Queensland
Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]
Legislative Assembly
MONDAY, 7 OCTOBER 1889
Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy
2028 The Sugar Inrlustr_1f. [ASSEMBLY.l Question of Privileqe.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. Monday, 7 OctobCJ·, 1889. Question of Privilege-official recordR.-Questions. Granville and Burnett Bridges Bill-committee. Federal Council Referring Bill (Queensland), Xo 1- second reading.-Companies Act Amendment Bill consideration of Legislative Council's, amendments. -Adjournment. The SPEAKER took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock. QUESTIO~ OF PRIVILEGE. 0l!'l!'ICIAL llECORDS. Mr. BARLOvV said: Mr. Speaker,-If I am not in order in bringing forward the matter on a question of privilege, I shall conclude with the usual motion. I desire to draw attention to the business papers of this House, Nos. 77 and 78. The sixth item on the business paper No. 78 states, with reference to the encouragement of the sugar industry, that after the Chief Secre tary moved that your ruling ce disagreed to, debate ensued, the question was put, and the House divided-Ayes 26, Noes 20. It states further that the Speaker stated that, "in his opinion, the origmal question has been re solved in the negative," but I am unable to find any record of that question having been put. I Questions. [7 OoTOBER.j Granville 4' Burnett Bridges Bill. 2029
find in the sixth item on business paper No. 77, The POSTMASTER-GENERAL replied after the amendment of the Hon. Sir S. \V. L (a) £147 10s. Griffith was disposed of, that the hour - 7 (b) Lydement, Heel
He certainly could not promise the hon. member cost £45,000, and that to cost £47,000, would any more than had been offered for the Tiara require renewing before the whole of the bridge. principal and interest had been paid, which Mr. SMYTH said perhaps the hon. gentleman would be a very unfortunate thing indeed. It would tell them why he would only consent to would mean a fresh loan to the local authority grant onP·fifth of the cost of a bridge near on the part of the Government. Gympie which was to cost about £1,500, whilst The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said he he proposed to contribute one· half of the cost of wished to know who,t the proposals of the Go the Maryborough bridge. There did not appear vernment were? The two clauses were con to be any consistency in such an arrangement. tradictory. The MINISTER FOR MINES AND The MINISTER :FOR MINES AND WORKS said he did not draw that line at the WORKS said he proposer! to accept the re Tiara bridge alone ; he drew the same line in commendation of the engineer to build the regard to a great many other bridges. bridge to cost £G6, 000. Mr. O'SULLIVAN : Why not introduce a The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said he general principle into this Bill? presumed the hon. gentleman proposed that the Government should find one-half of the The MINISTER FOR MINES AND amount and the local authority the other half? WORKS said that Bill dealt only with two Did the Governnoent propose to contribute bridges for which money had already been voted. £28,250 or more ? The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said he The MINISTER FOR MINES AND thought they should have some explanation as ·woRKS said the Government proposed to to what was to be done with regard to the extra contribute £28,250. He thought the recommenda cost of the Burnett Bridge. Were the local tion of the engineer was a very good one. authorities to pay the extra cost? The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said if The MINISTER FOR MINES AND that were the case he did not see why they "WORKS : Better leave that question until we should pass a clause which said the maximum come to the next clause. should not be more than £22,500. The clause The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said if did not give effect to what the Government they did that, and any alteration was made in intended. According to the Bill, the Govern the next clause, the two clauses would be con ment might contribute one-third or one-half tradictory. The 4th clause provided that the of the cost of the bridge, provided its propor Government should contribute towards the con tion did not exceed £22,500, and the remainder struction of the Burnett Bridge a sum not exceed of the cost of construction was to be paid by the ing £22,500, but one-half of the amount for the corporation. Any small extras were provided bridge proposed (£56,500) would be £28,250. He for by clause 11. did not quite understand clause 11, which at The MINISTER FOR MINES AND first sight seemed to override the one they were WORKS said he thought it would better to considering. Clause 4 provided that the Govern alter the fiE, ures in clause 4 and insert £28,250 ment should arrange with the local authority for instead of £22,500. He did not think the a bridge to cost £45,000 ; but if by any chance Granville Bridge would cost more than the extras were incurred and that amount were ex estimate ; in fact, he believed it would cost a ceeded, clause 11 would come into operation. good deal less. There would be no apparent According to the hon. gentleman's argument, contradiction at all between the two clauses if the words in clause 4 were idle; what was the that amendment were made. He moved that use of providing a maximum? the words "two thousand five hundred " be The MINISTER FOR MINES AND omitted, with a view of inserting " eight WORKS said clause 4 was quite in accordance thousand two hundred and fifty." with clause 11; it was subject to the provisions The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said it in the latter clause. would be necessary to have another recommenda The HoN. Sm S. W. GRIFFITH: How do tion from the Governor before that amendm-ent you reconcile the two? What will the combined could be passed ; the amount of appropriation effect be? would have to be increased. The MINISTER FOR MINES AND The MH\ISTER FOR MINES AND WORKS said the clause before them provided WORK::;\ s:tid the recommendation they bad for £20,000 being spent in one case, and £22,500 had covered the Bill as it stood, and clause 11 in the other. Buc if those amounts were un provided for the cost being more than was expectedly exceeded, clause 11 provided how the stated in clause 4. He did not think any extra expense was to be divided. As he had amendment in clause 4 need affect the present already pointed out, the bridge over the Burnett recommendation. would cost more than £45,000; it would cogt The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said the £56,500. words in clause 4 either meant something or The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said the nothing. The clause was covered by a recommen two clauses contradicted each other. They were dation from the Governor, recommending that flatly contradictory, and he wanted to know a certain sum of money be Rpent, and now it was what the Government proposed to do. It was proposed to increase that amount by £5,000 or impossible to find that out by reading the two more. clauses together. The MINISTER FOR MINES AND The MINISTER FOR MINES AND WORKS said there were only two ways of doing WORKS said he had the estimates of cost of it, as far as he could see. Either the amount three designs. The cost of the one upon which mentioned in clause 4 must be omitted alto the Bill was drafted would be £45,000; the gether, leaving a blank in place of it, or the second design would cost £47,500; and the Government must confine themselves to the third, £56,500. The last was tbe design that exact amount mentioned therein, which would the Engineer for Bridges strongly recommended, throw the additional coi't on the local authorities. for the reason that it would be a bridge that The question would then arise whether the local would stand not only floods, but would stand authorities would be able or willing to undertake the test of time, without r Mr. ADAMS said that in 1883 or 1884 the that way, but perhaps it was one of the new in· Government then in office had a large surphm, novations. It would save alotoftronbleif instead and in the distribution of the surplus £30,000 of voting for a salary, £600, they were to vote was allotted for a bridge over the Burnett. £600, " and as much more as may be deemed Shortly afterwards that Government went out of desirable." No Auditor-General would be office, and they had not an opportunity of carry wanted, except to inspect the vouchers. The ing out what they intended. \Vhen he entered Government were simply asking the Committee the House he tabled a motion for the construc to give them a blank cheque, and he did not tion of the bridge, and he was promised by the think any Government would be so stupid as to then Minister for \Vorks, Mr. Miles, that 'if he adk Parliament for a blank cheque. According would withdraw the motion the Government to the Bill the Government might advance the would erect a combined bridge free of cost to the half of £45,000, and if the cost of the bridge inhabitants of Bundaberg. After that it was should be £50,000 the Government would still thought desirable not to erect a combined bridge, pay only £22,500, and the remaining £27,500 but to erect one of the kind now proposed, and must be found by the local authority. They the local authorities were asked if they would should know the estimated cost of the bridge be prepared to pay one-half the cost. Their before the bargain w.>s made. The cost might answer was "Yes." It was discovered, after the be £56,500, and by clause 4 the corporation money had been voted last year, that the Govern would have to pay £34,000 and the Govern ment had no authority to expend the money, and ment the balance of £'22,500. Then, section 11 the consequence was that the present Bill had provided thitt if the estimate were exceeded the been brought in. He had himself asked the united balance was to be made up in the same propor authorities whether they were prepared to pay their tion--that was, the Government would pay full half share of the cost of the bridge, and their £22,500, the corporation the rest of the estimate, answer had a! ways been " Yes." He believed and the balance would have to be paid in the they were not only willing to pay half the cost, same proportion by the Government and the but would have ample funds to do so. At the corporation. Any other reading of clause 11 was present time the traffic was carried on by means absurd. of a steam punt, and there was no doubt the Mr. O'SUT,I,IVAN said he was sorry he had traffic would be greatly increased if the steam not been present when the reasons of the Chief punt was replaced by a bridge. The revenue Engineer and the Commissioners for Railways derived from the steam punt was £2,800 per had been given for objecting to a combined annum, and the working expenses were, not £700 bridge. He did not at all object to the Bill, but as he was reported to have said on a former he was positive that if a combined bridge was occasion, but£1,100; and they expected, as soon built over the Burnett it would save the State as the bridge was completed, to reduce the at least £20,000. There were other places need working expenses from £1,100 to£300 '>year. It ing bridges far more than Bundaberg and was anticipated that, taking into consideration Maryborough, and he knew some places where the great increase of traffic that must inevitably there would be more traffic in one week than follow the erection of the brii!ge, they would there would be over the Burnett Bridge in be able to pay oif both the principal and the twelve months. He did not wish the hon. mem interest within the specified time. ber for Bundaberg to think that he was offering Mr. O'SULLIVAN said the hon. member had any obstruction to the bridge. He would like no doubt made out a good case for that bridge, to hear the objection of the railway authorities to but it would have been far better for Bundaberg a combined bridge, as he was inclined to think to have had a combined bridge, and paid nothing he would be able to say something against it. for it, as seemed to have been promised, than to have a traffic bridge only, on conditions that they Mr. BARLOW said when the Bill was being might never be able to carry out. \Vhy not discussed on the second reading, he had sug have a combined bridge? \Vhat was the objec gested to the Minister for Mines and VVorks tion to it? There were combined bridges all that he should bring in some general bridge over the world. scheme. If a combined bridge was anything like the combined bridge at Ipswich, he would The MINISTER FOR MINES AND advise the people of Bundaberg to avoid having \VORKS said the objections came from the such a bridge. He might mention that when Chief Engineer and the Commissioners for Rail the Rail wav Commissioners had crossed the ways, not from the Government. That objec Bremer BriClge a few days previously, they had tion had been already explained by the Minister had a little exhibition of the combined bridge. for Railways. As to the contention of the leader A railway engine was passing at the time the of the Opposition about the Governor's message, vehicle containing the Commissioners and him it seemed to be completely met by clause 11, self were on the bridge, and the engine caused con which authorised a sum in excess of £20,000 for siderable disquietude and unpleasantness to them. the Granville Bridge and £22,500 for the Burnett He would suggest that all the bridges should be Bridge. put into one general measure, so that something The HoN. Sm S. W. GRIFFITH said f might be done for other places. As far as his that explanation was correct, it wn,s a most reading went, clause 11 appeared to be like extraordinary way to bring a Bill down to giving a blank cheque to the Government, as it the House. The Government were to advance would enable them to do just whatever they a sum not exceeding £22,500 for the bridge, pleased. If the bridges could not be built for the and if it cost more they would pay the balance. amounts specified in the 4th clause, the balance That was really what it amounted to. They was to be paid in the same proportions by the were asked to authorise the Government to local authorities and the Government. He advance a certain specified sum for the work, pro hoped they would get a bridge, although he ?id videdthatifthemoneywas not sufficient, whatever not grudge Bnndaberg and :Maryborough gettmg was necessary should be paid. The Bill was an bridges. He would like to see the unnecessary Appropriation Bill, and it was certainly a new expenditure on the Parliamentary Buildings and form. They would next be having the Estimates on other things directed to works which were abso of expenditure upon a particular department lutely necessary. He knew that he was charged stated at £100,000, and as much more as might be with continually bringing that matter forward. necessary. Appropriation Bills were not usually He was sorry he had to do so ; but he knew it drawn in that form. He had never heard of an was only a question of time for some terrible Appropriation Bill being brought forward in accident to take place on the Bremer Bridge, and 1889-6 I 2034 Granville and Bu1'nett [ASSEMBLY.] Bridges Bill•. while he did not grudge the people of l\Iary treasure up the fact that for the tlrst time in the borough andBundaberg getting bridges, he hoped history of the colony had local authorities offered one would be given to his district by some general to contribnte any part of the cost of a bridge, measure. and would remember that the offer emanated from Mr. ANNEAR said the hon. member for the people of Mar:y borough and Bundaberg. Ipswich stated that he hoped Ipswich would Mr; BARLO\V said the hon. gentleman had get a bridge; but Ip•wich had had a bridge misunderstood him. He did not object to the for many years paet, the whole cost of proposed bridge in the slightest degree, or to which had been defrayed out of the general public works in any part of the colony, but he revenue of the colony. For the first time must say that he never heard the chisels of the in the history of Queensland, the people of workmen employed in making the additions to Maryborough and Bundaberg had come for Parliament House that he did not feel that money ward and offered to pay half the cost of was being wantonly thrown away and wasted the construction of bridges. No other local which would have given employment to labour in authority in Queensland had ever made such an putting up bridges in varions parts of the country offer. He had no doubt that if the local authorities where they were required. If hon. members of Ipswich made an offer of the same sort to the wanted to 'see what a combined bridge meant he Government t,hey would get a bridge erected. would like them to see the bridge at Ipswich on a Maryborough and BundabPrg were the first day when there was a large amount of traffic places to make such an offer. Those two towns, there, when timber waggons, buggies, butcher which were always accused of getting everything, boys, and resth·e horses were all mixed np were the first to offer to tax them se! ves to together in utter confusion. In fact it was provide bridges. Clause 11 provided everything absolutely perilous to life to attempt to cross it that was required. He believed that the Gran at times. He had only been to Bundaberg once vine Bridge could be built for less than the in his life, and there did not appear to be very estimated cost ; but assuming, for argument's much traffic there, but there would be more by sake, that it cost £5,000 more, and that the and-by. In the course of a few years Queens Burnett Bridge also cost £5,000 more than land was going to be a colony of a million of the estimated cm•t, the local authorities in people, and they should narry out all th~ir public each case would have to pay £2,500 more. ·would works upon the expectation of the mCl·eased it be such a hardship that the Government population they would get. Although, as the should have to pay another £2,500? Were they hon. member for Maryborough hatl stated, going to quibble about a thing like that, when Ipswich had a free bridge, he contended that it they had seen things ten times worse? He was a great misfortune that ever Ipswich had could not see any objectkm to a combined bridge got that bridge, and that the deviation was ever over the Burnett. In that he quite agreed with taken >·mmd by W oodend. If he went into the what had been said by the hon. member for history of that transaction he could prove that Stanley. The Chief Engineer estimated that three it was a scandalous job from beginning to end ; trains each way would cross the Bnrnett Bridge and thA re·mlt was that the Ipswich people did per day, and he did not see the necessity for any not get a proper bridge at the time that other gates at the ends of the bridge, if they put a portions of the colony did. All they got was a piece of kerbing between the traffic and the miserable apology, a substitute for one, in the railway bridges, with a fence for twenty feet at shape of a combined bridge. He did not begruclge each end. If that were done, the traffic could be public works to any part of the c;olony so Ion~ as carried on all day long. The leader of the Oppo the loan money was expended m an econonncal sition and his colleague (the Hon. Sir Thomas and useful way, and the new principle introduced Mcilwraith) had travelled through larger cities was carried out fairly, so that all districts which than Brisbane, where trains passed through required to avail themselves of it should be streets having more traffic on them than enabled to do so. He still looked upon clause 11 Queen street, and yet the people there did not as a complete gate of escape, by which the Govern complain. The railway trains went on and so ment could expend whatever they pleased on did the traffic at the same time. He was not that work. So long as th<> people of the district going to oppose the construction of the Burnett paid half the expense, he had nothing to say, but Bridge, but it seemed extraordinary that they as far as the clause presented itself to his non should have to construct a bridge tn take the legal mind, the Government could expend railway over the Bnrnett River, and then within £100,000 on the work. a short distance of that build anuther bridge at a The HoN. Sm S. W. GRIFFITH : Do you cost of some £56,000. He was not an engineer, approve of that? but he had seen scores of combined bridges during the last six months where a railway Mr. BARLO\V: No; certainly not. ran in the middle, and ordinary traffic cro"sed Mr. COWLEY said he thought there was a at each side-bridges where there was ten great deal of force in what has been said by times more traffic than would be seen over the the hon. the leader of the Opposition, and Burnett for the next twenty years. No com that it would be wise to strike out clause 11 plaints were made in those places. It seemed altogether, and let clause 4 stand. They had as if they had an overflowing Treasury and did voted a certain sum of money for that work last not know what to do with all their money, when year, and that vote ought not to be exceeded. If they proposed to go in for such unnecessary the bridge could not be built for that, let the expenditure. He hoped to see a combined bridge local authorities find the balance. Surely the over the Burnett, as such a structure would meet bridge could be built for le~s than £56,000, when the requirements of the district for the next the Minister for Mines and \V arks had informed fifty years. A bridge was absolutely necessary them that the estimate of a combined bridge for as that was on the main road to the North. both ordinary and railway traffic was £5,000 less £56,000 seemed a large sum of money to than that sum. If that were so it would be better expend when they had been committed for to have a combined bridge. There was some some years past to the construction of another thingveryremarkablein that-that a combination bridge over the Burnett, even though the local bridge would cost £5,000 less than the one proposed. authorities were willing to contribute half the cost. He did not like the principle contained in clause At one time the inhabitants of Bundaberg were 11, because although the cost of the bridge was quite satisfied with a combined bridge, and he estimated at £56,000, it might cost £100,000. was at a loss to know what had led to the change In nine cases out of ten the estimated cost of in their ideas. He hoped hon. members would bridges had been exceeded, and there should be Granville and Burnett [7 OCTOBER.] Bridges Bill. 2035 some limit fixed, so far as the cost to the country work would be until tenders were invited. was concerned. He did not suppose a single After tenders were invited they would know bridge of any magnitude had been built in what the structure would cost, and if it was more which the ~stimatedcost was not largely exceeded, than the local authorities could provide, then he and in the present case Parliament might be thouo·ht they would tell the Minister for Mines called upon to·vote £10,000 or £15,000 more than and ~Vorks t"hat such a structure was beyond their the amount put down. means. There had been eight or nine bridges Mr. UNMACK said he had not the slightest which had been built at the cost of the country, objection to granting those bridges upon certain and as the people of Bundaberg had been pro terms, but he contended that the Committee mised that bridge for so long, he did not see any had a positive right to know what the colony reason for further delaying the work. was to be called upon to pay for them. But Mr. ARCHER said he should like to ask the clauses 4 and 11, taken together, left that en Minister for Mines and Works if he would men tirely an open question. :B'irst of all, clause 4 tion again the estimated cost of the different provided that the Government were to con designs? tribute £22,500 towards the Burnett Bridge, but The MINISTER FOR MINES AND the Hon. the Minister for Mines and Works ·woRKS said in design A the main girders had informed the Committee that he was in would rest upon six cast-iron piers and two favour of a design which was to cost £fi6,000; concrete ones; it would have seven 110-feet in other words, the country was to be called steel •pans, with timber decking and timber upon to pay £28,000. He did not object approach~s. The length of the structure would to the amount, provided it was known and be 1,48() feet, and the estimated cost was £44,716. fixed. His chief objection was to clause 11, That was the bridge which was promised to the by which it was provided that in the event people of Bundaberg, and agreed to by them. of the bridge costing more than the estimated Design B was similar to design A as to length, amount, the country should contribute propor but had steel decking, and tarred metal roadway, tionately to the remainder, whatever it might with steel spans only, the approaches being of be. He would offer no objection to clause 4, timber. It would co8t £47,500. Design C had provided the hon. gentleman in charge of the steel spans, and mehl roadway throughout the Bill would consent to alter clause 11, so as to entire length of the bridge and approaches, and read that in the event of either bridge costing was estimated to cost £56,500. more than the amount estimated, the amount of such excess should be provided by the re Mr. ARCHER said he took it for granted that spective local authorities. That was to say, that the Bill was drawn up before those estimates nothing more would be required from the con were framed. solidated revenue. He thought that was a fair The MINISTER FOR MINES AND and reasonable demand. They should not be WORKS: The Bill was drawn on the first called upon to give a blank cheque, as it were, for estimate. any amount the Minister might choose to expend Mr. ARCHER said if the bridge that was to in the future. Let the Committee know what be built could be built for £44,716 as estimated, the maximum cost of the bridge would be, and although there wa;, no certainty about it, then they would pay half of that ; and if it ultimately of course the Bill as it stood was exactly right. cost more than that, the local authorities, for The question was, were the Government to whose benefit the bridge was to be erected, be allowed to spend a larger sum, and make should pay the balance. a far better work? In that ca.se he saw no Mr. O'CONNELL said he could not see any thing for it but to alter the sum in the body great harm in the clause as it stood. It simply of the Bill in clause 4. As for clause 11, meant that the Government should provide which apparently would allow for any expendi one-half the cost of the bridge. Those were the ture, it would be found necessary to alter it. terms on which he understood the hon. the leader The Minister under the Bill had authority to of the Opposition, when he was in power, stated spend £44,000 odd. Snpposinr.: he got a tender for to a deputation from Bundaberg, that he was £iiG,ROO; that would block the whole concern. prepared to give the bridge. Clause 11 meant If the Committee considered that the most that if the bridge cost more that the .£45,000 economical was the dearest one, then, as they voted last year, the extra cost should be paid in had agreed already to grant half the amount of equal parts by the local authorities and the the cost of the bridge, they ought to consent to Government. allow the Minister for Mines and Works to Mr. UNMACK: How much is it to be? increase the amount to meet any special tender, but they ought still to retain clause 11 ; so Mr. O'CONNELL snid it was imposr,ible to that, if the tenders were too high, the whole say exactly what the cost of the bridge would matter would not have to wait for another be, but if it cost more than the sum appro session. The amount should not be allowed to priated last year the amount would be divided be increased by thousands, but they should equally between the joint municipalities and the allow some small margin. He thought both the Government. It was not likely that either the clauses were required, but that both would joint local authorities or the Government would require amendment. spend more on the work than they could possibly The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said he help. If there was going to be a big spree over quite agreed with the hon. member that both the matter there might be some reason for clauses were necessary, and that they both re objecting, but when the money was for an quired amendment. The 4th clause certainly important public work he did not think there required amendment, and the amendment could was much need for talking about blank cheques. not be made without an additional message. Mr. ADAMS said one would think from the They could not amend an Appropriation Bill remarks of some hon. members that the Go by incre~tsing the amount, or taking out any vernment and the local authorities were going to proviso which limited the amount. That used to be very reckless, but he could assure lion. be a familiar rule to them all. He regretted to see members that they had not got much money that some hon. members lost sight of it, because to spare to be reckleos with. The joint local when he first came into the House every mem authorities were quite willing to pay half the cost ber prided himself on observing constitutional . of the bridge, but it was impossible to :,ay to rules. A great many hon. members seemed to a penny or a pound what the cost of the think now ·that anything would do. He _very 2036 Granville and Bttrnett [ASSEMBLY.] Bridges Bill. much regretted to see that spirit spreading by the members of the Committee he would be pre· amongst hon. members. He had pointed out pared to do anything. The case stood thus: The before that they could not increase the amount, bridge first designed for £45,000 was a tim her and if it was necessary, he should have to ask bridge, that would have to be renewed in less than the Chairman to rule that the amendment could forty years, and the decking would have to not be put. There was another important be renewed twice in that time at a cost each matter connected with the work. The 6th time of £2,500. That was the bridge to which clause provided that the term of the loan was to the Government were committed by negotiations be for f The MINISTER FOR RAILWAYS said Mr. O'SULLIVAN said the Ipswich bridge that with regard to the traffic there would be on was not a combined bridge. What they meant the Burnett Bridge, Illr. Brady's estimate ap by a combined bridge was a wider structure peared to him to be too small. It was quite which would carry both railway and road traffic. certain that as soon as the railway bridge was The Ipswich bridge was built for the. railway, opened there, the traffic backwards and forwards and, as he had said, was not a combined bridge. on it would be very considerable. Of course Ipswich had not got a bridge as the hon. member there would be a saving to the Railway Depart for J'.Iaryborough had stated, nor Pven a culvert. ment in one way, as only one station master It harl been in contemplation to make a com and one traffic manager would do for the bined bridge that would be far more satisfac whole of North and South Bundaberg., One tory than the precent bridge. The traffic on difficulty was that tj;le workshop~ for repair the Ipswich bridge was almost as much as the ing locomotives and rolling-stock were ·on the traffic in Queen street at the present time, and north side. It was something like Ipswich in that women and children were afraid of their lives to respect, and locomotives and other rolling-stock walk on it. It was too narrow. would have to be taken across the bridge fre quently. Then there would be a considerable Mr. DARLOW said the Ipswich bridge had amount of coal traffic across the bridge, and, one footway about 2 feet 6 inches wide and a besides that, when they went on with the con roadway about 14 feet wide. At the edge of struction of the Bundaberg to Gladstone railway, the roadway there was a balustrade about 3 feet there would be a good deal of railway traffic over high separating it from the railway. As the the bridge in connection with that work; and :Minister for Railways had stated, there was a when that line was opened there would be trains great deal of trouble in shunting, because of the running through to Gladstone. So that it would narrow space for the railway, and a person going he seen that a combined bl'idge could only be a across the bridge in a vehicle never knew when a temporary thing. 'fhe bridge would be a quarter train or shunting engine would pass by. He of a mile in length, and from the time a train (Mr. Barlow) had himself when driving a buggy came in sight at one end of it until it cro,ssed across had his horse's feet almost on a level with over to the other, the bridge would have to be the balustrade, and he could assure hon. mem closed to ordinary traffic. That would have to bers that the bridge was most dangerous to be done for every train, and he should imagine vehicular traff.c. As the hon. member for that would not be very satisfactory to dray and Stanley had said, Ipswich never had a bridge; passenger traffic. After all, it would only be a it was merelv a sort of sufferance that the veople temporary affair, as the Railway Department were allowed to use the roadway, which was would have to take over the whole of the bridge simply an addendum to the railway bridge. when the traffic required it; and then there Mr. lVIELLOR said he wished to say a word would have to be a separate traffic bridge built or two in reference to the desirability of making after all. He could not, of course, tell when provision for a swing in the Maryborough bridge. that would be. Taylor Brothers had a saw-mill between the old Mr. O'SULLIVAN: They have never had to bridge and the proposed new bridge, and they do it in Ipswich. intended erecting another above the bridge, so The JYIINISTJ was the policy of one-half the cost being con a double line of rails, and that the space which tributed by the Government. He believed the would be taken up by one line should be used local authorities could repay the loan by endow as a roadway. ment on special rates, and that the expense the The MINISTER FOR MINES AND Government would be put to in the event of the WORKS: The bridge itself is to be 30 feet tolls being abolished would be not only the wide. £20,000 mentioned in the clause, but two-thirds Mr. ARCHER said if there was sufficient of the whole cost. At the present time there room on the combined bridge it would be all was an endowment to local authorities for the right but he had a great deal of sympathy with construction of bridges, and he believed that the h'on. member for Ipswich, who objected to many places were doing what he had described. being obliged to drive on such a narrow roadway. The Government were entitled to pay the subsidy when the local authorities struck a special rate The MINISTER FOR MINES AND for purposes of that kind. He hoped the Go WORlCS said the Ipswich bridge was !J5 feet vernment would grant the same concession to wide, including the part crossed by the railway. other places as they were granting in connection Mr. ARCHER said that was 5 feet wider with the Granville and Burnett Bridges. ·with than the bridge they were considering. regard to the extra cost that would be entailed by constructing two bridges at Bundaberg, he The MINISTER FOR MINES AND thought it would be better to incur that expendi 'vVORKS said there was to be a pathway as well, ture and build two bridges, than to build a besides the 30 feet. combined bridge for railway and road traffic. Mr. ARCHER said he should advise the He was sure it would not be satisfactory to have Government to be very careful if they thought a combined bridge. Bundaberg was increasing of building a combined bridge. in size very rapidly, and they would soon want The MINISTER FOR MINES AND more accommod~~tion in that direction. He under 'vVORKS said the bridge would be 30 feet wide, and stood that the contract for the railway bridge there would be a cantaliver footway outside the had been let, and, in that case, if they made up bridge 6 feet wide. It would be better to pass the their minds to have a combined bridge, and clause' as it stood, with amendments, and if the altered the plans and specifications, the con Committee "ave him the authority, he would try tractor would expect compensation. In reference and get thec~mbined bridge if possible. If he could to the other matter he thought they should make not, the people of Bundaberg would ha Ye to be some arrangement whereby a swing might be satisfied with a bridge to cost £45,000, or to pro erected in the Granville Bridge. He hoped the vide the balance themselvell. It would be much Government would see their way to granting the better to have a combined bridge. The hon. people of that place the same facilities as were member for Gym pie had asked him about bridges given to other people in that direction. elsewhere and about the principal and interest Mr. ADAMS said it was suggested in the of those bridges being paid from a special rate. correspondence that had been referred to that The present Bill provided that the principal and it might be desirable to build a combined bridge, interest were to be provided by tolls, an entirely but of course they wanted to know what was different thing. the opinion of the local authoritieR who would The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH: Suppose ha Ye to pay one-half of the cost of construction. the tolls are not collected ? They had been told that a traffic bridge would The MINISTER FOR MINES AND cost' something like £56,000, and that a com WORKS said that in that case the people bined bridge would cost about £5,000 less. The would lose their endowment; there would be no local authority had sent an urgent wire to toll necessary for a combined bridge. him, to say that they were perfectly satis Mr. TOZER said that having had the experi fied to take a combined bridge, so long as it ence of travelling over a toll bridge for some years, was really a combined bridge, and not only a he trusted the Minister for :i'.fines and 'vV orks railway bridge planked over. They were also would nCJt perpetuate the blumler in thos.e two told that the bridge wn,s to be 30 feet wide, bridges. \Vhen what had been facetiOusly and taking the width. of the average dray at called the Gympie bridge, but was really the 7 feet 6 inches, they would require 15 feet or 16 M:1ryborough bridge, was erected, a toll was feet for the traffic bridge. They could place a established there which was the greatest nui. kerb right down the middle of the bridge with sauce that could be possibly conceived. The out much expense, and put a rail on top of that. result was that the people of Maryborough got By adopting that course they would be able to so disgusted with reference to the tolls that do without a caretaker at each end of the bridge, they did away with them. It .was i~pos~i and in two or three years the extra expense of ble in the present state of pubhc feelmg m that barrier would be recouped. That arrange Queensland that toll bridges could continue. ment, he thought, would be acceptable to the Besides that the cost of collecting the tolls people of Bund:'-berg and the surrounding; dis was so great 'that nothing was got out of them. tricts, as the bridge could be open at all times. He hoped the discussion would induce the hon. Travelling in New South 'vV ales four or five gentleman to supervise the question of combined years ago, he happened to be staying with his bridges. Over the Tyne there were two low brother, near where there was a combined rail traffic bridges, hut the last bridge erected at way and traffic bridge, a good deal longer than the Newcastle was a combined bridgP, the traffic one which would be required to cross the Burnett. beina carried over the top of the railway. There He had asked his brother if there were never any was ;:;o difficulty in engineers doing whatever they accidents, and he replied that he had lived there were told. They did all they possibly could to for fourteen years and had never known an stop the utilisation for commercial . purposes accident. There was a kerb down the middle of of combined bridges. Take the Dickabram the bridge, leaving sufficient space for the railway Bridge, for instance. There was as fine a train. Above the kerb there was a substantial bridge for the requirements of the colony as fence morticed into the kerb. His constituents could be found anywhere. It had been built were' quite willing to pay half the cost of the nearly two years and a-half, and the last bridge. time he was there not a single team had gone Mr. ARCHER said he was not prepared to across it, owing to the rail waY: people P?tting support a combined bridge. It was intended their heads together to prevent 1t. He d1d not that there should be a bridge eapable of carrying know whether that bridge was now open, G?'anville and Burnett [7 OCTOBER.] Bridges Bill. 2039 The MINISTER FOR MINES AND young yet in Maryborough, and, as the hon. WORKS: Yes. member for Wide Bay had said, the time would come when the whole of the lands for Mr. TOZER said he was glad to hear it. He miles on either side of the river would be was certain that a bridge like the Dickabram irrigated, and they all knew the land in that Bridge would he sufficient for the requirements district was very rich. The hon. member for of Bunflaberg for many years. He hoped the 'Wide Bay had stated he would propose a clause people would get their combined bridge without whereby they would meet the request of the having to pay for it. . The Burdekin Bridge was local authorities. Messrs. Taylor Brothers stated a sample of a road bridge being utilised for in their telegram, "If bridge is not a swing railway purposes, and he had never heard of one it will ruin us having in vested over £13,000 an:>; accidents happening there by reason of the in the mill Our trade principally shipping trams crossing. A combined bridge over the \Vriting this mail." If it would injure even Burnett would be not onlv a very convenient that one firm to that extent they should make but a very handsome structure, and would cost provision for a swing in the bridge. Yen within the amount stated in the clause. garie was a very large sugar refinery. They Mr. ANNEAR said he was entirely opposed did not get as much by the river as formerly, to the toll being removed from theMaryborough as the railway now brought a good deal of the bridge, That bridge, which was not much used limestone, and took away their sugar; but since the opening of the railway, was, as the j\'Iinis still ships went through the present bridge, in ter for Mines and W arks stated, erected for the which there was a swing which was frequently convenience of Gym pie. It wa" now costing some opened, in order to get to Y engarie. If the hundreds a year to keep in repair, paid solely by Granville Bridge were constructed, Messrs. the ratepayer·s of the Tinana division and Mary Taylor Broth8rs would be between the two bridges, borough, and in a few years it would collapse and they could go through the one to get up the altogether. It was about the greatest white ele river, whilst they could not go through the other phant of a bridge that was ever erected in the to the different ports of the colony. If there colony. They had been told by the Minister was not to be a swing, he thought it would be that the hridge was to be 30 feet wide, with better to have no bridge at all. Not only had .a cantaliver side G feet wide for foot passengers. they tu consider the effect to that one mill, but Nine feet were sufficient for the railway which there were several other saw-mills on the Mary would leave 21 feet for the road. Allowiu'g 1 foot River above the bric'ge-one at Five-Mih,s, and for kerbing with a good iron fence in the kerbing one at Tiaro; and they all knew that the land to separate the roadway from the nil way, that on the Mary River was equal to the best in the would give a roadway which would meet all re colony. They should do nothing to impede quirements. The hon. gentleman had also atated navigation, and he hoped the hon. member for that up to the present time Maryborough had \Vide Bay would devise some amendment had no bridge. They had mad~ the same offer as by which such a state of things would be pre the Bundaberg people, but by the adoption of vented, the combined bridge the Bundaberg people The Ho~. P. PERKINS said he was sorry wouid get a bridge for which they would have to hear the hon. member for Maryborough tall< nothing to pay. He would prefer-and he be as he had done that afternoon, because if the lieved the majority d the people of Maryborough hon. member had paid a little more attention to would prefer-to see the long promised railway to the subject he would not have made the remarks Pialba constructed before the erection of the he had done. Maryborough was going to become bridge. He had put himself right with the mayor a curse to the colony like Ipswich, and was of Maryborough, who had placed himself in com going to prove an annoyance to the Committee. munication with the local authorities, and they The hon. member should not take up the time of had decided to pay one-h,,Jf of the cost. He the Committee, so as to prevent other hon. wished to draw attention to the statements made members from transacting their business. by some hon. members that afternoon. Had Mr. McMASTER said that so far as tolls there in the history of the colony up to the were concerned, the Government might as well pre.,ent time been one instance of repudiation of strike out the word altogether. Toll-bars be their j_ust claims by any municipality or local longed to the past ages. author!ty? Thr?ughout the colony the local The MINH:lTER FOR MINES AND authorities had faithfully fnlfille The MIXISTER FOR MINES AND they would be more inclined to break them in '\VORKS said timber decking might not last connection with a bridge than in connection with forty years, but that would not make the bridge waterworks. The only remedy was that the any the less a first-class work, because the super Government could take over those things and structure would be first class. The decking enforce payment, if such a catastrophe occurred would last a great deal longer than the decking as the leader of the Opposition suggested. The of Victoria Bridge, because the traffic would not local authorities could not take up the bridges be so great. if it would affect their borrowing powers for The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said he other necessary works. confessed he had some doubts about the clause. Mr. HODGKINSON said they knew very They knew very well that one of the bridges well, from the history of tolls in the colony, would not be a first-class work, and why should how easily they could be abolished. The moment they say it was? The Burnett Bridge would not those tolls were set up, there would be just the be a bridge of the first-class. That part of the same cry against them as there had been against Bill raised a very serious question, because it tolls previously imposed in the colony. Hon. mem assumed that tolls would be kept up for forty bers who could speak with more local authority years. He agreed with some hon. members than he could, would be in a position to say how with respect to tolls. The Bill said that tolls long the people would be likely to put up with might be imposed; but suppose the local authori tolls. ties did not impose them, then how would the Mr. MELLOR said that toll.~, in his experi repayments of principal and interest be met? ence, were not endurable. They had an instance Their other funds would not stand it, he was sure. of that in the Victoria Bridge. That bridge w:ts to It would be about £20,000, and that would mean be paid for by tolls, but they did not last very long, something like £2,000 a year, and he was quite and they betel the same experience in connection sure the funds of the local authorities would not with the :Maryborough bridge. In every instance bear £2,000 a year, and he was quite sure they where an attempt was made to collect tolls the would not raise that amount from tolls. It would people would not have it, and they would not be the same as with the Victoria Bridge-the allow them to exist. The people would very soon Government would have to take them over petition against the collection of tolls, and there at last. He did not think the Government was a provision, under the 18th section of the had looked far enough ahead. They should take Bill, to the following effect :- into consideration the probability that the " Xothing in this section shall prevent the Governor bridges would have to be renewed; and what in Council, at any earlier period than last mentioned, would happen then? It was no use saying they upon the joint requf,Mt of the local authorities, from would stop the endowment, as it was more than abolishing, in the prescrrbed manner, any such tolls, possible there would be no endowment by that ratttJ, or dues." time. He did not mean to say that the local authorities The MINISTER FOR MINES AND would try to evade their responsibilities ; but the '\VORKS said some other arrangement would collection of tolls was a very unpleasant and have to be made if the endowment was stopped, very objectionable way of getting revenue, and as it would no doubt be before forty years. the people would not have it. He was quite sure the local authorities could The MINISTER :B'OR MINES AND pay interest and principal in less than twenty ·woRKS said that the local authorities them years if they chose by tolls. He believed selves had agreed to impose tolls. He thought tolls would pay both in ten years. It would that was sufficient, and they must trust the local be a question for the local authorities to decide authorities. whether they would keep the tolls on or repay the loan by general rates. The hon. gentleman had Mr. HODGKINSON said that in the case of forgotten what kind of structure the Granville the Burnett Bridge there was a provision in the Bridge was to be. It was to be a steel and iron Bill providing for exemption from tolls in certain structure. cases, and by another provision the Government was really committed to the duplication of the Clause put and passed. existing line of railway ~;t an early period, On clause 7, as follows :- because so long as the space was left for a second "The sums to be borrowed bY the local authorities, line over the bridge, and it was not constructed, respe0tively, to provide their pi-oportions of the cost of it would be a local reproach. With regard to the construction and erection of the bridge shall not be the other bridge, there was a provision for levy taken into consideration in E"'timating, or otherwise ing tolls upon it, and that was followed by affect or limit, the amount of money that may be another provision for cloiPg away with them. borrowed by the local authorities respectively under the Acts in force prr'\\cribing or relating to the borrowing Anyone who would gravely suppose those tolls powers of such local authorities." would be maintained had a greater faith in the institution of tolls than he had. The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said of course that clause in effect meant that they Mr. BUCKLAND said that any member of would trust entirely to the tolls to get their the Committee who had had any experience of money back, as the local authorities would want local authorities could only express one opinion to borrow to the full extent of their borrowing on the subject, and that was that if a toll was powers for other purposes ; and if the tolls were imposed on a bridge it would take but a very stopped there would be an end to the whole short time, and but very few elections, before thing. the ratepayers would see that it was removed. The HoN. C. POWERS said they might He knew from his experience of divisional boards say the same about waterworks, and their cost that whenever it was mooted to pnt a toll on was not taken to affect borrowing powers. a bridge or a road, action was invariably taken to prevent such a toll being exacted. If the toll The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH: They are was exacted, it would not be long before the always reproductive. ratepayers took such action as would lead to its The HoN. C. POW:B;RS said the bridges could abolition. be made reproductive, because if the people Mr. O'CONNELL said that with regard to themselves did not or would not take them in the tolls on the Buuclaberg bridge, not only hand, he presumed the Government would do it. had the joint local authorities interested agreed So far the local authorities throughout Queens to accept that as a means by which they land had k":pt their contracts, and he did not see could pay the debt to the Government, but 2042 Granville and Burnett [ASSEMBLY.] Bridges Bill. there had been two largely attended meetings waterworks, but they could not get either. It held in Bundaberg, at which resolutions to the seemed as if Maryborough and Bundaberg were effect that the repayment should be made by favoured places. Tiara also wanted assistance means of tolls and not by local rate, were carried from the G-overnment in the erection of a bridge, unanimously. but had not succeeded in getting it. He should An HoNOURABLE llfEMBER: That was to get like to see the G-overnment apply the principle the brid;.;e. adopted in the present case to all places in the Mr. HODG-KINSON: There will be another colony, and not make fish of one and fowl of king arise who will know not J oseph. another. Clause put and passed. Mr. O'CONNELL said the queRtion was, whether they should pay a toll for going over by Clause 8-" Plans, etc., to be submitted to means of a ferry, or pay a toll for going over the Minister''-passed as printed. bridge. It was all very fine to say that tolls were M:r. BUCKLAND said he presumed the plans antediluvian, hut ferries were still more antedi and specifications of those bridges would be luvian. It was only a matter of expediency, prepared in the G-overnment office. and they preferred to pay a toll for going over The MINISTER FOR MINES AND the bridge, rather than bo pay the same toll for WORKS : Yes; by the Engineer for Bridges. crossing by means of a ferry. Mr. HODG-KINSON said the argument of Clauses 9 and 10-" G-overnor in Council may the hon. member was very ingenious, bnt it must sanction loan," and "Plans may be altered" be borne in mind that a ferry could be shifted, passed as printed. but a bridge could not. On clause 11, as follows :- Mr. HUNTER said he would point out that " If on the completion of either bridge the cost shall be founcl to have exceeded the esthnated cost thereof, there was an agitation going on in South the amount of such excess shall be provided and paid Brisbane to abolish the ferry tolls and run free out of the consolidated revenue and by the local boats. That showed how 'much further the authorities respectively in the same proportions as the argument against tolls could be carried. ENtimated cost was authorised by the Governor in Council to be advanced from the consolidated revenue Mr. ANNEAR said some people would like to and agreed to be provided by the local authorities have everything free. How was it possible to respectively. do away with ferry tolls in Brisbane? The " Any mone1 s to be ·provided by the local authorities Victoria Bridge had been referred to as a case in under ihe proVisions of this section shall be deemed to which tolls had been abolished; but in that form part of the loan authorised for the "rork." instance the G-overnment took away the lands Tbe HoN. SIR S. W. G-RIFFITH asked and sold them, and the proceeds, he believed, whether it was proposed ·to do anything with paid for the construction of the bridge. The' regard to authorising the stopping of the naviga local authorities had a-,ked the G-overnment to tion of the water-way? introduce a meo.sure such as that before the The MINISTER FOR MINES AND Committee, and he was sure they would faith 'WORKS said there were two plans by which fully observe their obligations, as they had that mi((ht be done-namely, either by pro always done in other matters hitherto. At viding for a swing in the bridge or by pro the present time there was a steam punt at viding that the local authorities should not be both Maryborongh and Bundaberg. Granville prosecuted in any way if a swing was not pro was a pretty large place now, and was a vided. He was inclined to think that there rising suburb, and the people were willing to should be a swing in the Gran ville Bridge, but tax themselves to pay the int?rest on the cost the extra cost would be between £11,000 and of constructing the bridge. Some hon. members £12,000. No swing would be required in the might fancy that the people residing there were Burnett River bridge. At the G-ranville Bridge like the people in another part of the colony there was, he believed, 30 feet of water, so that which he would not name ; but he would tell the the river was navigable thare. How far that hon. members representing that constituency, depth extended up the river he did not know. and who had been very prominent in the discus sion that evening, that they would carry out Mr. ARCH:ER: A long way. their obligations. He did not see the difference The MINISTER FOR MINES AND between a loan for waterworks and a loan for WORKS said he did not think that that depth bridge construction. In the former case a special extended a long way up the river. However, he rate was levied for the repayment of the loan, proposed to insert a proviso to the following and in the measure under consideration it was effect:- proposed that tolls should be levied for the same ProYided that any bridge erected by the local purpose; and clause 18 provided that- authority over the ::\Iary River, shall be constructed so that a portion thereof can from time to time be '' Nothing in this section shall prevent the Governor opened to allow the passage of sea-going vessels. in Council, at any earlier period than last n1entioned, upon the joiRt request of the local authorities, from The HoN. SIR S. W. G-RIFFITH : It would abolishing in the prescribed manner such tolls, rates, or be better to make that a new clause. dues." The MINISTER FOR MINES AND That was sufficient protection, as no Government \VORKS s»id he would make it a new clause would ever consent to abolish the tolls unless and insert it in the place of clause 11, which he some other means were provided for raising the proposed to negative. money for the payment of the loan. He did not Clause put and negatived. want to insult anyone, but he could not help stating that some people wanted the Government The MINISTER FOR MIN:ES AND to put down bores, make bridges, and do every WORKS said he had a new clause to propose. thing for them. The people of Bundaberg and It was as follows :- Maryborough instead of doing that said, "\Ve No action, suit, indictment, information, or other pro ceeding shall be commenced, vresented, prosecuted, or want a bridge, and are willing to pay one-half maintained against the local authorities, or against any the cost." If others would follow that example other local authority or person for or in respect of the they would soon get bridges. erecting or maintaining of the said bridges or the obstruc· tion of the navigation of the rivers thereby, or for or in Mr. M:F.:LLOR said the G-ympie people had respect of any damage, loss, or expenses occasioned or gone to the Government and asked to get a alleged to be occasioned by reason of such erecting, bridge constructed on the same terms, and had maintaining, closure, or obstruction, or in anywise also applied for a loan for the construction of whatever a1ising therefrom. Gmnville and Burnett [7 OCTOBER.] Bridges Bill. 2043 Then the following had better come in as a The MINISTER FOR MINES AND pwviso:- WORKS moved that the following words be Provided that any bridge so erected across the added to the proviso :- Mary River shall be constructed so that a portion And shall be opened by the local authorities at thereof can from tin1e to time be opened to allow of the passage of seagoing vessels. all reasonable times for the passage of such vessels. The HoN. SIRS. W. GRIFFITH said he was Mr. AKNEAR said he did not understand afraid that would be a very poor protection for how the swing was going to cost an extra sum of th.e peop)e who had property above the Mary £12,000. The swing must be on one of the piers Rrver bndge. In respect to the Burnett it was of the bridge. Tr,king 30 feet as being- wide proposed to close navigation altogether. 'Practi enough for a waterway, the swing would open cally there was no navigation at present above up and down stream, which would give two the site af the Burnett Bridge although there was waterways, one for vessels coming up and the deep water. He believed all'the frontages above other for vessels going down. The pier would that bridge belonged to the Government. be 30 feet wide, making 80 feet in all. That 90 feet fanned a portion of the bridge, and would Mr. O'CONNELL: Not on the north side • have to be paid for if the swing was not made. on the south side only. ' The extra expense for a swing would be The HoN.. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said per the construction of a transom at the top sons who drd own frontages above the bridge of the pier, and the swing would work would have a gri~vance. "Where there was deep in the same way as a swivel gun was worked, ~ater they had nght of access to it. Of course and by almost the same machinery. He had Jt was within the power of Parliament to deprive already read a telegram from one firm who had a man of anything. The British Parliament had invested £13,000 iu one factory, and who would often configcated property and handed it over to be seriously injured if the navigation of the ~he Crown, or someone else. He was not disput river was so impeded that vessels could not come mg the power of Parliament, but simply pointing to their mill. He felt confident that a swing out what the effect would be. In respect to the bridge could be put across the Mary River for Mary River, the clause and the proviso would not £40,000. Of course the swing would not be such protect the people at all. It was very poor a costly affair as the one in the Victoria Bridge satisfact_ion to a man 'Yho could not get through, over the Brisbane River. The science of engineer to tell hrm that the brrdge was capable of being ing as applied to bridge building had greatly opened. The authorities would say they had advanced since that swing was made, and he made no arrangements for opening it and if the estimated that the extra cost of putting a swing man brough.t an action against them,'they would in the Granville Bridge would not be more say the brrd~e was capable of being opened. at the outside than £3,000. He did not know 'That was askmg for. bread and getting a stone. the width between the piers, but he believed a So long; as the brrdge was capable of being bridge could be built over that part of the Mary opened rt was all rrght; there was no provision River for the sum he had named, which would compelling them to open it. ~lo no injuiry to the industries already established m that locality. Mr. ADAlV:I:S said there was no deep water for any considerable distance above the bridge • The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said he the shoals were something tremendous. J!'lat presumed the effect of the clause would be that bottomed boats and punts could travel up and the Maryborough people would have to pay all down ; but no vessel drawing more than 4 feet the extra cost. That was to say, they would of water could go. He was sure that anv vessel have to pay £32,000 to the Government's £20,000. not drawing more than •! feet would be able Did the hon. member for Maryborough think his to go under the bridge. constituents would pay that? The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said he Mr. ANNEAR: I could not say. found the following proviso to clause 1 of the The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFJ!'ITH said they Victoria Bridge Act :- would be very good if they did, and he hoped "And provided also that no bridge erected by the they would. said municipal council shall be so constructed as to obstr'?-ct the navigation of the river Brisbane by any The PREMIER: If they get the £20,000 they seagOing vessels.'' will do very well. He would not advocate the adoption of a clause The MINISTER FOR MINES AKD like that. No bridge could be comtructed that WORKS said the cost ofthe bridge, according to was not an obstruction ; but there should be a the engineer's estimates was £36,350, and the proviso in the present case saying that the bridge cost of the swing between £11,000 and £12,000. should be opened at all reasonable times when If the swing could be constructed for £3,000 so people required the use of it. much the better. The bridge would consist of three 170-feet spans. The J_!ON. C. !'OWERS said, looking at the The HoN. C. POWERS said he also had Act whiCh prov1ded for the temporary closing received a telegram from Taylor Brothers to the of the Victoria Bridge, he found the clause before effect that they would be ruined if no provision them was almost a copy of a clause in that Act. was made enabling vessels to get beyond the Part of the preamble of that Act stated- bridge. As to the question of whether the Mary " And ~'hereas under and in pursuance of the powers borongh people would be willing to pay the extra nf. the sard Act, the said Inunicipal council erected a amount, it must be remembered that:the plans had b~rdge. acr?ss the .said river Brisbane, now called the first to be approved of by the Governor in Council, Vwt?rra B1·rdge, whrch bridge was so collstructed that a portiOn thereof might from time to time be opened to and if tbey were deemed too expensive, timber allow of the passage of seagoing vessels." might be substituted for steel for the flooring so as to keep the cost within a reasonable amount. ~ltho~gh the clause in the Bill did not say that, He might mention that the trade of Messrs. rt showed that the bridge was not to obstruct Taylor Brothers was mostly with shipping. He navigation. did not think the ratepayers ,of Maryborough Mr. MELLOR said the clause as it stood wished to ruin them altogether merely to have a referre~ to the Mary River generally. It cmght bridge. Besides, there was a lot of land above to specify that bridge only, otherwise it might the bridge which would be useful for wharfage, block the erection of bridges on other parts of and the people would not want to limit the the river. amount of frontage for wharves. Before the 2044 Granville. and Bu1·nett [ASSEMBLY.] b_ridge was built the ratepayers and local authori the first thing they would find would be that tJes would be asked to approve of the plans and they would be stopped and blackmailed by specifications, and a vote of the people would having to pay a toll. He trusted the Committee have to be taken before the loan was obtained. would not adopt a system which should not be He was sure the local authorities would get the tolerated at the end of the nineteenth century. advice of the hon. member for Maryborough The MINISTER J<'OR MINJ<;S AND upon tr e plans and specifications before they WORKS said he agreed with -vhat the hon. agreed to them. member for Bundanba had said, as he had no New clause put and passed. great love of tolls, but there were exceptional Clause 12-" Joint local authority to maintain cases in which tolls might be levied, and the pre bridge to be constructed "-put and passed. sent was one of the exceptional caoe'"• The people On clause 13, as follows :- themselves would have to consent to the levy of tolls, and if they did not want a bridge with "The joint local authorit:y may establish a toll upon tolls on it, they need not have it. It would the bridge, and may demand, take, recover, and receive, for passengers, vehiclr·o;, cattle, sheep, horses, or other save the Government so much money. It was a live stock crossing the bridge, reasonable tolls, rates, question entirely for the ratepayers and the local and persons who requested the Government to tolls, and substituted a special rate under introduce the Bill ; and they were willing to the existing law, there would not be much tax themselves to pay for the bridge. The con objection to it. He did not presume to know as struction of the bridge would greatly benefit the much about the district in question as the hon. State, because there were thousands of acres member who represented it, but he did know of unsold land which people would buy for that there was a wide-spread feelinlj everywhere residence sites. The beautiful suburb of Granville against tolls, and he was sure that 1f they were had grown since the member for Burke (Mr. imposed in that case, the people would take the Hunter) was there; and it would give him great earliest opportunity of ridding themselves of so pleasure to show that hon. member the palatial obnoxious a tax. residences, the public halls, and the churches Mr. STEPHENS said he altogether objected that had sprung up there since he had gone to to tolls if they could be done away with, but as live in the North. If a request had been made hon. members pointed out, if a special rate was that there should be no toll, the proposal would struck the Government would have to pay never have passed in 1Iaryborough, because the endowment on it. That endowment would majority would not consent to be taxed for the probably be £2 for £1, so that he would advise construction of the bridge. The people chiefly the people of the district to strike a rate, because concerned were quite willing to pay a toll, becauRe by doing so they would have very little to pay. they ]mid a heavier toll every day when crossing' He did not know whether the Government the river by the punt, and it would be a great underRtood that, but it would make a wonderful relief to them to have a bridge because they difference if the Govm·nment had to contribute could then cross the river in one-tenth of the £2 for £1 on the rate. They would be contribut time now occupied. He was glad to have been ing a g-reat deal more than one-half the cost of informed that the navigation of the river would the bridge. not be impeded. That was a concession, and would prevent a good deal of unpleasantness. Question put and passed. 1b to the sugg0;tion of repudiation, he claimed Clauses H-" Toll gates may be erected"-and that no local authority in the colony had ever 15--" :Exemption from toll"-passed as printed. repudiated an engagement entered into with On clause 16, as follows:- the Government. "The joint local authority shall put up or cause to be put up, and continued in some conspicuous place at) Mr. 0'8ULLIVAN said after the remarks upon, or near. the bridge, toll-gate, or toll-bar, a table that had been m<>de by hon. members, he painted on a boa.rd in legible black letters upon a white thought the hon. gentleman in charge of the ground the name of the bridge and a list of the tolls Bill would do well to .~Withdraw the word puyable at the bridge, distinguishing severally the "shall," and allow "may" to stand, and thus amount of tolls and the different sorts of cattle, beasts, leave it at the option of the local authorities to carriages, or other vehicles for which they are severally establish a toll. to be paid where there is any variation." Mr. BUCKLAND said he must repeat his Mr. BARLOW said it might appear a trifling objection to tolls, and he would point out to the matter, but he would suggest that the letters hon. member for Maryborough that there was a should be white upon a black ground, on the very ready way of collecting special rates under same principle that some watches had white the Joint Local Authorities Act. He would figure> on black ground. They would last longer also point out that a special rate would be and could be more easily read in twilight. entitled to be subsidised ·by the Government, The MINISTER FOR MINES AND which would not be the case if tolls were levied. ·woRKS said he thought black letters on a white In all cases within his recollection in the old ground were quite as good as the others. country whenever the House of Commons had Mr. HUNTER said supposing the joint local given authority for the collection of tolls, they authority painted white letters on a black ground had invariably added a schedule of the amounts and an action was brought against them, how to be collected. and he thought the Committee would the matter stand? It might be held that should do the same in that Bill, otherwise they they had not complied with the provisions of the might be giving the local authorities a great deal Act. too much power. \Vithout some provision of The HoN. SIRS. W. GRIFFITH said the that kind the clause would not work at all. matter was more than a mere form. If white The MINISTER FOR MINES AND letters on a black ground were used, a question WORKS said there seemed to be a general might be raised as to whether the toll could be opinion that "may" should be retained instead legally demanded. vVhy not say "in legible· of inserting "shall." All the Government was letters," irrespective of colours altogether? concerned in was getting payment of the principal Mr. BARLOW said he had made the sug and interest, and if the local authority chose at gestion bona firlc for the public good, and would any time to establish a rate instead of a toll, they point out that a white board would get dis should have it in their power to do so. He would coloured by the weather sooner than the other. therefore withdraw his amendment. He believed "may" covered all that was required. On the motion of the MINISTER FOR MINES AND WORKS, the words " black " Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. and "upon a white ground " were omitted. Mr. GLASSEY said only a few days ago he Clause, as amended, put and passed. had a rate-paper left at his residence in connec tion with a special rate for the bridge over Clauses 17 to 21, inclusive, passed as printed. Breakfast Creek, and he did not see why The HoN. Sm S. \V. GRIFFITH said clause a similar course could not be adopted with 4 had been amended so as to provide for the pos regard to the bridg-e under discussion. He sibility of the Burnett Bridge being constructed thought tolls should be discouraged as much as entirely at the cost of the Government, and of possible. They were utterly and thoroughly cour, The House resumed, and the CHAIRMAN re of any jury or proper tribunal as to the state ported the Bill with amendments. of the man's mind, and the place where he is, is The report was adopted, ard the third reading where such an investigation can best be made. of the Bill made an Order of the Day for to· At present they may do so, but the matter is morrow. dependent upon the idiosyncracy of the judge who may hear the matter. This, then, commends FEDERAL COUNCIL REFJ<~RRING BILL itself as a desirable reference to make. Another (QUEENSLAND), No. 1. matter has been brought particularly under my SECOND READING. notice when in Hobart, on two occasions when I The MINISTER FOR MINES AND have been there, and that is the difficulty of WORKS said: Mr. Speaker,--This Bill, the compelling the production of a will. Suppose a second reading of which I am about to propose, is man dies, leaving property in Queensland, and to be referred to the Federal Council. It is a legal his will is in the possession of some person in Bill, which I believe the legal gentlemen of the New South Wales or Victoria. How are you to House understand a great deal better than I do ; get it? Nobody knows. If you wish to prove but I believe it to be a very useful Bill. There are the will here, and to get possession of the property many cases which come before the courts which and administer the will, the Supreme Court of concern suitors or clients in other colonies, and Queensland has not the power to compel the which concern suitors and clients in this colony production of the document for the purpose of who have business in other colonies, but at the having the will proved, and until it is produced present time there is no jurisdiction. This Bill, it cannot be proved. That is a matter which if it becomes law, as I hope it will, will he the was brought specially under my notice; but, means of giving effect to proceedings which upon consideration, it seemed to me that there may take place in this colony and in other was no reason why we should confine such colonies which refer the Bill to the Federal provisions to wills, or why the provi>,ions Council and the l<'ederal Council pass it. I am should not be extended to any other docu quite certain that the hon. gentleman at the ment or thing, the production of which is head of the Opposition will he able to explain neeessary for the purpo0e of administering the measure much better than I can. There justice. I advised my hon. friend, in intro fore I shall say nothing more than that at ducing this Bill, to extend the provicions the present time it is before the Parliament of to any document requiren for the administration Tasmania for reference to the Federal Council, of justice. No matter what the document may so that if we pass it there will at least be another be, if it is required for the purpose of ad colony which will be in the same position, ann ministering justice in Queensland, we should documents that are required to be produced by the have the power to bring it before our courts, court will be produced in Tasmania and in other and I do not think that any of the colonie~ colonies which pass a similar Bill. I move, Mr. would be likely to object to the production of Speaker, that the Bill be now read a second time. any document that would assist the court in Queensland in administering justice here. The The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said: Mr. same thing will, of course, apply in the case Speaker,-As representing this colony on the of every colony. I believe extremely useful Federal Council with my hon. friend, the Minis provisions of this kind may be made, if these ter for Mines and vVorks, I feel it my duty matters are referred to the Federal Council. to say something in respect of this Bill. The These two matters commend themselves to Imperial Federal Council Act provides amongst me as likely to be very useful. Some gentle other things that the Federal Council shall have men say that the Federal Council has not done legislative authority in respect of certain matters much good ; but it is not intended to let off referred to it by two or more colonies; amongst fireworks, rockets, or anything of that kind. It which are incluned any matters of general Aus is intended to do steady, useful work, and to tralasian interest with resnect to which the remove difficulties found in the administration legislatures of the several colonies can legislate of Government in Australia at the present time, within their own limits, and as to which it is where we have practically several jurisdictions deemed desirable that there should be a law of independent of one another. That is very good for general application. By the Federal Council many purposes, but it is far better for many (Adoptin~>:) Act of 1885 we adopten the Federal other purposes that there should be one juris Council, and became one of the Federal Colonies, niction. There is one jurisdiction now which and we referred to the Federal Council, besines has power to deal with matters referred to it by .the things, referred to it by the Imperial Act, individual jurisdictions, and this enables us to the following :- secure completer administration of justice than "The status of corporations and joint stock co,.m rmnies in other colonies than that in which they have could otherwise be done with the diversity of been constituted i constitutions in Australia. This Bill, if adopted n The trial und punishments in one colony of offenders by the legislature of this and the other colonies, against the laws of an adjoining colony." will enable the Federal Council to do some very That was to enable us to administer justice to useful work in connection with the administra a greater extent on our western borders. Our tion of justice, and I therefore gladly support ~fforts up to the present have been unsuccessful the second reading. in inducing other colonies to make similar Mr. HODGKINSON said: Mr. Speaker,-In references, with the exception of the colony of the consideration of this matter it must not be Tasmania, where they have taken a very great and forgotten that this Federal Coundl is probably intelligent interest in matters relating to federa the initiation of a body which will have a very tion, which might be followed by other colonies. powerful influence upon the Australasian colonies. They are anxious that besides the matters It is the most practical step we have yet taken already referred, there should be power given towards federation. At the last Council the to the courts of one colony to recognise the representation of the colony of Queensland order« of courts in another colony in respect of was arranged under somewhat difficult circum matters of luna~y. A little consideration shows stances, owing to a change of Government. On that to be very desirable and necessary. 'Whether that occasion the hon. the leader of the Opposition a man is insane or not can best be ascer and the Minister for Mines and \Vorks were, at tained where he is. His property might the desire and with the approbation of the whole be in all the other colonies; and I am quite colony, appointed to represent this colony on sure the courts of any colony would, if directed the J!lederal Council. The matters which are in this way, willingly recognise the finding specially referred to in this Bill are such as will Federal Oozmcil R<:ferring [7 OcTOBER.] Bill (Queenslund), No. 1. 2047 no doubt commend themselves to everyone ; but and likely to be a good thing for the whole of we must not forget, in view of the powers which the Australasian colonies if all the colonies can the Federal Council may yet exercise, that the see their way to unite with those who have question of representation should be placed upon already adopted the principle of federation. a proper basis. Our experience of Bills passed This is the first Bill, I think, which has been sub in our own legislature is, that they are improved mitted by the present Government for referring by discussion by both parties. No matter by matters to the Federal Council. It is not a very what Government a Bill may be introduced pretentiou.s one, it does not cover a great deal of it is very frequently modified to a serious ground, but I am very glad to see brought in e~tent by the Opposition. Whoever the Govern even at this late period of the session a Bill of this ment may be that introduce a measure, they sort, not only because it will tend to promote the can generally accept suggestions from the federal spirit by keeping matters of public im Opposition that tend to perfect the measure. In portance such as are proposed to be dealt with committing to this Federal Council what are by the measure before the colonies of Australia, really legislative powers, I think it should but f1lso because a real benefit will be secured be brought under -notice that, at any rate, for this colony by the adoption of the provi speaking for our colony, the delegates to sions of the Bill. Anyone who has had to do such Council should be elected. They should with the administration of justice, and who has not be the nominees of the Government for had experience in connection with the matters the time being, but should he elected by on which it is proposed to legislate, will see at the members of the legislature they represent. once that it does not require any words to com Otherwise we deprive ourselves of the assistance mend the objects of the Bill. It will, if acted that we cheerfully avail ourselves of in our own upon, remove many difficulties which have Chamber. It would be quite possible under certain seriously impeded the interests of justice, and will circumstances to have two delegates, or what not only be very beneficial in many particulars ever may he the number contributed by this with regard to the redre·.sing of private wrongs, colony-exclusively the nominees of the Govern but will also tend to facilitate the administra ment for the time being, and not representing tion of justice in some of its criminal aspects. the general feeling of the Assembly. On the I am glad the Government have introduced the last occasion we were particularly fortunate, as Bill, and I trust it is but the first of a long series owing to a change of Government occurring about of Bills of this sort which we shall have. the time but not completely effected, we were Mr. O'SULLIVAN said: Mr. Speaker,-I able to send a representative from each side of regret exceedingly that I have made no prepara the Chamber, the leader of the Opposition and tion to speak on this Bill to-night. It is a very the Minister for Mines and \Vorks. I do not short one, and althongh I saw it a few days ago, think the colony as a whole has lost by that. It !,allowed the matter to escape my attention. I had two representatives of distinct sets of opinions, fully agree that a few things such as those each capable of forcibly presenting hi.> own mentioned by the leader of the Opposition may special arguments. The Federal Council will, be of some advantage to us, as for instance the in time, have to deal with even mom important production of wills and several other little matters, and if the number of representatives is matters of that kind pertaining to lawyers. But increased, as will undoubtedly be the case, and the rambling speech made by the hon. member greater powers are exercised by the Council, I who has just sat down I could not follow, he think it will be desirable that the representa spoke so fast. The hon. member went over the tives should be elective and not be the nominees whole range of federation and cast the whole of any Government. subject off his hands just as he would brush his Mr. ARCHER said: Mr. Speaker,-1 hardly coat. He said it would settle this and that and agree with what has fallen from the hon. mem the other thing, but it strikes me that although ber for Burke. I believe that any Government federation is a noble thing to look at in theory, of the colony will be sensible enough to appoint yet in practice it would not suit Queensland a.t as representatives to the Federal Council the men the present time. If we had everything that who are the ablest to represent the colony, and pertains to Queensland relegated to the J<'ederal that if their appointment was to be decided by Council we should be like a plucked turkey or a election in the House it would give rise to a much divisional board. \Ve should have no laws of stronger party feeling than at present exists. If our own comparatively, and we should be in they were elected by the House I presume it competition with a powerful society at home would be in the ordinary manner by writing their that goes in for Imperial J<'ederation. I take it names down in the same way as is done in regard that the hon. member for Charters Towers, the to members of select committees. In that case Hon. A. Rutledge, would not go that far. Does members would just put down the names of the hon. member think for a single moment of their own friends, and party spirit would be attaining in his day or mine the thing that is =uch stronger than it is at present. I think it called federation? will be well to let the matter remain as it is. It The HoN. A. RUTLEDGE: No;notlmperial would be a very peculiar Ministry, or the Oppo federation. sition must be ntterly destitute of good men, if Mr. O'SULLIVAN : The hon. member, so far representatives were not appointed from both as I know, has not gone into the tnatter except sides of the House. I know that if I had any in theory : he has not gone into the practica thing to do with a Ministry I should be very part of it. This evening I just jotted down a sorry indeed to see the representatives all ap few thin;rs that we, as an independent colony, pointed from one side. The Ministry did well must part with if we go in for federation, either on the last occasion in making appointments from Imperial or colonial. 'Ne should have to give to both sides, and I do not think they could have the Federal Council the defence of the colony made a better choice than they did. against foreign powers, and for that purpose we The Hol\f. A. RUTLEDGE said: Mr. Speaker, shoulrt require to have a uniform system of rail -I am very glad indeed to see this~ Bill, the ways, and I believe a double line, in order to carry second reading- of which the hon. gentleman has our soldiers and ammunition from place to place. just moved. It goes to show that the Govern \Ve should have t•l hand over the control of the ment are fully alive to the advantages of federa military and naval forces. The Federal Council tion, and that they are not less convinced than would have to make our fortifications · and my hon. friend, the leader of the Opposition, arsenals and protect our coasts. It would also that federal action is a good thing for this colony, see to the construction and maintenance of our 2048 Federal Council. Riferring [ASSEMBLY.] Bill (Queensland), No. 1. trunk lines of railway and our telegraph and postal comes to look at them in any way whatever. In syRtems. Trade and commerce would be under Queensland we have a very energetic officer on its control, and also the navigation a.nd lighting our border, and he sees that no goods upon which of our coasts, currency and coinage, weights and duty should be paid according to our tariff come measures, Customs and Excise duties, and all in free. Is that leading in any way to that unity other general taxation, the command of banks, which is strength ? The first duty of the :Federal and savings banks, and matters in insolvency, Council should betomakeanniform tariff. Now, copyright, patents of invention, marriages and I will refer to the Telegraph Department. The divorce, immigration &.nd naturalisation-all these cost of a telegram from Albany, vV est Australia, would be dealt with by the Federal Council, besides to Brisbane is 4s., and from Adelaide 3s. The criminal law, and the payment of our judges. charge from Melbourne to Sydney is ls., but from In a word, the Federal Council would have power Melbourne to Brisbane 3s. New South Wales over everything not ex:pressly handed over to the and Victoria are united so far as telegrams are different local Governments. What would we concerned. ' have left; can any hon. member tell me ? Federa tion upon a few points, such as those just The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Hon. J. mentioned by the practical leader of the Oppo Donaldson) : Thm;e rates a& only for the first ten sition may be of use; but this complete system words, remember. of federation is merely a dream. It is a simple Mr. ANNEAR : In regard to freetrade, Aus theory, and I for one refuse to part with tlalia contains about 4,000,000 of people, ancl any of these privileges of m'l own colony. the tariffs are altogether different in the Of course, I have not the elightest objection various colonies-different Customs tariffs, and to supporting the second reading of the Bill. different telegraphic tariffs; but I believe the I have not the least objection to a few able postal tariffs have been to some extent equalised. men from our Assembly going down South In Australia there is a separate department of and measuring themselves with the great men Customs' officers in every colony, whereas in from the other colonies, although I am a be America, with its population of 65,000,000, there liever in the doctrine of Henry George, that is not a Customs' officer in the entire territory. there is scarcely half-an-inch between them It is absolute freetrade amongst Americans all. It does not matter who goes and who stays inside America, and protection against the out at home, nor do I care for my own part whether side world. They have put 50 per cent. on they are elected by the House or by the Govern machinery-some 'hon. members were horrified ment. It is only a sort of jollification, a trip to the other day because we tried to impose a duty another colony, and after all there is really of 11' per cent.-and 70 per cent on English nothing in it. To please the hon. member who tweeds-; and when Australasia becomes united, brought forward this Bill, I shall vote for the and protects her own people against the outside second reading. I suppose if it went to a world, she will become the great nation we division I should be alone. I have gone into all thoroughly believe she will be. Until this matter and turned it over. Theoretically, that is done we shall only be as we are now and looking at it from the outside, it is all very at sixes and sevens one with the other. There well, but when you come to investigate it, it is is nothing whatever in common. It should be like the Dead Sea apple, all rotten and full of the duty of those gentlemen who meet in dust inside. Tasmania to bring about this unity. To my Mr. ANNEAR said: Mr. Speaker,-The mind the :Federal Council, up to the present Federal Council of Austmlasia has been before time, has been a myth. It has been a Federal this and the other Parliaments of Australasia Council in name ; I do not see what good they for a good many years. We Ree that the Uouncil have done; and now they come before us with meets, and I have asked myself what has been a Bill of two clauses referring to Supreme Court the result of their meetings in Tasmania? I fail cases, when there are other matters of far to see that there has been much result up to the greater importance to the interests of the people present time. Now we are asked to pass a Bill of Australasia which they leave absolutely un to give the Federal Uouncil further powers touched. What we want is a federated which are in regard to the following :- Australasia. IV e do not want to federate with ''(a) The recognition in other colonies of orders and Great Britain. vVe can run by ourselves if we declarations of the Supreme Court of any colony in are united, and when we are united we shall matters of lunacy: become that great nation which we are destined u (b) Compelling the production to the Supreme Court to be if we are properly governed. I trust that of any colony of any documents, or of any property of when those gentlemen meet again in Tasmania any kind, the production whereof may be required for next year they will do something to bring the purposes of any proceedings in the Supreme Court about that unitv. In England the other of any other colony.'' day the Great ·Eastern Railway Company I have no doubt that these a.re very e"sen called for tenders for fifty locomotives. This tial matters ; but I think the bnsines; of was in freetra.de England. What was the re the leading men from all the colonies who meet sult? A Belgian tenderer sent in the lowest there, ought to be of a more substantial nature. tender, and it was accepted by that English The first thing the Federal Cd'nncil should do, company. Belgian engines go into England free, should be to equalise the tariffs throughout the on English engines imported into Belgium colonies. The other day there were a lot of there is a duty of 25 per cent. It is all very well people landed on the jetty at Adelaide, who had for hon. members to talk about freetrade. I just come to Australia. They were met by a travelled the other day to the Crystal Palace Customs officer, and I saw that officer, who was with a gentleman who ·represented Singleton in in the pay of the Government of South Aus New South \Vales for many years, Mr. \V. C. tralia, levy the sum of 3s. towards the revenue Brown, and we saw on our way some very large of that colony, on account of some ribbons factories, with letters as tall as I am on the walls, which had not been used, and which he found stating that "freetrade closed this establish in a lady's box, after turning all her clothes and ment." That is what England is doing. Let us things out on to the jetty. I will refer to the tariffs imitate America anci protect oursel vec< against later on. In Victoria the Custom-house officers all outsiders. Everyone outside America is a are also very careful in seeing that no dutiable foteigner to her, and everyone outside of us goods are taken into the colony without paying. should be a foreigner to Australia. Put on those In New South Wales when passengers' goods are duties, and this will become one of the grandest landed on the wharf no Custom-house officer countries on the face of the earth. Companies Act [7 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 2049 Mr. CALLAN said: Mr. Speaker,-The hon. his mind it would' make the Bill clearer having member for Maryborough, in speaking on this those clauses folio wing clauses 5 and G. subject, has not put before the House his own The HoN. Sm S. W. GRIFFITH said the views. He does not say whether he is in favour Bill as it was printed showed the scheme pretty of protection or in favour of free trade. He also clearly. By the English Act of 1867 it was finds fault with the Federal Council because provided, in section 9, which ;vas clause 4 _of they have not adopted any particular policy. the Bill, that a company might reduce .Its The hon. member forgets that at this early stage capital· section 10 of the English Act, whiCh of the J:<'ederal Council it is impossible for it to was se~tion 5 of the Bill as printed, provided adopt a policy. The hon. member says he is in that a company might add the words, "and favour of a uniform tariff. That must inevitably reduced," to its name for a limited time ; section follow in course of time, but whether in the 11 of the J The POSTMASTEH-GENERAL moved that "divided into shares of a larger ·or smaller the Committee do not insist upon the insertion amount." He thought the amendment was a of the word "preceding" in clause 15 of the Bill. very useful one, as it made the clause clearer The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFJ!'ITH said the than it was before. At the same time he did not clause ,neant quite a different thing in the care very much whether it was carried or not, English Act, and the amendment ma,de by the because under the Act of 1863, shares could be Assembly was necessary. The English Act to increased, and that provided only for a reduction. which the clause applied consisted of only sections If the leader of the Opposition had any strong 7 and 8, but the Bill before the Committee objection to the amendment he would not press contained fifty clauses. it. In the meantime he moved that it be '"greed to. The POSTMASTER-GENERAL: This refers to the preceding section. The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFJ!'ITH said that 'l'he HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said was 11n important amendment. The first part that hon. members would see the a bsnrdity of the of the Bill enabled a company, by special resolu Council's disagreement to the amendment by tion, to reduce its capital to a smaller amount referring to the following paragraph in clause 7 :- than was fixed by the memorandum of associa tion. Then that clause provided that when " 'l.'he minute required to be registered in the case of reduction of capital shall show, in addition to the other that was done, the memorandum of association particulars required by law. the amount (if any) at tho issued should be in accordance with the special date of the registration of the minute proposed to be resolution, and show that the ce~pital had been deemed to have been p&id up on each share." reduced, or that the amount of the shares had been One might look in vain in any preceding part of reduced. That was very importaDt, because it the Bill to find out what that referred to, but if would inform the public dealing with the company the student of the Bill was diligent and read on of the liability of the members. The provision till he came to clause 11, he WOlJld find that it respecting the increase of capital was unimpor referred to a thing required to be done by that tant. But the Legislative Council's amendment clause; so that there was something in the 7th left out all reference to the previous parts of the clause which qualified a provision contained in Bill, which were for the protection ofthe creditors the 11th clause. He was merely pointing out of the company, and made it apply merely to the the absurdity of the transposition. Then the 8th last preceding section, so that it would be simply clause-the 15th clame as printed-provided that a means of gratifying idle curiosity. any company limited by shares might sofarmodify The POSTMASTER-GENERAL: Negative the conditions contained in its memorandum of the motion. association, if authorised so to do by its regula Question put and negatived. tions, as to reduce its ea pital bycancellingunissued shares. And without the amendment made by the The POSTMASTJ!JR-GENERAL said when Assembly the clause would provide that none of the Bill was g0ing through Committee there the provisions of the Act should apply to any was considerable difference of opinion as to reduction of capital made under the section; but whether the system of audit proposed should what was meant in the J<~nglish Act was that the apply to other companies as well as banking provisions contained in clause 7 should not apply. companies; and the weight of evidence appeared The 18th section-the 17th as printeJ-provided to be in favour of not having it extended to all that the statement of the number of shares into other companies. For instance, it was pointed which the capital was divided contained in every out that it should not apply to mining companies, copy of the memorandum of association issued and as it was the intention of the Government after the passing of any special resolution by to rbring in a Mining Companies Bill next which the capital was increaSed or reduced, or session, he moved that the Committee do not by which the amount of the shares was reduced, insist on their amendment in clause 23, line 41. should be in accordance with such reso1ution. \V as not that clause to "-Pply? Suppose the Question put and passed. capital was reduced from £100,000 to £10,000, was The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said he pro the memorandum of association to say that the posGcl to agree to the amendment of the Legis capital was £100,000, or was a minute to be lative Council in line 27 of the same clause-to registered, showing that the capital was reduced insert '' banking " before ''cornpany." to £10,000? The clauses seemed to have got Question put and pas~ed. astray somewhere. The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said he The POSTMASTER-GEi-l"ERAL s,aid the thought the word" preceding" ought to be taken n0xt amendment of the Legislative Council was out. It was quite necessary to insert the word in clause 24-to insert "banking" before "com when the position of the clause was altered, but pany ;" to omit "the chairman of " in line 35, unless it were taken out, the clause would not and to insert "at least one of the." He thought cover the whole ground when placed back in its the words "the chairman " should be omitted, original position. because difficulties might arise in consequence of the chairman being absent at any time. The Mr. HODGKINSON said that surely there amendment was a very desirable one. He pro was no man so stupid as not to see the absurdity posed to agree to both the amendments of the of the proposal. Was it thrown O~lt as food for Legislative Council. the lawyers? Question put and passed. The POSTMASTER-GENERAL: State your objections, and I will answer them. On clause 25- Mr. HODGKINSON said the leader of the The POSTMASTER-G J;;NERAL moved that Opposition had pointed out that the clause con the Legislative Council's amendment be agreed taining the provision with regard to the minute to. had reference to a subsequent clause. Question put and passed. Question put and passed. On clause 26- The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said the The POSTMASTER-GENERAL moved that next amendment of the Legislative Council was the Committee do not insist upon the proposed in clause 17 as now printed-to omit the words new clause to which the Legislative Council dis " increased or reduced, or by which the amount agree.. of the shares is reduced," and to insert the worcls Question put ~tnd passed, Companies Act [7 OcTOBER.] Amendment Bill. 2051 On clauses 23, 24, and 25- entry were made by the transferee." He con· The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said that sidered there was no danger about the clause he would put the question that the transposition whatever, because any articles of association he of the clauses 23, 24, and 25 be insisted upon. had ever seen, provided that transfers should be He had no intention of accepting the Council's in writing. Then, again, the directors of a com disagreement, because he thought the Bill was pany had the right of rejecting any transferee far more intelligible as it left the Assembly, whose position they did not think good enough. notwithstanding the Legislative Council's asser That was a proper right to reserve because men tion that "The proposed transposition would of ,,traw might be substituted for substantial tend to confuse two distinct subject" under one rnen. heading." He moved that the Committee insist The Hox. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH: Do you upon the transposition of clauses 23, 24, and 25, not think that the directors might be sometimes and the proposed amendment in clause 25. willing to register men of straw? The HoN. Sm S. W. GRIFFITH said there The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said that must be some extraordinary mistake in the neither the clause as it stood or as amended message. The reason given ag.-cinst the trans would affect that in any way. He had thought a position was that it c0nfu-;ed two distinct great deal about the clause, and it would have subjects, but they were the whole of an English been better if it had been omitted altogether Act of Parliament, consisting of three clauses, from the Bill. It would not have done the and as they were proposed to be put in the Bill slightest harm, as it was only the affirmation of a they would be in order. The Committee ]Jro principle to give the transferror the right to posed to put them in their right order of 1, 2, register a transfer of his shares. Shares might be and 3 ; the Legislative Council, on the contrary, sold and never transferred, and if the company insisted upon putting them in the order of 3, 1, went bad the transferror would be liable for and 2, and they said that putting them in the calls; but he would like to see something Joro order of 1, 2, and 3, was mixing up two different vided to protect the transferee if possible. There subjects. Either the members of the Com was no necessity to insist upon the amendment, mittee did not know what they were doing·, as hon. members knew that if they wanted to or the Legislative Council did not know what transfer shares the transfer had to be in writing they were doing. He was sorry to speak signed by the transferror ~nd transferee, and disrespectfully of another place, but th'" message there was no use for the clause. was most astonishing. The other propoaed The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said the amendment in clause 25 had nothing whatever to clause without the amendment would either be do with the tmnsposit.ion, and was connected extremely dangerous or it would have no with a different subject. It was put in to pre meaning. Yent any conflict with the last section of the The POSTMASTER-GENERAL : It has no Act. meaning. Question put and passed. The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said that On clause 28- without the amendment it would enable a trans The POSTMASTER-GENERALmoYed that ferror to put someone else's name on the share the Committee do not insist upon their amend list, and shift all liability from himself. It ment. ought not to mean that, and as they had amended it, it could not mean that at any rate. Question put and passed. It might be useful in some cases as ~mended, but On clause 20-"Manner in which shares are it could not be dangerous. If the amendment to be issued and held"- was not insisted upon, a man might find that his The POST~IASTER- GENERAL said the name had been forged and that he was a share words, "the memorandum of association, or holder without knowing anything at all about by," had been inserted by the Committee, and it. The hon. gentleman said that companies the Legislative Council disagreed to that, "be generally required a transf~ree to sign the caustl it was desirable that the registration of transfer, hut some of them drd not. That was the contract should in all cases be insisted on." not by any means a universal rule. Suppose He proposed that the Committee do not insist a company did not insist upon that, a mem upon the amendment. ber might put another man on the share The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said that holders' list, and then he would be liable for provision was entirely for the protection of the calls. That would be injurious to the company public. For one rnem ber of the public who would as well as to the transferee. The reason given see a registered contract, fifty would see the by the Council for objecting to the amendment memorandum of association. It was the omission was that it would render the clause practically from the English Act of the amendment which useless, and it was desirable that the right of a they had inserted which had given rise to inter transferror to claim registration of his transferee minable litigation, should be affirmed by statute. That was exactly what the cbuse did as amended, and he hoped Question pnt and negatived. the hon. gentleman would insist upon the amend On clause 31--" Transfer may be registered at ment, because the clause would be most dangerous request of transferror"-which the Legislative without it, Assembly had amended by the insertion of the The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said the words--" and on the production of a transfer clause altogether was a very useless one in his duly executed by the transferee"- opinion, and he was snrry they had not struck The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said he it out when they were passing the Bill in would move that the Assembly do not insist Committee. upon their amendment, because at the present The HoN. Sm S. W. GRIFFITH: It is too time it was unnecessary. The transferee would late to do that now, and we had better make it sign the scrip transferred in the usu"l way, and as harmless as we can. to provide that he should do so in the clause was The POSTMASTER-GENERAL said that surplusage. If the right given to the transferror as it stood it was exactly as it appeared in the to register a transfer could be fully a vailed of, it English Act, and he dared say there was a good might be very dangerous, but it was provided reason for having it there. With regard to the that it should be "in the same manner and subject statement that a person might find himself in to the same conditions ~s if the application for such possession of shares that he did not bargain for, 2052 Companies Act Amendment Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Message from the Governor. he repeated thaf he had never seen any articles tion to companies registered under the Com of association of any company that did not pro p:mies Act of 1863." That was utterly absurd. vide that transfers should be in writing and The whole Bill dealt only with companies regis signed by transferror and transferee, and they tered under that Act, and they· were told that merely provided in the clause for exactly the the amendment was objectionable, because it conditions under which transfers were usually might lead persons to form a correct opinion as made. He could not see that there was any to the object of the Bill. danger to be apprehended from it at all. Question put and passed. Mr. UNMACK said he hoped the Committee would insist upon their amendment. The The House resumed, and the CHAIRMAN reported clause said that any company should enter in its to the House that the Committee insisted upon register the name of a transferee on the applica some of their amendments, did not insist upon tion of a transferror, and there was nothing to others, and agreed to certain amendments made show that it should be upon conditions. by the Legislative Council upon their amend ments. The POSTMASTER-GENERAL : It says, "In the same manner and subject to the same On the motion of the POSTMASTJnt conditions as if the application for such entry G ENERAL, the repm-t was adopted. were made by the transferee." ADJOURNMENT. Mr. UNMACK said they should insist upon their amendment, as without it any person who The PREMIER said: Mr. Speaker,-I move was the owner of shares which he wished to get that this House do now adjourn. The first rid of, could go and sign scrip and put on the Government business to-morrow will be the name of anyone he liked, and yet that person was Local Government Acts Amendment Bill in allotted the shares and the liability. The amend committee; after that the Diseases in Sheep Act ment was a very good one; it was a safeguard, Amendment Bill in committee; after that the and they should insist upon it being retained in District Courts Act Amendment Bill in com the clause. mittee, and after that, if there is time, Supply. Mr. BARLOW said that the amendment was Question put and passed. insisted upon by the hon. member for Burke, The House adjourned at twenty-one minutes JYir. Hunter, who, he was sorry, was not then past 10 o'clock. present. It appeared a monstrous thing that a man should be made a transferee and incur liability without his consent. Mr. TOZER said the object of the clause in the English Act was simply to give a legal status to a person who had a right to have his name placed on the register, and enable him to bring an action tu compel the company to register his name if they refused to do so. If they allowed the clause to go without the amendment people would act upon 1t and stick anybody upon the register, but as amended the clause could do no harm. Question put and negatived. On clause 35-" Company to hold meeting within six months after registration "-which the Assembly had amended by omitting the word "six" and inserting the word "three," by omitting the words "and every subscriber of the memorandum of association," and by adding the words "such meeting shall have power to transact all such business of the company as shall be specified in the notice convening the meeting, or of which previous notice shall have been given in manner required by the articles of associa tion." The POSTMASTER-GENERAL moved that the Committee do not insist upon their amend ments. Question put and passed. On clause 36-" Where compromise proposed court may order a meeting of creditors, etc., to decide as to such compromise"-which the Assembly had amended by omitting the words "this Act and" and the words " or either of them"- The POSTMASTER-GENERAL moved that the Committee do not insist upon their amend ments in that clause. The HoN. SIR S. W. GRIFFITH said the reason given by the Legislative Council for their disagreementtotheamendmentin that clause, was remarkable. The clause, as amended, provided for companies being wound-up under the principal Act, the only Act under which they could be wound-up, and the Legislative Council disagreed to the amendment, "Because the proposed 1\lllendment might be held to limit the applica-