speak to the people, [9 p.m.] and they have not a chance of

knowing whether the statements are correct or not. I am not saying the state­ment is not correct, but it wants explaining. The reason why there is less direct taxation per head was not because of the present Govern­ment ; it was because of the decreased amount received from the Federal Government from Customs and Excise. If the hon. gentleman wants to know whether or not the State, during the last three years, has increased direct taxation, I will give him the figures. The increase of direct taxation for the three years of the Philp Govern­ment, on the average, was £340,000, while the increase of the present Government was some £474,000. The direct taxation of Queensland by this Government-not by the Federal Govern­ment-i..,creased, for the three years, by no less than £133,000 yearly. To put it in another way :· The actual increase of direct taxa­tion by the State has increased, in three years, by no less than £400,000, so that direct taxation has been increased by the

Mr. Farsgth.]

596 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

present Government. It was a false statement which was made by the Home Secretary-no, I will not say that-it was perfectly correct as regards figures, but it wants explaining, and the explanation is because the grant from the Federal Government from Customs and Excise was less than before. The total revenue in­creased last year by Ss. 5d. per head, but the direct taxation this year, as against last year, has increased by 4s. 1d. per head. As a matter of fact, direct taxation has increased by £107,000, which was caused by an increase of Customs and Excise of £83,000, and by an in­crease of direct taxation by the State of £40,000. With regard to loan, the Treasurer stated that we had some £775,000 available. That is true, but if you will look at the loan fund estimate of expenditure you will find we will probably spend next year £7 44,000, so that if this money is spent next year the balance which the Trea­surer will have available from the loan fund will be very small indeed.

Mr. RYLAND: It won't be £180,000. Mr. :B'ORSYTH : It will only be a matter of

£39,000. In connection with the loan fund, the amount of money spent by the late Govern­ment has not been large. Last year we only spent £297,000, and we got £143,000 repaid to the loan fund, and .£RG,OOO from the Queens­land National Bank, so that, although we spent .£297,000, we come back with £229,000. There is a small difference there. The Treasurer made a strong point on page 5 of the Budget Speech­that, under the proposed Railway Bill, railway construction will move much more rapidly than before. I do not think that the effect will be such as to produce a very heavy extension of raihvay communication. You may get railway communication to one or two congested agri­cultural districts, but it practically means a stoppage of the extenRion of any main lines. If you want to extend the main lines through a sparsely populated distriet, and the people of the district are to be forced to pay the loss accruing thereon, it will be one of the most unjust things that has ever taken place in Queensland. Take as an illustration the line to vVinton from Hughenden, which is good sheep country. I do not believe thera are half a dozen stations between the two points, but suppose you go beyond that and bring in a benefited area com­prising twenty stations instead of five or six, and there was a loss of .£8,000 on the Win ton line, it would mean that those twenty stations would have to find over £400 each.

:Hr. KERR: It would pay them, too. Mr. FORSYTH: I do not think you would

get an average of £400 from thoA<l stations. My only objection to the Bill is that the people who are going to be taxed have got no voice in the matter at all. 'l'he Government say, '' vVell, if you want the railway we are prepared to build it for you, and you will have to pay 4 per cent. interest and working expenses." But if the people say they don't want the railway, I do not think any Government has the right to force it on them, more especially if they have got to pay for it themselves. Considering that we have spent £22,000,000 on railways, l do not think it is a fair thing that th~ people should alilo bear an extra: burden on railways to be built in the future, as well as on the railways already built. 'rhis is a question which will affect the finances of the State, and therefore it is justifiable to speak of it now. I am pleased to see the Savings Bank funds are inereasing, but after all they are not increasing to the same extent as they do in the other States. \Ve have over £4,000,000 lying at fixed deposit, and there are 88,026 depositors, which represents only about one-sixth of the population of Queensland. In Victoria they have over £11,000,000 on deposit, and the num-

[Mr.Forsyth.

her of depositors is 461,000, or one-third of the population. In South Australia, with a very much smaller population than Queens­land, they have a far larger amount of deposits in the Savings Bank than we have­more than one-third of the people have deposits. In New South Wales, which has the largest population, more than one-fourth of the whole population have deposits, amounting to nearly £H,OOO,OOO. The total amount of deposits in the whole of Australia at the end of the year was between £37,000,000 and £38,000,000, which I think is very satisfactory. I do not intend to dis­cuss the sugar question, because it has been dealt with by those who understand it thoroughly. vV e must bear in mind that the sugar crops in Queensland for the last three years have ex­panded to a very great extent. In 1902-3, the last year of the drought, we only got 90,000 tons; in 11!04 we got nearly 150,000 tons; last year, 153,000 tons; and this year we will pro­bably get 170,000 tons ; so that we can see that the enormous quantity of sugar grown and the splendid price received has been a great factor in achieving the present state of things. vVe were pleased to get the report of the Under Secretary for Agriculture, which gives most interesting information. The quan­tity of wheat grown last year was less than the year before, and the quantity of maize grown was also less. \Vith regard to mining, there is one point in connection with tramways. In the Cloncurry district a great many places are likely to want trams, and the restriction to 10 miles in the new Bill will, I am sure, hurt that industry, and I hope something will be done to help this particular locality. There is one pleasant thing in connection with minerals, w hi eh appears in the 11Iining J onrnal, that minerals other than gold and coal have increased 33§ per cent. during the last six months. Copper and tin have in­creased to a great extent, and I believe that at the end of the year, in spite of the fact that gold is falling off, tin and copper will compensate for the loss on gold. I trust that this year will be the means of Improving things, and that the record this year will be even better. In connection with federation, I want to refer to a question about which there is a great deal said in the Treasurer's Statement. The Treasurer has stated that the policy he believes in is that Queensland should get back from the Federal Government three­fourths of the total Customs and li:xcise-that is, upon a per capita basis. I do not think, although it would be a very good thing for Queensland, that the other States are at all likely to agree to that. In the first place, New South vVales, which is far more affected than any other State, received .£371,000 last year more than her three­fourths; Victoria received .£241,000 more than her three-fourths ; while Queensland received .£8,!\54 more than her three-fourths. Therefore, if it is settled upon a per capita basis, it would mean that Queensland would receive a very much larger amount thn,n she getcl at the present time, and I do not think that the other States would agree to that.

Mr. J. LEAHY_: How much would Queens­land receive on a per capita basis?

Mr. FORSYTH : About £G5,000 more than she does at the present time, taking last year's basis. The total amount of revenue returned to the States last year was £7,385,729, and Queens­land, if she was to receive a proportion of that, would receive £923,000, about £65,000 more than she actually received.

Mr. J. LEAHY: Is vV estern Australia in­cluded?

Mr. FORSYTH: No, that is the exact amount returned to the various States. I will give the figures, excluding the special tariff of \Ves­tern Australia. If we take the figures for the

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 597

year 1903-6, New South \V ales would lose £52, 000; Victoria would gain £100,000, and Queensland would gain £95,000. But if we take the Estimates for the present year, then New South \Vales would looe £173,000, Victoria would gain £104,000, and Queensland would gain £155,000. If we exclude \V estern Australia, New South \Vales would lose £290,000; Victoria would gain only £3,9G4, while Queensland would gain £112,000. Mr. Harper wants the Federal Go­vernment to take over the State debts, and pay the interest. Now, Mr. Harper has gob a scheme which has been placed before the Fedfral Parliament. It is a scheme which certainly must have cost him a great deal of time to think out, but I do not think it is likely to be accepted. Mr. Harper wants to take the average amount of the total Customs and Excise paid to the States for the last four years. Three-fourths of the net revenue returned to the States by the Federal Govern­ment for the years 1902.3 to 1905-6 amounted to £6,566,789. Taking the year 1905-6, just closed, the amount paid by the Commonwealth to the States was £7,385,729. That means that, if we accept 1\Ir. Harper's scheme, the Federal Go­vernment would have £829,000 more revenue to spend than they have at the present time. They will then have £2,500,000 to spend during the next three years extra, and lVlr. Harper says they will require it for various things; but I leave it to the judgment of hon. members whether the States are likely to give the Federal Parliament that extra amount of money to spend.

Hon. R. PHILP: They can spend tlmt money now.

Mr. FORSYTH : Yes, they can spend that money now, but they do not spend it. They gave the States back that amount over and above their three-fourths of Customs and Excise.

1\Ir .• J. LEAHY: The Federal Government has given Queensland more than her three-fourths all along.

Mr. FORSYTH: You are quite wrong, as I have the figures here. I will read the figures because the Treasurer has laid great stre8s on the fact that Queensland does not get her three­fourths of the Customs and Excise at the present time. \Ve will not take the first year that federation commenced, as it includes six months of the fin:wcial year 1900-1. It is no use taking half a year. \V e will take the five years that have followed since then. In 1901 Queensland got back from the Federal Treasurer less than her quota, £20,188. In 1903 we got back £2,455 less, and in the year 1904-5 we got back £2S,81lless. For those three years there was taken away £51,-154 from our three-fourths share. In the year 1902-3 we gained £15,677 more than our three-fourths, and last year, 1905-6, we gained £8,654 more than our three-fourths, making a total of £24,331 which we gained. Taking the amount which Queensland gained­£24,331-from the amount she lost out of her three-fourths since federation, then we received from Customs and Excise £27,123 ]e:;s than our three-fourths, or an annual average for the five years of £5,400. So as a matter of fact we have not got so much to complain about up to date. The total amount is a mere bagatelle. \Vhen we compare these figures with the present year, we see the huge amount we are likely to lose. The Federal Treasurer says that we are going to get £83,000 less this year than our three-fourths share. \Vhat I wish to point out in connec­tion with Mr. Harper's report is this : The States' three-fourths of thg net revenue on the average of the four years, 1902 to 1906, amounted to £(j,556,000. Taking last year's revenue into consideration on this basis, New South Wales would lose £3ti0,000; Vie-

toria would lose £289,000; and Queensland would lose £27,000. I will give the amount received by each State from the Commonwealth in the last twelve months. New South \Vales received £2,742,771, and her interest bill amounted to £2,8-11,000, so that New South Wales would be short of her interest bill by £98,000. If 1\ew South \Vales were to receive the lesser amount proposed by Mr. Harper, then instead of having to make up £08,000, she would be short £459,000. Victoria is in a b~tter poRition. The Commonwealth returned to Vic­toria last year £2,097,000, which is more than the total interest she has to pay on her national debt, and she was actually in credit £116,000. In the scheme proposed by l\Ir. Harper, instead of Victoria having £116,000 over, she would be £173,000 to the bad, and Queensland would have to find £736,2.50 as against £708,000, the amount she would have to find this year. This year the monev we received from the Federal Treasurer was £708,000 less than our interest on the national debt. Under this scheme of .Mr. Harper's we would have to find £736,000. I abk members if they thmk for one moment if New South \Vales and Victoria are likely to lose such an amount of money as the figures I have given show that they will lose under l\1r. Harper's scheme? Under that scheme the proposal is to reduce the amount by G per cent. each year after the close of the Braddon clause period-1911-and at the end of twenty years the whole amount would be wiped out. Although it would certainly clear mathro up so far as the Braddon clause is concerned, I do not think that it is a policy that is likely to be accepted by Queensland. .T~1is year the J!'ederal Government purpose g1vmg back £744,000, but taking the new scheme on the average of the last four years we would get back £829,000. That meant that the Federal Government would have to find from £80,000 to £90,000 under the new system, but it all de­pends upon what amount of revenue we receive this year. \V e hope that our Customs and Excise will so increase thab instead of Queensland getting back £820,000 she will get a very much larger revenue than that. J'\ ow we come to the transferred properties. JYir. Harper says that the transferred properties should be handed over free to the ]'ederal Government.

Mr. RYLAND: Before you leave that subject of the Braddon clause, what is your solution of it?

Mr. FORSY'l'H : It would practically not interfere with any State, and only to a small extent with the Federal Government, if the States received back three-fourths of their Cus­toms and Excise. The Braddon clame should be perpetuated. vV e should at least be placed on the same footing as the other States, who are receiving more than their three-fourths of Customs and Excise. The Treasurer says that the three-fourths should be divided per capita, and if that is so it will mean that a good total will come out of the pockets of New South Wales and Victoria and come into the pocket& of Queensland. If we could get it on a peT capita basis it would be all right. As I pointed out, for the last five years we only received £5,000 per annum less than our three-fourths. I do notJ think that would affect the Federal Government in the slightest degree. I do not think that any of the States would object to Queensland getting her three-fourths. In connection with the trans­ferred properties, we have to pay £70,000 interest on them at the present time-that is at the rate of 31 per cent. ; the value of these properties in Queensland is over £2,000,000. If we cannot get tbe cash for the transferred properties, we should get th<:> interest. The total federal properties taken over are valued at £12,000,000, and the

Mr. Forsyth.]

598 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

interest on them is .£420,000 a year. Say Queensland's proportion would be one-eighth, on that basis we would have to pay £50,000 a year. Consequently, Queensland would gain £20,000 per annum. I do not intend to take up

the time of the Committee any longer. [9.30 p.m.] Reference has been made to the

mail service, and I would only add that I hope some action will be taken at no distant date to establish a service via Torres Straits. At present the people in the North have only a very intermittent service running from :Melbourne and Sydney, and calling at Brisbane. Under the old system we had a direct service which came by way of Torres Straits. Thursday Island was the first port of call, and from there the boats ·came on to Cooktown, Cairns, and so on down to Brisbane. Cairns and Cooktown gets no benefit by the present service, because any goods coming by the existing cargo vessels have to be transhipped at Brisbane for ports north of Townsville. If we had a service via Torres Straits, it would benefit every port in Queensland. I hope that some action will be taken in this matter by the Government. I am snre we all hope that the Trea­surer's estimate of revenue will come out more than anticipated, and that it will be fonnd that his anticipations with regard to expenditure are accurate, and that instead of having a small surplus of .£3,000 at the end of the year be will have just as big a snrvlus as he had this year. Owing to the splendid rains we have had in the State lately, everything is prosperous; the pas­toralists are getting good prices for their wool and their cattle, a~riculturists are getting good prices for their products, and I am sure we all hope that the expansion in the wealth production of Queensland will be greater and greater every year. I thank hon. members for listening to me so patiently, and I trust that all our hopes with reference to the future of Queensland will be realised.

HoNOt:RABLE l\IE>IBERS : Hear, hear! Mr. :il!IACKIKTOSH ( Cambomtrz) : I shall not

keep the Committee long with what I have to say on the Financial Statement. \Ve have heard a great deal about sugar during the course of this debate, and I do not propose to touch upon that question. I am very pleased that the country is in a pro;perons condition, and I think it is our duty to try to make it more prosperous. The only way in which we can do that is by promot­ing settlement on the land and building railways to enable settlers to get their products to markets as expeditiously as possible. It is no use sending men on to the land unless we give them facilities for taking their products to market. Holding that view, I should be very pleased to hear that a considerable portion of the surplus we have this year is to be spent in bringing more people into Queensland. If we brin~ more people into the country, and give them land, there will be very little necessity to do anything el,e. I remember the crisis of 1866, and the passing of the Land Act of 1868, followed by the Act of 1872, and the amending Act of 1875. I know plenty of people who went on the land in those days with nothing more than a bag of flour, some sugar and te:t, and a quarter of beef, and now they are prmperous and have happy families around them. Those people got the land practically for nothing-that is, they got it under the home­stead provisions at 2s. 6d. an acre, with pay­ments extending over five years. They were not required to reside constantly on the land, and they worked on stations, earning money to fence in their holdings and to buy a few head of cattle. Those ~attle they put on their land, and they gradually increased, and as time went on the selector was able to devote his whole time to his land, with the result that he prospered. \Ve

[Mr.Forsyth.

have a large quantity of Crown land, and we could afford to give that land to settlers, and if we did so it would result in gain to the State, because what a man produces does not benefit himself alone, but the whole community. \Ve must have more food produced by the land, and when that food is produced we must provide the means of transporting it to the best market. If the settlers on the land have not facilities for getting their products to market, they will be shut out of the markets of the world. As an instance of what I think should be done, I may mention that on one estate which the Govern­ment purchased they made a profit of £20,000. If the Government had built a rail way to that estate-the distance was only 30 miles-that £20,000 would have gone some way towards meeting the cost, and the purchasers of the land would have been placed in a position to make a success on the land. \Ve have an enormous amount of wealth in our lands, and if the Govern­ment would only afford facilities for its develop­ment, the result would be a great benefit to the State. But instead of directing our energies in that direction, we seem to be going in for more taxes. One railway which would greatly assist settlers on the land" is the one which it has been suggested should be built from Clifton to Ellan­gowan. I am glad to see from the }financial State· ment that it is proposed to make certain exemp­tions in connection with the income tax. At the time the ineome tax was imposed I ad vacated that the inc >mes of working married men shonld be ex­empted up to .£160, and I think it would be a good thing if all incomes were exempted up to that amount, otherwise the man who is getting £1()1 "' year would be taxed on the whole lot, while a man who was in receipt of £15H would be exempt altogether. The income tax is heavier on farmers than on any other section of the comm11nity, as they hr,ve got to pay the divisional board tax, the rabbit tax, the stock tax--

An Ho~ot:RABLE MKIIBER: The marsupial tax.

Mr. MACKINTOSH: Yes; the marsupial tax, the rabbit tax, and a tax on dogs. (Laughter.) The best advertisement this country can get is to bring plenty of immigrants here in the same way as we did years ago. As to the talk of there being plenty of labour available, I can say that out of every twenty men looking for work there is not one you can put to harness yonr horse or to follow the plouf(h.

Mr. LESINA: vVhat are you doing with the boys you are rearing up there? Putting them into the public eervice?

);lr. MACKINTOSH : No, we are not putting them into the public eervice. I had one son in the public service, but when I got into Parliament I took him out of the service, so that no one could cast it into my face that I had a son in the public service. I am in favour of •pending a few hun­dreds of thousands of pounds in bringing immi­grants into Queensland, and of the Government buying land to give to them for nothing. That would be the best advertisement we could give this country, because the people who c.,tme here would not be very long in the State before they would be able to employ labour themselves. The sections in the last Land Act, giving the Agent-General authority to sell land to would-be selectors in England, was a good idea, although I think we should give the preference to our own people for any good land we have got. At the same time, if people in England are willing to select land under those conditions, I trust the Secretary for Lands will see that suitable land is set apart for them, and not such land as was described to-night as "barren, dry ridges."

1Ir. LESINA: There has only been one appli­cant in twelve months.

Supply. [5 SEPTEMBER.] Supply. 599

?.Ir. MACKINTOSH : If that applicant comes here, and he is well treated, no doubt he will induce others to follow him. I had in­tended to give some figures to-night, but after hearing so many from my esteemed friend, the hon. member for Carpentaria, I shalllettve them alone in the meantime. (Laughter.) But some day I shall be prepared to go in for argument of that description. 1fy great object is to see people settled on the land, and to bring about that end we must offer them every facility. In France, for instance-which is not much bigger than the electorate of Oambooya-there are 12,000 miles of branch railw"\ys as feeders to the main lines. Even in connection with the Bris­bane Tramway Company, there are lines of omnibuses whicb run as feeders to the trams, and passengers who travel in those 'buses to the tramlines pay nothing for the 'buse,,, If rail ways were built into farming centres to feed the main lines they would repay the Secretary for Railways tenfolrl. Another thing I would like to see is a rdnction of the rates and fares. (Hear, hear !) The hon. m ~cm ber for Toowoombo, Mr. Tolmie, dealt with this subject, and I do not care to go over the same ground as anyone else; but I would point out that the first­class return fare from Pittsworth to Toowoomba is lls. 10d. It is only a distance oi 36 miles, and people frequently drive into Toowoomba, transact their business, and drive home again rather than travPl by rail. The railway loses through having such excessive fare,. If the fare was half that amount there would be ten times a,t{ many pas;;engers. Then, again, people who live some miles out of town carry their goods there instead of sending them by rail, in consequence of the inconvenienra and the ex­cessive charges. If the ti rnetable were better arranged, and the fares more reasonable, the railway receipts would be largely increased. Thes·' are points that I desire to impress upon the Secretary for Hailways. I am sure the Government are as anxious to make the country prosperous as any Government we have ever had. I am greatly in favour of the Government borrowing £1,000,000 or £2,000,000 to construct railways and other necessary pnblic works. 'There is not one of us who are engaged in any form of business who would not come to grief if we were unable to borrow m::mey. During the time of the drought, whel'e would the people in the country have been if they had not been able to get the banks to lend them money and trust to their honesty to repay them, because their security was neu,rly gone ? Through being able to borrow they were able to restock, and now they are able to keep their heads above water. Any country that cannot borrow money to spend in productive works must retrograde instearl of progreHs. A country ought to be governed exactly in the same way as a business institntion. I mi!;ht trespass at greater length upon the time of the Committee, but time is short, and there are many hon. members who wish to speak. For my part, I would sooner put in a day's work than make a speech any time. ·when I do speak, I like to be short and sweet. (Laughter.) I shall not follow the example of one of my sugar friends who spoke last night. He gave me enough sugar to do me all the rest of my life. (Laughter.) It is strange that, with all the latest scientific knowledge and improvements, sugar is no better than it was years ago, while it is twice as dear. Farmers have to pay a lot of that, because, instead of going down in price, it is going up. When we have millions of acres of land suitable for the production of sugar, it is surprising to me that the price should rise instead of fall. How­eever, I am of opinion that the time is coming -when we shall consume sugar grown by the

blackfellows whom we are now deporting, as the next cry will be to do away with the bonus and the duty on sugar in order that housewives may get sugar at a reasonable figure. I thank hon. members for the patient hearing they have given n1e.

Mr. GRAYSO:'{(Cunninghmn): The Treasurer is to be commended on the "Financial Statement he has laid before the House. Onr finances are in as good a position at the pre,,ent time as I have known them during the time I have been in the State, and we have shown conclusively to the ontside world that Queensland is able to pay her way, and that is a very happy position to be in. I am very pleased to see that the Treasurer is going to restore the subsidy to hospitals and schools of arts. It was a great pity that the subsidies were reduced. Hospitals, above all institutions, should receive as much as the Government can possibly give them, and as for schools of art", the result of this increased subsidy will be that in several country districts these institution. will be established. I was very pleased to hear the Secretary for Railways say the other night that he intended to apply for a loan of £1,000,000 to build railways. I am very glad the Govern­ment are coming forward with a railway policy. At the present time settlement is rapidly increas­ing in the tbickly populated agricultural districts, and the farmers need quick and easy meansofcom­mnnication to enable them to dispose of their prod· uc·'· \Vithout such means of ccmmunication it is useless to expect to get our lands settled. In my own district there are two branch lines of railway that I hope the Government will bring forward this session. One is the line from \Var­wick to }Iaryvale, and the other is the extension of the hrrlnch line from Alkra to Goomburra. I am certain both those lines will pay in the very ne:cr future, as both of them run into the heart of rich agricultural distrirts. \Ye have hear~, a great deal to-night about settling people on the land. That is one of the most important matters that this House can consider, and it is one of the first questions that should engage the attention of hon. members. I have taken particular notice in regard to the question, and the best way of settling the best class of people on the land is for the Go,·ernment to repurchase estates contiguous to existing rail ways, and throw them open for selection. I find that in New Zettland-which is one of the most democratic States in Austrnlasia -they spent £810,000 last year in repurchasing esk"ltes and settling farmers upon those estates. Victoria is doing exactly the same-repurchasing estates yearly; and the Premier of New South

\Vales is now in treaty with the [10 p.m.] Peel River company to purchase

about 310,000 acres near Tamworth. This proves that other States see the wisdom of repurchasing land that is fit for close settlement, and giving their farmers an opportunity of settling on the beqt lands of the State. I might just menticJn my own experience in connection with repurchased estates in Queensland. In the Ounningham electorate, within the last nine years, there have been about 130,000 acres repur­chased, and out of that area there is not a single acre left unselected. The Clifton and Headington Hill Estates which were repurchased around Clifton have not a single acre left, and the town of Olifton has three times the population it had nine years ago. There were then only a few houses there, but to-day it is a prosperous town with three banks and a ftourmill erected in the town. Since the repurchase of Goomburra the popnlation of Allora has doubled within the last few years. In the town of Allora there are three banks and a f!ourmill, and a butter factory. Yangan, where there were only half a dozen houses six years ago, is now a thriving

Mr. Grayson.]

600 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

township with a bank and two cheese factories. "\Ye all know what the township of Killarney was nine years ago, before Canning Downs, com­prising 70,000 acres, was subdivided, and dis· posed of by the proprietors for close settlement. Before that the town had been blocked, and there was no hope of increasing the population because there was no room for expansion. Killarney has now three banks and four sawmills, and is a very prosperous town. Since the sub­division of Uanning Downs there is not one single acre unselected, and it is all settled upon by the right class of people. Again, the North Toolburra Estate of 13,000 acres-that was repurchased by the Government ; and also Glengallan in three sections-35,000 acre&-every acre of which has been selected. Amongst those who have selected this land are many New South ·wales and Victorian settlers-men who have come with the view of making Queensland a home. They have come over here and settled upon these lands. I am rather disappointed, as a member representing an agricul.tural constitu­ency, at the attitude of the Government in not repurchasing more estates in the settled districts, where there would be no doubt whatever about the land being resold.

Mr . .MANN : Sell the Crown lands first. Mr. GRAYSON: In these districts there are

no Crown lands. There are milways running through the estates, there is a splendid rainfall, and there is no doubt about the quality of the land, which is excellent; in fact, there is none better in the State.

Mr. PAGE1': They want a land monopoly tax. .Mr. G RA YSON : I do not think that is a

correct way of acquiring these estates. The best way is by repurchase, and, if the owners will not take a fair valuation when the Government wants it for closer settlement, there are other means of getting the land valued and to compel the owners to take the fair market value. No company or private owner is in a position to give the terms which the Government can give. In the first place, the Government can borrow money at a much cheaper rate than private individuals, and on longer terms.

.Mr. PAGET: The Government can purchase these estates by debentures.

.Mr. GRAYSOX: By the Government re· purchasing these estates we increase our popula­tion. and the State reaps the benefit. There is a splendid opportunity to geb settlers from the southern St,tes if we adopt the proper means. I noticed that there were seven blocks of land thrown open in the Riverina district in New South \Vales, for which there were 267 appli­cants.

The SECRETARY FOR PFBLIO LANDS: Never forget that there are a number of umuccessfnl applicants both in Queensland and New South Wales.

Mr. GRAYSON: I have two letters from New South Wales farmers, one of "horn has five sons, and the other four sons, and each of them is waiting until an estate is repurchased on the Downs, with the view of taking np land. They are so keen to get land on the Downs that, in the meantime, they have taken a dairy farm on the share system until they have an opportunity of selecting the land. Many farmers' sons have come to me and asked me to assist them in get­ting land. Two months a,;o a public meeting of eighty or ninety farmers and farmers' sons was held at Clifton, with the object of petitioning the Government to have one or two estates repurchased in the Ulifton district. Resolutions were unanimously passed that the Government be asked to do so, and it was stated that three months after the land was thrown open there would not be an acre left. I would like to mention another point as the Minister is in his place. Some time

[Mr. Gray son.

ago there were 20,000 acres of land on a gold­field reserve resumed at Pikedale, and the depart· ment decided to throw it open in four 5,000-acre blocks. A petition was presented to me by a number of my own constituents, and some in Oaruarvon, asking me to interview the Minister with a view to having it cut up into 1,000-acre blocks, and, to the credit of the rviinister, when I explained the matter to him he cons~nted to accede to the wishes of the petitioners. The land was thrown open on the tender system.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LAl\DS: On their own initiative.

Mr. GRAYSON: However desirable it is to have the tender system in the "\Vestern country, where land is thrownopenin10,000, 20,000, 30,000, or 40 000 acre blocks, it is very undesirable to have'it where land is thrown open in small areas and the poorer class of people wish to acquire it. "\Vhen land is thrown open in small areas it would be better for the department to get one of their trusted officers-a man of experience and local knowledge, and who i8 able to value the land. Let him fix the price of the land, and throw it open under the ballot system. That gives the poor man an opportunity of getting a selection.

Mr. KERR: It gives the bank clerks an oppor­tunity of getting a selection.

:Mr. GRAYSON: The bank clerks and com­panies will not go in for small areas under the ballot system. I admit that in the "\Vestern country it is desirable to open the land under the tender system, but it is not desirable in cases of small areas. I can mention the case of four or five farmers in my own electorate-one farmer with three sons-who spent three or four days in Stanthorpe. They put in their application and waited till the land was allotted, and what was the result? Not one single applicant who left "\Varwick to go up there and take up land got a single acre of it because it was opened under the tender system. I pleaded with the ::\Iinister to have this land opened under the ballot system.

The SECRETAI\Y ~'OR PFBLIC LANDS : You have not got your facts right. If they had undertaken to personally reside there they could have knocked the tender system kite high.

Mr. GRAYSON: The successful applicants put in bona fide residence conditions. They teudered a high price for it, and the land was certainly not worth it. If this continues, the consequence will be that the man with the small purse has no hope whatever in getting a bit of land. The tender system is a great mistake for small areas. "\Ve have heard a great deal about homestead selection. I have always been a great believer in allowing the man with small me,ans to acquire· land under homestead conditions, and I think ill is a great mistake on the part of the Minister for Lands to try to demand too much for the land.

The SECRETARY l<'OR PUBLIC LANDS : If we followed your advice and bought these estate3, we would throw them open at a larger price.

Mr. GRAYSO~~: I am talking of prickly­pear lands. There is a lot of land going to waste with vegetable and other pests all over it, and it would be well for the State t,) give it away if you ea n get settlers to go on it.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS: I have got rid of more land this year than was ever done before.

Mr. GRAYSON: I believe you have got rid of more land than any other Minister for Lands. At the same time, encouragement should be given to take np land under prickly-pear con· ditions. I am very pleased to see that the dairying industry is making such rapid strid~s in this t:ltate. ,Judging by the large increase m production during the last few years, I believe that in a few years' time it will be one of our leading industries. In 1900 we exported

Supply. [6 SEPTEMBER.] Questions. 601

1,389,250 lb. of butter, valued at .£51,129 ; in 1901 we exported 2,085,998 lb., valued at .£86,171; in 1902 we e'<ported 552,625 lb., valued at £24,610; in 1903 we exported 1,223,414 lb., valued at .£49,804; in 1904 we exported 9,ii20,921 lb., valued at £344,943; and in 1905 we exported 11,773,182 lb., valued at .£455,863. I would like members to notice the increase that took place in the last three years. I think that an industry which is making such rapid strides as that will be of great benefit to the State. The farmers bst rnmt of their herds in E102, but since then they have been increa3ing their herds rapidly, and not only the dairymen but the farmers on the Downs are going in for a much better breed of cattle. They have now the best blood procurable in the Aus­tralian States, and I predict that in five years' time Queensland will be exporting at least .£1,000,000 worth of butter, judging by the rate we are going on now. I would not be surprised to see much more than that exported. \Ve ought to be pleased to see the improved prospects of the State. l'\ot only are our flocks and herds increasing, but there is a prospect of Queensland reaping a fair harvest of grain this next season. In the Maranoa district they have bright pros­pects, and I am pleased to see that since the Financial Statement was tabled beautiful rains have fallen all over the Darling Downs. A greao deal of the wheat crop was saved by that, and I anticipate that we will have as much wheat on the D·owns this year as we bad last year.

The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : A little more, I hope.

Mr. G RA YSON : I believe there will be more. \Ve have also the best maize crop on the Downs this year that they have had for many yeare. Fortunately it is at a fair price, and farmers are doing well out of it. Considering that the rail­ways are doing so well, I think it is about time that the Minister took into consideration the revision of the rates from the Downs to Bris­bane. \Ve agitated for a long time, and the reply we got was that when the railways paid 3 per cent. the Commissioner would take into serious consideration the revision of the rates. I know that the Minister's entire symJ>athy is with the pronucers of the State, and I hope that as soon as he possibly can he will take this matter into his serious consideration. I would like to see the fares on the Killarney line reduced. I notice that it is h. 1d. more on the return from Killarney to \Varwick than it is from Brisbane to Calvert, a little station 27 miles from Bris­bane. There should be a uniform rate all round.

Mr. J. LEAHY: You voted for a Railway Bill making the people of your district pay 4 per cent. if they want a railway.

Mr. GRAYSON: I voted for the second read­ing, but I said I would do my best, when the Bill got into committee, to have the interest reduced to 3 or 2 per cent. When the new Railway Bill is discussed in committee I hope the Minister will take into consideration the ad visableness of reducing the amount of interest .to 3 or 2 per cent., as 4 per cent. would be simply unbearable. I would like to see the Commissioner run cheap excursion trains fre­quently from Brisbane to Killarney, as there is no better sanatorium in Queensland than Killarney. There is magnificent scenery there, and I read recently in the Warwick papers an excellent graphic description given by the Minister for Railways of a round trip from Warwick to Killarney, returning l'iti, Tanny­morel, Emu Vale, and Yangan. I will not take up the time of the Committee any longer.

The House resumed. The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and the Committee obtained leave to sit again to-morrow.

HARBOUR DUES ACTS AMEJ'\DMENT BILL .

MESSAGE FROM COL'NCIL.

The SPEAKEE announced the receipt of a message from the Council, returning the Har­bour Dues Acts Amendment Bill with an amend­ment.

The message was ordered to be taken into con­sideration on Tuesd~ty next.

The House adjourned at twenty-nine minutes to 11 o'cluck.