Quehon. [ JLY,190.]Questious. 177

trgislatiie e5Ztbip,Tuesday, 3rd Jul, 1906.

PAGEQuestions: Timber Industry Inuiy Fees 1;7

Ironwork, Hudson and Ritdil.......177Mining, Sunday Work .......... 177Railway Spur Mount!Monger............177Raitway 3initeri l r ow Laeed........177Xining Machinery Inspection, Pilbarra. 178Government House, ma a University..........178Mines Development, Marchison and Peak Rill1 175State Blatteriesa Purebiase .................. 179Advertising by Government...........178Abattoir" at Knigoorlie . ... .. 178Water Mains Extension, Leederville and North

Perth................179Bill:- Vinat readinkg fordy1.79Address-in-tteply. debate forhdy179

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 4130o'clock p.m.

PRAYERS.

QUESTION-T-I MBER INDUSTRYINQUIRY, FERS.

MR. F. COLLIER asked the Ministerfor Lands: i, What fee per sitting waspaid (a) to the Chairman of the Boardof Inquliry into the Timber Industry, and(b) to each of the other members of theboard ? 2, What was the total amount offees paid in connection with the inquiry?

THE MINISTER FOR LANDS re-plied: i, (a) £2 2s.; (b) £2 2s. z,£371 14s.

QUERSTION-IRONWORK, HUDSON &RITOHIE.

MuAp. P. COLLIER asked the Ministerfor Railways: t, What amount has beenpaid to the firn of Hudson & Ritchie,North Fremantle, from the 1st ofJanuary to the present ditte for iron-work in connection with rolling stockfor the Railways Departmnent? z, Whatis the total amount paid to this firm forall work dlone for the Railway Depart-ment within those dates?

THE MINISTER FOR RAILWAYSreplied: i, From 14th M ay to 8th June,1906, vacuum brake forgings £2802 18s.9d.; 13th June, 1906, first progresspayment in connection with manufactureof five "ASJ." brake vans £1,118 15s.Id1. 2, £1,921 13s, 10d.

QUESTlON-MININO, SUNDAY WORK.Mu. P. COLLIER asked the Minister

for ]Mines: i, Was permission given themanagemient of the Kalgarli Mine to

Iwork; their employees on Sunday, Maythe 6th ? z, Whatt were the reasons for

Iwhich such permission was granted? 3.Was the Federated Miners' Union con-sulted P If so, on what. date ?

THE MINISTER FOR MINES re,-plied: [, Permuission was not accorded thewuanagemeat of the Kalglirli Mine towork on Sunday, May 6th!* 2 and 3,Answered by No. 1.

[Appleution, however, was made by several minesrt algoorlie for a permkit to work on Sunday, the 6thMay to enable them to grant a holiday to theiremjioyees on the following Wednesday, Eight floursDay. This permit was con-litionally approved suhjectto its being mnutually arranged betweev employera andempoyes The application was made On the 3rd May,

adthe Secretary of the Miners' Association watsadvised hy wire on the 5th May' to the effect that theMiuister had no objection provided the employees werewilling.]

QUESTION-RAILWAY SPUR, MOUNTMONGER.

Ma. HORAN asked the Premuier: Inview of the Governor's Speech containingreference to the proposed NorsemnanRailway, does he consider it advisable tocarry out the request made 10 the Minis-ter for Mines to provide by State aid aspur railway to Mt. Monger ?

THE PREMIER replied: The requestreferred to has been approved of, butthat will not affect the construction ofa line from Coolgardie to Norseman,whic-h will he, considered- with otherrailway propositions.

QUESTION9-RAILWAY MrNISTERIALCAR, I-LOW USED.

MR. HTORAN asied the Minister forRailways: i, On whose authority was theMillisterial car sent from Perth to Kal-goorlie on a recent occasion to convey aMr. Butler from Kalgoorlie to Perth ?2, What was the cost of such servicel3, In view of the fac;t that Mr. Butlerexpressed himself as well pleased wit h areserved compartment, does the MinisterConsider such expenditure justifiable ?

THE MINISTER FOR RAILWAYSreplied:- i, On the authority (if tile Coim-missioner oif Railways. 2, Approximately40S. 3, The Department is not awarethat Mr. Butler expressed any suchopinion. Mr. Butler -was a mnember of,and attended, the Chamber of CommerceConference in Perth, the visiting niemi-hers of which were provided by the Gov-erment with passes, and generalytreated as- distinguished visitors. Ile was

[3 JrtT, 1906.]Questions,

178 Questions. [ASSEMBLY.] Questions.

taken seriouslyv ill on the fields withhemorrhage, and for some days his con-dition was very serious. In view of this,and that it was necessary that the returnto the coast should be as little disturbingas possible, an inspection car, being atliberty, was placed at his disposal.

QUESTION-MINING MACHINERY IN-SPECTION, PILBAERA.

MR. HORAN asked the Minister forMines: a, When was the last inspectionmade by the Inspector of Machinery orhis deputy of the boilers and plantsituated on the Pilbarra Goldfields? 2,Will be submit to the House any rep~ortsby such officerse

Tian MINISTER FOR MINES re-plied P The Pilbarra. Goldields Districtshave not been proclaimed under theInspection of Machinery Act, 1904;therefore no machinery and boilers havebeen inspected to date.

QUESTION-GOVERNMENT HOUSE, ASA UNIVERSITY.

MR. HORAN asked the Premier: Inview of the appointment of Sir EdwardStone as Lieutenant Governor, and theresolution of this House affirming theundesirability of the British Governmentcontinuing to& appolInt 0Governor-s for thisState, will the Government, consistentlywith the foregoing, take into considera-tion the conversion of Government Houseinto a University, after the expiration ofthe term of the present distinguishedoccupant of that position ?

THE PREMIER replied: It is notdesirable to announce any decision onthis question, until the occasion arises forthe appointment of a successor to thepresent distinguished occupant.

QUESTION-MINES DEVELOPMENT,MURCHISON AND PEAK HILL.'

MR. TROY asked the Minister forMines: a, What proportion of the Loanfunds allocated to the development ofmining on the Murchison and Peak HillGoldfields is still unspent? 2, (a) Whatamount has been expended during thepast year of the £ 12,600 showing tocredit of these fields at the beginningof the financial ypar 1905-1906 ? (b)Details of such expenditure?

THE MINISTER FOR MINESreplied: I desire to draw attention tothe fact that this reply, which I will notread but will lay on the table of theHouse, is really a return. In addition toworks mentioned in the return, watersupplies for Yuin and MNeekatharra, androaA fromn Cue to Earrambie, have beenauthorised, estimated to cost respectively£350, X900, and £800.

QUESTION-STATE BATTERIESPURCHASE.

MR. TROY asked the Minister forMines: r, Have any batteries been pur-chased since the present Battery InquiryBoard has been holding its inquiry 1P 2,

If so, (a) Were they new or second-hand

Plants? (b) From whom were theypurchased, and on whose recommenda-ionP (a) The price agreed to be paid

in each case?THE MINISTER FOR MINES

replied: r, One battery is under option,and the purchase will probably be com-pleted within the next few days. 2,Second-hand. 3, Silverthorne & Adair,after report by the State Mining Engineer.4, £1l,400. The purchase includes-Gold-mining lease with shaft, poppet-legs,.and winding engine. Two waterrights, water shaft, and tank with esti-mated capacity of 1,000,000 gallons, withpiping, vertical boiler, and pump.

QUESTION-ADVERTISING BY GOV-ERNMENT, COST.

MR. HOLMAN asked the Premier: r,Was any farther expense above the £150for the advertisement incurred Fly theGovernment in the distribution of theinformation contained in the Perth DailyNews publication of 8th November, 1905 ?2, If so, what amount ?

THE PREMIER replied: i, Yes. 2,£R62 was paid to Street. and Company,London, for reproducing the informationin the Agricultural Oazette.

QUESTION.-AHATTOIRS ATKALGOORLIE.

Mn. WALKER asked the Premier:Is it the intention of the Government tobuild abattoirs at Kalgoorlie ?

THE PREMIER replied: Yes.

Addrss-n-Rely: [:3Jr~r 196.]Fourth, day. 179

QUESTION -WATER MAINS EXTEN-SION, LEEDERVILLE AND NORTHPERTH,Mu. VERYARD asked the Minister

for Works: i, Does he intend to exlendthe water mains to North TLeederville andNorth Perth, as promised by his immre-diate predecessor ? 2, If so, when ?

Tus MINISTER FOR WORKS re-plied: i. Extensions being cardied out atpresent time; two miles laid in Leeder-yulle out of a total scheme of 13 miles;half-ile laid in, North Perth out of atotal scheme of 11 miles. z, Majorportion will be laid by December, 1906.

PAPERS PRESENTED.By! the PREMIER: Southern Cross

municipal by-laws.By the TREASURER: Fire Brigades,

receipts and payments, 1905.By the 1 ISTon8 FOR WORKS: Gold-

fields Water Supply Construction Branch,balance sheet.

By the MINISTER FOR MiNES: Expen-diture on Murchison and Peak HillGoldfields, return.

BILLx-FIRST READING.Bills ot Sale Act 1899 Amendment,

introduced by the Attorne'y General.

AD DRESS-IN-REPLY.FOURTH DAY OF DEBATE.

Resumed from the previous Thursday.THEp MINISTER FOR WORKS (Hon.

J. Price): I trust that in the few remarksI have to make on this Address, I shallnot unnecessarily labour the personalelemnent which has already been so freelyintroduced in the course of this discus-sionI. Rut at the same time, it is utterlyjimpossible for anyone who has been sub-jected to the attacks levelled at meduring the last sitting of this House toignore altogether the Tuatters which werethen brought forward. However, I willdo my best to keep my remarks free fromn-anything of a, recriminatory nature.Since the House last siat I have beenturning over in my mind the reason whythe members for Mt. Magnet (Mr. Tray)and. Mt. TLeonora (Mr. Lynch) were sopersonal in the speeches they deliveredlast week; and 1 can come to only oneconclusion, that other opportunities forcriticism are so few that those members

have to adopt the methods of a pettifog-ging lawyer with an extremely bad ease,and so abuse their opponents. We weretold by geutleinvF' on the other side ofthe House that part of the Governmentprogramme was stolen. I have yet tolearn that such important proposals aswere inadeat Btunbury by the Premier-proposals tar a tax 'i the unimprovedvalue of land and for extending landsettlement in this State- were evolved bythe inis of the members of the PoliticalLabour Party in Western Australia. Itseems to mne that these proposals werethought of and propounded long beforemany of thost. individuals came intopolitical life. TheiLse proposals belong tothe whale of the commnunity, and nomore belong to those sitting an the Op-position side of thet louse than the airwhich we breathe. They have no more amonopoly- than we- have in regard tothose great priniciples which -are commnonto all mankind, and which regulate ourconduct.

M R. TAYLOR:. Some of these proposalswere thought of 25 years ago.

Tn MINISTER FOR WORKS:Thought of perhaps 125 years ago.The great accusation is that we havestolen their policY, and the very accusa-tion proves the extremes of poverty towhich they are driven when they haveto criticise our methods and proposals.Suich an admission in itself is anadmission that the policy proposed b-ythis Government is 'a good one, and a,forward one, and one which the countryapproves of and is prepared to take-yes,and one which they (the Opposition) haveno right to oppose. It has been shownby the Press criticisms throughout thecountry that our proposals have theapproval of the country, and not onl 'yhas it been shown in this way, but it hasalso been shown. by the result of therecent elections. It is all very ivell tosay that the election in which I was oneof the chief participators was won bybribery of an extreme description. Thi:s

Iis nothiing more nor less than a travestyof the truth; and I trust that before I

Isit down I shall show this is the case. Ican make many allowances for my friendthe member for Leonora. For some tendays he was worrying himself to ashadow, talking so vehemently thatmany listeners were driven to frenzy ;

Address-in- Reply. [3 Jrr'y' 1906.]

180 Address-in-Reply: [ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

and then at the end of that time, liefound his hopes destroyed, his idolfallen. We can understand that he isfilled with chagrin, that he looks atthings through coloured spectacles, andthat he is jaundiced in the view he takeswhen he makes unfavourable commentsso far as my personal conduct is con-corned. But there is a limit to faircriticism; and I submit to the Housethat when the hon. member suppressesfacts and distorts incidents he has passedthe limits of fair criticism. I shall haveno difficulty in showing he did so theother evening. During the course of theelection campaign in which I was en-gaged I delivered four speeches, whichwere fairly and fully reported by thePress of this State; and, let hon. mem-bers mark, during the whole course ofthe remarks which the member forLeonora addressed to this House on thisparticular subject, he did not give onesingle quotation from my publishedremarks which in any way tend to showthat J was guilty of dangling a bribe inthe eyes of the electors.

MR. COLLIER: I Will give YOU Some.THE MINISTER FOR WORKS: I

shall deal with the hon. gentlemandirectly. He had a good deal to say atMidland Junction last night about asubject with which he was imperfectlyacquainted. I had three weeks' bitterexperience of the hon. member's friends,not a month ago.

MR. COLLIER; 'YOU came out of itpretty well.

THE MINISTER FOR WORKS:Yes, I came out pretty well, as truth andright always must. It would have beenadvisable for the member for Leonora tohave prefaced his remarks by reading asentence he will find in the West Aus-tralian of the 18th of May, where myopponent (Mr. Needham) threw downthe gi~pntlet to me in this way. Hesaid:-

He maintained that if he were returned asrepresentative of Fremantle, he could do morefor the town-Ethat is the pointj-tbnn Mr.Price as Minister for Works.Now what was I to do? If T wereanimated by those lofty ideals whichseem to appeal to the member forLeonora, I suppose I should haxve satsilent and mum, perchance; but in faceof such statements, was I not to point

Iout to the electors that, as reasonablemen and thinking women, they were

Ientitled to examnine this statement of myopponent and decide among themselveswhether they could -not be better repre-sented by a Minister or by. as I put it,a member of an extremely weak and

Ifeeble Opposition. I submit that I wasIquite justified, seeing that my opponenthad introduced thisvhbase of the matter,in putting this side of the question tothe electors; and I doubt, with all theprotestations of virtue with which heseems to be overflowing, if my hon.friend would not have taken up verymuch the same stand as I did. 'We aretold by the hon. gentleman that when hewas before his constituents standing for re-election as a Minister of the Crown, he toldthem, " Put aside all ideas and thoughtsthat I am a Minister of the Crown;leave that out of your minds altogether."We have heard that sort of thingbefore; and we know perfectly well thatwhen the yokel, dealing with someunpopular villager, says " Whatever youdo, don't put him in the horse-pond," thehint is quite enough. If the hon. mem-ber wished to leave that thing out ofconsideration altogether, all he had to dowas to say absolutely nothing about it;hut by saying "put itoutof yourminds"he very effectively advertised the fact.[MR. HOLMAN: What about your photo-graph on this dodger?] Itisavery gooddodger; and I am told by my friendsthat the photograph is an extremelyexcellent one. I cam make great allow-anices for the member for Leonora, butthere is one matter which I fancy he willfind it extremely difficult to explain. InFremantle there is an unregistered book-maker, one of those birds of prey whofatten on the weakness of humanity.This gentleman was one of the strongestsupporters of my opponent; his shop wasa centre of agitation on mny opponent'sbehalf. This man busied hi mself-

MR. BOLTrON: Name him.THE MINISTER FOR WORKS: If

you want the name, it is Barry.11R. BOLTON: You are absolutely

incorrect, and you know it.THE MINISTER FOR WORKS: He

busied himself in placing people on therolls. He was an active member of myopponent's committee. Now, will it bebelieved that the political purist opposite

Addrss-n-Rply [3JUL, 1064F day. 181

hunted the Colonial Secretary to makethis man an appointee for taking votes-[Ma. LYNOBn: Hear, hear]-a positionwhere impartiality and where no intimateconnection with either party should exist?I ask members, what would have beenthe position if I had gone to Mr. Connollyand asked that the secretary of theNational Political League should be madean appointee for taking votes? Had Idone such a thing, very' rightly therewould have been a howl of indignation atmy conduct; but this hon. gentleman,who shudders at my behaviour, was quiteready to wake one of the most activepartisans on the other side, if he couldget the Colonial Secretary to do it, anappointee to take votes.

MEMBER: What about Mr. Higham ?TH r MINISTER FOR WORKS: Mr.

Highamn never acted ats a member of mycornmittee; nor did any of the otherappointees in Fremnantle; nor did theytake any prominent part in either of myelections. It was left for my friendsopposite to drag in an extreme partisan,a commnitteeman of one of the candidates,and attempt to wake himD ant appointeefor taking votes. [MR. TAYLOR: Whatabout Mr. Holmes ?J I am not con-cerned with Mr. Holmes. Mr. Holmes isquite able to defend himself. I am deal-ing with the election at Fremantle andmy own conductA; and it is for my ownconduct I have to answer. 1, at allevents, have never taken such an indecentstep as endeavouring to get one of mycommitteemen. made an appointee fortaking votes. The position, and I thinkthe House will agree with me, is that anappointee taking votes-his position beingmuch the same as that of a returningofficer-should keep himself apart fromactive politics; and an er-Mlinister ofthe Crown should have had such a senseof what is right and proper that be atall events should not endeavour to makea. member of an election committee anappointee for taking votes. I do notwant to labour the question. These arebriefly the reasons which induced me totake the stand which I did at Fremantle.When I first. went into Parliament I hadcertain ideas before me to enable thetown of Fremantle to obtain a gravingdock. I got the other members forthe district as well as the member forNorth Frenman tle together and assisted

in the wrork of initiating a. schemewhich involved extending the powers ofthe Hlarbotur Trust, enabling them toborrow money and construct works.That scheme wan almost adopted by Mr.Rason. The member for North Fre-mauntie knows that is praoctically correct.When Mr. Rason was considering thematter favourably he gave up office.Later I was approached by Mr. Mooreand asked to accept office. I said," Is it part of your policy to ex-tend the powers of the FremantleHarbour Trust?" Mr. Moore told methat it was. Was I to be debarred fromusing my prviu labou rs as a recom-mnendation to my constituents to returnme? My opponent served his time inthe State Parliame nt for some 14 month s,and when he retired Fremantle 'wasas near the fruition of its desires aswhen he went in. I claim that Ihave brought the members for Fremautleinto more intimate association withone another than they were before.

IUnder these circumstances, and see-injg what position my advocacy withsoy fellow members brought thematter to, was it unfair to say to theelectors, -This is what I have done, andthis is the position the matter stands in."Did it not mean this. Seeing that wheumy opponent represented Fremantlematters bad been practically at a stand-still, and that, partly owing to my energyand the i nterest I took, these matters hadcome to the: front, was it not for imyconstituents at Fremjan tle to say 'whetherthey preferred the attitude of my oppio-nent in the past or my attitudeP Thatis the plain and straightforward ques-tion, and I ask mnembors to view it freefrom party pass ion and party bias, andto ask themselves whether I was notjustified in the stand which I took. Inthis matter I am perfectly unrepentant,and if the same thing cropped up againto-morrow I should adopt the sameattitude which I took- at the last election.[Interjection.] I should stand again andget in, and should adopt the same attitudeexactly as I on that occasion adopted.I have to apologise to members that,owingy to the Personal element which hasbeen dragged into this debate, I havebeen forced to refer to personal matters,much against my inclination. But un-fortunately those who are our associates

Addrem-in- Reply, [3 JULY, 1906.)

AS SE.UbLY]

in parliamentary life govern largely our-line of conduct, or I should not havetouched this personal matter to-day' .For the rest, I Shall deal with questionsnot of a personal moment; matters inwhich the public of the State are in-terested. Surely the public are tired ofthis constant drag'ging into debates ofpersonal matters. Mud is sluug all overthe place. In the election I went through,the tactics of my opponent were suchthat I was, denied freedom of speech.Mfy meetings were broken up by thetactics of political agitators who stood atthe street corners and worried the towniuto a frenzy of passion. Thete menwere responsible for breaking up mymeetings and denying ine the right offree speech. If members understood thetyrnny adopted by mn'y olipounu atthis time, they would -ay they wouldhave no more of it. [Mni. TAYLOR:- Djonot look at woe; I was n ot t here. ] Themember for Nit. Mlargaret was not there;and Ixvil give ine this credit, that if hehad been there he would have fought mein a straightforward and Wanly manner.He, at all events, would not hare workedthe lower elements of the population ofFrenantle into the frenzy of passioninto which they were agitated. [interjec-tion.] The police, not at the request ofmyself or my friends, l)It bec:ause ofwhat they saw-4Mu. BOLTON. Do notlabour that subjecti-it is too degradingto their ease and the mlethods theyadopted to be laboured; but I din goingto labour it. Owing to the trenzy workedup, the police, not at the request of mny-self or my friends-[M. BOLTON-. It isnot true; Captain Laurie was respon-sible]-not at my request, nor as far as Iknow at the request of any of my friends-[OPPOSITION MEMBERS: Oh! -hpolice thoughit it. necessary to send aguard with me to the station, becausethere was a, howling mob of four orlive h-undred people who were preparedto do personal violence to me. I canonly tell members that one of the policeescort informed wec that lie heard one ofthe mob sav he wishvd he hat] a revolver.[LABOUR kMBER: That was to shoothimself.] If anybody should desire tolet the dead past hury its dead in con-nection with the events of that election,it is my friends on the other SidP 4-f theHouse. I have somnewhat got over the

*injustice to which I was subjected, andI trust we have heard the last ofit, and that in future I shall beale to work in an amicable and

*friendly way with my friends on theopposite side, for the advaunent ofthe State. I recognise that the bulk ofmembers opposite are as much interestedIin the welfare of the State as I alnt; butthe interpolation of these matters andthe personal insults one at times is sub-jected to make this course very difficult.[Mn. LYNCH:. Just explain the'distortionof facts.] I was charged with holdingbefore the electors a bribe, and there isnothing in any of my speeches to showthat such took place. Fartherinore myopponent directly challenged me, in that

*lie said hle could do as much as a privatemember as I could do as at A] iister of theCrown. The suppression of that state-iteut was a distortion of facts, Themember for Boulder last night spokevery freely and very strongly about theconduct of the Fremnantle election. Ithink before he committed himself on

Ithat point, be at all events might havehad the courtesy to listen to my side ofthe case. It is not usual to hang andquarter a manl without giving hitu achance of defending himself, except bymemobers on the other side of the House.The member for Leonora inl his speechreferred to the public works which theGovernment of the State with which hewas associated carried out when in office,and he drew a disparaging picture ofthe works carried out by this partywhile in power. I would like membersopposite to deal with the question, as towhat important works they initiatedwhen in office. They found a certainprogramme in force when they went intopower, initiated and started by the

Iprevious Government, and they com-pleted, as they had to do as far as theycould, these works during the timne theywere in office-they completed the pro-gramme of their predecessors. Bitt itwas a. very small policy of works whichMr. Rason found when he took office. I

ithink the figures show that during theyear 19014-5 (1 had the figures very care-fully compiled) the departmental worksundertaken and the contracts let amountedto the sum of £467,607, and during theYears 1905-6 the departmental 'worksundertaken and the contracts let amounted

1812 Aeldress-in-Reldy: Flourth day.

Addeasin-epi: [3 Jty,190.] ourth day. 183

to £482,738. [MR. DAGLISH:- That isin your department only.] That is inmay department, in so far as the depart-ment over which I have control is con-cerned. On both occasions certain workswere carried over, but the matter formnembers to address themselves to, andwhat the country wants to know is, whitemembers opposite held the reins ofgovernment, what important works didthey initiate ? Lt is easy to come alongand carry on the policy of your pre-decessors, but the question is, what worksdid memb ers opposite initiate? Whatworks did they starte A careful examima-tion of the works undertaken during thelast two years, and those projected, showsthat the initiation of most of the recentgreat public works has been by the partywith which Iam connected. [Mn. TAYT~oa:They have been in office practically for13 years.] There is one item I shouldlike to refer to, because it has beenthesubject of a great deal of criticism on thepart of the public. It is an item inwhich party element need find no place.I refer to the metropolitan seweragescheme. The first time the sewerage ofthe metropolitan area was mooted was inthe Year 1897. A report was presentedin 1899. In 1901 two of the engineersconnected with the Works Departmentinitiated experiments as to the bac-terial treatment of sewage, and in1902 Mr. Davis, an expert from NewSouth Wales, visited Western Australia.and devised a, sche me. In 1904 theMidland Junction system was installed;iand in 1905 Air. Oldham, one of theofficers oC the Works Department, visitedSydney with full particulars of thescheme that had been elaborated fromthe ideas and experience of Mr. Bell. Tothese details Mr. Bell got approval. Thatscheme was again submitted to Mr. Palmer,consulting engineer of the Government inLondon, and he concurred in the scheme.Such exhaustive details as Mr. Davishad the advantage of seeing Mr. Palmaerdid not see, but on the general principleshe was, quite in accord with the otherengineers. The Chief Engineer of thisState, Mr. Thompson, has also signifiedhis apjroval. We find that, despite althis examination, all this careful pro-cedure, there still remain some people inthis State -who do not believe in the Ibacterial system of treating sewage.I

Strange to say, only last week we had acorroboralion of the attitude which thesuccessive Governments have taken up inthis matter. We find that in theMunicipal Journal Mr.m A rthur J. Martin,M.I.C.E., an engineer of repute in theold country, writes as follows:-

Bacterial works are in progress or projectedfor Birminghanm, Burnley, Derby, Halifax,Leeds, Leicester, London, Manchester, Oldhamn,and Sheffild .. .. .. Te large majorityof new works comprise septic tanks for pre-liminary treatment, though here and there atendency to revert to the Scott-Moncrieff cul-tivation tank is apparent. The purification iscomplete for the most part in contact beds oftrickling filters, the latter being for themoment the more popular, at all events for'works of medium size,

What experience we have had of theseptic tank system by the Works Depart-ment in this State--and the biggesttank, I think, is at Alidland Junct-ion~-shows it to be an absolute and unquali-fled success. This Government is notresponsible for the present scheme, butcareful investigation and inquiry madewit.h an open mind has led me to believethat every care, every precaution whicha man of intelligence could take, wastaken before this systemn was adopted;and I cannot help thintking it is somewhatlate in the day, after the thing has beenunder consideration for several years, forcritics to comue forward in the abundancein which we have seena them lately. Forinstance, one gentleman told us not many'days ago that the weight of the filterbed would be 12,000 tons. A carefulIinvestigation shows the weight will be,asi a. matter of fact, about 9,800 tons.But that is not altogether the point. Thequestion is: what is the weight persquare foot of foundations? We findthat even this objection was anticipatedby the officers. of the Works Depart-went, because the foundations were testedto one ton per square foot, and theweight of the filter beds will only be6cwt. to the square foot. Someone tookexception to the syphon which will conveythe effluent of the tanks over to lurswoodIsland. A syphon similar in construc-tion to that which we propose to put inis already in work and has been at workat Cook'e River, Sydney, for many years.It does not convey the effluent acrossCook's River, but it conveys crude sewageto the other side, A~d has done so for

Address-in-Beply: [8 JULY, 1906.1

184 Address-in-Reply: [ASSEJMBLY] Fourth day.

inar ear. gai, hecost of resuiptiouoi Brswod I aisbensad

to be sonme X6,000 or £7,000. Thisagain is a fallacious estimate. There hasbeen certain information in the depart-int which will be used should the caseever conic to arbitration, and I can assuremembers that the statemenut as to theprice which the Government will have topay for land resumed is absolutely andtotally outside the mark. I think thetime has eouic when generally the publicshould be prepared to treat theengineers of the department with acertain amount of confidence. If wehave not confidence iii these mn weshould get rid of them ; lbut to hamiperthem with constant and persistent criti-cism in their conduct of a schieme likethis is, to say the least, somewhat on-generous, and not likely to get the bestwork out of our advisers. It is strangeto- see the criticisms whic-h were madesome few weeks ago, eat-h one of whichhas I think been exploded. One gentle-man told ns it was an absurd thing inconnection with the sewage outfall totake storm water drainage to the sea.As a matter of fact, that never wascontemplated. When the estimates weregot ant for an outfall into the sea-ascheme which was calculated to cost£8E87,000-it was always intended thatthe storm-water drainage should go intothe river. A great deal has been saidabout the cost of the plins and surveys.I have no doubt that those gentlemenwho have remarked upon the subject badevery desire to be accurate, but they havebeen on many occasions at least 50 percent, outside the mark. I see it has beenasked that information should be laid onthe table of the House, and it will bethere for members to see exactly whatthose surveys and plans cost, It mustalways be remembered that a scheme ofthis nature involves atremendous amountof detail, and that the plans and surveysare necessarily expensive; but they havecost nearer hailf the amount stated thanthe whole sum. Now I have to deal withanother matter on which I shall be sub-jected to a great deal of criticism, not somuch as to what. has occurred since Ihave been a 'Minister, hut as to my actionas a private membler. On one side I amtold I unduly favoured the Frenmantlepuipe works, and on the other side it has

been insinuated that I have favouredClemenger & Monteith since I have beena. Minister ; and one member has statedthat by' reason of the late order for pipeslbeing distributed between Clemenger &Monteith and the Fremantle works, Perthwill lose something like from 23s. to 25s.per ton of pipes. I think it is desirablethat members should see exactly what hashappened. In February, 1904, the pipeswere costing the Government somethinglike X8 l5s. per ton. In September, 1904,they were costing the Government some-thing like £9 a ton. In March, 1905, acontract was let for vertical cast pipesfrom eight to twelve inches in diameterat X8 12s. f1d. per ton. I find that thepresent contract price is £28 '2s. 2d. perton, and that the dep:Lrtmental cost ofpipes at Fremnantle since its inception hasbeen £8 5s. per ton. I scarcely knowhow that bon. member call judqify him-self when he states that it means a lossof from 28s. to 25s. per ton.

MR. DAGLISH: What has caused thereduction in price?

TEMINISTER FOR WORKS: Thatis another matter. I have mn'y own opinionas to what caused the reduction of price,and I think other people will have italso-that being, that competition inmanufacture has caused the reduction;and that the Government works, in sofar as they have brought competitioninto this industry, have been of greatbenefit to the State.

MR. DAGLIsH: What works?THE MINTSTER FOR WORKS: The

Fremantle works. It applies also to allworks. [Interjection by LABOUR MEM-BER.] That is a contract dated the 22nd'March, 1906. 1 cannot say off-hand whogot the contract. At all events, theLeader of the Opposition, in referring tothis matter, has made a statement whichI did trust he would see fit to with-draw, because it is entirely beside thefact and inaccurate. He stated thatI bad accomplished the act of lettingtenders in connection with these pipes.As a matter of fact this matter was aet-tied long before I took office; and I donot think that an ungenerous portion, inso far as Cleinenger & Monteith areconcerned, was given to that firm. I thinkthe Fremnantle works were entit led to bekept on; and the difference in pricebetween the two being so small, and in

Address-in-Reply: [3 iris, 1906.] Fourth day. 185

view of the fact that one wvas a Govern-ment factory and that if no order hadbeen placed there the plant would havebeen idle, they were entitled at least toall they got, if not a little bit more.But at all events, Olemenger & Monteithhave been established in this State; con-tracts were called, and they also got theirshare; but to say that I was the indi-vidual who split that order up and settledhow it should go was totally beside themark and absolutely inaccurate. I donot care whether a work is done depart-mentally or by contract. What I amdesirous of doing is to get work done forthe State in the cheapest possible manner.I am neither a hide-hound follower ofthose who want to see everything done bycontract, nor of those who want to seethe work done deppartmentally. There isone matter which it is said we have stolenfrom the programme of our opponents.namely, an unimproved land value tax.Everyone must see that if the loss ofrevenue we have been subject to inthe returns from the Commonwealth,the returns amounting at the time I tookthem out to something like ;C172,000less than in the previous year, is goingon, a loss not caused by failing prosperity,but by decrease in taxation-some methodat least must be found of replacing it,or else the back country upon whichall of us live, both the agriculturalcommunity and the mining community,must cease to go ahead and prosper. Ithink, and am of opinion that mem-bers representing the towns of thisState share my view, that if we inthis State are to prosper, it can onlybe by giving every possible encourage-ment to the back country; and sofar as I am concerned, in the depart-ment I have the honour to administer,it will always 1)e my desire to give'consideration to those people who, byreason of the unfavourable conditionswhich exist out back, have at least inmy opinion, the first claim upon thisState. If we have to replace thisrevenue which is lost, we have to con-sider carefully what is going to effectthat object. It seems to me that in someway or other the general public of thisState will have to bear increased taxation.The question then comes, which. is thebest and fairest method of applying itP

MR. H. BRowN : An income tax.

THY, MINISTER FOR WORKS: Themember for Perth interpolates "1Anincome tax." So far as I am concerned,I strongly object to an income tax. Ilook upon it as a tax upon the energy ofthe individual, and, as a confirmed in-dividualist, I would do nothing to cramp

*and confine the energy of any man.[LABoUR MEMBER: What is the landtax?] The land tax is not a tax uponthe energies of the individual. Let meshow where the difference comes in. Aman, for example, saves up and buysland for a house. He pays a couple ofhundred pounds for it, and puts a build-ing on it to the tune of £500 or £600.The amount of the tax, say' at a penny inthe pound, is something like 16s. 8d.That land has not got its value of £200from any work of that particular indi-vidual. A few years ago it was a pieceof land worth probably £20, £30, or£40. Many portions of Perth and Fre-mantle ten years ago were not worth atithe of what they are worth to-day.The taxation is not on the industry ofthe individual who owns that particularpiece of laud. The increased value hasbeen owing entirely to fortuitous circumi-stances over which he has had no control.Increased population has caused increasein the value of the land, and theenhanced value is something which hasnot been the result of his own energy.There will have to be some limitations inregard to the tax. What they are hasyet to be decided.

MR. DAGLISH: You wouldf tax thelandlord, but you would not tax the user.

THE MINISTER FOR WORKS: Ifyou tax the landlord, you tax the user.The landlord will get it out of somebody.There is no man who, if the expenses ofhis particular business go up five percent., will not take five per cent. from hiscustomers. He is something more thanhuman if he will not do that. I neverknew a case where one did not in someshape manage to get the amount back.We have now to decide what is thefairest and most reasonable method ofgetting an increased revenue. I submitthat the income tax, for example, is oneof the easiest taxes to evade. Englishexperience proves this absolutely. Thereis no tax so frequently and so easilyevaded in England as the income tax.On the other hand, there is not the

186 Address-in-Reply: [SEBY orhdy

slightest difficulty in assessing the valueof laud for the purpose of taxation.Then again, it is absurd to sa 'y that theland taxis difficult to collect. And it baaanother and a great advantage in my eyes.in that it is a direct tax, one falingdirectly on the individual, who clearlyand easily sees exactly what he pays.We have to admit that if this countr y isto be developed, we must find new sour~cesof revenue for its development; and oneof these sources is a tax on the unim-proved value of land; and I trust thatmembers will look in a rcasonable andrational manner on this proposal. What-ever form of taxation is imposed will beunpopular.

CR088-BENCH MEMBER:- Look at theother side.

MR. SCADDAN: Some Ministerial sup-porters will consider it unpopular.

THE M1INISTER FOR WORKS: Iam not Speaking of members of theHouse, but of the general public. What-ever system of taxation we devise will beunpopular, and the community as awhole will not like it. But taxpayerscan make up their minds that somethinghas to be done; and they and the Gov-ernment also will have to search for theeasiest and fairest method of raising therevenue whichi we so urgently require.And I submit that all these requirementsare found in a tax on the unimprovedvalue of land. I have now flikled withthose matters which mnore particularlyinterest my department, and with thosewhich interest myself personally. I trustthat in the course of these few remarks Ihave not said anything that will ranklein the breasts of my opponents. I thinkthat the time has gone by for partybickering and strife. I venture to saythere was nothing in any of my elec-tioneering speeches which could hurt themost sensitive person. I have sometimesfelt wronged and injured, and havefrankly and freely expressed my views onthe subject, but I trust not in immoderatelanguage. The position is: we are re-turned by the people to legislate in theirbest interests. If we are to waste time inpersonal and dare I say frivolous dis-cussion, then it is impossible that theirinterests will be properly safeguarded. Itrust that this is but a preliminary canterto a session of real, good, honest work forthe people of this State, and of work

which will conduce to its great and lastingprosperity.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION.Mn. P. J. LYNCH (Mount Leonora):

The Minister for Works (Ron. J. Price)refers to me as having gone out of my wayto have what lie called an unregisteredbookmaker and strong partisan of one ofthe candidates in the field, appointed totake postal votes in respect of the Fre-mantle election. I wish to Say that theMinister for Works saved me the troubleof including this matter in an explana-tion that I am to make hereafter; be-cause on that very point I certainlyintended to find the greatest fault withthe present Colonial Secretary (Hon. J.D. Connolly) for not acceding to mywish in that regard. The facts weresimply these. There were seven ap-pointees for the district of Fremantle,

1one of themn being Mr. Cadd, who wasknown to reside permanently in Perth.

THE MINISTER FOR Wos: Andthe secretary for the Trades Hall.

MR. LYNCH: And my application tothe Colonial Secretary was sinmply tohave Mr. Barry appointed in place ofMr. Cadd, so that if seven appointeeswere considered Sufficient before, a comn-pliance with my request would not resultin an increase of the number. Andthere is no more reason for the Minister

ifor Works to say that I was seeking theappointment of a partisan than for theColonial Secretary to recognise thatnearly all the appointees of Mr. Pricewere partisans of that Minister. I say

teMister (Mr. Price) has saved metrouble, because I consider that theColonial Secretary was distinctly biasedwhen he refused to sanction the ap-pointment of Mr. Barry, and to bringthe number up to seven as before.

RESUMED).Ms. T. H. BATH (Brown Hill):

Before T begin to deal with the de-batable matter which is contained nobonly in the Governor's Speech but alsoin the remarks made during the debate,I abould like to express my pleasure atbeing able to hold at least one sentimentin common with the mover of the Address-in-Reply, by congratulating you, Mr.Speaker, on your return amongstus with improved health and with

Iincreased energy, to continue to per-I form those high and hononrable duties

[ASSEMBLY.1 Fourth (lay.

Addres-in-Reply: [3 JrULY, 1906.] Fourth day. 187

to which you have been called. Ishould also like to congratulate themember for the Swan (Mr. Gull), whomoved the Address-in-Reply, on the im-pressive and candid manner in which hespoke on that occasion. Not only washe candid, but he blundered into somevery startling admissions which must, Ithink, prove very disconcerting to theMinisterial side. Unlike the member forMt. Leonora (Mr. Lynch) I am not pre-pared just 11ow to congratulate Ministerson their accession to office, until fl-st ofall explanations are offered as to eventswhich took place during the recess, andwhit-h I consider cal for some explana-tion from those gentlemen. Are theevents which took place during the longrecess which Ministers were given inorder to carry out their legislative andadmninistrative wvork of such common oc-currence in West Australian polities thatM inisters should come down here withoutone word of explanation, as if these eventswere in consonance with a high standardof morality and of honourable conduct PIs it so natural a thing, for instance, thatbon. members should have to waylay theMinister for Mines (Hon. H. Gregory)somewhere in the locality of MidlandJunction ; that they should have to resortto intrigues againt one with whom theyhad worked as a colleague; that hon.memnbers who had sworn to stand to-gether and act together in the crisis whichoec-urred should afterwards desert thatcolleague and allow him to remaindesertedP Are these the actions whichJustify those Ministers in coming here,and sitting before uts in those chairs likeSunday-school scholars-

THE MINISTER FOR WORKS: You area judge.

Ain. TAYLOR: And you are a criminal,on this occasion.

MR. BATH: Like Sunday-schoolscholars, with angelic smiles of innocenceon their countenances ? I consider thatthose gentlemen owe an explanation tothis House. I believe that one of thefirst things the Premier ought to havedone on meeting the House on Thursday-there was an opportunity when weadjourned-was to make some explana-tion of how he attained to his presentposition, and some attimpt to justifythe sordid and disreputable details con-nected with the change of Ministry.

The Premier observed, in the course ofthe debate on the appointment of anAgent General to succeed the presentoccupant of that office, that theme wassufficient material in his policy speech tojustify his expecting me to continue thedebate on the Address-in-Reply after themover and the seconder had dealt with it;or that if there was not sufficient materialin that speech, there was enough in theSpeech delivered by His Excellency at theopening of this session of Parliament.Well, I do not think one ought to beexpected to criticise a verbal fantasia suchas the policy speech which the Premierdelivered at Bunbury. So much pathos,melodrama, and I suppose legitimatedrama, and all those variations of verbaltheatricals, constituted ndt a politicalspeech, but what I have characterised asa verbal fantasia. And so far as theGovernor's Speech is concerned, if mem-bers will take the trouble to read itthrough, they will find in it nothingtangible to criticise. It reminds me verymuch of a dressmaker's dummy, deckedout for the purpose of alluring unwaryladies at bargain sales. It seemed to muerather on the lines of that famous billwhich Falstaff had in his pocket on oneauspicious occasion, and in which wasset down a halfpenny worth of bread to5s. 8d. worth of sack. We are told in anold and well known proverb that languagewas given to man to conceal his thoughts;and it appears to me that language wasspecially bestowed on the Premier andhis colleagues in order to conceal theirintentions for the forthcoming session.But I think I can see the hand of tbeAttorney' General (Eon. N. Keenan) inthe construction of that policy speech. Ihave no doubt but that in his unsophis-ticated innocence the Premier was desi-rous of giving the public some informationas to Ministers' intentions for this ses-sion ; and I have no doubt that theMinister for Mines was willing that weshould know his legislative intentionsduring this Parliament, because what-ever may be his faults, the Minister forMines has alway* s possessed at least themerit of letting'people know what he isgoing to do. [Ma. TAYLOR: But neverdoes.] Yet I imagine that when theAttorney General joined the Cabinet andassisted in the preparation of the policy

Ispeech, and when it was proposed to

188 Addrea8-in.Reply- [SEBY] orkdy

insert these details, he advised his eol-leagues to go slow. I can imagine him,in thoise legal accents of which he is sucha, master, advising them not to incrimi-nate themselves; not to put in thatspeech details which might afterwardsbe used in evidence against them. Evi-dently, his Legal advice was followed;and so we have a speech emasculated of alldetails of Ministers' Legislative proposals.I could forgive the inadefiniteness of thespeech if Ministers had ouly paid someregard to truthifulness in that production.I presume that all members of this Househave some knowledge of the particularniche which the Governor fills in thepolitical sphere of this State. We all knewthat even the utterance which he deliversat the opening of Parliament is preparedfor him by his responsible advisers, andthat he is not supposed on any occasionto interfere in party politics. I think,therefore, that Ministers owe to his Ex-cellency -the Governor an obligationto see that in composing the Speechto which he is to give utterance later on,there shall be in it nothing derogatory tohis dignity as a gentleman, or which canoutrage his gentlemanly instincts. Yetalmost at the outset of the Speech wehave a statement which members whoknow anything of the position of affairsin Westerna Australia mnust know to bevery far from the truth. We are toldthat-"L It is my pleasing duty to againassure you that the prosperity of theState continues apace." If membersknow anything of the present condi-tion of affairs in this State, the coni-dition which has obtained during thepast six or seven months, they know thatthis statement is very wide of the mark.Evidently the member for Collie, whoseconded the A ddress-in-Reply, had somebetter knowledge than hen. membhers onthe Treasury bench as to the real con-dition of affairs. That hon. gentlemanreferred to the fact that a depression-avery bad depression-was existent inWestern Australia at the present time;and of course, in his attempt to shoulderit upon somebody, he did not attempt toshoulder it upon those '&to, I think, areresponsible for it, but he put it upon

Feration. As the hon. member forSubiaco interjected the other day, whenthe Labour Government were in powermembers used to put it on the Labou-r

Government, but now they put it onFederation. If Ministers are desirous ofknowing what the real condition ofaffairs is, if they would get away fromthat atmosphere created by the receipt of£21,000 a year, the Ministerial salary.and would look around amongq the arti-sans, of the metropolis and goldfields,they would fliud many hundreds of them,thousands of them I should say, who areunable to find employment; they wouldfind large numbers of miners on the gold-fields searching for work and unable tofind it; and they would find amongst theresidents of the metropolitan and gold-fields districts many very regrettablecases of distress. Those are the con-ditions which are existent now, andwhich give the lie to the statenment thatthe State is enjoying great prosperity atthe present time. I attribute it to thefact that during the past eight or ninemonths we have had mismanagement andmisgovernment of the State's affairs.We have bad during the last 11 monthsa considerable reduction in the expendi-ture of those gentlemen opposite, or ofthe Government of which they formed apart, on the great spending departmentsof this State. On the Public WorksDepartment, the Mines Department, andthe Railway Department, those Labour-employing departments of the State-[THE MINISTER FOR MINES: Quite in-correct]-we have had a reduction ofnearly £200,000. It is only natural,therefore, to assume that with thisreduction in expenditare on the greatemploying departments there must bedistress among those directly concerned inthat aspect of employment, a distresswhich reacts on our private enterprise andcauses the present deplorable conditionof affairs. Then the hion. gentlemen onthe other side take consolation that theycould not upend what they did uot re-ceive. The objection I urge against themis that they made no attempt whateverto exploit new sources of taxation whichwould have given them at least the sameamount of expenditure in these depart-ments as was spent in the precedingterm, Instead of introducing what wehave now proposed in this programme,for instance, a tax on unimproved landvalues, we had feeble proposals, such asincreasing the licensing fees for hotels,the imposition of a tax on totalisators,

[ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

Address-in-Reply: [3 JULY, 1906.] Fourth day- 189

and an increase in the stamp duties, noneof which can be characterised. as States-manlike in the least degree; and the re-suit is that we have had to record inregard to the Government, of which threemembers on the Government bench wereMinisters, an absolute failure where somuch was expected. The Government ofwhich they were members came in like aLord Mayor's procession with a greatflourish of trumpets and the brays of the"National Asses" of Perth and Fre-

mantle, and they have gone out like thebaited dog with a tin tied to its tail byits best friends. That is the position ofWestern Auistralia while we have thesegentlemen, members of a reconstructedCabinet, coming here and facing thisHouse without one word of explanation;probably labouring under the idea thatthe appointment of the late member forGuildford as Agent General, and theinfusion of a. little fresh blood in theCabinet, have fully redeemed themfrom any participation in that failure.I think it is somewhat unkind on the partof those members to attempt to shoulderthe responsibility on the late Premier.No doubt he should bear some portion ofthat blame, but I hope those hon. gentle-men were not dumb in that Cabinet. Isuppose they had as much say or voice asthe Premier as to what works should becarried on, or as to what legislationshould be carried out, and in the adminis-tration of the work of the State. Thepresent Premier, as Minister for Lands inthat Cabinet, the Minister for Mines, andthe Treasurer cannot shelve their respon-si bility for the acts of the Rason Adminis-tration. They were as much to blame asMr. Rason was. They are as muchresponsible for the ignominious failure asMr. Rason was. They cannot come hereand shelve their responsibilities withoutone word of explanation.

THE PuRniEu Who wants to do so?9THE MINISTER FOR MINSs: Have

we tried to do so ?MR. BATH: They tried to do so in

travelling about the country in Min-isterial cars and in informing the countryof what they were going to do; but sofar as administrative work is concerned,their record is absolutely barren. Isuppose we will have to wait some timeuntil we have the details of it, but atleast (luring that term they have not

given any' evidence, to the pulic as totbe administrative reforms they promisedthe House faithfully last session theywere going to introduce, or as to theeconomy they 'were going to effect.There are som~e items in connection withadministration to which I wish to referbriefly. In the first place I wish to makea few remarks in regard to the adminis-tration of the Goldfields Water SupplyScheme. I have always been one whohas adopted this attitude, that it was anundertaking which at the outset wasbeset with great difficulty, that it re-quired on the part of those chargedwith the administration a great deal ofpatience and a great deal of ability, andthat on the other hand there should bethe same patience displayed by the con-Sumers, by the general public, until theofficers had a grip of the working detailsand until they had the scheme well inhand. So far as that administration isconcerned, in many points I may say it isworthy of commendation; but I takeconsiderable exception to the methodsthey employ in dealing with the con-sumers. Instead of it. being a. greatpublic department seeking to' make itsadministration as liberal and as consonantwith the wishes of the consumers aspossible, the officers of the departmentseem to go out of their way to be cavalierin the manner in which they deal withthe consumers. If the- manager of aprivate firm dealt with the firm's cus-tomers in the same way he would soonlose their custom. The method adoptedby the administration is:i recognisingthat in most places they have practicallythe monopoly of the supply of water, theyseem to imagine that it gives them aright to deal with the consumers as theyplease. I have here a letter from one ofthose consumers complaining of the wayin which he was treated. He states:-

I should like to call your attention to a pieceof injustice in the Goldfields Water Supplyadministration. 1, with others, receivednotice that, unless certain moneys were paidby a certain date, the water would be out off.I overlooked the matter until it was too lateto pay on the particular day, but I sent my

icheque down first thing the following morn-ing and procured a receipt. T'hey wanted to

Icharge me 59. extra for reconnection; but asthey had not cat the water off at the time ofpaying, I naturally refused to part. I Sent thereceipt downhiome, and some three hours afterI had paid my rates. Although they had

190 -Address-in-Re ply: [A EML.Furhd.

been shown my receipt, they cut my supply off .This happened oa the 15th inst. The mensaid that tbsy would make inquiries and if thereceipt was in order they would reconnect me.This has not been done tip to the present, andhas caused me a lot of inconvenience and loss.It does also a lot of in] ory to me as a businessman,ssit looks as if I was unable to pay.~Trusting yon will look into the matter (etc.)

TaHE Tj&ASlunEs: Whatt is the name ?Mu. BATH: Tt is a letter from one of

the consumers under the Water SupplyDepartment. I will show it to the hon.Minister afterwards. I have only torefer to other instances in mv electorateto show that the same cavalier methodshave been adopted. There were threeresidents who were practically accused ofbeing thieves. They were accused ofstealing water by an adjustment of themeter. One of them went away a monthbefore the time they stated, that isbefore the meter began to read wrongly,and. returned a month after they madethe complaint, Yet they accused him ofadjusting his meter and of stealing thewater from the Goldfialds Water SupplyScheme. There are two other gentlemenwhom I know to be honourable men,who are, above such conduct; andalthough I have written to the depart-ment and have asked to he supplied withthe informnation on which the officersbase their charges and upon which theybase their charge of 1Us. 6d. annualrental for a cover which any plumbercould make for 5s., the only intimation Thave received was that I could call. andsee the papers. I am anxious to reply tothese gentlemen to let them know whyaction was taken, and why they werepractically branded as criminals, y et theinformation is not vouchsafed.

THE TasE&una: Did you not calland see the papers?

.Mum. BATH: No; I did not want theinformation for myself. I wanted it forthose gentlemen who had been so unjustlytreated. They were the persons con-cerned, and I wanted. the informationwritten to me by the department so thatI could forward it to them. Then weha~ve the treatment or the co-operativeworking parties of miuers, who havetaken up shows and by their efforts beenable to establish batteries and work theirown mines, which were mines that hadbeen abAndoned by English companiesand were unworked until these miners

took them up. Though they have paidregularly, the manner in which they havebeen treated has been arbitrary. Theyhave been treated in a most cavalierfashiun, and it does not popularise theadministration of the water scheme whenthese methods are resorted to. Con-sonant with the interests of the depart-ment? they should endeavour to treatthese people in a courteous manner andmeet them on a friendly basis. Seeingthat they are desirous of securing amonopoly, the obligation rests upon theofficers of the department to see thatthe monopoly is wisely and generouslyadministered. Then we have the runt-administration of the Electoral Depart-ment during the recess. During thegeneral elections which took place inOctober, the time specified up to whichnames could be inserted on the rolls tovote was 14 days before the issue of thewrit. The result was that in many elec-torates throughout the State largenumbers of electors were disfranchised.In Menzies electorate there were 567disfranchised, although their claims wereput in between that time and the date ofthe election. When the LegislativeCouncil elections were on we found thata different interpretation altogether wasplaced on the reading of this section, atsection which applies as much to theAssembly elections as to the Councilelections; and we were told that theprolier interpretation was that the claimshould be allowed to be received right upto the date of the issue of the writ, anudthat was done in connection with theseelections. Then we have the interpreta-tion of what is meant by the annualvalue which should be placed on pro-perty. In some instances the properview was taken, which was upheld by alllegal decisions, anad that is that theannual value is the rental value withoutany deductions whatever. The ratablevalue in some instances is altogetherdifferent, because it is the annual valuewith certain ppeentage reductions andallowances for rates, taxes, and thatkind of thing. In the Brown Hillelectorate 360 men possessing the qnali-cation were disfranchised, while on theother side of the street, in the Ivanhoeelectorate, in another province, men withhouses not one whit better, and in someinstances not so good. were placed on the

[ASSEMBLY] Fourth day.

Addessin-epl: 3 JLY,190.3 Fourth day. 191

roll and allowed to record their votes.Then coming to the late Fremantlie extra-ordinary election, we find a third inter-pretation placed on the reading of theclause in regard to the time in which anelector could become qualified, and thenit is not up to the day of issue of thewrit, but the day before the issue of thewrit. I was at Fremantle in charge of atable outside the polling booth. Therewas a list of 90 voters supplied to us, andwhen these electors wvent in to recordtheir votes they were told by the returningofficer that they were not entitled to vote;yet these names were received on theevening of the day before the issue ofthe writ. There are the three differentinterpretations. Last October the claimsmust be in & fortnight before the issue ofthe writ, and thousands of electors weredisqualified in consequence. In connec-tion with the Legislative Council elections,claims were received up to the date of theissue of the writ; and in the Fremantleelection another interpretation was given,and names could not be received afterthe day before the issue of the writ. Asfar as the Electoral Act is concerned, agreat deal of blame has been placed onthe Act to cover up the sins of persons.In the 1904 election that Electoral A&ctserved very well because those whoadministered that Act said it was therefor giving liberal opportunities for peopleto enrol themselves, and they took theview that it was better that a few namesshould be on the roll wrongfully thanthat a large number of electors should bedisqualified. We heard no complaintsas to the administration of the ElectoralAct at that time, nor anDy complaints asto disqualifications like those takingplace at elections since that date underthe same Act. Through the recess wehave had a considerable amount of con-troversy as to the rival worth of theState manufacture of pipes and otherarticles and the manufacture of thosearticles by private enterprise. A boardof inquiry was appointed to inquire intothe respective merits of the rival claims. Iwould like to say at the outset, as far asthe then Min isterfor Works is concerned-the present Treasurer-that he did not, Ithink, give a fair deal in the appoint-ments to that board of inquiry. I amStrongly of opinion that he wanted acertain report submitted to Parliament,

and that report was submitted in con-sonance with his wishes. Those who haveperused the report will see the boardpractically confess their failure to arriveat any decision, to arrive at the cost ofState manufacture.

THE TR&EASURER: Is that my fault FMaL. BATH : Yet the Treasurer, who

was then Minister for Works, appointedan accountant, and I presume he knewsomething of his merits, for he was theaccountant of a ompany in which theb on. member was a shareholder. the CollieProprietary Company.

THE TREASURER: He was not the ac-countant.

Mn. BATH: He was.THE TREASURER: He was never; you

are absolutely misinformed.MRt. BATH: If I arm misinformed-THaE TREASUjRR You are misinformed

if you speak of Mr. Ross,MR, BATH: Yes.THtE TREASURER: He never had any

connection as accountant with the CollieIProprietary Company.

MR. BATH:. I accept the Minister'sassurance, but the point is this. I assumnehe appointed the gentleman for hisabilityI as an accountant, and he musthave been an able accountant because hewas paid £5 5s. a sitting as chairman ofthe board, while the other members ofthe board were only paid £2 2s. Yet wehave that gentleman, who was appointedfor his particular abilities as accountant,in the report stating that he was unable toarrive at the cost of the State manufac-ture. I say, if he was an accountant whoknew his business and was anxious towork out the cost, there was no difficultyin doing so. That confession of failureand lack- of details to support the findingsof the commission seemed to be fair

I evidence that the Minister wanted areport which would back up his petprivate enterpnise.

THE TREASURER:- Did he get it?Ma. BATH : The lion, member tried

very hard.THE TREASURER: Did he get itVMa. BATH: Certainly the report was

practically in conformity with the Min-i ister's views, and I1 believe The tried very

hard as Minister to have them carriedFinto effect. Evidently the hon. memberplays an important part in the Cabinet,-because he was able to get £215,000 for

Address-in-Reply: [3 JVr'y' 1906.1

192 Address-in-Reply: [AS BL ]Forhdy

private enterprise while only £8,000 wasgiven to the State workshops at Fre-mantle. We know there has been somecontroversy as to day labour and contractwork in regard to public works, and Ihave only to give two examples, one ofthe day labour system and one of thecontract system, to show the superiorityof the day labour system over the con-tract system. I refer to the ClaremontHospital for Insane, which was con-structed by day labour at considerablyunder the cost it could have been con-structed by contract.

Tan MINISTER FOR. MINES: How doyou knowl

MR. BATH: The work was a credit tothe day labour system, for t-he workman-ship and finish will compare with anyother building in Western Australia. Ifwe want an example of the contractsystem we have only to go the LawCourts in Perth. One has only to lookover the outside to find the cement andstucco-work cracking all over, and thebuilding, although only comparativelyrecently constructed, has begun to lookdisreputable in the extreme. With theseexamples of the respective merits of daylabour and the contract system, 1 want toknow why the Minister for Railways didnot see fit to have the Frumantle RailwayStation constructed by day labour.

TEE MINSTER Pon MINtS AND RAIL-WAYS: I do not believe your statement inregard to the Claremont asylum.

MR. BATH:± I have very good evidenceso far as I am concerned. Although thelate Minister and the late Premier havebeen challenged times and *again to con-trovert our statements or have someinquiry into the respective mnerits of thetwo systems carried out, they have neverattempted to do s o. They have neverattempted to disprove any of the argu-mnents raised as to the day labour system.I am also informed in conuectiou with-the work which is gloing on in Perthstreets, the storm-water channel, thatwhen the tenders were invited for thatwork the specification was for pipes inl2ft. lengths, but the successful con-tractor tendered for 6ft. lengths, whichmeans that he has an advantage of£1 ,500 over other tenderers.

TER TRASasnna:'The Perth pipes?MR. BATH: In connection with these

pipes.

TEE TuEAsunEa: There are no Gft.lengths at all.

MR. BATH: That is what T am told.THE TREAsuRER: You do not know

what you are talking about.MR. BATH: If it is not true, the hon.

member will be able to explain.Tat: TREASURER:- Who would cast 6ft.

pipes?MR. BATHE: We are informed in the

Address-in-Reply, in the preliminarypadding, that as far as the miningindustry is concerned there is no needfor alarm, although there is a slightfalling off in the gold yield. Af terreading that there is an increasedamount of dividends paid, I can say, asfar as the shareholders are concerned,there is no need for worry or alarm.But if we read these statements in con-junction with certain facts occurring inthe Mines Department Report, certainlywe find that a large nutnber of miners inthe State have every, reason to complainand every reason for alarm. Th theMines Report we are informed that-

The average tonnage of ore raised perman employed, above and under ground, hasincreased by 13-7 tons, but on the averageevery such man has produced but 108-1d3 fineounces of gold, as compared with 112-6 in1904. Although the tonnage raised per manis remarkably high in the Peak Hill Goldfield,there is but a small number of men employed.Considering the number employed on theEast Coolgardie Goldfisld (6,258), the numberof tons raised per man is high, and speaksmuch for the cleat of men employed and themethods in use.

Tan MiNIaTRa Pon Mints: We didnot say aa much as that in the Governor'sSpeech.

Mn. BATH: You dlid not say that inthe Governor's Speech, but the remarksin the Governor's Speech referring to themining industry should. be read in con-junction with these facts. The reasonthat we have had an increase in dividends,although the yield has fallen and thegrade of ore is low, is due to this fact:there is a policy of rush, as far as thatgold field is concerned, in vogue in themines, and due regard is pot paid to thesafety of the men working there. I willprove that by reference to the record ofaccidents which have taken place in themines. In the Mines Report it is statedthat;-

It is very gratifying to note that the fatalaccidents during 1905 have decreased by eight,

Fourth day.[ASSEMBLY.]

Address-in-Reply: [3 JLTy, 1906.] Fourth day. 193

mn compared with those during 1904. Thenumber of men injured has increased by 117,as compared with that for the previous year.This increase is attributable to the fact thatlme managers are more careful to reportaccidents which, though comparatively trivial,are sufficient to keep the sufferer off work formore than 14 days.

That is a very lame explaunation for thevery large increase in the number ofaccidents. I have an opportunity ofknowing, and no one knows better thanthose who come into contact with theorganisations, that there has been a verylarge increase of accidents in the mines,mainly due to the fact that there isa policy of rush in order to earn thedividends and to lessen the cost of pro-duction. Due regard is not paid to thesafety of the working miners, who arenot given an opportunity themselves oflooking after their own Safety. We haveheard it recorded, and I see it in theSpeech, that many of the accidents aredue to the men themselves. This is notbecause the men have been neglectful,but because they know of the polity ofrush, and unless they do these things andunless they practically acquesce, theyknow they will be discharged and othersput in their places.

TuE MINISTER WOR MINES: You arereading the records for last year.

MR. BATH: I am reading these inconjunction with the statement in theGovernor's Speech, and I am not placingthe blame on the Minister, but showingthe reason why the mines are able totreat ore so much cheaper, and why themen are able to mine so much more ore,than in previous years, and why moreaccidents have occurred than in previousyears. [Interjection by the MINISTERFOR MINER.] The report of accidentswhich I have seen and the numbers whichthe Miners' Associations have had, go toshow that accidents are on the increase,not only trivial but serious accidents, andthis condition of affairs makes it neces-sary that a Mines Regulation 'Bill shouldbe introduced at the earliest possibledate. As far as that is concerned, I haveno desire to enter into debate as to theprovisions which it should contain,because the Minister for Mines assuresus that we shall have an opportunity ofdealing with that at a later date, and Iwill reserve my remarks till then, merelycontenting myself by saying that the

condition of affairs shows that suc-h ameasure, an effective measure, is iae-lutely necessary' in the interests of thoseemployed on our mines. We also havereference made to the increase in landsettlement; and while there has been anincrease during the last term cited in theStatistical Regi.ster, it is just as well topoint out that the increase is not at allproportionate to the area alienated. Sofar as Western Australia is concerned, itdoes not begin to compare favourablywith the Eastern States. Take SouthAustralia, for instance, which I shouldsay is a fair country for comparison.South Australia has not had the ad-vantage we have hail of a prosperousgold-mining iudustry, employing a largepopulation, and giving it that fillipWestern Australia has had. And withvery much the same area, we find thatin South Australia 17 per cent. of thelandalienated or in process of* alienationis under cultivation, whilst in WesternAustralia not 3 per cent. is nuder cultiva-tion. This goes to show that, whilstthere may have been a considerableincrease in laud alienation or the takingup of land, there has not been a corre-sponding increase in legitimate settle-ment, This is a state of affairs which Ithink should call for consideration bythose more conversant with the agri-cultural industry than perhaps I aID, andit is a matter which I commend to theattention of the Premier, who, whateverhis faults, has always taken a deepinterest in the settlement of people oii theland. What is necessary is not aliena-tion of the land to such a great extent,or the boasting of the amount of landalienated, but rather to see that thosewho have been placed in possession ofthat land are made to put it to somelegitimate use, and thus make a bettershow than we do in comparison with theother portions of Australia, Then wehave reference made in His Excellency'sSpeech to the matter of immigration; andin this I think the Ministers have placedsome misstatements in the mouth oif theGovernor. It is stated here that-

A steady abd increasing stream of immligra-dion is flowing into the State, and becomingabsorbed mainly in our agricultural popula-tion.What evidence have the bon. gentlementhat the great majority of the surplus of

194 Addrea8 -in-Reply: [ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

arrivals over departures in this State, ofabgput two thousand for the first fourmonths of this year, have been absorbedin the agricultural population ? Where,for instance, did the 72 Italians and the78 Austrians go? Not many of themwent into agricultural settlement, and asto the others, I am safe in asserting thatover 75 per cent. of the excess of arrivalsover departures came either to themetropolis or went to the Eastern Gold-fields and the various mining districts ofthis State. Probably the Premier maymean the stream of assisted immigrantswho have been brought to this State bymeans of this Government through theAgent General in the old country; buteven then the statement is not exactlyaccurate. I have been credibly informedduring the past few days that men whohave been assisted to this State by theaid of the Government are at presentemployed at the goods-sheds in Perth,and at a lower wage than that paid tothose whom they replaced.

MR. TAYLOR: Some in the Govern-ment workshops at Midland Junction.

MR. BATH: In fact, that men havebeen discharged to put these new arrivals

THE Panmima: Oh, no; that is notcorrect.

MR. BATH: And at a lower rate thanthat paid to those who preceded them. Ihave absolutely authentic information. Iknow several instances which have beenbrought to my notice, and if necessary Jcan bring proof that this is correct.There are other men who were presumedto have been absorbed in the agriculturaldistricts who are working in and aroundthe metropolis, who have been broughthere to work at employment other tbanfarming, and who have replaced menthat had been in employment. There isnothing to boast of or to be proud of inthat kind of immigration; and it will benecessary to exercise more care beforeany scheme of immigration will be suc-cessful. We are informed that effortsshould be continued towards securingmore of the class that we have securedfrom the Eastern States. We havemen who have revolutionised farmingin Western Australia. who have shownmany of those, not all, who are on theland how farming should be carriedon ; and they are men who are a credit

and an acquisition to this State. We canbring more of those here so long as weexercise care in our choice, but we mustbear in mind that, whilst introducingthese settlers, we should be just as readyto extend those facilities to men who arealready in our State and who may bedesirous of settling on the land. Themember for Swan (Mr.-Gull), who movedthe Address-in-Reply. presu med to be asomewhat unsophisticated gentleman. Ithink Ministers made at very unwiseehoice in selecting him to move theAddress-in-Reply.

MR. TAYLOR: They did not select.-He asked them.

Mu. BATH: In fact, from the mannerin which he put the show away, andfrom his defence of the attitude of Mr.Rason and his attempt to cover up someof the sins of that- Administration, itseems to mec it would pay Ministers onthose benches to club together and pro-vide him with an extra £200 to remainsilent, and join say the member forBeverley (Mr. H. Smith) in the silentarmy on the third bench. In the firstplace, he was so foolish as to say thatmenmber-s on this (Opposition) side shouldhe quiet during the forthcoming session,because the result of the LegislativeCouncil elections had proved the confi-dence of the country in the presentGovernment. He certainly could haveadduced no more unfortunate evidence toprove his statement. In the first place,it must be known to members that the%unlification for the Legislative Councilis a property qualification, and that only20 or 30 per cent. of those eligibleto vote for the Assembly elections arequalified to vote for the Council- So faras the Labour party is concerned, itscontention always has been that there isno justification whatever for a propertyqualification. No logical justificationhas ever been adduced by any politicaleconomist, by any politician in Australiaor out of it, for such a qualification; andwe have only to recollect the fact thatwhilst the possession of the qualificationwhich exists in this State may in oneelection give a person the right to vote,the loss of that property or qualificationduring the intervening term will preventhim from voting on another occasion,although there has been no change in hisintelligence or mental capacity to vote in

Address-in-Reply: [3 Jc'xy, 1906.] Fourth day. 195

the interval..- And when we recollectthat this was the basis on which the votefor the Legislative Council was takenduring the recent election, there is no-Lhing which can be laid to the detrimentof teLabour party in the result of thatverdict. [Laxoun MEMBER: Our voteincreased.] On the other baud, I regardthe result of this election as strong pre-suinptive evidence of the insincerity of theGovernment in their present legislativeproposals, and especially so in regard toconstitutional reform and land valuestaxation. We find that the gentlemenelected in the recent Legislative Councilelections were amongst the strongest sup-porters of the present Administration.We found them touring with Ministersthrough the country and obtaining elec-tion advertisements by accompanyingMinisters on tour. We found themduring the recent election in Fremantleaccompanying them on the platform,and declaring themselves enthusiasticsupporters of that Government andthose Ministers. Yet those very samegentlemen on the election platformdeclared themselves as strong opponentsof land values taxation, and of consti-tutional reform. And they can be heardany night on which the Address-in-Replyis progressing in another place-EMn.BOLTONy: It is finished] -XPvess theiropinions in opposition to these proposals,at the same time that they are en-thusiastic admirers of the gentlemenopposite.

MR. BOLTON: That is the safeguard.MR. BATH: Then we have the indict-

ment of the member for Perth in regardto the proposals of the Government, andhe could have stated the cae not onewhit more correctly than he did when hesaid that, if those hon. gentlemen wereon this side and the Labour party wereoccupying those benches, nine-tenths ofthem would be in opposition to theseproposals, and especially land valuetaxation and Upper House reform.

MR. TAYLOR: That is absolutely cor-rect.

Mn. BATH: The Minister for Workshas taken exception to a statement madeby the member for L~eonora (Mr. Lynch)that the platform has been stolen.

MR. TAYLOR: A man does not like tobe accused of stealing, if he does it.

Ms. BATH: He went on to observethat the Labour party had not initiatedeither one reform or the other. TheLabour party make no claim of exclusivepossession of these reforms, or even forthe fact of having initiated them; butwhat members on this side do claim isthat the Labour party have popularisedthese lprinciples, brought them to thefront, (ought for years and years againstthe most determined opposition and mis-representation, on bhbalf of these reforms,and year in and year out they havefought the battle until to-day those

Iprinciples are popular amongst the greatbulk, of the people. M~embers opposite.who a few months ago were opposingthese very proposals, now step in andexpress themselves as ardent admirers ofthem. We also have- evidence of insin-cerity on the part of the Government inthe speeches which have been deliveredby members on that side. What sup-

port, for instance, for their land tax pro-posals did they have from the memberfor North Perth (Mr. Brebber). themember for Kalanning (Hon. F. H.Piesse). and the mnember for Perth (Mr.H. Brown)?P And yet those gentlemenhave assured us that this is precisely thesamte Governmnent as that they previouslysupported and which they were returnedto support in October last; that they areadvocates of precisely the same platform,that there has been no change whatever,and that there is no reason why theyshould alter their allegiance to theirparty. It goes to show they must havesomec information, they must have someassurance from the Ministers occupyingthose benches that there is no intentionof pushing those proposals to a success-ful issue; and after bearing or readingthe opinions which have been expressedin another place by the ardent admirers

Iof the Government, I say they have onlyintroduced those proposals knowing thatwhen these get to another place they willbe rejected by that Chamber.

The PREMIER: You are wrong.

At 6-30, the SPEAKER left the Chair.At 7I30, Chair resumed.

MR. BATH (continuing): When theHouse adjourned, I was making referenceto the proposals of the Government forthe imposition of a tax on the unm-

196 Address-in- Reply: [ASML.-orhdy

proved value of land. I questioned theirsincerity in regard to these propkisals. asI questioned it in* connection with con-stitutional reform. But even admittingtheir bona fides in their land taxationproposals, there is one thing we haveevery reason to complain of; namtely,the lack of definiteness in their state-ment of their intentions in this respect.For instance, we have hail the AttorneyGeneral, in the course of a Mlinisterialspeech at Kalgoorlie, stating that hie wasopposed to exemptions, but that hewould make an exception in favour of avery little one, a very alight exemption.On the other hand, we have had thePremier in his policy speech at Bun-bury stating that he was in favour ofboth a time and a monetary exemption.And then, as the climax of all, we havethe Honorary Minister in the UpperHfouse (Bon. 0. A. Piesse) declaringhimself entirely opposed to the taxationof the unimproved value of land, butita ting that he is prepared to go so farks to advocate a tax on unimprovedlands-an altogether different proposi-tion. Now which are we to accept as thedefinite pronouncement of the Minis-terial policy?

ITHE PanExrn: You will get the Billnext 'week..M ' . BATH: Who is really running

the showF Who is declaring the policyof the Government, and stating theirabsolute intentions regarding the im-position of this taxP Then wve have themember for Swan (Mr. Gull). whenmoving the Address-in-Reply, statingthat he is entirely opposed to land valuetaxation as a. means of bre-aking up largeestates, but favours it as a means of raisingrevenue. And yet, ift the very Governor'sSpeech which he was supporting, we findit stated that the tax is to be imposed sothat, "while not inflicting hardship onthe man of small means, or the settler inhis pioneering days, it should also havethe effect of considerably increasing thedevelopment of onr agricultural lands."Now how is that development to bebrought about, except by a tax com pellingthose who hold large areas unworked tomake them available for those who arewilling and desirous of putting them tolegitimate use? Yet the hon. membersays he is not in favour of a tax for th ispurpose, and we see him sitting behind

the Government'and givinj them hisenth usiastic and whole-hearted support.One is amazed at the convenience of theviews of lion. members on that side. Itdoes not matter whether the Governmentare in favour of land values taxation orare opposed to' it; whether they believein constitutional reform or are opposed toit. No matter how Ministers may differfrom the views of members on that side,these tire still prepared to accept holusbolus the views of Ministers, and tosupport the present Administration. Theposition was very fairly summed up bythe Minister for Works, in the statementthat fresh revenue is required. Whilewe have an increasing de mand for mnoney,especially for interest and sinking fundcharges, while we have increased demandson our revenue to provide educationalfacilities, to provide encouragement forthe mining and agricultural industries,we are faoced with a reduction in revenue.The members representing agriculturalconstituencies, who think that their con-stituents are opposed to this method oftaxation, have not looked at this aspectof the question, and have not presentedany alternative views as to the manner inwhiich the needed revenue- can be raised.Those members must face the situation.We cannot square the finances by anyeconomy in admninistration or aniy reduc-tion in expenditure. It has been saidthat our administrative cost in WesternAustralia is much higher than that of theEastern States ; and last year, when theBudget proposals were brought in, wefound the then Colonial Treasurer pre-senting an elaborate plan showing thecomparative cost of administration inWestern Australia with that in theEastern States. But I looked carefullythrough that tabulated statement, andfo und that the th ree departments in whic hour cost of administration appeared to bemucb higher than that of the EasternStates were the very departments bymeans of whbicb we do so much more inthe way of providing public services than.do the Eastern States: namely, theDepartmients of Lands and Agriculture,the Department of Mines, and the Medi-cal Department. Taking out these three,we find that our administration, com-paratively speaking, costs much less thanthat of the Eastern States; and if thereis to be any redur-tion in expenditure,

[ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

Addrss-n-Rply [8 Juv,190.)Fourth day. 197

the agricultural members must recognisethat it can be made only hy dispensingwith the method of encouraging agricul-ture by certain expenditure designedprimarily to give an irnpetys to that veryindustry. Then if we recognise, as Ithink all members must recognise, nomatter on which side of the Rouse theysit, that additional revenue is necessaryto continue honestly our financial admin-istration, we must look around formethods by which this revenue can beraised; and if we say we shall not acceptor support a proposal for taxation ofunimproved land values, the alternativeto that proposal is a property tax. Andon whomn would a property tax press thewnore heavily? On the legitimate farmerwith big improvements on his holding,or on the man who holds large areascontaining smuall. improvements? Morehardly on the legitimate farmer doing'his best to develop his land, doing hisbest to muake as much as possible outof it; while the other man would gopractically unscathed. The mover andthe seconder of the Address-in-Reply hadsomne hard things to say about Feder-ation. They said our financial positionis due to the fact of OUT entering Feder-ation, and that to the loss of the slidingscale, or of the interstate duties, we mayattribute our present financial stringency.In that there may be a certain amount oftruth; but I for one am prepared to saythat the abolition of the sliding scaleduties is not a bad thing for WesternAustralia. Those duties pressed mosthardly upoy the great consuming popula-tion in our metropolitan and our gold-fields areas. They pressed so hardlyupon those who were already bearing anundue share of taxation--

MR. G3ULL: Wave prices been reducedsince the abolition of the sliding scale ?

Mpl. BATH: Of course, the argumnentis advanced that although the slidingscale has been abolished, its abolition hasnot red ued. the prices of the cornmuoditiesin question. But the failure to reducethose prices cannot be ascribed either tothe sliding scale or to its abolition, but. tothose who were amongst the foremost inour population, at the time we embarkedon Federation, in demanding inter-colonial freetrade as a result of Feder-atLion, and the abolition of this specialimpost. And those very persons who

I advocated that view of the situation, whoasked for the abolition of those dutiesand for intercolonial freetrade, are thosewho are now denying to the consuingpopulation of Western Australia thelegitimate advantage of that reduction.I say iti is regrettable that as a result

Iof indirect taxation the consumers donot perhaps realise the great extent towhich they are taxed; and perhaps the

jreason is that they have not given. tothe question that attention whichwould show them that the highcost of living and the absorptionof their -wages in dlomestic expenses

iresult from the fact that prices are nowthe same ats when the sliding scale was infull force. What we should do is not toargue for the retention of special imposi-ions-those duties which press so hardly

on the consumer-but to see whetherwe cannot induce a standard of moralityin our commercial men 'which willlead them to give to the people ofthis State the advantage which istheir due from the reduction of theeliding scale duties. As to the attitudeof the Labour party in regard to tatxa-tion, we- are not desirous of *adoptingthat method which has been pursued inthe Anstralasian States ever since theyachieved responsible government, themethod of trying to adjiust the burden oftaxation in such a manner that the peopledo not realise the amount they are actuallypaying. The contention of the Labourparty is that in the rent of land and inthe earnings of capital, there are consider-able amounts which are monopolised orappropriated by the individual, thoughthey really betong to the community.They are the result of communal enter-prise and energy, the result of the build-ing up of this State by those who haveflocked here in consequence of the devel-opment of the mining industry; and wesay that these values1 being imparte bythe community, should be taken for the

cmunity for the purposes of govern-ment Wemake a start by advocating

this principle in respect of the rent ofland. The other night the member forNorth Perth (Mr. Brebber) said it wasvery hard that because certain persons inthis metropolitan community purchasedlaud with a view to secouring the unearned

i increment, there should be any proposalIto impose a tax which would take some

Address-in-Reply [8 JCi'Y' 1906.3

198 Address-in-Resply: [ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

of that increment for the purposes ofthe State. I say that the owners othe land are not responsible for im-parting that value to it. We have onlyto onsider the price realised for thatcorner block between Barr-ack Street andHay Street, a piece of land originallypurchased I believe for £500, and soldthe other day for X60,000, though thebuildings upon it, I suppose, were notworth more than.£5,000 or £6,000. Thedifference between the two amounts is theincrement of value which was impartednot by the owner of it, but by the influxof population to this community; by thefaoct that the immigrants were of anenterprising class, and that by theirenterprise and their energy they havebuilt up this State to its present condi-tion of prosperity. They have establishedthat value; and the proposed tax on theunimproved value of land is an effort onthe part of the community to secure foritself the value which the community hasimparted to those areas. To show thatthe owner of that land has not impartedthat value, we need only consider that ifhe' went to the South Sea, Islands, toAmerica, to Great Britain- if he wentto live on Mars-the value would beimparted to the land just the same;and therefore it is unearned increment, sofar as he is concerned. It is incrementwhich rightly belongs to the people andwhich the people have a. perfect andlegitimate right to absorb. In regard tothe question of land values taxation, thelikelihood of this Parliament being ableto carry it out, or of any reform being

iagrted, depends on another veryial reform, and that is in the constitu-

tion of another place. So far as theprinciple is concerned, in every Statewhere it has been introduced it has mietwith most strenuous opposition in theHouse whose members are elected ona property qualification, or are nomi-nated by the Government of the day. Ifwe are to inaugurate anything ]ike aneffective measure of land values taxationin Western Australia. we will need tomake some alteration in the constitutionof another place. We find that duringthe course of the recent campaign, as Ihave pointed out before, those who havedeclared themselves supporters of thepresent Government which professes to hein favour of these reforms, are the very

men who opposed these reforms nioststrenuously. We have no idea as to thenature of the proposed change in thequalification of another place that is to bebrought down by the present Adminis-tration; but any proposal to reduce thequalification to an annual value of £215will be entirely insufficient and wifl beonly tampering with very' necessary re-form. We have heard a few individualsin this State, in common with those inother parts of the Commonwealth,declaring that what they want is secessionfrom Federation. They are never likely toget secession; and so far as some membi ersare concerned, they are like John-the-Baptists crying in the wildernessfor something they are never likely toobtain. Instead of people being in favourof secession, I can inform the member forSwan (Mr. Gull) and other memberswho talk of secession from the Common-wealth, that there is a strong arid growingfeeling in favour of unification of theStates amongst the great body of thepopulation ; there is a strong and growingfeeling in favour of an amendment of theCommonwealth Constitution to lop offfrom the State Legislatures a consider-able amount of the power they at presenthold, and confer that power on the Corn-nmonwealth Parliament. In fact, there isa strong feeling in favour of doing awaywith State Parliaments altogether andtransferring their legislative functions tothe Commonwealth Parliament. [MEM-nEit: Where?] In Western Australiaand in other States of the Common-wealth. If bon. members, take thetrouble to go through the countr~y as Ihave done during the recess, they willfind this feeling very prevalent. It is afeeling that is growing in strength andfavour every day. I am not in favour ofunification. I believe it will be a badday for- Western Australia if we haveunification and if we have centralisiationof, legislative powers in the hands of theCommonwealth Government. 'I believe,in spite of the democratic nature of theCommonwealth franchise, that the ceo-tralisation of power would be disadvan-tageous to the interests of the individualStates. We have seen what centralisationof power has done for America, where ithas practically taken away from thepeople of the States the right to govern,and handed over the control of affairs to

Addessin- spy: 3 Jty,190.]Fourth dal. 199

the moneyed magnates of that country.While I believe that unification is unde-sirable, theduty devolves upon us to preventsuch a feeling giowing any stronger; andit can be done by democratisiug the Con-stitution of Western Australia and bybringing it more in consonance with thatof the Commonwealth, I we place ourLegislature on a democratic basis we canhope to hear the last of any proposal forunification and the ab6lition of StateParliaments. I doj not advocate theseviews because I happen to he a memberof a St~te Parliament. So far as that isconcerned, I believe that we have central-isation even in State government, andthat we could confer greater governingpowers on the municipalities throughoutthe State with advantage to the wholecommunity. The mover and seconder ofthe Address-ia- Reply also made somereference to the loan proposals of theGovernment. Both gentlemen wereapparently of opinion that a loan policyis a splendid thing for this community.The member for Collie (Mr. Ewing)declared that lie did not see the dis-advantage or injustice of leaving theseburdens to posterity. If the bon. mem-ber were here I would like to ask biniwhether he is prepared to burden thefuture of his own children, and I wouldprobably get the answer that he is notprepared to do any such thing. If he isnot prepared to do it so far as hischildren are concerned, why should be,as a member of this Legislature, proposeto do it so far as the State is concerned?It is not so much a question of that;because at present we have the burdenswith us. [Tia PREMIER: What aboutour sinking fund ?] The member forSwan declared that he thought borrow-ing was a good thing because lie hadalways noticed that after a temporarycessation of borrowing there was aresultant depression.

MR. GULL: He said nothing of thekind.

Ma. BATH:- It is recorded in Hansardand I was present when the hon. membersaid it. I may tell the bon. memberthat I am not permitted to quote fromthis session's Hanzsard, or I would readhim the passage. If the hon. memberrefreshes his memory bhe will find it re-corded. Beautiful logic it is from anymember of thisi Rouse. The hon. mew-

ber might just as well say that if anindividual fills himself wfith whisky over-night, because he has a bad head in themorning therefore drinking whisky is agood thing for the constitution. Theposition in Western Australia is fastdeveloping.to the same extent, so far asour borrowing proclivities are concerned,as it has developed in the Eastern Statesof the Comm onwealthi; and I shall provethis by a reference to the growth of ourinterest and sinking fund charges. In1898 the interest and sinking fundcharges absorbed 12 per cent. of therevenue of this State. In 1905 the per-centage was, 21 per cent., and at the enidof May, 1906, interest aind sinking fundabsorbed 24 per cent. of the revenue. Ifwe get the million and a half borrowedas the Prvmier proposes, it will meanthat over a quarter of the revenue of thisState must go at the outset to pay in-terest and sinking fund charges. Itproves that all this talk about the repro-duct ive nature of the works on whibhi ourloanu expenditure is embarked is all moon-shine, and that the ordinary revenue isbeing gradually encroached upon to paythese interest and sinking fund charges.The tendency to disregard the reproduc-tive nature of any works on which wepropose to embark loan capital, is grow-ing not, only in Western Australia but inthe Eastern States; and as we havea stringenicy in our revenue and lose itfrom various sources, the tendency ismore and more to embark that loan ex-penditure on doubtful works.

Ma. A. J. WILsON:' Seventy-five percent. is a very good return.

Ma. BATH: If the hon. member willlook into the returns he will find that, sofar as our loan expenditure is concerned,it is not returning 75 per cent. or any-thing like it. The revenue 1 am speakingof refers to the whole revenue from taxa-tion and other sources, including theamounts received from the public servicesrendered to the community. Somethinghas been said during the course of thedebate in regard to the attitude of theOpposition on the railway proposals sub-mitted last session. It has been adducedthat we were opposed to railways in theagricultural districts. There is nothinin the declarations from members to leadany member, who has made a study of

Address-in-Beply: [3 JULY, 1906.]

200 Ad~res-iu-&eply: [ASM L'ort.dy

the question, to adduce any such idea.What we, the Opposition, did oppose wasthe bringing down of these proposalswithout information in regard to them,without official reports, with just thebarest details and the request that thisHouse should swallow them down in theclosing hours of last session; andl whenit is proposed to embark loan capital onthese railways, then T say any memberwho desires to conserve the financialposition in this State is junstified in saying,"Pause before we commit the House and

country to this expenditure." Row canit be expected that newv lines, spur rail-ways as they are called, are going to paywhen the existing trunk lines in ouragricultural districts are not paying atthe present timeV If they do not pay,and if the goldfields line is asked not, onlyto bear its own burden but also to takeup the burden of these other lines, is itjust and fair to the people of this Stateto ask that we should embark on newunpri~table railways out of loan expen-diture? P1 say there is justification if bySome betterment principle we can assurethat interest and sinking fund will b3epaid on these railway proposals; but it isabsurd to ask this Rouse withoutsome suchassurance, to readily grant large sumns fromour loan funds to build these uproductivelines. We are also asked auring thecourse of this debate for a reduction inrailway freights and for reductions inother directions; and the whole positionis, we have to recognise that if we re-duce these freights and make a biggerdemand still upon the general revenuefor the payment of interest and sinkingfund on these works, the burden mustfallupon the gener-al taxpayer of the State;and there is a limit which the generaltaxpayer can bear, especially when webear in mind that his taxation as it isnow constituted is an inverse ratio to hiscapacity to bear it. Both last sessionand on the public platforms I have urged,and urge now, that before we embark inthese proposals and Tote muoney away, weshould have siome more explicit infornia-tiou and wore reasonable propositionbefore us that within a reasonable periodthese railways will be made to pay in-terest. and sinking fund.

Mn. A. J. WILRoN:- Is not the taxationper se lower in this State than in anyother State of the Commonwealth ?

*Mna. BATH: No. We are assuredthat the Public Service Commissionerhas recently submitted his first proposalin conection with the classification ofthe clerical division, and that his Excel-leucy's advisers are now giving thisimportant matter their careful con-sideration. One could ask oin anoccasion like this that we should havesomething more than this bald assurance.I think the House can reasonably askthat the Government should Kive someidea of their intention in regard to theclassification made by the Public ServiceCommissioner appointed in 1904 as totheresult of the united demand of Parlia-ment, the public service, and the publicc-f this State that the public serviceshould be placed under' some competenthand to be classified, and so that hewould see a fair deal was done toeveryone employed in the service. We

*have had that classification placed beforeUs. Ample powers are given in thePublic Service Act for appeals from anydecisions given by the Public ServiceCommissioner, and I think it is only a

*reasonable request that the Premiershould supply us with something moredefinite than the remarks contained inthe Governor's Speech. We find no

Imention either of any proposal for asystem of old age pensions in this State.

*The predecessor of the Premier in officestated that he did not think it wvas a,matter on which the State shouldembark. It was rather a matter to beleft to the Federal Government. Solong as we have the existing financialconditions of the Constitution Act pro-viding for the raising of taxation by theFederal Government, so long will it beimpossible for the Federal Governmentto make provision for old age pensions.

*I believe, as a majority of members inthat Parliament who are desirous ofinstituting the Federal scheme of old agepensions believe, it would be preferableif such a scheme were introduced in thefuture rather than say piecemeal pro-posal by individual States. But afterafl, those who are and should be entitledto receive old age pensions in WesternAustralia cannot afford. to wait until analteration of the Constitution gives theFederal Government finfincial means.There is no likelihood of their beingy ableto wait. One has only to traverse the

[ASSEMBLY.] -Fourih day.

Addesain-ep4: 3 JLY.190.] Fourth day. 201

various portions of the State to find menwho have been pioneers of Western Aug.tralia, who have by their enterprise andenergy helped to raise it to its presentstage of prosperity, in a state of want.I think therefore they are entitled tosome consideration, I think some schemeshould be introduced in Western Aus-tralia, and if the time arrives when theFederal Government shall embark on anold age pension scheme, the individualschemes in the respective States shouldbe handed to their control, and an all-embracing Federal scheme introduced.Until that time it is the piain duty of theLegislature cbarged with looking afterthe people in Western Australia toembark on a. schemne of this kind. Iregret it has been omitted from the pro-posals of the Government.

THE TREASURER:- Why did not yourGovernment do itP

Mn. BATE! : The Treasurer asks whywe did not do it. The member knowsthat it was submitted in our programme,and the boa. members now sitting on theGovernment side of the House were verystrenuous in opposition to it, also to theland values taxation of the Government.So strenuous were they that they spenta great deal of time railing against ourproposals in this direction, and charac-terising them as revolutionary, and justsuch proposals as would comie from aLabour Government, So af raid werethey that these proposals would comeinto force that they spent three or fourweeks discussing a censure motion to'stave off the evil day. I come to amatter which has caused a great deal ofperturbation in the minds of members ofthe House, and which was referred to bythe member Mt. for Leonora, and aldodealt with in the Speech of the Ministerfor Works to-night. I refer to the circum-stances surrounding the Fremantle elec-tion. 1 do not think I shall be accusedin any sense of party. bias when I saythe explanation given by the Minister forWorks was not a full and satisfactoryexplanation of his participation in thataffair, and he is entirely wrong when heseeks to impress on the House that it isa personal matter directed against him;that it is really a. personality and not amatter of puljlic moment. I say it isessentially a matter of public moment.It is one that has been referred to, or

the procedure has been referred to indebates previously held in Parliamentsof this State, and in these present cir-cumstances the case is even more glaring.In the course of the session of 1903 avacancy occurred in the representationof North Fremantle, and at that time theGovernment, of which I suppose we canclaimi the present Administration asdirect successors, ran a candidate, andtire Labour party ran one in opposition.At that time the then Minister for Works,Mr. Ilason, went to Fremsantle to assistin the campaign of the Ministerial can-didate. He made certain references tothe Government proposals, to theirapproval and intention of constructing atdock at North Fremantle, and theseremarks were taken exception to in thecourse of the debate, on an urgencymotion for adjournment. The remarksto 4hich exception were taken were these,as they were recorded in the Press:

The Minister for Works (Mr. C. H. Rason,M.L.A.), speaking at North Fremantle lastnight, remarked that the dry-dock for Fre-manitle was one of the many subjects ofancient history which had been left to thepresent Government to take up and accom-plish. They could depend upon it that theGovernment were going to make that dock.(Applause.) it was not going to be any toydock; it would be a moat modern dock,capable, be hoped, of accommodating thelargest ship afloat, (Applause.) They pro-posed to get the services of Mr. Thow, anengineer from New South Wales, who was anauthority on docks, and who would conferwith the Engineer-in-Chiof on the subject.Boringis were now being carried out in order toascertain the best site for the dock, and thatsite would be debermined in the first place, onthe recommendation of the engineers, andfinally by Parliament. The people of NorthFremantle could rest assured that, whereverthat site was fixed, their interests would notbe neglected. No doubt the sooner they gotthe dock the better, and for his part, and forthe part bi the Government, t~hey would getit without any farther delay. (Applause.)Speaking of the bridges across the Swan River,the Minister said he had no definite informa-tion yet as to where the site of the new bridgeswould be, but whatever site was determinedupon, he saw no necessity to put North Fre-maslntle to any aifcuty in connection withthe matter.

In the course of the debate which ensuedon that motion for adjournment, somnetrenchant criticisms were uttered notonly by members on the Opposition sidebut by those supporting the Governmentat that time, and it was pointed out that

Addrew-in-Beply. [3 JULY, 1906.]

202 Address-in-Reply: [AEML]Forhdy

it was essentially a matter of interest tothe public that these things should beventilated. It was also pointed out byone member on the Government side atthat time that the constitutional law ofGreat Britain declatred that-

It is highly criminal in any Minister orMinisters or other servants under the Crownof Great Britain, directly or indirectly to usethe powers of office in the election of repre-sentatives to serve in Parliament.And on the basis of such a criticism asthat, the Minister for Works at that datehad to suffer a, very warm time fromnmewmbers on both sides of the House asthen constituted. The Minister forWorks states that this is a matter whichis brought up merely out of party piquebecause of the defeat of the Labour can-dilate in that election, and that there wasno justification for any such stricturesas were passed by the member for'Mt.Leonora on the evening of Thursday last.I do not want to go to) the Labour partyfor an indictment of the Ministry on thatoccasion. I have only to go to the

A eading columns of the West Australianon this matter. In the leading columnsof May 29th the W~est Australian stated-

There is one other question over whichevery thoughtful and patriotic elector mustfeel grave misgiving. In no election whichhas been fought within the knowledge of thosewhose memory can run over all the contests ofresponsible government have so many appealsbeen made toD the pecuniary benefits whichthis candidate or the other might confer uponthe town if he were returned to Parliament.Unhappily, neither party is free from blamein tii respect. Whoever started it is, nodoubt, himself responsible for the counter-action of his opponent; but it is difficult toconceive a lower point than that to whichmany of the appeals sank-appeals, if notme~de by the candidates themsetvres, yet urgedon their behalf by their supporters. Everyclaim that had a chance of putting a few extrashillings into the pockets of the electors ofFremantle was pressed into the service, and itmay safely be said that the battle was trulyfought out on the sordid ground of who couldmost influence the Treasurer in favour of thetown.

MEMBER; There is something in theBoomerang about them both.

MR. BATH: There is nothing of theboomerang about it. I refer the memberto this statement--

Whoever started it is, no doubt, himselfresponsible for the counter-action of hisopponent.We had the Minister for Works himself,

during the course of the campaign,stating that by his return they would beable to secure the dock.

TEm Pannwimn: I must ask the hon.member to withdraw that statement.

MR. SPEAKER: The statement isdenied, and the hon. member must with-draw it.

Mn. BATH: The Premier has deniedthe statement, and I musat perforce accepthis denial and withdraw it. I will refer,however, just to prove what I said has agreat deal of foundation for it, to thePremier's remarks at Bun bury. Inspeaking of the proposed vesting ofincreased powers in the Frem anticHarbour Trust he declared:

However, the result of the election onFriday will indicate whether the town (Fre-mantle) indorses the action we intend totake.

THE PREMIER: Read the precedingremarks about the members for thedistrict.

MR. BATH: Cannot that be construedinto this, that only by the return of theMinister for Works they might accom-plish this thing? Did the Premier knowthat the opponent of the Minister forWorks was also an advocate for the con-struction of the dock F

ThaE PREMIERt: Was not the memberfor North Fremantle in favour of thedock tooP

Mu. BATH: Was it not a fact that onthe floor of this House Mr. N~eedh am, atthe time the member for Fremantle, onseveral occasions advocated the construc-tion of this dock ? How could anymember, whether the Premier or anymember of the House, say that by thereturn of the Minister for Works they*ould know whether the people of Fre-mantle approved of it or not?

THrE PREMIER: Approved of extendingthe powers of the Harbour Trust, not thebuilding of a dock.

MR. BATH: Then wve have a state-ment made not over the name of a leader-writer, but in an article appearing in theWest Australian of Wednesday, May239rd, by "1Onlooker," which states as

Ifollows:ILocal interests are paramnount and the battle

Iis being waged over the question of whichcandidate, if returned, will the better serveFremantle's interests. There are some whogo so far a to believe that a crisis has beenreached in the history of the party, and that in

[ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

Addessin-epl: [ JUY, 906] ourth day. 203

the result of the election the future pros-perity of Fremantle and its environs is boundup. They aver that the return of the Laboarcandidate would not only jeopardise the chancesof a graving dock being built at Fremiantle,but snch a fe~eling of hostility on the part ofthe present Government would be arousedthat the town would receive a6 set-back fromwhich it would take years to recover.

We have the statement made to theeelectIors by business men. People weregoing round saying "If you do not returnthe Ministerfor Works, we have Buckley'schance of getting the dock." Then to capall we have this production [holding upa placard], issued on the evening beforethe day of election, and it was autborisedby the secretary of the Minister forWorks:

Pre-mantle electors, do not be misled. Safe-guard your own and the town's interests byvoting for James Price.Then underneath the photo. the words-

Ask yourselves the question, Which willserve the town best-a Minister of the Crownwho has charge of the Works Department, ora private member of a weak Opposition PSo far as the legitimate wants of theconstituencies in this State are concerned,a member of the weakest Opposition thatever sat in this House should be inprecisely the same position as regardsthe expenditure of public money as amember of the large party which sitsbehind the Premier. The Minister forWorks is there to deal out evenL-handedjustice to the constituencies of this Stateaccording to their just deserts, and not toshow that by voting for a M iister of theCrown who has charge of the PublicWorks Department they can help a townbest. [Interjections from Governmentside.] Members say "misinterpretation,"but I defy any member to misinterpret astatement of that kind. With all thelegal sophistry of the Attorney General,with all the theological learning, shallI say, of the member for West Perth(Mr. lllingworth), and with all themetaphysical skill of the GovernmentWhip (Mr. Gordon), no one can placeany other meaning on the statement inthat circular than that it was an attemptto bribe the electors of Fremantle. Thestatement by the Minister for Works inregard to the assertion by the memberfor Mount Leonora (Mr. Lynch) bringsme to a question which he failed toventilate, and which I am going to deal

with now, that being the appointment ofpersons to take postal votes in thedifferent electorates. He stated that itwas not to his knowledge that any ofthose gentlemen authorised to take votesassisted him on the day of election. Iwas there on voting day, and I saw thosegentlemen wearing Mr. Price's colours,and bring ing up to the polling boothelectors who donned his colours; and,when we saw lthat they had the right totake those votes, was it not perfectly justand right for the member for MountLeonora or any other supporter to seethat the other side were at least givenequal representation and equal fair playPThere was nothing in the charge; and Isay the blame rests more with those -whomake these appointments and render itnecessary for mnembers to seek theMinister in order that an appointmenton the other side should be -made. Sofar as my personal opinion is con-cerned, I think it is undesirablethat any other than Government offi-cials should be appointed to take postalvotes, and I assert that many ofthe abuses which have crept in underthis system would not have occurred baodthat systemn been adopted ; blut when wehave the present system, and people onthe other side hiave been appdinted, Ithink it is only fair that the oppositionside should have a. show also.

Ma. HARDWICK: C. an -you give us thenames of persons appointed?

Ma. BOLTON. Yes ; Learmouth andHigham. There are two for you. Onetook a dead man's vote.

Ma. BATH: We have also heard themember for North Perth inform memberswhy he could not be found sitting on thisside of the House. I think that even inthe 'wildest nightmare any member ofthe Opposition has ever had, not one hasever dreamed of such a calamity asthe hon. member for North Perthsitting on this side of the House;and when that member talks about themaintenance of his independence andindividuality he is beginning to get ondangerous ground. So far as memberson this side are concerned, they have atleast democratic methods in their, selec-tion of candidates; but I am informed,and credibly so, that the hon. memberwas selected by Mr. James Gardiner.Where does his individuality, or inde-

Address-in-Reply. (3 JULY, 1906.]

204 Address-in-Reply: ASML..orhdy

pendence come in? PMEM-BER: Throughthe ballot.] There was no ballot. Itwas merely a question of arbitration.The bon. member submitted his claims tobe a candidate, with that of several othergentlemen, to the arbitrator, Mr. JamesGardiner.

MR. LiNen: The Premier is arbitratornow-a-days.

MR. BATH:- I was going to say thatif his individuality and independence arethe only coverings the hon. member hastbo keep s-way the cold, ho 'will have to goto a warmer climate than Perth. Thenhe also referred to the fact that he couldnot support the policy adopted on thisside of the House; that he could not, forinstance, countenance the caucus methodsof this party. That is very dangerousground for any member sitting on theMinisterial side to get on. We havesome insight into the methods of thecaucus in the interview given by dieGovernment Whip in connection withthe change of Ministry. It was statedthen that Mr. Gordon was interviewedby the West Australian, and he stated:

As Whip of the party I may be allowed toknow what actually did take place at thatmeeting. Mr. Rason asked for an expressionof opinion as to the vacant Agent General-ship. He said that if the party desired, hewould stiby on as Premier, or, if they thouightit better that he should take the vacant AgentGeneralship, he would do that. He placedhimself entirely in the bands of the meeting.and the unanimous decision was that he shouldtake the vacant Agent Generalship.

That was one illustration of the caucusmethods which obtain on the Ministerialside. Then we have the question of theappointment of the Premier also left tothe decision of the 'Ministerial caucus.We knew how the present Premier andhis ex-colleague the memnber for Roe-bourne (Dr. Hicks) pursued the Ministerfor Nines up at Midland Junction; weknow bow the Colonial Treasurer, withthe portfolio in his pocket, waited dis-consolate on the platform for the returnof the Minister, who, however, did nothappen to return; and we know that theMinisterial Whip and various other gen-tlemen-T believe the member for NorthPerth was mentioned and the member forSwan -(Mr. Gull)-were all waiting ex-pectantly for the news that the ColonialTreasurer had accepted the Governor'scommission, that he bad formed his

Ministry, and was ready for them to besworn in as members. Then he foundthere had been ab little intriguing againsthim, and that, although he had the com-mission in his pocket, he did not exactlyhave the Premiership in his band ; and sohe came to the Ministerial caucus, putthe commission on the table, and said,"There, gentlemen; do with it as youwill. If you take mne, I will be glari to~act as Premier; if you take anyone else,I will be glad to co-operate with him ina asecondary capacity ;" and so 'we have aPremier selec ted by Ministerial caucus totake up the important duties of thatposition, and to accept His Excellency'scommission. When the member forNorth Perth talks about caucus;, let himlook at his own side of the House beforehe begins to cast stones.

Ma. BOLTON: He is leaving that side.MR. BATH: Theme is another matter

upon which I think we should have someenlighteuing, namely who is leader of theGovernment of Western Australia6 at thepresent tane?

TanE PREMIER:- Who leads the Oppo-sition P

MR. BATH: Is there a leader of theGovernment, or have we a. repetition ofthe condition of affairs which obtained inRome when Julius Cmsar passed away.Have we a triumvirate, three leadersinstead of one-three instead of one toact as leader i n t hi s Hou se ? So far i tis dIfficult to ascertain that, and the factthat we have such uncertainty in HisExcellency's Speech as to the proposalsof the Government is evidence that theMinisterial party have not as yet decidedwho is to be leader of the party, andwho, therefore, is to be leader 'of theHousQ. The Premier seems to be in avery parlous position. He is somethinglike Shylock's servant, who was greatlyexercised between claims of conscienceand an individual not mentioned in politesociety. Conscience desired him to con-tinue in the service of Shy lock, who wasa very hard mnaster, and the Devil urgedhim on the other hand to run away-

Tan PREMIER: Who is that, you?MaL. HEITNN:; Wilson.Ma. BATH: I am not going to carry

the simile to a conclusion, because al-though the profession to which theAttorney General belongs is very oftenterLmed the devil's brigade, I certainly do

[ASSEMBLY.] Foztrth day.

Addfreasin.Reply: [3 JULY, 1906.] Fourth day. 205

not wish to pursue the simile to thatextent; but up to the present date, andin view of the fact that the Premier hasto rely largely on legal advice, the gentle.man on the right seems to -have his earmost of the time, and his co-ruler on theleft seems to be altogether out in thecold, altogether disconsolate, and notwearing a very happy expression. I wantto advise the Premier, because I have aconsiderable amount of sympathy for him.He is an innocent enough and unsophis-ticated enough politician, and I want toassure him or advise him that theAttorney General will weave some subtlewebs of his legal sophistry around him,and will put his native intelligence in thecobwebs of legal formula. So far as theAddress-in-Reply or so far as the busi-ness of this session has gone, the Pre-mier has not stood up and voiced his ownopinions. He has not stood forward asLeader of the House, but we have had theAttorney General at his right handtugging his coat as if he were a schoolboynot well versed in his lesson. I believethe Premier has sufficient brains andsufficient intelligence to lead this Housewithout that Ministers legal advice orwithout his coat-tails being pulled bythat gentleman. I would like to see himnot only leader in name but leader inactuality, to see him independent of thelegal sophistries of the Attorney Generalor any other member in this House;taking his place as leader and Premier.and leading the House in the true senseof the word. As far as the Address-in-Reply is concerned, I have had to com-plain of the lack of definiteness in theproposals of the Government. I hopethat before this debate is finished we willhave from gentlemen sitting on that sideof the House something more definitewith regard to the proposals, somethingtangible which we can criticise and takehold oif, and that before the session iswell advanced we shall have the businessin hand and know exactly what they meanby land taxation, whether it is to bewith exemptions or not; also whether theconstitutional reform is to be a sufficientone, or the miserable proposal which hasbeen outlined by some members ; in fact,that we shall know whether this policy isto be a democratic oDe which democraticmembers of the House can be expected tosupport.

Tun PREMIER (Hon. N. J. Moore):Possibly it miight have been wiser for meto take the opportunity of making a fewnotes to enable me to reply to the speechwhich has just been delivered by theLeader of the Opposition (Mr. Bath).But before referring to the manycriticisms and suggestions thrown outduring the course of the debate, I shouldlike to thank those members who havebeen kind enough to make generousreferences to my succession to the Pre-miership. though I did not expect theLeader of the Opposition to do so, be-cusue his mind is built somewhat inproportion to isis body. I should likealso to thank those gentlemen who havepersonally extended their congratulationsto me in connection with my appoint-nient. I realise that owing to my limitedexperience in Parliament I may probablyhave to crave your indulgence, Mr.Speaker, on occasions when I may inad-vertently depart from the establishedusages of parliamentary procedure, andto rely to some extent on the generosityof hon. members on such occasions. TheLeader of the Opposition has referred tothe fact that no announcement has beenmade regarding the changes which tookplace in the Ministry during the laterecess. I have keen in Parliamentduring the last two years, and I haveseen two or three changes of Ministry:but on no occasion has there been anyannouncement made. When the Labourparty were in office-I do not know howthey managed it, whether or not theyintrigued - the member for Subiaco(Mr. Daglish). being Premier, jettisonedthe members for Mount Margaret (Mr.Taylor) and Cue (Mr. Holman) out ofthe Cabinet, to make room for the mem-bers for Brown Hill (Mr. Bath) andMounttLeonora (Mr. Lynch). When thatwas done, and afterwards, there was abso-lutely no announcement of any kind madeto this House concerning the change; so,following the precedent then set by theirleader, I did not think it necessary tomake an announcement, more especiallyas the hon. member must have spent agood many hours in looking up thedetails in connection with the new Min-istfry.

Mu. TAYLOR: The Premiership hadnot been changed ou the occasion towhich you refer.

206 Addlress-in-Reply: lSEBY] orhdy

THE PREMIER: In reply to whatthe hon. member (Ur. Bath) has4 said asto the present Ministry taking up theresponsibilitivs of the old, I can say formnyself and for those who were associatedwith Mr. Bason in the preceding Cabinet,that they are prepared to takie everyresponsibility for any acts done by themin the administration of their depart-ments. At tbe same time, I do notthink it is reasonable that the Ministryas a whole should be prepared to takeeither full credit or bld.me for any act ofthe late Administration. I can only sa~ythat if the acts of the late Governmentare subjected to impartial criticism, itwill found that the record of work doneduring their term of office will cornparefavourably with any other record wehave had. since the institution of respon-sible government. The Ministry wassworn in on the 28th August lastyear; and although Ministers had beenasked by the Opposition to take up thereins of Government, they were never-theless subjected to opposition in theirown electorates, and had to fightMinisterial elections; and soon after themeeting of the House a dissolutioncame about, and then they had to fight ageneral election, prepare their 'Estimates,get their work ready for Parliament, andconduct a session of Parliament-all infour months. There is not the leastdoubt any reasonable man must concedethat during this period a good deal ofhard work was entailed. I agree with themember for Mt. Leonora that the timeoccupied in debates of this kind is notwasted. As a deliberative Assembly it isour duty to debate everything; and I1 forone am willing and glad to bear anycriticism of any act of administration forwhich I am responsible. But I contendthat we should al ways have a keen regardto the wide difference between a delibera-tive Assembly and a debating society.The Leader of the Opposition refers tothe fact that Ministers have been prolificin their promises of reformation in ad-ministrative work, but that the onlywork done by Ministers has been done inMinisterial cars. Now whatever chargesmay be brought against me or any otherMinister, the accusation that our ad-ministrative work has been neglectedcannot be sustained. For the fact thatM1inisters have taken every opportunity of

visiting the various districts of the State,I think they should be commended ratherthan criticised, If that be considered asin, then I am a very great sinner.

'A. LYNCH: Will you keep on sinning?THE PRR9M LEE: Yes. I will con-

tinue to sin. I think that hon. memberswho have accompanied me on those ex-peditions have come back with theiropinions considerably changed in regardto Ministerial picnics. If riding on asaddle for a week or two with your rugin front of you, and camping out in theopen, can be construed into a, Ministerialpicnic, then I am well satisfied that theLeader of the Opposition will never govery far from a railway line.

Mn. BATHE: YOU Must know YOU Can-not effect economy in administrationwhile you are doing that.

THEm PREMIER: You must knowwhat you are talking about in regard tothese proposals when they are broughtbefore the House. When proposals arebrought in dealing with the variousdistricts, it is absolutely essential thatthe Minister Concerned. should have visitedthose districts, in order that he may speakfrom experience. And I contend thatwhatever may be ray shorteomings, myexperience of the. country generallyand of railway engineering in particularshould be of some value, whether I amhere or on the other side of the House.When in Opposition, the members whonow form this Government were corn-plimented by the leader of the lateGovern ment on the work they had doneto assist him in his parliamentary duties.He referred in generous terms to thework we had done. For five monthswhile I was in Opposition I assisted theLabour party, without fee or rewaird ofany kind, as chairman of the TimberInquiry Board; so I think members willrealise that Ministers- are prepared towork for their country, whether they areon this or the other side of the House.It is stated that during last session itwas the desire of the late Government,as of the present Government, to under-take the construction of certain develop-mental railways in various parts of theState, with the object of giving facilitiesto the producer. I at least, as theMinister responsible for the Lands De-partment, consider that I should havebeen wanting in attention to the duties

[ISSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

Addesein.Bepy: 3 Jtv,190.] Forth day. 207

of ray office had I neglected to takeevery means of satisfying myself asto the reasonableness -of any pro-position put forward. As to travel-liug in the Ministerial car, I may say, forthe information of the hon. member, Ifound on many occasions that I was ableto do considerably more work in theMinisterial car than in my office, owingto t he fact that in the car I was out ofhail of the telephone and of the persistentinterviewer. A man has there an oppor-tunity of working which dues not fall tohim during office hours. In dealingwith the 'administration of my owndepartment, I am quite prepared tosubmnit to a comparison with any periodin its history. The hon. member hasreferred to what has been done onprevious occasions; but his record ofwork in the Lands Department is nothingto be very proud of. In the adminis-tration of that department ha knows thatI received several legacies. One was inconnection with the Hamel Settlement,which bad given two Governments con-siderable trouble, and had occupied theattention of a select committee of thisHouse. I do not propose to state in fulldetail what has been done about thatsettlement, but may say that the Govern-ment has arranged for the settlers togive up their contracts, has now placedall the settlers OD the same terms asother conditional purchasers, and isdealing with the land on the same linesas repurchased estates ; so that everysettler who endeavours to secure anadvance in respect of his laud makes anapplication direct to the Agriculturalflank, and this obviates the necessity formaking to Ministers personal applicationsfor money. I think that this is animprovement, and feel sure that the pro-ceduro adopted will be beneficial notonly to the men who are living onthe settlement, but to the departmentgenerally. Survey before selection hasformed a prominent part of the workundertaken during the recess; and in notime in the h istory of the department has,there been such a large area of landsurveyed before selection and availablefor settlement. We have had up to dateconsiderably over 200,000 acres sub-divided, some of which has been throwvnopen, whilst the remainder will be avail-able as soon as the plans are completed.

Notwithstanding the work involved bythis, I have been able to effect a savingof £19,064 on may estimated expenditureduring the year, while the revenue of theLands Department during the sameperiod of eleven months is £25,444 inexcess of the estimated receipts, being£C16,543 till the 25th June more than thereceipts for last year.

Mn. BATE: From what source is thatrevenue ?

THE PREMIER: It is revenue fromadditional survey fees and increasedsettlement, making a difference to theLands Department of £235,000. Theclosest inspection of improvements hasbeen made during the period underreview, and every effort put forth toprevent speculative selection. But thewhole trouble in regard to the improve-ment coniditions is that such a, trivialamount of work is necessary in order tocomply with those conditions. And not-withstanding the fact that the hon. mem-ber's party was in power during twosessions of Parliament, no attempt wasmade to make more stringent the termsof conditional purchase selection.

MR. HOLMHAN: We were not in powerfor one session.

Tues PREMIER:- You were in powerfor 14 months.

Mn. BOLTON: No] during any fullsession.

THE PREMIER:- Well, you did notmake an attempt. We had a mouthafter a parliamentary ,reeess, and yetmanaged to bring in an amendment ofthe Land Act providing for payment ofhalf the cost of survey, and did much toprevent speculative settlement.

Mn. BATH: YOU might mnention theBill which I drafted for that purpose.

Ma. GORDON:- That is in the waste-paper basket.

TF~i PREMIER. I say that Billwhich I introduced is an evidence thatwe are desirous of securing none butgenuine settlers, while at the same timeit has had the effect of bringing in some-thing like £R4,000 of additional revenue.

MR. TAYLOR: That is largely from thesale of lands.

TnsE PREMIER: I say, the mere factof the amending measure providing forpayment of half cost of survey broughtin additLional] reven ue amounting to some-thing like £4,000 from that source alone.

Address-in-Beply. [3 JuLy, 1906.3

208 Address-in-Reply: [SEBY)Fut.dy

In the Department of Agriculture themethod of administering experimentalfarms has been considerably altered, andan attempt made to put them on a com-mercial basis. A valuation of the pro-perties has been made, and plans pre-pared showing the plots laid. out and thegrasses grown on them; while generalreturns are forwarded every week show-ing the stock on the farms and otherinformation of value to Ministers. TheHonorary 'Minister, Mr. J. Mitthell, hastaken a, great interest in this department.on which be brings to beara thoroughcommercial knowledge of the 'wholebusiness of agriculture.

MR. BOLTON. It is to be hoped that hewill straighten out the departmentalfinances.

Tn PREMIER: The Honorary, Win-ister has had a good experience infinancial questions as well, and I haveevei-y confidence be will do that. T hetick question in Kimberley is anothermatter that received attention duringrecess. For some time past there hasbeen considerably difficulty in connec-tion with the transportation of cattlefrom the tick-infested area of EastKimberley. After giving the questionconsiderable attention, I decided that theonly method of dealing with it was toreadjust the boundary of the tick area.As hon. members may be aware, Kim -berley is divided into Eastern andWestern districts. East Kiinberley is3tick-infested, while W~est Kimnberlev isknown as clean country; but portion ofEast Kimberley is also clean country.In order to bring tattle to Fremantle, itbaa been necessary for the cattle fromthe clean country in East Kimberley, totravel through the tick-infested countryof the northern portion of East Kimber-ley. Consequently, these cattle, whichwere clean when they left the homestation, became infested 'with tick, andthere was a very severe loss to theexporter, while many of the cattle whichcontracted tick while travelling over thisportion returned to the home station,and there was a possibility of theirticking, up the clean country. The ChiefTnspector of Stock, Mr. Weir, has gone

.North, and he proposes to so amend theboundaries of this region that no diffi-culty willk he experienced in this respect ;whil Mr. Canning has recently gone

North with the object of seeing whetherit is possible to provide a stock routefrom the Sturt Creek Station tothe Eastern Goldfields. [MR. LYxcHf:Another idea you stole from the Op po-sition.] One of the most importantmeas~ures that will1 be brought forward d ur-ing this session will be an amendment tothe Laud Act. It was originally intendedthat an amending and consolidatingmeasnre should be brought down, but a.xit was most important that ctertain pro-posals in the measure should be dealtwith as early as possible, it was decided,after consideration, to bring down an

Iamending measure, and this Bill I hopeIto be able to lay on the table next week.IOur present land hlws are undoubtedlythe most liberal in the world; hut sincetheir inauguration, conditions have alteredvery considerably, and improvement con-ditions which may have been con siderodstringent in the past are comparatively'trivial now, in view of the fact thatmost of this country is now within a.reasonable distance of a railway line.When Sir John Forrest first introducedthese regulations and subsequently the

PLand Act, they were as good as could bedevised, but the time has now arrivedwhen considerations other than the merealienation of land should be considered;that is to say, not only should worestringent improvement conditions heinsisted on in regard to conditional pur-chasew lands, but the area which has beenselected by one person, either indi viduallyor in conjunction with others, should besubstantially reduced from that allowedunder the present Act. I have on morethan one ocoasion alluded to the fact thatthere is; something like 11-k million acresof land alienatefl, and only somethinglike 400,000 acres brought under crop.Despite this fact, it is well known thatdevelopment is going on by leaps andbounds, and to ensure that persons shallnot take np land merely for the purposeof holding for a rise, I have introducedprogressive improvements in the Billwhich I propose to ask the House toapprove. The effect of putting this

tpuil into operation will be to bringthe land under crop much sooner than isdone under existing conditions. The

Ienforcement of progressive improvementson conditional purchase blocks will

Icause a considerable amount of money

[A-SSE10LY.) Fourth day.

Addessin-Repy: 3 Jrs.190.)Fourth day. 209

to be expended in prescribed im-provements every two years from thedate of approval to the tenth year,when an amount equal to the fullpurchase money will have been expendedin improvemaents. The question of limita-tion of area will also receive attention.It is evident that some alteration isnecessary, as, under the existing law, it isvery hard to determine just how muchland one person in conjunction withothers may helect. Provision will bemade for classification of land in someinstances; and in the case of this landand the areas which I have had surveyedbefore selection, the price will be fixedaccording to its value in the same way asrepurchased estates are dealt with. Thespeech of the member for Leonora (Mr.Lynch) was a very vigorous utterance,despite the fact that his remarks were toa certain extent robbed of their dueproportion by the very strong partysentiment that permeated them. Withreference to what the bon. member said inregard to our stealing the planks of theLabour party, I would like to remind thehon. member that the two principalmeasures he referred to, the tax onunimproved land values and the reduc-tion of the franchise of the Upper House,were measures advocated by Mr. Jamesprior to the advent of the Labour partyto power.

Mn. LYNCH: They were not advocatedby Mr. Rason last October.

THE: PREMIER: If you read Mr.Rason's speech at Midland Junction youwill find that at that time he advocateda tax on unimproved land values, andalso a reduction in the franchise of theUpper House. In my first speech in thisHouse I advocated a tax on unimprovedland values, with liberal exemption togenuine settlers; and I have seen noreason to alter my opinion in thatrespect. The Bill that will be broughtdown to the House on this occasion willprovide for exemptions in that regard.I do not propose to go into the details ofthat Bill . We hope to have the secondreading moved next week. I havealready stated in the policy speech thatit is our intention to make certain ex-emptions, and the fullest possible infor-malion will be given by the Ministerintroducing the measure. I do not claimthat the policy we have put forward is

original, but I do say that I have en-deavoured to outline a programme which,if given effect to, will result in generalimpirovements throughout the State, andnot to any particular industry or class.The member for L~eonora referred to thefact that during last year the Govern-ment then in power had not contractedfor so many works aij the previous regime.For the information of the hon. member,I would like to inform him that during1904-5 the number of contracts let was255, involving an amount of X97,685;while in 1905-6 we let 268 contracts, in-volving -an amount of £222,496. Also,during the period this Government hasbeen in office, just under two months,67 contracts have been let, totalling£106,998 18s.

MR. BATHE: Is that from revenuePTn PREMIER: No; general con-

tracts.MR. BOLTON: HOW much apart from

the sewerage ?Tu PREMIER: I will give 'you the

details. Perth Refriger-ating WVorks,£2,550; Narrogin State Farm Buildings,X3,173: Kalgoorlie School of MinesMuseum, £2,404; Metropolitan Sewer-age Treatment Works, £20,968; Bun-bury Court House, £2,402; Perth NewCookery and Laundry School, £2,060;Sewer Pipes for the Metropolitan Sewer-age Scheme, £21,981; Gonmalling-Dowerin Railway, £6,466; Katanning-Kojonup Railway, £17,197; and Wagin-Dumbleyung Railway, £10,776. That isexclusive of the amount which will beexpended in the purchase of 70 miles ofrailway material.

MR. LYNCH: You are lumping loanexpenditure with revenue,

MR. BATH: That was not our conten-tion. We were dealing with the expend i-ture from revenue for the two terms.

THE PREMIER: One of the argu-ments put forward by the member forLeonora to prove what a prosperous timethe working man had during the regimeof the Labour Government was that theaverage per head to the credit ofdepositors in the Savings Banks hadfallen off by £1 14s. 3d. during the last11 months as compared with the corre-sponding period in the previous year.This is doubtless explained by the factthat there have been 490 new dlepositors.I think that is rather an unfortunate

Addre8e-in- Reply: [3 JULY, 1906.]

210 Address-in-Reply: [ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

argument from the lion. member's stand-point. 1 would like to refer him to thefact that the position is now improved,this being evidenced by the fact that thedeposits for the month of June to the28th exceeded the withdrawals by no lessa sum than X30,822. This happy stateof affairs can hardly be credited to theLabour party by evgn such an enthusi-astic supporter as tme member forLeonora. The amount due to depositorsin May, 1904, was £2,012,346, and theaverage amount to credit was £36 9s. 5d.In May. 1906, the amount due todepositors was £22124,907, while theaverage amount to credit on each accountwas £35 17s. 9d. In Mfay, 1906, theamount due to depositors was £2,228,345,and the average amount to credit was£356 s. Id., or Ila, less. The lion.member stated that the difference was£1 14s. 3d. These figures show a steadyincrease in the total amount of depositorsand a steady but slight decrease in theaverage amount due to each depositor.Another matter the hon. member referredto was the fact that no income tax pro-posals had been foreshadowed in theGovernor's Speech. Our stand in regardto income tax proposals is that theyshould, as far as possible, be kept inreserve as taxation. Should necessityarise, however, the Government will nothesitate to institute such a, tax. Thebon. member referred in very strongterms to the action taken by theGovernment during the course of theFremantle election. The leader ofthe Opposition also referred to it.The Minister for Works to-day, duringthe course of his reply, dealt ex-haustively with this question, so I donot propose to go into any details in con-nection with it, except that I do not thinkthat any statement I made during thecourse of that election can be construedinto a6 bribe in any shape or formn.If the hon. member is satisfied that themeis any truth in his statements, he shouldhave moved a vote of no-confidence, sothat if those members on whom the lifeof this Ministry practically depends weresatisfied the charges made were true, theywould have an opportunity of sayingwhether the Government is deservingof their confidence or not. It is a case ofwin, tie, or wrangle. The tactics adopted-by the members of the Ministry are to be

coumnended rather than those adoptedon occasions at Fremantle by memberswho were supporting Mr. Needham'scandidature, when not only were theactions of the Government criticised, butan attempt was made to blacken thereputation of every member of theMinistry. There is niot the least doubtabout that. Statements were made bysome members ranting at street cornerslike demented demagogues. The coursepursued on that occasion by Ministerswould be taken again to-morrow, forwe only did all we could from the publicplatform to secure the return of a col-league.

MR. BATn: Hare you never spoken ata street corner P

THE PREMIER: Yes.MR. BATH: What is derogatory in

that?'THE PREMIER: Nothing derogatory.MR. WALKER: Why these veiled allu-

sions. Tell us what was said.THE: PREMIER: I do not know

exactly what was said.MR. WALKER: That is the kind of

calumny fronm that side of the House.THE PREMIER: I cannot say any-

thing I heard myself.MR. WALKER: Nor anyone else.TEE PREMIER: I am glad to hear

the statement that it is not true.MR. WALKER: The Ministerial side

has been constantly libelling this sideover the Fremantle election. Membershave been libellous right through.

THE PREMIER: If members thinkthat way and hare occasion to speak thatway, there is no occasion to express per-sonal respect for the persons libelled. Iam glad to have the assurance that mnem-bers have been misinformed as to thestatements made at Fremantle. I con-tend it is impossible to have two codesof morality. If a man is not worthy ofthe confidence of the people in it publiccapacity, Ineither is he worthy of the re-spectof honest men in his privateeApacity.

ME. TAYLOR: I have held those viewsfor years.

THE PREMIER: The Leader of theOpposition is aspiring to be a fire-eaterand endeavouring to emulate the tacticsof some members near him, who are onlytoo willing on every possible occasion togive us evidence of their fighting quali-ties. It does not become the gentleman ;

Address-in-Reply: [3 Jris, 1906.] Fourth day. 211

be is not built that way. He has beengiving me cheap advice to-nigbt, and inreturn I may tell him it would be far betterto confine himself to calm and deliberatecriticism, than endeavour to seek areputation for fire-eating and recklessfighting.

MR. BATH: That is what I try to be,calm and deliberate, but the enormitieswere so great.

THE PREMIER: I understand that Iam undergoing my baptism of fire. Afterthe snipe-shooting of the member forMount Magnet, the big guns are beingbrought to bear in the leader of the partyhimself and his aide-dc-camp or adjutant,the member for L~eonora. The memberreferred to the fact that he did not knowwho was Leader of the House. I thinkit would be interesting for members onthis side to know who is Leader of theOpposition, for as a rule after the Address-in-Reply has been proposed and seconded,.the Leader of the Opposition generallyfollows with his remarks. This prazticehas not been followed unless the memberfor Mt. Magnet (Mr. Troy) has assumedthe r6le of Leader of -the Opposition.

MR. HUDSON: There is no such rule ofprocedure.

ME. BATH: The member for WestPerth was put up by his Leader, Mr.Leaks, on several occasions after theAddress-in-Reply bad been moved andseconded. We wanted some explanationof the funny proceedings during ther-ecess.

THn PREMIER: In regard to themeasure which we intend to bring forwardit is our intention to liberalise the pro-visions of the Agricultural Bank Act to aconsiderable extent by reducing the maxi-Imum. The original measure enabled per -sons to borrow tip to £ 1,000; we propose toreduce the maximumn to £500- It is myopinion that if a, farmer desires to borrowmore than £500 for the improvement ofhis land, he is in a position to apply toother financial institutions than the StateBank for aid. The primary object of theAgricultural Bank Act was to assist thesmall man in the first years of his occupa-tion of the land, and we consider it wiserto extend the operation in favour of thesmall man with a maximiini of £2500,rather than that it should hie restrictedas it is in the case where a larger amountis advanced. It is proposed that the

Bank sball be managed by a board ofthree persons, to whom the manager willmake his recommendations. Authoritywill he given to advance to the full valueof the improvements up to from £200 to£300, while the remaining £2200 will beadvanced up to 50 per cent. of the valueof the improvements; 5 per cent. interestto be paid on the amount advanced forthe first five years, while the pr~ncipaland interest are to be paid off by equalpayments extending over 25 Years.As at present, the money is to beobtained from the Savings flank, tobe recouped from time to time byordinary loan funds or debentures. Asmembers know, it is the intention of theGovernment to make some radical altera-tions in regard to the tenure of land onthe goldfields. I refer to residentialleases.

ME. ScAnnaw: We heard somethingabout that by private wires from theMinister for Mines during the elections.

THE PREMIER: Shortly after goinginto office a deputation from the Kal-goorlie Roads Board.waited upon ine tourge the Government to grant the rightof purchase to residential leaseholders.It was pointed out that ever since theregulation was introduced there had beengeneral dissatisfactiozf owing to the diffi-culty holders had to secure financialassistance to build decent homes.

Mn. SCADDAN: Who has expressedthat Opinion ?

THE PREMIER: The KalgoorlieRoads Board. The result is, instead ofa good substantial type of house beingconstructed there, the erections in manycases are hessian shanties.

MR. BATH: That is a libel on thepeop~le of Trafalgar, where they havedecent buildings.

MR. SCAIDDAN: At Boulder as well.THE PREMIER: As a comparison in

this regard, no better example can be-taken than the case of Subiaeo, which toa large extent is a working man's suburb.

Ma. DAoLrsn: More members of Par-liarnent live there than anywhere else.

THE PREMIER : It is absolutelyimpossible to find a better class of cot-tage than in Subiaco.

MR. BATH: Seventy-five per cent, arepaying rent.

THE PREMIER: What is the reason?These people having freeholds have had

212 Address-in-Reply: [ASSEMBLY.] Fourth day.

an opportunity of obtaining financialassistance, while on the goldfields thatassistance is denied to persona. In caseswhere money has been advanced it hasbeen at exorbitant interest. A case wasbrought under rmy notice recently where aproposal 'was made to advance a man£600 on a residential lease at 20 per cent.Is that not sufficient argument to provethat this form of tenure cannot be con-ducive to settlement in these localities ?

MR. SoinnnN: There are no vacantblocks except where freeholds exist.

THE PREMIER: I may say my de-cision was not arrived at until after thegravest possible consideration and untilafter consulting the Under Secretary forLands and the Government official on thefields. These gentlemen have been con-nected with this question in their officialcapacity, and I1 feel sure members willrealis that their opinion in this respectis valuable. The former officer in hisreport stated :

I may, say that residential leases have atleast had a fair trial, having first come intoforce in 1898; and although the regulationscontrolling them have been amended fromtime to time, and in the last instance, duringMr. Daglish's Government, were very consider-ably liberalised and a 999 years' lease pro-vided for, I fear that it must be said that theyhave not been a su~cesis, that is if success ismeasured by absence of complaints fromselectors and others interested in them.

MR. BATH: Who is that?THE PREMIER: Mr. Clifton. The

report continues:-From past experience, and particularly with

regard to the latest most liberal residentiallease regulations, it appears that we mustgive up the idea, that people will ever be con-tented on residential leases. Mr. Tupper inhis admirable minute on pp. 16 to 18 arrivesat much the same conclusion. When sucha strong advocate for the lease system asMr. Tupper has always been practically admnitsits failure, and he has had opportunities ofseeing it in practice to an extent whichperhaps no other official of the departmenthas, it makes one feel that there is somethingwrong about it . . . I must say that Icannot see that much if any harm wouldcome of allowing the fee simple or residentiallots to be acquired; and had my recom-mendations, in this respect made in 1898 withregard to the Boulder blocks been followed, itwould have saved a vast amount of con-troversy and heart-burning.Mr. Topper, the Government land agentat Kalgoorlie, says;

It was thought a lease of this nature (999years) would give universal satisfaction, but T

regret to say quite the contrary seems, to be thecase. Judging from what I have heard andseen on the goldfields, I am quite convincedthat the residents there will never be satisfieduntil they have the right to purchase the feesimple of the holdings after a certain time.

MR. SCADDAN: That very officer pre-vented it.

THE PREMIER: Continuing, Mr.Tapper says :

Holders of residential leases under previousregulations (21 years' lease) can change theirtitle to the new lease (999 years) on paymentof a fee of 20s., hut very few have up to thepresent availed themselves of this privilege,as they have repeatedly stated to me that theycould see no advantage to be gained by sodoing. One great disadvantage that a holderof a residential lease has to put up with is thefact that banks and such like institutions willnot accept that class of title as security, andthe consequence is that if the lessee wishes toraise a few pounds for the purpose of erectinga house or other improvements, he is obligedto go to a certain class of money lenders, whocharge him any rate of interest from 25 percent, to 75 per cent. Most of the workers areunable to eet dwellings without financialassistance, and the money lenders are the onlypeople who will advance the sum required, andfor which they always charge an exorbitantrate of interest. . .. . Those persons whowere the strongest advocates for leaseholdtitles a few years ago are now, with very fewexceptions, the strongest advocates for free-hold.

MR. COLLIER: That is untrue.MEL. SPEAKER: Order!TuE PREMIER: The report goes

on:-

I personally was a strong believer in theleasehold system, but I must confess theexperiment has not been the sueces I ex-pected. It is all very good in theory, but itwill not work out well in practice, and so longas the present system continues there willalways be, I think, the same dissatisfaction.

MR. HoRAN: After Mr. Tupper wrotethat report, he resigned from the depart-ment, did he not?

Tus PREMIER; I do not think hehas resigned yet. No Minister would bejustified in ignoring the opinions of tworesponsible officers who have been soclosely associated with the question fromthe beginning. [Interjection by Mr.SC&DDA.N.] Those reports were madesix months ago.

MR. SCADDN: You stated more thansix months argo that you decided to do so.

Ma. BATH: You said so in reply to themember for East Fremantle more thansix months ago.

Addessi nRepyj: [3 ULY190.] Fourth day. 213

Mna. BOLTON:- You said so about eightmonths ago.

Tnn PREMIER: It is proved thatmany people in the neighbourhood ofthat district will not be satisfied withanything less than the freehold. Nothingbetter could be quoted than the opinionof the local body controlling the centrewhere very many of these leases were setapart-the municipal council of Kal-goorlie. Subsequently to the delivery ofthe polity speech I received the followingletter from that body-

By direction of this council, r have thehunour to urge that legislation be broughtinto effect to allow those holders of residentialareas, as so desire, to secure the fee simple ofthei hodns and that in future town landsforirsdnta purposes be dealt with undertho workmens blocks principle of the LaudAct 1898; with a maximum time of twelvemonths after the granting of such leaseswithin which application may be made for thepurchase of the lots right out.

What the council ask was what I hadpromised. 1 may say, however, that itis not the intention to limit the periodwithin which tile purchase-money has tohe paid to 12 mionths, as suggested.This might press heavily on the financi-ally weak, and we have extended thetime. The strongest argument that canbe used against the principle of grantingthe right of purchase is that in a. fewyears the great majority of these blocksmay come into the possession of thosewho have the wherewithal to purchasefrom their more needy fellows. It mayhappen in a few cases, hut I do not thinkthe whole of the majority should. bepenalised for exceptional cases. I fore-saw this possibility, and with a view topreventing it as fax as possible includeda provision that no man who has onceheld a workiug-man's block will be ableto secure another from the Crown. Ithink that provision will go to a verylarge extent to prevent anyone fromsecuring more than one of these pur-chases. I would like to say that it is notcompulsory for them to give. the proetup. but they are given an opportunity Ofcoming under the principle I have sug-gested with regard to workmen's blocks.The Government are desirous as far aspossible to assist in the development ofthe North-West, and provision is beingmade on the next year's Estimates forputting down a number of artesian bores

*in different localities. Already one borehas been put down at B3roome with agood flaw of water, and plant has beensbifted to Derby to enable one to be putdown at the 66-Mile on the Fitzroy-road.Arrangement h as been made for an officerof the Lands Department to proceed toDerby with a view to inspecting certainareas of land which it is thought may bewade available for tropical culture. Itis necessary that this inpetiona shall bemade, and that the landsall. be sur-veyed, so that notice of resumption canbe given to the leaseholder. Under theAct it is necessary to give 12 months'notice of resumption in such cases. Inregard to the question of immigration;there has been and oubtedly a big attemptmade to induce settlement, not only inour own State, but in New Zealand,Queensland, and New South Wales. Fromthe old country I quito recently had aletter from a gentlemani well known inWestern Australia, in which lie statedthat not only wore emigration agentstravelling Scotland and Ireland in theinterests of the Canadian 0-ovefn went,hut also certain agents were there whowere sent out by the Americin Govern-ment, and they had adopted a systempractically of acting as land agents.They had a list of all the farms whichwere available in certain districts inAmeriic a, and the agents of the AmericanGovernment were doing all they possiblycould to encourage emnigration to theirparticular States. New Zealand at thepresent time is bringing out a thousandlabourers and a thousand domestic femagleservants from the old country, and isoffering to find work for them on arrival ;whilst New South Wales in paw ph-lets and advertising matter states thatwork will be guaranteed to any personsemigrating to New South Wales. I donot propose to deal at any farther lengthwith the matters which the Govern-ment intend to bring forward this ses-sion. There are several other Billswhich have been already referred to,not only in the policy speech hut also inithe Speech of His Excellency. Amongthe Bills to be submitted will be one

Iamending the Constitution, providing fora reduction of the franlchise for 'theLegislative Council from .£25 to £15.This, as I have already stated, was the

Ipolicy of the late Government, and was

Address-in-Reply: [3 JULY 1906.]

214 Address-iri-Reply: [ASBL.Forhd.

announced by Mr. Rason in his policyspeech at Midland Junction. TheGovernment propose to ask the Rouseto give effect to that proposal, while atthe same Lime making provision for areduction of £200 in Ministerial salaries.The IFreinantle Harbour Trust Amend-mnent Bill will be referred to by othermembers during' the course of thisdebate. As has already been stated, itis proposed to give the trust increasedpowers to enable it to construct docksand for work in connection with theharbours, whilst at the same time givingit power to raise mn'oney by debentures.Bills dealing with mnunicipalities, publichealth, and mines regulations are olddishes, and are measures which are wvellworthy of the consideration of the House.Copies of the Municipal Bill will beforwarded to the various municipalitiesthroughout the State. so that they mayhave an opportunity of making knownthrough their representations any sug-gested amendments which they thinknecessary. In conclusion, I would liketo say'that, as already announced, it isthe intention of the GJoverument to goon the London market to raise a loan.That loan wifl be spent on reproductiveworks. The principal works which weintend to bring forward this session arein connection with agricultural and mniningdevelopmental railways.

Ma. BATH: What is your meaning of"reproductive" ?

THEs PREMIER: I do not say thatthe railways will be reproductive imame-diately. A reproductive railway is arailway which will assist in the settle-ment of a. State, and thereby enablemany men who would otherwise not beable to go on the land to take up country,and not only take it up. but develop itto the utmost of its capacity. Amongstthe various lines to which 1 have alreadyreferred is an extension of the line fromGreenhills eastward. I have had anopportunity of traversing the route ofthis line, and the line is one which Ifeel sure will commend itself to theHouse. It is our desire as far aspossible to give the House an idea ofwhat our views are in coninection -withour programme of railway construction.1 consider it is muoch more advisable todo this, so that members of the Housemnky have an opportunity of making

Iwhatever inquiries they may have toniake in connection with these proposals.Last session exception was taken to thefact that certain Railway Bills 'werebrought down very hurriedly, and thatmembers bad not had an opportunity ofvisiting those localities and satisfyingthemselves as to the urgency or otherwiseof (be proposed railways. We have out-lined the proposals which we intend tobring down. Included in them are fourrailways which we propose to build inthe interests of the mining industry.

Mn. DAGILISH: Will you extend theJandakot line to Armadafe?:

THiE PREMIER: It is the intentionof the Government to extend that rail-way to connect with the South- WesternRailway,

Aln. DAGLISH: At Arniadale?TunE PREMIER: That will be stated

in the Bill. As to the railways which wepropose to bring under the considerationof the House, it is our intention to allowParliament to have an opportunity ofsaying which are the most urgent. Nextto the line from IGrevnhills we have theproposal to extend the line from Narrogintowards the Wickepin Agricultural Area.We propose to have an extension of theline from Bridgetown in a southerlydirection to Wilgarrup, and to have a line

'from Donnybrook up the valley of thePreston. This line will open up a con-siderable area of fruit-growing country,and at the same time will give an oppor-tiinity for the establishment of smalltimber mills. There is a considerableamount of land held there by conditionalpurchase holders, which at the presenttime is not available for cultivation, carry-ing a. considerable quantity of good'timber, and I am sure that the ownersof this land will be only too glad to havean opportunity of disposing of the timbergrowing on their property at a reasonableroyalty. Another proposal is to constructa line in the direction of the LowerBlackwood. This also will open up aconsiderable area of timber country.The proposal which we have in regard tothe construction of the mining railways Iwill leave to the Minister for l~ines todeal with, because he is more intimately

I acquainted with the particular districtsthey will serve than I am. Memberswill be given every opportunity of makingthemselves acquainted with thesLe pro-

[ASSE-51BLY.] Fourth day,

Addrss-n-Rply [8 rLY 196.1Frth day. 215

posals, and every p)ossible informationwill be brought down to the Rouse beforethe Bills are being considered.

Mu. BATH: Are you not going to sayanything about Perth, North Perth, andKa tanning ?

THE PREMIE II: With regard to themember for 'Perth (Mr. H. Brown), hehas been characterised as a candid friendof the Government, but 1 think it ismuch better to have a candid friendthan a supporter who does not knowexactly where be is. The member forPerth was elected -possibly he has for-gotten the fact-as a supporter of theJames and Rason Governments; and thetwo planks in the platform to which heobjects, namely the tax on unimprovedland values and the reduction of thefranchise for tte Legislative Council,were both included in the policy of thosetwo gentlemen.

Ma. El. Enowu: I was asked the ques-tion in the Town Hall, and said I wouldnot vote for either.

THE: PREMIER: That was the policyof the two Governments. As far as thehon. mnem ber is concerned, he has definedhis Posj tion pretty clearly. He tells ushe objects to these two proposals, andthat he will vote against them. Werealise thbat the municipal experience hehas had wdll be of the greatest possible.Value to the Rouse when considering theMunicipal Bill, and I am glad to hear heis willing to utilise that experience forthe benefit of the -House. In regard tothe land tax proposals, the member forKatautning (Hon. F. H. Piesse) hasreferred to the fact that he intended tovote against these proposals. However,he need have no fear for these whom beis interested in, I mean the small

-farmers who have recently settled on thesoil. We propose to make such liberalconditions that they will not harass thesmall farmers in their pioneering effortsat development.

MR. A. J. WILSON: You can dependupon the Opposition to convert him tothat view.

THE: REMIER: I am very glad tohear it. In conclusion, I realise that intaking up the position of Le~der of theGovernment I have undertaken a veryonerous task, and a. grave responsibilitfor a man with my very limited parlia-mentary experience. I can only say that,

whether I amn Leader of the Governmentor in Opposition, I will endeavour to thebest of my ability to do tmy duty to theStalte.

XM. W. 3. BUTCHER (Gascoyne) : I'shall not, like some of the precedingspeakers, commence by congratulatingeverybody in the House and many out-side the House. I will content myselfsimply with offering my congratulationsto the Premier on having at this earlystage in his parliamentary career attainedthe high political distinction he nowholds. Let us hope sincerely that lateron we shall have. to congratulate thecountry on having found at last one whowill prove capable of dragging, it out ofits present financial entanglement. Letus hope that will come about in the nearfuture. In connection with this appoint-ment, I have one cause for regret inthe Premier's little knowledge, or abso-lute want of knowledge, of the northernportion of this State. I am not one ofthose who dread that the North will beabsolutely neglected because the membersof the Ministry have not a knowledge ofthat great country, so long as the Ministryare prepared to be guided by the repre-senitatives of that part of the State, andavail themselves of the knowledge whichthose representatives have acquired,though not expecting that Ministerswill necessarily do everything whichthose representatives may suggest. Ifmembers who have lived for any timefrom 10 to 20 years in that part of thecountry have not a sufficient knowledgeof the local conditions to enable them togive information as to the requirementsof that country, I am sure that the Gov-ernment cannot hope to gain that know-ledge through any other channel. It isan enormous and valuable country; andit is impossible for anyone to gain thatknowledge of7 it which its present repre-sentatives have acquired, unless he isprepared to spend in it a considerableportion of his life. Only when Governors'Speeches were being read in Parliamenthave we heard of the intention of theGovernment to assist and develop theNorth. Promnise after promise is madeon those occasions; but I regret to statethat the promnises are invariably broken,only to be remembered again at the timeof the preparation of the next Governor'sSpeech. I wish to know whether this

. Address-in-Reply. [3 JuLy, 1906.]

216 Addres8-in-Reply: [ASSEMfBLY.] Fourth day.

state of things is to continue al ways.Are we always to allow these valuableresources known to exist in that part ofthe country to remain undeveloped, seeingthat Government after Government hasmade the same promises, and I cansafely say that not on one occasion hasany attempt been made to carry themout? Yet no part of this State that Iknow of would respond so quickly todevelopment as would the North; andup to the present the North has beenmost shamef ully neglected. Look at theresources we have there-gold, silver, andtin in minerals, and on our coast-line avaluable pearling industry, and enormousscope for the development of the fishingindustry itself. Then we have beenpromised at different times a railway toopen up some of our mineral country inthe North; and I am sorry to say thatthis has been left out of the Governor'sSpeech for the present session. I shouldlike to know whether the Governmentintend to do anything towards the con-struction of that railway, either by directGovernment assistance, by private enter-prise, or by an -y other means. Un-doubtedly the railway is badly wantedthere; and our vast -resources cannotbe developed except by railway con-struction. I hope that in this Govern-ment there does not exist that strongelement of hostility to the North whichhas been so characteristic of Govern-muents in the past. I firml 'y believe thatthe gentleman now leading the Govern-ment will be prepared to listen to thosewho represent the northern areas, and todo his best to develop those rich pastoraland mineral lands. I should like to drawattention to the enormous progress whichthe pastoral district which I representhas made since the James Government

an to put down artesian bores- Iampru to say, at my instigation.

-The first bore was put down four 'yearsago:1 and since that time millions of acresof pastoral land have been taken up andsettled as quickly as stock could beobtained to put on them. I can safelysay that there is scarcely an inch ofsuitable country in that district that has

not already been taken uip, throughoutthe Gnscoyne and the Minilya, in everydirection within the limits of what is atthe present time considered to be theartesian basin. We have already eight

or ten bores, completed or in course ofconstruction or arranged for; and thefour, five, or six bores completed areproducing say from 1,500,000 gal-Ions down to 450,000 gallons per day.Those acquainted with pastoral pursuiscan easily imagine bow immensely valu-able it is to a country which has alwaysbeen regarded as waterless, to find thatartesian water can be obtained to thisextent; and we have repeatedly askedthe Government to send out geologists

1with a view to trace and to define as faras possible the limits of this artesian

*basin, so as to give landholders an oppor-tunity of knowing whether or not theycan risk a large expenditure with the

*hope of success. It is recognised that itis the duty of the Government to takethe initiative, as it were, in this direction.ti hardly fair to expect the pastoralist

to tke 4 a large area on lease, andimmediately to put his hand in his pocketto the tune of £5,000 or £6,000 in orderto put down a bore to test what isactually a Government estate. Theseareas are only lcaseholds; and it ishardly fair to expect a private person toput down the first artesian bores. Surelythe Government should take that workin hand. Once having proved the exist-ence of artesian water, then the Govern-'ment can leave it to the lessee to proceedto develope his leases. I1 am glad to saythat was done with the assistance of theprogressive member for Menzies (Ron.H. Gregory), who was Minister forMines in the James Government as inthis Government. He considered myproposals fair and reasonable; and Ican but say that the development andprogress which that district has madeup to the present are due entirelyto that hon. member. I hope thatthe Government will see the wisdomof his policy, and will continue it. Wehave promises of bores in certain partsof the country farther North ; but Ithink it would be wise if the Governmentsent out a geologist to ascertain whetherthere was a prospect of obtaining artesianwater, before launching out into a largeexpenditure. There is another projectthat I should much like to see the Gov-ernment undertake, and one that I regrethas not found a place in the Governor'sSpeech. I refer to the establishment offreezing works throughout the northern

Addessin-s'py: 3 JLY,190.]Fourth day. 217

pastoral districts of this State. It mustbe recognised that the whale of our meatsupply for the metropolitan and the gold-fields areas must conme froze the pastoralregions of tho North; and the waste andthe pecuniary loss in bringing stock fromthese areas to Freinantle arie so greatthat if I were to state the amo-ant I amperfectly certain that members who donot know the facts would think I wasexaggerating. But the loss amounts tothousands of pounds per annum, and isa direct loss to the producer, to theState. and to the consumer. With theestablishment of freezing works thewhole difficulty would be overcome.The cattle would be killed on the spot,would be brought down to Fremmntlechilled, and would be put on the marketin really good condition. Moreover,freezing works would obviate the neces-sity for the ruthlessly cruel treatmentnow suffered by the stock. The unfor-tunate animals, after being herded. foreight or ten days on board ship, areagain herded into a stock-yard at Rabb'sJett 'Y, where they remain starving untilthey are slaughtered. When that for-tunate ime, from the bullock's point ofview, arrives, they are in many casesnot fit for human consumption. Andnow I come to that very vexed question,the land tax. My vicw is this. I firstask myself whether a land tax is neces-sary;i and if necessary, for what purpose.If it is for revenue purposes, then we are

co0nin down to bed-roc;k; if, as somemembers think and as some other peoplehave thought, the object is the burstingup of big estates, it will not have thateffect-rather the opposite. At the pre-sent time we have not been shownconclusively -that the tax is absolutelynecessary from a revenue point of view.Before we coma down to that position-before we look for farther taxation-wemust first finid out whether it is abso-lutely impossible to reduce our expenses,or to bring them within the scope of ourrevenue. Has this been doneP I donot think it has. T would suggest thatwe cut down our grants to mnunicipalities.The member for North Forth (Mr.Brebber) will not like that. We cancease to give these huge grants to varioussocieties throughout the State. We cancut dawn or entirely abolish the grantsto the Caves Board, which have figured

very largely in our Estimates for the lastfew years . The member for Sussex(Hon. F. Wilson) will not like that,I admit. We must also cease to givegrants for public parks throughout theState. We must cease to give our grantsto the Zoological Gardens, for thepurpose of building useless snake-houses. And I should advocate theabolition of the Observatory -anotheruseless article in Western Australia.There are lots of these things we mightcut down in order to reduce our expenses.To a great extent they are useless to theState; and when that is done, if we findthat we cannot keep within the limits ofour revenue, let us bring down a landtax, and I will be found one of the firstto support it. Another thing, the Gov-ernment might just as well take anotherpull at those huge dividends we seefiguriug in the Governor's Speech. I seethere is no less a sum than X2,167,639paid in dividends in the last 12 months.The greater proportion of these dividendsis drawn by absentees, by people whocontribute little to the revenue of theState. Let us take another pull at thesedividends, and sce if we cannot get itlittle more towards the revenue out ofthese people. After we have done allthese things, if we find that we requirerevenue let us institute a land tax ; butdo. not forget that when a land tax isintroduced it will have a very seriouseffect upon our future land settlement.We are asking settlers to come here andtake up agricultural land and settle on it;and unless we allow very liberal exenmp-tions, we cannot expect to do otherwisethan strangle the agricultural industryand cripple the unfortunate settlers whocomne bore; and it will have more theeffect of increasing large estates thanreducing them. Before we resort to a landtax by which the struggling fa~rmer willbe affected, let us go to somebody whocan afford to pay. a tax better. Let usstart on an income tax, and we will strikethe wan who contributes nothing towardsthe development of the country and whois doing nothing but drawing an incomeas a middleman.

MR. BATH: And by an income tax youwill also be getting at the man who isdoing something.

Mn. BUTCHER: Yes; I am advo-cating an income tax. I went to see it

Addregs-in-Beply. (3 JuLy, 1906.]

218 Address-in-Reply. [SE BY)Qetos

really before a land tax; or put themboth together; I am perfectly willing toassist in passing both of them. Unfor-tunately perhaps, I shall have to con-tribute towards it. I do not mind, solong as I can see reasonable hopes ofprotecting the struggling settler to agreat extent, and of allowing him toovercome the first few years of pioneeringwithout a land tax; but no land taxshall go through this House without myopposition if it is not going to carrywith it very liberal exemptions to thestruggling settlers. Now I am go0ing tohave &atilt at Federation. WhilelIadmitthat I amn a federalist at heart-I havebeen throughout my life-I cannot Saythat we can look on Federation, as far asit affects West Australia, as a. blessing.Ratber I he opposite. No only can wesay that we have derived no benefit fromit, but we can honestly say it has been adistinct disadvantage. We have sufferedvery heavy loss in the past, and we arelikely to suffer very considerably in thefuture. I consider that we undoubtedlypaid very largely for our whistle, and ourwhistle, inl fact, onky exists in name.The whole question of Federation is ahuge sentimental joke from the com-mencement, and we have to pay for it.We have lost considerably in our revenue,and we can ill-afford to4 and in thefuture we Shall probably lose a great dealmore. The only hope we have now is, a~sfar as I can see, to carefully see that wesend to represent us in the Federal Par-liament men of the ver~y best class whoare caplable of guarding jealously ourinterests and fighting strenuously for ourrights. Let us look forward to the time,and hope it will soon arrive, when we willreceive some of those glorious benefitswhich we have been promised in the past.I only hope it will come before very soonand that we will prosper under Feder%-tion. 1 have nothing more to speak uponbut to accord the Address-in-Reply myheartiest support.

On motion by Mr. BOLTON, debateadjourned.

ADJOURNMENT.The House adjourned at 9651 o'clock,

until the next day.

Wednesday, 41h July, 1906.

PAEQuestions; -. erson afl eetion, Mr. Tigilb ._ 219

Fremnantle Hfarbour Property, and cost .. 1Co lie-Narrogin Railway. Wages ............ 21

Comissone o Ralwas.Terms awl Notice 219Public Bettery at Yardi 219Boilers and Mcinnery Iaspcction, Exemptions 219Sbootiug at Femwantle, Compensation... 219

I -.I Legal Practitioners Act Ameudment, Ir.22AddessinRepydebtefifth day..............o

THE SPEAKER took the Chair at4-30 o'clock p.m.

PRAYERS.

QU ESTION- PERSONAL REFLECTIONS,MR. DAGLISH.

MR. DAGLISH: I beg, to ask thePrewier, without notice, if he will affordme an opportunity to-morrow to makemotions which appear in Orders 28 and29 on the Notice Paper for to-day. Thosepapers are moved for in consequence ofcertain reflections of a personal naturecast upon me, and my desire is to get thevery earliest opportunity to answer ques-tions and have the contents of the files in

Iquestion made public.TanE PREMTIER replied:; As these deal

Iwith a personal matter, I will give thehon. member an opportunity to move themotions to-morrow.

QUESTLON-FREMANTLE HARBOURTRUST PROPERTY, AND COST.

MR. BATH asked the Premier: i,Has his attention been drawn to the corn-plaint of the Fremanrtle Harbour Comn-missioners in their annual report, that theschedule showing value of property

Ivested in the Commissioners has notbeen supplied by the Government? z,If so. has he acceded to their wishes? 3,If not, why not?

THE PREMIER replied: i, z, and 3,The matter is now under the considera-tion of the Colonial Secretary. InFebruary, 1904, a statement was suppliedto the Harbour Trust showing the figuresalloc-ated by the Department against the

FTrust, but since that date the Depart-ment and the Tmust have been discussingwhether certain of the figures. should beincluded, and eventually a basis has beenarrived at, with the exception of a ques-

[ASSEMBLY.] Questions.