Legislative Assembly Hansard 1893
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Queensland Parliamentary Debates [Hansard] Legislative Assembly WEDNESDAY, 23 AUGUST 1893 Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy 594 Meat and Dairg, cj"c. Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Duty on Imported Coal and Timber. LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. Wednesday, 23 August, 1893. Inquests of Death Act Amendment Bill : Assent. Duty on Imported Coal and Timber.-Examination or Imported Fruit.-Meat and Dairy Produce Encouragement Bill: Third reading. - Central Separation.-Pearl-shell and Beche-de-mer Fishery Acts Amendment Bill : Message from the Legisla tive CounciL-Adjournment. The SPEAKER took the chair at half-past 3 o'clock. INQUESTS OF DEATH ACT AMEND MENT BILL. AssENT. The SPEAKER reported that he had received a message from His Excellency the Governor, assenting to the Inquests of Death Act of 1866, Amendment Bill. DUTY ON IMPORTED COAL AND TIMBER. Mr. HARDINGasked the Colonial Treasnrer- 1. Is it correct that the coal used on the hulks at Townsville, Cooktown, and Thmsday Island, and brought from New South Wales, pay_s no duty? 2, Was a lot of timber delivered at Townsville Meat Works on which no duty was collected? · 3, And if so, on what authority? Central Separation. [23 AuGUsT.] Central Separation. 505 The COLONIAL TREASURER (Hon. great Central division of the colony. Shortly H. M. Nelson) replied- after the colony of Queenslanrl. obtained separa 1. Dutie• are collected on all coal imported into the tion from New South Wales the people lidng to colony in accordance with the Customs Act. the north of Dawes Range, who were really 2. No dutiable timber has been delivered at the port offshoots from the colonies <Jf New South \V ales of Townsville at any time without payment of duty. and Victoria, found that, owing to the centralisa tion of the whole of the legislative and adminis EXAMINATION OF IMPORTED FRUIT. trative affairs of the colony in Brisbane, it Mr. GROOM asked the Secretary for Agri was impossible to obtain due consideration of culture- their own affairs, and they protested frequently by 1, Whether the Agricultural Department have made their representatives in the Brisbane Parliaments any arrangements to examine before landing green fruit imported from places other than the Australasian against the systAm; but always .without avail. colonies? About the year 18G3, the people in the Central 2. Is the .Agricultural Department aware that large district made a formal protest and a specific quantities of American fruits are now being landed in demand regarding, first, the adjustment of Brisbane. conta.ining insect pests destructive to the accounts, because even at that early stage of the apple and other orchards of the colony ? history of the colony the people living to the The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE north of Dawes Range alleged that they had (Hon. A. H. Barlow) replied- lost large sums of the surplus revenue contributed 1. No. The Department of Agriculture has no power by them, which had been spent in the Southern to do so. division. They demanded increased representa 2. The department is aware that American fruits are tion and the establishment of provincial councils; landed in Brisbane, viti Sydney, bttt is not aware that and in 1864 our then representative, Mr. John they contain any insect pests, or, if such be contained, Douglas-now the Hon. John Douglas-brought that they are likely to be more destructive to the apple forward a scheme for a sort of federated division and other orchal'dS of the colony than the green fruits of Queensland, for the establishment of pro imported from Tasmania and other Australian colonies, where the orchards are infected with the codlin moth vincial parliaments, with a Central Parliament and other insects destructive to the apple and other exercising jurisdiction over matters of general fruits. No direct shipments of green fruit from America concern. The Herbert-l\facalister Government, have been landed in Brisbane during th1s year. however, objected to such a measure being brought in by aprivatemember, and Mr. Douglas MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCE was obliged to withdraw it. Rut the Government ENCOURAGEMENT BILL. distinctly recognisQd the fact that, owing to the THIRD READING. great extent of Queensland and the remote "itua On the motion of the PREMIER (Hon. Sir T. tion of its capital and the seat of government in the Mcilwraith), this Bill was read a third time, extreme l'out.h-eaetern corner of the territory, it passed, and ordered to be transmitted to the was impossible that the affairs of the colony could Legislative CounciL for their concurrf'nce, by be managed under the then system, and they message in the usual form. proposed to establish a system of provincial councils. They brought in a Bill called the CENTRAL SEPARATION. "Provincial Councils Enabling Bill," which was Mr. CURTIS, in moving- allowed to drop after being read a second time. 1. That the constituencies of the Central division of Mr. Douglas then stated that, as justice was not the colony of Queensland having, at the recent general to be obtained from the Parliament of Queens election, declared in favour of territorial separation, land, they would seek it elsewhere, and very in the opinion of this House, it is desirable that the shortly afterwards the -first separation move· territory comprised within such division should be separated from the said colony and erected into a new ment wa; started by the people living to the colony; but so that the interchange of natural products north of Dawes Range, the headquarters being between the new colony and the old one shall be and in Rockhampton, and the southern boundary continue as free from tax or duty after such separation they adopted in their -first petition was as if it had never been made. Dawes Range, in respect to which Sir Thomas 2. That this r<>solntion be presented to His Excellency Mitchell said that Nature had set up her own the Governor for transmission to the Principal Secre~ landmark not to be disputed. Dawes Range tary of State for the Colonies in the usual way- naturally separates that part of the colony said : I desire, in bringing forward this resolu from Southern Queensland. The agitation was •tion, to state in the first place that I do so with carried on for some time, until in 1871 our first the entire approval of all the Central members, petition was presented to Earl Kimberley, then with 01i.e solitary exception-that is, the hon. Secretary of State, for the Colonies, by Mr. member for Gregory. I also wish to state that Archer. Unfortunately, the movement was not we are impressed with the conviction that in carried on as it should have been. It was bringing this matter forward, and asking the allowed to lapse ; but subsequently to that re House to discuss it, we are performing a duty peated demands were made by the people living which we owe to ourselves, to the people of in the Central districts for some schernP of decen Central Queensland, and to those who come tralisation, and successive Governments brought after them, their children, and their children's in different measures from time to time having de children; and that we are also upholding a great centralisation for their object, but none of them principle which was long ago established for were allowed to become law, simply because the all time·-namely, that as soon as an off;hoot South was too strong, and it did not suit its of the mother country or a mother colony interests that any scheme of decentralisation becomes self-supporting, it is entitled to the should come into existence. I will read the management of its own affairs. I am aware different measures brought forward from time to that this question of separation has frequently time. In the year 1871 the Colonial Secretary, been discussed in this House ; and, so far Sir Arthur Palmer, introduced a Bill known as as the older members are concerned, I can the Financial Separation Bill, which provided say nothing on che subject of which they are for the financial division of the colony into three not already aware. On the other hand, there parts ; and in 1872 a Bill of a like nature was are a large number of new members who pro. introduced, but neither became law. , In 1877 a bably are not very familiar with the subject, and Royal Commission was appointerl. by the Go have not heard the matter debated. 'l'herefore vernment for the purpose of finding out how to I think it desirable that I should, as briefly and allay the feeling of discontent, and bring succinctly as possible, give an outline of the about a more equitable distribution of the separation movement so far as it relates, to the revenue. The recommendations brought up Central Separation. [ASSEMBLY.] Cenb·al Separation. were embodied in a Bill which was intro Lordship's hands. The Governor, in a despatch duced and ·read a first time. In 1877 Sir to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, re S. \Y. Griffith introduced what is known as ferring to the amendment brought forward by the Financial Districts Bill, to divide the colonY Sir S. W. Griffith, said he did not feel called into three parts, and provide for the keeping of upon to express an opinion upon the resolutions separate account.< of the expenditure within such then before Parliament, but it app<>ared to him that divisions and the revenue raised therein. At the the amendment proposed by Sir S. \V. Griffith same time he laid upon the table of the House practically admitted the necessity or expediency of a m::tp showing the boundaries of the three some considerable measure of separation, to divide divisions, but the Bill was afterwards withdrawn.