View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate
2 July 1902

1^st Parliament · 1^st Session

QUESTION
- TEMPORARY OFFICERS
QUESTION
- MILITARY AND NAVAL FORCES
QUESTION
- ENGLISH MAIL SERVICE
CUSTOMS TARIFF BILL

The President took the chair at 2.30 p.m., and read prayers.

page 14084

QUESTION

TEMPORARY OFFICERS

Senator PEARCE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

asked the Vice-Presi- dent of the Executive Council, upon notice -

In the caseof officers in the temporary or casual employment of the State, who were transferred to the Commonwealth service at the time of the transfer of their departments, is it the intention of the Government to deal with such officers under section 33 of the Public Service Act, or under section 40 of that Act, dealing with temporary employment ?

Senator O’CONNOR:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

– The case of the officers on the temporary staff is one of the difficulties met with in connexion with the initiation of the Public Service Act. The Government is now obtaining information as to the position of these employes in the several States, and. until this is furnished it is, impossible to say under which section of the Act they will be dealt with. It is probable, however, that those who are performing duties of an essentially permanent character will come under section 33 of the Act, while those engaged upon work of a purely temporary or casual nature will come under the terms of section 40 of the Act.

page 14084

QUESTION

MILITARY AND NAVAL FORCES

Under what statute or statutes are the military and naval forces of the Commonwealth maintained and administered ?

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

– Under the Acts of the several States ; and under the Commonwealth Constitution Act, and the laws made under it.

page 14084

QUESTION

ENGLISH MAIL SERVICE

Senator PEARCE:

asked the Vice-Presi dent of the Executive Council, upon notice -

Is it a fact that the steamer bringing the mails from England is some days behind time this week ?
Is this caused by an old and slow steamer being used for this service ?
In view of the loss and inconvenience caused to the community by this steamer being used, will the Government make representations with a view to the substitution of faster boats?

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

– The answers to the honorable senator’s questions are as follow : -

. It is a fact that the steamer bringing the mails from England is some days behind time this week.
It is thought that the delay is due to a comparatively slow steamer, the Cvzco, being used on this occasion.
The attention of tho Imperial PostmasterGeneral was invited to the delays caused by the employment of the Cvzco in November last, and it was stated in reply that it was hoped that when the Ophir was able to resume her employment in the mail service, the Cvzco might bc dispensed with. A suitable representation will again bo made.

page 14084

CUSTOMS TARIFF BILL

In Committee (Consideration resumed from 1st July).

Division VI. - Metals and machinery. Item 78. - Manufactures of metal, viz. - Nails, n.e.i., viz., horseshoe nails, per cwt.,5s.

Upon which Senator Pulsford had moved -

That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 78 by adding to the duty “‘Nails, n.e.i., viz., horseshoe nails, per cwt., 5s.,” the words “and on and after 1st August, 1902, free.”

Senator PULSFORD:
New South Wales

– I proposed this resolution in very brief terms last night, because I thought the committee would appreciate brevity. I do not expect to be called upon to enter into the whole question of free-trade and protection in regard to every item. When I moved the resolution, I pointed out last night that fancy nails were free of duty, and for that reason I fail to see why ordinary nails should not also be free. Since then I have discovered that the following long list of nails used in the making of boots is to be found on the list of exemptions in connexion with item 116 -

Bills, Sparrow and other, Clog, Hob, Hungarian, Nugget, Pin -point, Screw or Ice, Spike, Cricket, Running, Sprigs, Tacks lasting, Tips, Tingles, and Rivets.

Senator O’CONNOR:
NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT

– They are exempt because they are not made here.

Senator PULSFORD:

– I understand that. Screws are also on the free list, and is it not reasonable that ordinary nails should likewise be free, considering that, they are used in various industries which are not protected 1 They are used in large quantities in the making of fruit, butter, and other boxes for export purposes. Senator Higgs has informed us that the duty of 5s. per cwt. upon horse-shoe nails is equal to a duty of only 10 per cent.; but I do not think he could have made any inquiries on the subject. I find that imported horse-shoe nails have a value of about 30s. per cwt. landed in Victoria, or say 28s. per cwt. when shipped on the other side; therefore this duty is clearly equal to at least 20 per cent, on the shipping value. That is a very heavy tax to be imposed on an article of such common use. The majority of horses are used by people following some industry or other - largely by farmers and pastoralists - and I fail to see why they should be Subjected to this very material impost. An attempt has been made to draw the general question of free-trade and protection across the trail, but I decline to be drawn into such a discussion. The employment given by the making of horseshoe nails here is very small, and I do not see why, in order to foster a particular factory, the six States of the Union should be called upon to bear this burden. For these substantial reasons I ask the committee to agree to the motion.

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

– I do not think that the duty is intended to foster a particular factory. It is in the interests of the consumer. It has been clearly shown by Senator Higgs - and his statement has not been controverted - that horseshoe nails are now selling locally at half the price charged for them before the local factory was established. At the present time the price is 6£d. per lb; but before the establishment of the local industry a charge of ls. Id. was made.

Senator Pulsford:

– They cost 4d. per lb. to import.

Senator STYLES:

– That is 33s. per hundred lbs. The importer is doing very well if he is obtaining a profit of 2£d. upon an investment of 4d. No wonder he clings to his industry. If they cost that amount to import, a duty of 5s. is not equal to more than 13 or 14 per cent., and therefore Senator Pulsford was misleading the committee, when he said it was equal to about 20 per cent. The reasons given by Senator Higgs and the Vice-President of the Executive Council for continuing to encourage this industry are sound, and cannot be contradicted. The establishment of the local factory has caused the price of nails to be reduced, and it is a check upon those who import these articles.

Senator HIGGS (Queensland). - A few evenings ago Senator Pulsford appealed tothe committee to exercise a spirit of compromise. His sweet reasonableness is shown when he is not satisfied with what has taken place in another Chamber. I find, on reference to the records, that Sir William McMillan moved in another place that the original duty of 7s. per cwt. be reduced to 4s. per cwt., and that after being freely debated, the amendment was negatived by a majority of six. A further amendment, proposed by Mr. McCay, that the duty be reduced to 5s. per cwt. was carried on the voices. Surely there was a spirit of compromise shown there ? I appeal to those honorable senators who come here to do business, and desire to see the Tariff put through as quickly as possible, to say whether we should palter with propositions of this kind ; whether we should not say at once that we will not have anything to do with such proposals.

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

– I am extremely loth to interpose in this debate, and I should not do so but for the fact that Senator O’Connor has quoted certain figures relating to the comparative prices of imported and locally made horseshoe nails, which are utterly misleading, although I am satisfied that he believed in their accuracy. In September, 1 901, which is about the nearest date to the introduction of the Federal Tariff that could be selected, the following were the wholesale prices for

Melbourne made and imported horseshoe nails : - No. 6, Melbourne made, 7d. per lb.; imported, 41/4 per lb ; No 8, Melbourne made, 61/2 per lb.; imported, 31/2d. per lb. ; No. 10, Melbourne made, 61/2d. per lb.; imported, 31/2d. per lb; No. 12, Melbourne made,53/4d. per lb.; imported, 3d. per lb. I admit that from the Melbourne prices a deduction of 12 per cent. is allowed, but even allowing for that deduction there is a wide difference between the two quotations. The very insignificance of this item affords abundant proof of the length to which the Government will go in their desire for protection. We have been told that they wish to protect the workers, and that we are not to lay ruthless hands upon the industries of Australia. My figures show that there are only fifteen men employed in making these nails throughout the Commonwealth, but to be on the safe side I put down the number at twenty. For the sake of twenty men carrying on this ridiculous little industry we are asked to tax - and there is no other alternative - all the consumers in the Commonwealth.

Senator Styles:

– This is not a tax.

Senator CLEMONS:

– It can have no operation except to increase the price of horse-shoe nails. Mr. Pender, the local manufacturer, has said frankly that he cannot make horse-shoe nails at the price for which nails of the same quality can be imported, and that if he is to live there must be a duty. I see no reason for taxing all those who use horse-shoe nails for the sake of the few men who are employed in this industry. They do not receive anything wonderful in the way of wages. It is said that they are paid a fair wage, but it is not more than 32s 6d. per week. As a matter of fact the additional price paid by the consumer under this tax does not go to the worker. It goes to the man who carries on this industry, when possibly he ought not to carry it on. I quote the manufacturer himself, and in evidence he gave before a Tariff Commissionhe saidhe employed fifteen hands, and, inclusive of export to the other States, he produced 100 tons a year. His price was £54 per ton on an average, whereas the imported article could be sold for £40 per ton without the duty.

Senator Styles:

– He does not say that it would be sold at that price, but that it could be sold at that price.

Senator CLEMONS:

– I can give Senator Styles proof in the matter. The Customs authorities dealt with 600 cwts. of horseshoe nails imported in 1900, and they put down their value at £956, or an average of slightly over £30 per ton. The local manufacturer may very well say that the imported article can be sold at £40 per ton, when the Customs authorities value it at £30 per ton. The reason for the duty in this case is obvious - the consumers of horseshoe nails throughout the Commonwealth are to be taxed to maintain fifteen men in employment. If we desire to impose this tax, let us do it frankly for revenue purposes, and let us not pretend that we do so because to abolish it will mean the ruthless destruction of an industry employing fifteen men all told.

– Western Australia may get a set-back in mining development, and if there is to be any opening in that State for the unemployed it is more likely to be in connexion with farming, and we know that the farming industry has received several blows at the hands of free-trade senators. This proposition is only a small link in the chain to protect the heavy swell to whom I have previously referred, and who is to have several luxuries he enjoys admitted into the Commonwealth at a low duty. I say that he can well afford to pay the extra farthing which the imposition of this duty may add to the cost of shoeing his horse once in six months. There is no chance of this proposal being agreed to in another place, and I appeal to the hard-headed senators who desire to do business to oppose it. I do not object to the fullest discussion upon important items such as that with which we dealt yesterday, but when an honorable senator submits a tinkering proposition to reduce the duty upon horseshoe nails I can hardly find words to properly describe his action.

Question - That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 78, by adding to the duty “Nails, n.e.i., viz., horseshoe nails, per cwt. 5s.,” the words,, “ and on and after 1st August, 1902, free “ - put. The committee divided -

Ayes … … … 15

Noes … … … 11

Majority … … 4

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Item 78. - Manufactures of metal, viz. . . . Nails, wire and other, and spikes, staples, brads, andtacks, per cwt., 3s.

Senator PULSFORD:
New South Wales

– I move -

That the House ofRepresentatives be requested to amend item 78 by adding to the duty, ‘ ‘ Nails, wire and other . . . per cwt., 3s.,” the words “ and on and after 1st August, 1902, free.”

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

– Senator Clemons stated that fifteen men are employed in making horseshoe nails in the Commonwealth. One hundred and three men are employed in nail making in Victoria, according to a return which was published by Mr. .Fenton on the 15th May last. Eightyeight men are employed in making nails other than horseshoe nails. Including horseshoe nails, the output is valued at £1,000 per week and the output for the year at £50,333, and the value of the buildings, machinery, and plant is £29,000. So that the nailmaking industry, although it is only in its infancy, is not so very small as would appear at first sight. Very little money seems to have been sent from Victoria to other countries for the purchase of nails. We apparently manufactured all our nails while New South Wales imported her nails from other countries instead of spending the money among her own people. We ask that an industry which has been so successful, and which has not increased the price of the article, shall receive some measure of protection. In Victoria the protection was two and a half times that which is now proposed to be given. Surely that ought to satisfy any free-trade senator who professes that he does not wish to destroy industries. I can understand the position of a free-trader who says that he wishes to close up industries, but I cannot understand the position of a man who, while he professes to be anxious about preserving industries, speaks and votes in favour of wiping them out. I am not able to judge whether a duty of 3s. per cwt. will preserve this industry, but it will certainly help to do so* I would support a duty of 7s. Cd. per cwt. if it were proposed. _ I should like to see the Commonwealth manufacture all the nails it requires. I am sure that Senator Pulsford would like to see nails made out of the iron deposits in New South Wales, so long as it did not interfere with importers. It is a waste of time to discuss this item so far as the free-trade party is concerned. It is not possible to alter one vote, for they have decided what they are going to do, and they will adhere to their decision. The protectionists are challenged with wasting time. Who wastes time 1 Who introduces all these small matters like horseshoe nails ? One would have thought that the duty on this article would have been passed without any discussion. I should like to see those honorable senators, who are not such outandout free-traders that they would destroy all industries, voting with the Government on this occasion.

Senator PULSFORD (New South Wales). - I must protest against the attempt made by the Vice-President of the’ Executive Council to drive honorable senators when he fails to persuade them. I also want to say a word with regard to the revenue. I admit at once that this committee has made some proposals which, if carried into effect, will lead to a loss of revenue, but many of our proposals will bring about an increase of revenue. Senator O’Connor is very much mistaken in his idea that our suggestions as a whole, if carried out, will lead to a reduction of revenue. I am quite sure that they will not. In regard to this item, the revenue which the Government estimate to receive is about £10,000. But that would be greatly reduced when the Tariff obtained full play. If the nails used here are made in the Commonwealth, what revenue can be obtained from them?

Senator O’Keefe:

– Does not the honorable senator want them to be made here ?

Senator PULSFORD:

– I do not care where they are made so long as we obtain them from places where they are made to the best advantage. There are a few people who make nails in Australia, but nails are used by tens of thousands of people, and the interests of the multitude should be considered before the interests of the few individuals directly concerned. Screws, which are very costly as compared with nails, have been put upon the free list by the House of Representatives, and why not continue the same policy by placing upon the free list nails, which are very much less expensive to produce?

Senator HIGGS (Queensland). - We could not enter into a discussion as to the powers of the Senate in regard to such items as agricultural machinery, but in a ease like this, where the item under discussion is a comparatively small one, we certainly may view the question from the stand-point suggested by Senator O’Connor, as to whether what is proposed will not tend to diminish the influence and power of the Senate. I am very anxious that we should uphold our power and dignity in every respect ; and I submit that the Senate was not constituted to remould the Tariff, but to revise the work done by another place. I believe that the public of the Commonwealth would not have voted for the Constitution had they known that the Senate would consider the items of the Tariff in detail, and alter them. I would ask Senator Pulsford to put to himself the question whether he is not placing the Senate in a false position, and bringing about a fight which can end in only one way. The other House has the right to deal with Money Bills. We have a certain power of suggestion, and if we exercise that power in a reasonable way we shall undoubtedly acquire a very great deal of influence. But if we occupy the time of the Commonwealth in dealing with proposals such as this, we shall be looked upon as an excrescence on parliamentary institutions, and a body which might very well be done without. Instead of having two Chambers the

Commonwealth may prefer to have only one. I find on looking through the Queensland statistics with regard to interchange, that, in spite of the duty, there were imported into that State from the United Kingdom, 274 tons 11 cwt. 23 lbs. of nails; from New South Wales, 378 tons 17 cwt. 2 qrs. 15 lbs.; from Victoria, 9 tons 4 cwt. 13 lbs.; from South Australia, 5 cwt. 2 qrs. 24 lbs.; from Hong Kong, 7 tons 3 qrs. 14 lbs.; from China, 18 cwt. 2 qrs.; from Germany, 664 tons 3 qrs. 12 lbs.; from Sweden and Norway, 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 12 lbs.; from Belgium, 85 tons 17 cwt. 2 qrs. 4 lbs.; from the United States of America, 28 tons 10 cwt. 1 qr. The countries of origin of these imports of nails were the United Kingdom, India, China, Germany, Austria, Sweden and Norway, Belgium, and the United States of America. Honorable senators should consider the wages paid in those countries when asking that Australian workmen who are engaged in the nail-making industry shall be compelled to compete with foreign makers. Is it suggested for a moment that the Australian product is not equal to any nails which come from other countries? I will ask Senator Pearce, who has probabty driven more nails than any other member of the Commonwealth Parliament, what is the quality of the German article as compared with the Australian product ?

Senator Pearce:

– I do not know the Australian article, but the English nail is certainly superior to the German ; that is, the protectionist nail is inferior to the freetrade nail.

Senator HIGGS:

– Queensland imported £11,432 worth of nails from Germany as contrasted with £10,490 worth from other countries, and I suppose those figures are indicative of what has happened throughout the Commonwealth. Senator Pulsford proposes not only to kill revenue by making nails free, but to kill the local industry. If importations are increased, undoubtedly local production must decrease, and that must add to the number of the unemployed. First, because I think that Senator Pulsford’s proposal, if carried, would lead to a considerable amount of irritation, and decrease the influence and power of the Semite; in the second place, because the proposal will detroy revenue ; and, thirdly, because increasing importations will throw the people of the Commonwealth out of employment, I trust that the motion will be rejected.

Question - That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 78 by adding to the duty, “Nails, wire and other, . . per cwt., 3s.,” the words “ and on and after 1st August, 1902, free” - put. The committee divided -

Ayes … … … 13

Noes … … … 14

Majority … … 1

Question so resolved in the negative.

Item 78. - Manufactures of metal, via. . . Engines, gas and oil, and high-speed engines and turbines, water and steam, ad valorem, 15 per cent.

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
New South Wales

– Under this paragraph, “turbines, water and steam “ are subject to a duty of 15 per cent., but. it will be seen that “ turbines, steam and water “ appear amongst the list of special exemptions on page 12. I do not know whether it is merely a mistake, but the matter is one of consequence. Perhaps the Minister will explain.

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

– I fail to see why this paragraph should not also include “ hot air engines.” They are largely used, and there seems to be no reason why gas and oil engines should be included in the item while hot air engines are deliberately omitted. I think Senator O’Connor will see the reasonableness of making the addition I have suggested.

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

– Before the honorable and learned senator moves in the direction indicated by him, I should like to point out there is really nothing to be gained by doing so. If hot air engines are not included in this paragraph, they will still be liable to a duty of 15 per cent. under the heading of “ engines “ generally.

Senator CLEMONS (Tasmania).- If the Vice-President of the Executive Council is very particular about the present form of the Tariff, I shall not press my proposal, but hot air engines come into direct and continual competition with gas and oil engines, and as the latter have been specified in this paragraph, I think it would be well to specify hot air engines.

Senator O’CONNOR:

– Gas and oil engines were specified in this paragraph, because, originally, engines generally were subject to a duty of 25 per cent. under another part of the item, while the duty fixed for engines under this paragraph was always 15 per cent. The duty on engines generally was subsequently reduced to 15 per cent.

Senator Lt.-Col. NEILD (New South Wales). - I move -

That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 78 by omitting from the duty “ Engines, gas, and oil . . . and turbines, water and steam, ad valorem, 15 per cent.,” the words “and turbines.”

The water and steam turbines which are included in the list of exemptions must surely be the same articles, and therefore I move the omission of these words.

Senator O’CONNOR:

– It is true that there is an anomaly on the face of the Tariff as it stands, but 1 intend to ask the committee tocure that anomaly by striking out the word “ turbines” from the list of exemptions. Gas and oil engines and high-speed engines and turbines were originally placed under a duty of 15 per cent., while other engines were made liable to a duty of 25 per cent. That duty was subsequently reduced, first of all to 20 per cent., and then to 15 per cent. It was thought that the engines covered by this paragraph should be subjected to the lower duty, because there might be some question as to their being made cheaply here, and also because they are very largely used. Highspeed engines and turbines were placed in this category, because they are not made here at the present time, and it is very doubtful whether they will be manufactured here for some considerable time to come. They are more difficult to construct and less frequently made than are the ordinary classes of steam engines; but there is no reason why they should not contribute to the revenue. The honorable senator will have to show some very good reason why they should not pay this duty. Machinery of all descriptions must bear some duty ; even agricultural machines, which some honorable senatorshave endeavoured to show are the tools of trade of the farmer, have to bear taxation, and why should not these special classes of engines, which are certainly not employed in the smaller kinds of industry, pay a duty. For these reasons, I oppose the motion.

Senator Lt.-Col. NEILD (New South Wales.) - All that Senator O’Connor has said in favour of going back upon the action of another place in placing, “turbines, steam and water,” on the list of exemptions, would apply with great force to many other items on the free list. If these turbine engines are of very high class, so also are the linotype and monotype machines placed in the list of special exemptions. I fail to see why we should go back on the action of the House of Representatives and deliberately strike an article off the free list in order to make it dutiable. It is a most extraordinary thing that the committee is asked to do.

Motion negatived.

Senator CLEMONS (Tasmania). - I move -

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

– Are oil-engines made in Australia?

Senator O’CONNOR:

– Yes; in both Victoria and New South Wales.

Senator Clemons:

– They were made in New South Wales under free-trade.

Senator O’CONNOR:

– Oil-engines were not made in New South Wales under freetrade. Since the imposition of the present Tariff the industry has been started in that State ; but it will, of course, come to an end if the protection be removed. I hope before the debate is over to be able to supply the committee with some details as to the condition of the industry in New South Wales. From a revenue point of view, I say that it is altogether unjustifiable to ask the committee to make the reduction now proposed. With regard to the protectionist incidence of the duty, I have already used arguments which appear to be unanswerable from the point of view of the whole of Australia. The effect of a protective duty of this kind will be to give employment to a large number of persons without appreciably raising prices. When once local production begins, competition is created between the imported article and the local manufacture, and the price of the former is reduced. An industry of this kind cannot possibly be conducted with less protection than 15 per cent. To commence a factory of this description means the investment of a large amount of capital in plant and buildings before any profit can be expected. In the absence of the protection proposed in the Tariff, the industry might drag on for years in the hope of something better ; but instead of agreeing to the suggested amendment, it would be preferable to at once do away will all protection, when manufacturers would know their position, and could dismiss their hands and close up the factories. It would be much better to take that course, than, under the guise of protection, to impose a miserable duty which would have no effect of any real value, and would in the end place the manufacturers in a really worse position. Let us either give protection worth having, or give no protection.

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

– The electors have not affirmed a protective policy.

Senator O’CONNOR:

– The electors have affirmed by a majority that there shall be a Federal Tariff, and that in the framing of that Tariff existing industries shall be cared for. The electors have also affirmed the proposition that, as far as possible, revenue must be collected sufficient for the Commonwealth as a whole and sufficient for each of the States, and, further, that wherever it is possible to develop our industries and employ our own people in conformity with those principles, that shall be done. On every ground I submit that the motion ought not to be carried.

Senator HIGGS:
Queensland

– There are very few farmers who use oil engines.

Senator Clemons:

– Hundreds of, fanners use them in South Australia.

Senator HIGGS:

– Throughout the Commonwealth there may be hundreds of farmers who use oil engines, but they are men who have been more successful than the majority. The Horsham and Wimmera District Horticultural, Agricultural, and Pastoral Society have issued a list of the plant necessary for a well-equipped farm, the plant costing about £501 ; but in that list I see no mention of oil-engines. The ordinary farmer is not able to buy these conveniences, and depends on horse power. Are the senators from New South Wales absolutely blind to what has taken place ‘in their own State since federation? The buildings for metal working which have been erected since federation, and since the imposition of a duty, show a marked progress in that State. The Victor Motor Company established works at Double Bay, near Sydney, fifteen months ago, and invested some £5,000 in plant, when it was understood that there would be protection against the world. This company was induced to begin its operations in the belief that it would be protected against foreign productions. How does Senator Pulsford propose to encourage the industry at Double Bay ? By seeking to reduce the duty of 10 per cent, after the establishment has been erected and the plant set up. Senator Clemons does not take into consideration the welfare of the 35 men .who are employed at Double Bay. If the prices of these engines had been raised since the establishment of federation I could understand his desire to reduce the rate of duty, but as a matter of fact, the prices are no higher now than they used to be. Here we have one company, not to mention others, putting £5,000 into -a plant and giving employment to 35 hands whose wages circulate indirectly throughout the Commonwealth, .and directly through Double Bay, giving employment to grocers, butchers, bakers, farmers, and others. That consideration, of course, does not appeal to the mind of Senator Clemons. In Victoria we have the firms of Coulsen, Hampton, and Tarrent making these very engines. On all these grounds, I think that the committee should reject the motion. I wonder what Senator Sargood intends to do. He told the public that he would advocate revenue without destruction of local industries. Will he, finding that the local manufacturers are so handicapped by a 15 per cent, duty, vote for its reduction to 10 per cent. 1

Senator Sir Frederick Sargood:

– They will do splendidly with 10 per cent.

Senator HIGGS:

– The honorable senator has had considerable experience in one branch of industry, but I do not think that he can speak for the manufacturers of oil engines as well as they can speak for themselves, and they declare that with a 10 per cent, duty they will be hampered very greatly in their operations if not compelled to close their factories and turn their hands into the streets.

Senator Clemons:

– In New South Wales 7,000 men are employed at splendid wages in this industry.

Senator HIGGS:

– It is a strange thing that in the great State of New South Wales, which, according to Senator Neild, gave up its policy of free-trade, industries are being established in all parts under the protectionist duties in the Federal Tariff. Honorable senators on the other side are doing their level best to hamper that progress and expansion. The protectionists who come from other States are the true representatives of New South Wales. We are protecting that State against the wrongheadedness of her representatives, and I hope that we shall succeed in rejecting this motion.

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

- Senator Clemons was very much exercised in mind about country producers having to pay something extra for these engines. The country producer does not use gas engines, high speed engines, or turbines. He uses oil engines, and these are made in Victoria by the hundred. It is the manufacturers in cities and towns who use gas engines, and they do not object to the imposition of the duty. A great number of oil and gas engines are used for working lifts in big. buildings. In Port Melbourne, Senator Clemons will see a row of eight large gas engines in one installation, ranging from ten up to sixteen horse-power, and made, I think, in Victoria. Oil engines are used, to a small extent, in the country, and the users are manufacturers who are already protected in the Tariff. Farmers do not use oil engines to any great extent, but they use portable engines largely. Traction engines are used in the country for timber hauling. Portable and traction engines, however, are on the free list. To those who do not think out the matter, Senator Clemons made rather a strong point when he referred to work being carried on at Mort’s Dock, in Sydney, under freetrade. We could not very well have protection for a dock. If the honorable and learned senator were a practical man, he would know the reason why the work can be done more cheaply in Mort’s Dock than, perhaps, in other places. The manufacture of machinery furnishes what might be called a stock job for a great number of their men when they are not engaged in docking vessels, but docking is their principal business.

Senator Major Gould:

– They do a lot of other work beside that.

Senator STYLES:

– The engineering work outside keeps their men employed when there is no docking to be done, and therefore they can afford to take work at a cheap rate and to pay good wages. All large engineering establishments are conducted in the same way. I recollect reading in the Melbourne Herald some three months ago that since the Federal Tariff came.into force certain firms had entered into an arrangement for the outlay of over £500,000 in Sydney in the erection of factories and the provision of machinery and plant, and the names of the firms were published. Senator Clemons has stated that 7,000 men are employed in machinery works in New South Wales. According to a return which was ordered by the other House on the 7th J une last year, on the motion of Mr. Knox, the male adults employed in the engine, machinery, iron foundry,.and engineering works of New South Wales numbered 3,064 in 1898, 3,828 in 1899, and 4,479 in 1900. In 1900, in Victoria, 5,026 male adults were employed in similar establishments. Whether the figures are correct or not I do not know. New South Wales had 128 machinery establishments, while Victoria, with a much smaller population had 172, and the output from her engineering establishments was valued at £1,245,960. No distinction is made between the manufacturers of gas and oil engines and the manufacturers of other engines. The exact figures are £1,245,960, and the value of the “Victorian plant and machinery is £714,000. Out of the number, 4,479 employed in New South Wales, probably one-third are engaged in connexion with Mort’s dock. Senator Clemons said that he did not know of any English-speaking country in the world where there was such taxation as is now being imposed. The statistics published this morning show that the customs and excise taxation of the Commonwealth amounts to £2 7s. 3d. per head of the population. In Tasmania, for the five years ending 1900, the customs and excise taxation was £2 lis. ; in New Zealand for last year it was £2 19s. 2d. per head ; in Queensland, £3 ls. id. per head ; and in Western Australia, £6 9s. 2d. per head per annum for the five years ending 1900. It is just as well to correct these erroneous statements, made by an honorable and learned senator, who evidently did not take the trouble to check the figures which were supplied to him.

Senator BARRETT:
Victoria

– I should have thought that a moderate duty of 15 per cent, would have been allowed to pass without any attack from the Opposition, but Senator Clemons asks that it shall be reduced to 10 per cent. In the opinion of those who know something about the business in question, even 15 per cent, is too low. The Amalgamated Society of Engineers desire that the duty shall be 35 per cent, in order that the engineering industry may be put upon a proper footing. I have thought a good deal about this matter, and know something of the engineering establishments that will be affected by Senator Clemons’s proposal. There is no doubt that a good deal of the engineering work that has in the past been done in Australia will be done abroad if the duty is reduced. In the majority of cases this class of engine is used in manufacturing establishments. It is only in a few isolated cases that it is used by farmers. In considering the duty we should have regard to the majority of the people who use engines, and should impose such a duty as will effectually protect the Australian industry. It has been pointed out that Messrs. Coulsen, Hampton, and Torrent, in Victoria, are manufacturing these engines, and Senator Sargood, when asked how he was going to vote, said that in his opinion a 10 per cent. duty would suit these firms very well. Mr. Coulson, with whom I was talking over this matter about a month ago, showed me invoices from the old country, and proved conclusively that unless there was a higher protection than 15 per cent., he would not be able to compete with engines made abroad. With such facts staring us in the face, I urge Senator Clemons to withdraw his proposal. The difference between his motion and the Tariff as it stands is only 5 per cent. That is not very much from his point of view, but I can assure him that it means a great deal to the manufacturers. Reference has been made to Mort’s Dock, and the wages paid there. I know a good many men who work at Mort’s Dock, and certainly they are paid fairly good wages. But that is not due to the company ; it is due to the fact that the men have a splendid organization behind them in the Amalgamated Society of Engineers. Mort’s Dock is to a large extent a huge repairing shop the company are not manufacturers of engineering appliances in’ the sense that that term is usually applied in other States. The people of New South Wales have provided splendid docking accommodation, and have at present, in Sydney, the finest dock south of the line. It will accommodate the largest vessels in the world. That is the reason why there are such large repairing works in New South Wales. I appeal to Senator Clemons to reconsider the position, and not to press his proposal.

Senator PULSFORD:
NewSouth Wales

– The age in which we live, if marked by anything in particular, is certainly marked by the use of machinery. We might call this “ the machinery age.” Machinery is more used and more necessary to-day than ever. For that reason it is desirable that we should do our best to enable those who need machinery to obtain it on the best terms possible. To put the producers of machinery before the users of it indicates, in my judgment, a lack of common sense. Machinery is needed in numberless industries, and gas and oil engines are largely used inland. For instance, gas engines are used in small newspaper offices, which are usually carried on under very difficult circumstances. Certainly we ought to allow them to obtain their machinery as cheaply as possible. These engines are also used by small manufacturers inland, who cannot afford to put up a large plant. The reduction of the duty will be a means of helping the small man, who has not a large capital behind him and cannot afford to go into a big industry. Surely it is in the interest of the Commonwealth that sucha man should not have obstacles put in his path. To say that the man who makes an engine must be considered first and foremost, is surely to put the cart before the horse. Everybody must admit that if we so arrange our legislation as to force certain manufactures into the hands of local people, those people must have more employment, and similarly it must be admitted that if by increasing the price of machinery we make its use more difficult, we do something to discourage the use of machinery by the multitude. The more the purchase of implements at low prices is facilitated, the greater will be the aggregate production, and consequently the aggregate wealth and payments in the matter of wages. For these reasons I ask honorable senators to agree to the motion. We must always remember the section in the Customs Act which makes goods coming under ad valorem duties subject to an additional 10 per cent.; so that a 10 per cent. ad valorem duty is collected at the rate of 11 per cent., and a 15 per cent. duty at the rate of 161/2 per cent. A duty of 10 per cent., plus the natural protection, is surely enough for the manufacturers of these engines, especially when we consider that the higher the duties we impose the more encouragement we give to the local manufacturer, and the greater the discouragement of the whole producing trade of Australia.

Senator McGREGOR:
South Australia

– I desire to say a word or two in regard to the additional charge of 10 per cent. under the Customs Act, to which reference has again been made. Senator Pulsford knows well that that provision was agreed to by the Senate, because it was recognised that importers always invoice their goods at the very lowest rate, and possibly often below cost price. It was designed to protect the revenue.

Senator Pulsford:

– The honorable senator is altogether wrong.

Senator McGREGOR:

– My statement is correct. Senator Pulsford has said that there are small industries in the back-blocks, in which oil and gas engines are used ; but, in dealing with the Tariff, has he not been endeavouring from the first to make it impossible for these small manufacturers to exist? The honorable senator has never promised anything to the industrial classes in Australia ; but I appeal to those who promised in their election speeches that they would do nothing .that would destroy existing industries, to say whether 15 percent, is too high a duty. When the Tariff was first introduced, those who were professedly freetraders said they would be satisfied with a protective incidence of 15 per cent., although they would not support 50 and 60 per cent, duties. But whenever a 15 per cent, duty is put before us, an attempt is made to reduce it. I am certain that honorable senators of the Opposition would move to place these engines on the free list if they thought that they could succeed in doing so.

Senator Major GOULD:
New South Wales.

– Senator McGregor has endeavoured to make it appear that the 10 per cent, provision in the Customs Act is designed to meet the case of those who desire to defraud the revenue, but every one knows that it was inserted simply to cover the cost of freight, and so add to the value of the imported article. Senator McGregor has also charged honorable senators of the Opposition with a desire to destroy the manufacturing industries of the country. There is not and never has been any such desire on our part. Our object is to protect the consumer. We support this motion because we consider that 10 per cent, will be sufficient protection for the local manufacturer, while the reduction from 15 per cent, will be a benefit to the community at large. Senator Barrett has said that the operatives in this industry declare that they can do with nothing less than 35 per cent. Under the Victorian Tariff the duty was something like 35 per cent., and hence the desire on the part of these people to cling to advantages which they have enjoyed for manyyears. If it is true, as has been stated by the Vice-President of the Executive Council, that it is impossible for these high-speed and turbine engines to be manufactured here at the present time, what difference can it make to the local manufacturer whether a duty of 10 or 15 per cent, is charged ?

Senator Styles:

– Those engines enter into competition with others which are made here.

Senator Major GOULD:

– High-speed engines are advantageous to the men who use them. Gas engines are used for innumerable purposes, and oil engines have a much more extensive use throughout the Commonwealth. Many farmers in New South Wales are beginning to purchase oil engines to enable them to irrigate land and produce crops where otherwise there would be none.

Senator O’Connor:

– Oil and gas engines can be made here as well and as cheaply as anywhere else.

Senator Major GOULD:

– I do not say anything about that. Oil engines are also used in small craft trading to the islands, and in some of the fishing craft working along the coast. For these reasons we are justified in seeking to keep the price of these engines as low as possible. While the Government orginally proposed a duty of 25 per cent, on engines generally, they proposed a duty of only 15 per cent, on engines coming under this heading, showing that they were anxious to make a distinction between the two classes.

Senator O’Connor:

– That plan has been put an end to under a general agreement, by which a number of machines were placed on the free list, while certain other machines and engines were made liable to a duty of 15 per cent.

Senator Major GOULD:

– I assume that a good deal of the machinery placed upon the free list has been treated in that way, for the reason that it is either patented, or because the Government are satisfied that it will not be made here. Allusion has been made to Mort’s Dock, and while, no doubt, their work relates largely to docking and shipbuilding, I know that they manufacture engines for the general community. The Clyde Engineering Works also do so, and there are a number of other firms in New South Wales which have been able to manufacture engines for mining and other purposes, and to compete against Victorian and English manufacturers under absolutely free- trade conditions in that State. I hope the committee will recognise that 10 per cent. is a reasonable duty to impose upon this class of engines. If this motion is accepted, honorable senators will not find that a single engineering establishment will be closed in either Victoria or South Australia. On the contrary, by the increased work they will get from the extended market of the whole of the Commonwealth, they will progress and prosper to a greater extent than they have done in times past.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

– It appears to me that the free-traders in this Chamber have been seized with that particular form of madness known as “ running amuck.” Wherever they see a duty they determine to reduce it. Senator Pulsford says that protectionists are more concerned about the people who produce machinery than about the people who use it. I may tell the honorable senator that we are concerned about both. If the policy which free-trade senators advocate is carried out, Australia will be a one-handed community able to exercise only one set of faculties, atnd absolutely impotent so far as the exercise of certain other functions is concerned. If their policy is adopted we shall be indebted to other communities for all our engines and tools, and for everything but wool, gold, meat, fruit, and a few other things.

Senator Pulsford:

– Has the honorable senator ever heard of a place called New South Wales?

Senator STEWART:

– I have heard a great deal of it, and I know that that State is progressing much more rapidly under the new protective policy of the Commonwealth, than it did under the old insane free-trade policy in force there. It is rapidly becoming not only the shipping centre, but the manufacturing centre of the Commonwealth under this protective Tariff. Has Senator Pulsford heard of the huge trusts that are now being formed in America and England 1 Has it not occurred to the honorable senator that if we allow ourselves to be left in such a position that we shall be able to produce nothing, and must import everything in the way of machinery, some day a machinery trust will be formed which will force prices up to such an extent, as will levy toll from every Australian user of machinery ? Is it not desirable that we should now provide against any contingency of that kind arising by assisting our people to establish manufacturing industries in the Commonwealth ? Senator Pulsford. - To establish trusts.

Senator STEWART:

– I remind the honorable senator that we can deal with trusts within our own borders, but we should have no control over trusts formed outside. I call the policy supported by the honorable senator a short-sighted policy, a penny wise and pound foolish policy. It is a policy which sees no further from its nose than about 6 inches, while the protectionist policy which provides for the contingencies of the future is a long-sighted policy, a wise policy, and one which is bound to be extremely beneficial to Australia.

Senator Pulsford:

– Exotic, not patriotic.

Senator STEWART:

– I wonder does the honorable senator know the meaning of “ exotic “ ? He wishes to infer that the manufacture of engines is an exotic industry in Australia. Have we not iron and coal in Australia, and what were those minerals placed in the earth for except to be used ? Engine-building is more of a natural industry here than is sheep-growing. There was not a single sheep, cow, or bullock in Australia when it was discovered. If honorable senators want examples of exotic industries there they are. They were not native to the soil. But we have iron and coal in millions of tons buried in the soil, and to call any industry into which those materials enter an exotic industry is to talk so much nonsense. I know very well that it is of no use to appeal to honorable senators who represent the importing industry. They are interested in making Australia get everything she requires from outside her own borders. But I appeal to honorable senators who have the interest of the working classes of Australia at heart. If we expose our manufacturers to the competition of countries in which employes are worked for long hours under bad conditions and for miserable wages, to talk of establishing wages boards, boards of conciliation and arbitration, an eight hours day and a minimum wage, is to talk the sheerest nonsense imaginable. I believe in all these things, and I shall try, by my votes on this Tariff, to place our Australian manufacturers in such a position that when we ask them to pay fair wages to their workmen they will be able to do so, and will not be able to retort upon us, “ You have exposed us to the competition of low wage countries, and you now ask us to do the impossible.”

Senator Staniforth Smith:

– Ten per cent. is higher than the average of the duties previously existing in the Australian States.

Senator STEWART:

– I consider Canada is our best example in this matter, and the duty there is 25 per cent. I do not hear that the farmers in Canada are grumbling on that account. Canada is an exceedingly prosperous country at the present time, and I was reading only recently that not only are thousands of people leaving Great Britain for Canada, but that people are also leaving the UnitedStates for that country. Why should we handicap ourselves and our people by exposing ourselves to the exactions of trusts who may force prices up to an extraordinary height whenever it suits them to do so ? I trust that honorable senators will not be carried away by the sophistries of the advocates of free-trade. I hope they will take an Australian view of this matter, and will endeavour to place the Commonwealth in a position of independence. If they do so, they will have the support of the farmers and of the newspaper proprietors. The newspaper proprietors are themselves protected to a certain extent, and it is proper that they should be so. We require to encourage native enterprise as much as possible in a literary as well as in every other direction. I trust that some consideration will be shown for the manufacturing industries of the Commonwealth. We must all remember the bond made when the Commonwealth was formed. It was that the interest of every industry in the Commonwealth should be respected. Industries in Queensland have been respected, and the sugar industry in particular. I cannot forget that, and, remembering it, I think it is due to the workmen engaged in manufacturing industries in the other States that, having received some consideration ourselves, we should extend the same consideration to them.

Question - That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 78 by adding to the duty, “ Engines, gas and oil, and high-speed engines and turbines, water and steam, ad valorem, 15 per cent. “ the words “ and on and after 1st August, 1902, 10 per cent.” - put. The committee divided -

Ayes … … … … 14

Noes … … … … 12

Majority … … 2

Question so resolvedin the affirmative.

Item 78 - Manufactures of metal, viz. . . . Engines, ad valorem., 15 percent.

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

– I move -

That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 78 by adding to the duty ‘ ‘ Engines, ad valorem, 15 per cent.,” the words “and on and after the 1st August, 1902, 10 per cent.”

It will be recognised, in view of the previous divisions, that this is practically a consequential motion, and, therefore, I shall not attempt to repeat arguments which have already been presented to the committee.

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

– I do not intend to take up much time in discussing this item. The same arguments, facts, and considerations apply as applied to the other items already dealt with. The whole of the lines of this division have been dealt with on one basis, and any one who followed the debates upon the Tariff in the House of Representatives must see that the duties as introduced into this Chamber are the result of a compromise. In regard to both trade tools and machine tools used in manufacture, a large free list was agreed upon in anotherplace, and in consideration of that the duties in this division were fixed all round at 15 per cent. That arrangement will, I have no doubt, be adhered to in another place ; and after the divisions which have already been taken, it is not worth while to waste time in repeating to ears that are not likely to listen arguments which have already been used. It is far better to go to a division at once, so that we may the more quickly be brought to the point when the real settlement of this matter will take place, and when I have no doubt the duty, as now proposed by the Government, will be agreed to.

Question put. The committee divided -

Ayes … … … 1

Noes … … … 10

Majority … … 2

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Item 78. - Manufactures of metal, viz. : . . . Boilers, pumps, machines, and machinery, n.ei., ad valorem, 15 percent.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:
Western Australia

– I move -

That the House of Representatives be requested to amend item 78 by adding to duty “ Boilers, pumps, machines, and machinery n.e.i., ad val. 15 per cent.” the words “and on and after 1st August, 1902, 10 per cent.”

We have discussed fully the item of agricultural machinery, and we now reach a class of machinery which is largely used in the great industry of mining, the importance of which it is difficult for us to over estimate. I am confident that if this duty be carried as proposed by the Government, mining will be seriously injured. Australia is one of the greatest mineral-producing countries of the world, all the principal metals of economic value being found here. That statement will, I think, be agreed with when I state that Australia contributes over one-fourth of the total gold, one-twelfth of the silver, and oneeighteenth of the copper produced in the world. We also produce a very large quantity of lead, tin, and other minerals, and the present prosperity of the Commonwealth is to a great extent due to this mineral wealth, which has attracted thousands and tens of thousands of people to these shores. In times of drought or financial panic, when other industries have been endangered, mining has been our sheet anchor. On several occasions I have quoted Coghlan, whom protectionists and freetraders agree in regarding as an authority who states the position fairly and clearly. Goghlan says -

The present prosperity of Australia is largely due to the discoveries of this metal (gold), the development of other industries being, in a country of varied resources, a natural sequence to the acquisition of mineral treasure.

Coghlan goes on to say -

Victoria, although in area the smallest(colony) of the group, with the exception of Tasmania, achieved the foremost position amongst the colonies, and retained that place so long as the powerful attraction of gold continued.

The total production of minerals in the Commonwealth up to 1900 represented £520,000,000, and in two of the States minerals constituted more than half of the total wealth produced. In Western Australia, in 1889, the total value of all produce was £10,215,000, of which 60 per cent., or £6,346,000, was from minerals. In Tasmania, in the same year, the total value of all produce was £5,090,000, over 50 per cent. of which, or £2,539,000, was from minerals. The other States have benefited very largely, though not to such a great extent as Western Australia and Tasmania from their mineral production. The exports of gold from Australia in the year 1900 amounted to £12,159,077. That sum is sufficient to pay not only the interest on the debts of the whole of the States in the Commonwealth, but on practically the whole of the Australian private borrowings as well. That fact clearly shows the enormous importance of the mining industry of Australia. The industry employs a larger number of men than any other in Australia. But, notwithstanding the enormous importance of the mining industry, I think I can say, without fear of contradiction, that it is at present in an unsatisfactory position, and, in some cases, even in a perilous position. Even in regard to gold mining, in all the States except one, the industry is not prosperous at present. The yield is diminishing in spite of the strenuous efforts that are being made by the State Governments by means of grants, subsidies, and prospecting votes to stem the disaster. In New South Wales, in 1899, the production of gold amounted to 496,196 ozs.; in 1900 it amounted to 345, 350 ozs., and in 1901 to 267,061 ozs. In Tasmania there was a similar fall. The gold yield in 1.899 was S3,922 ozs., and in 1891 59,654 ozs. In Victoria, the gold yield fell from 854,500 ozs. in 1899 to 789,562 ozs. in 1 891. In the first five months in 1S92 there has been a further fall in Victoria of 12,442 ozs. as compared with the yield in the corresponding period of 1891. The Mount Morgan mine, which supplies one-fourth of the gold yield of Queensland, employs 2,000 men. The average yield has been 1 oz. 13 dwts. 8 grs. to the ton. In 1S99, the average yield was 15 dwts., or about onehalf of the average yield of Mount Morgan. The richest deposits in these great mines in Australia are being worked out. In Western Australia the average value of gold production per miner was £297 9s. 3d., in Tasmania £252 14s. 10d., and in Victoria £113 per annum. Whilst the gold-mining industry is not flourishing in the various States with one exception, the position in regard to the production of other metals is even more disquieting. That is indicated by the figures in regard to lead silver, tin, and copper. The mines are not only working on bodies of a lower grade of ore, but they suffer from the additional disadvantage of a steady and continuous reduction in the value of their metal. Broken Hill has contributed £26,000,000 worth of minerals to the wealth of Australia, and in 1900 the group of mines at Broken Hill employed 7,256 men. Last December there were employed there 4,862 men. So that the number of men employed has declined by nearly one-half since 1891. The Mining Standard of the 22nd of February, speaking of the machinery duties, says -

In view of the revision of the Tariff by the Federal Senate, the Broken Hill outlook may well be accepted as a special argument in favour of fixing duties largely affecting the mining industry on the lowest scale consistent with due regard for revenue-raising necessity. The general case has been frequently stated in these columns, but has been by no means exhausted, and the fall in the market price of silver below any point previously recorded, adds further weight to these representations. What has been done by silver-lead mining in the Barrier district is so well known that it need not be minutely recapitulated. It is enough to say that it added a new province to the senior St:ite, transformed a scene of desolation into a hive of industry, built a flourishing city in an arid waste, added enormously to the sum total of Australian realized wealth, stimulated outside business activity, and provided a livelihood for a resident population of about 25,000. What its chief centre is now, with its industry in irons, its trade languishing, its diminished populatioin still dwindling away, and those compelled to remain calling out for State expenditure to find them employment, is also known ; but what it will become with silver below 2s. per ounce and lead still waiting for a substantial improvement, while heavy additional burdens are placed upon its mining companies has yet to appear. In one sense, it might be claimed that Broken Hill companies are entitled to special consideration, because they are so specially affected by the decline in the metal rates, because they have hitherto had the full advantage of a free-trade policy, and because of the magnitude of the enterprise upon which, under these auspices, they have embarked.

This paper goes on to say -

To relieve the producing industry as far as may be consistent with revenue requirement is the true progressive principle which should guide the Senate in its work of Tariff revision, and upon the extent to which it is respected rests not only the future prospects of Broken Hill, but of the Australian Commonwealth, whose fortunes must, of necessity, be materially influenced by the rate of its mining progress. . . . The point to be specially borne in mind Jay the Senate is that to choose this particular time to make the mining burden heavier is to deliberately decrease the prospect of recovery, and to make it well nigh hopeless.

The value of silver and of other metals, with the exception of gold, has fallen enormously during the last few years. The price of silver in 1S90 was 4s. 6£d. per oz.; to-day the price is 2s. 03-5d. per oz., or a fall of 55 per cent. The price of lead in 1890 was £17 15s. a ton; in 1902 the price was £11 5s. per ton, or a fall of 35 per cent. The price of copper was £7S pelton in 1890 ; it is £55 12s. 6d. in 1902, or a fall of 32 per cent. The price of tin has fallen from £146 per ton in 1890 to “ 126 10s. in 1902, or 14 per cent. I think that from the figures I have given it mustbe admitted that the mining industry generally is in an unsatisfactory condition. The present state of the mining industry’ of Australia does not arise from the fact that we have exhausted our ore reserves. In the first place we have worked out some of our richest deposits, and in the second place the price of metals, excepting gold, has fallen enormously during the last few years, and is still falling. On this point, Coghlan says -

Australia possesses invaluable mineral resources, and although enormous quantities of minerals of all kinds have been won since their first discovery, yet the deposits, with the exception perhaps of gold, have only reached the first period of their exploitation. Vast beds of silver, tin, and copper ore, and of coal, are known to exist, but their development has not reached a sufficiently advanced stage to enable an exact opinion to be expressed regarding their commercial value, though it is confidently held by mining experts that this must be enormous.

As we cannot increase the richness of our mineral reserves, or control the price of metals, the situation postulates one of. two courses. Either some of our principal mines must shut clown, and some of our principal centres decay, or we must reduce the cost of extraction. That can only be cloneby reducing wages, which no one wishes to see, or by adopting improved machinery which will treat large quantities of ore at a less cost, and with a higher extraction. The necessity for using the most modern machinery has been recognised in Queensland, New South Wales, New Zealand, and Western Australia. The imposition of very low duties in those States has encouraged the use of modern machinery, and, in the absence of any new- conditions, the yield has continually increased. Queensland had a nominal duty of 25 per cent. ; but there was an enormous* free list, and the Statistical Register shows that of the mining machinery imported £31,477 worth came in absolutely free, while only £18,521 worth paid duty. Coghlan gives the reason for the steady increase in that State as the result of improved gold extraction. He says -

This result is due to the now universal application, wherever practicable, of the cyanide process to the treatment of the mill tailings, and the gold recovered in this manner hist year constituted a little more than one-third of the total yield.

In New Zealand mining machinery is absolutely free, and, concerning the improved yield there, Coghlan says -

The introduction of capital has enabled the claims not only to be opened up at greater depths, but also to be worked in a more systematic andeconomic manner. The improved appliances . ‘ ‘ have made it possible to treat material at a cost of Id. to 3d. per cubic yard.

Ib free-trade New South Wales, the value of the mineral production of 1900 was the largest on record, and Coghlan says -

In the absence of any new finds of importance, the increase is doubtless due to the steady improvement in the methods of mining, and in the plant used in treating the ore.

It is a remarkable fact that in Queensland, New South Wales, New Zealand, and Western Australia, where no restrictions, or very few, have been imposed on the importation of machinery, the output has increased, and Coghlan shows that in the three former cases the result has been due, not to new discoveries, but to a superior mode of treatment and more economical’ extraction. In Victoria, the cost of extraction of gold has been low, perhaps lower than in any other State except New Zealand; but it has not been as cheap as it should be, as the ores are found in their’ simplest forms, less refractory than in any other State, while water and fuel are in abundance, and the wages are lower than in other States. In Western Australia we have the most modern and extensive mining appliances. In one year we imported, no less than £3,000,000 worth of machinery ; yet the cost of extraction is probably higher than in any of the States on account of the complicated nature of the ores, the cost of water, fuel, railway carriage, and other causes. For 66 mines the wattes amounted to £1,933,239; the fuel cost £253,541, the- water £111,258, and therailage £103,194. The cost of mining is enormously expensive, and if the cost of extraction- is going to be increased by the imposition of a higher duty on machinery, the wonderful expansion- which has taken place will undoubtedly be- arrested. While in 1886 we produced hardly £1,000 worth of. gold, in 1901 wa produced £7,089,067 worth. For the last three years that State has held the premier position producing nearly one-half of the gold won in the Commonwealth. But the natural conditions are so adverse, and the cost of transit so enormous, that almost insuperable difficulties have to be overcome in obtaining this gold. It was decided by the directors to erect large reduction plants on certain mines, but since the imposition of the duty, cables have been sent home to stop the exportation of the machinery, and, of course, no plants have been erected. These mines are what we call “low-grade propositions,” about 12 dwts., and They can only be worked on a large scale at a comparatively small profit. The people of the eastern States hardly realize the extent of the auriferous fields of Western Australia, and what - may be the possibilities if we can reduce the cost of extraction by even a few pennyweights. I believe that we have the largest and richest gold-field in the world. Almost the whole of the arid portion of the State contains valuable minerals. Nature seems to have compensated the Western Australians for the aridity of a certain portion of the interior of their State by substituting enormous mineral wealth. The auriferous country stretches from Kimberley in the north to Norseman and Phillip River in the south - a distance of 1,000 miles, and from Cue- in the west to Kurnalpi in the east - a distance of nearly 400 miles. It is divided into eighteen proclaimed gold-fields, containing 324,213 square miles, or an area larger than all New South Wales. . Up to the present time, with even a 5 per cent, duty, ore bodies cannot be touched unless they contain at least 10 dwts. to the ton. If such ore body occurred in Victoria in the simple form in which ore bodies occur in Victoria, it would make a Victorian minemanager’s mouth water to think that he had a lode 6 or 8 feet wide which would go 10 dwts. to the ton. Yet in Western Australia even oxidized ores cannot be worked unless they go 10 dwts. or over to the ton. I believe that if the cost of extraction could be reduced by a few pennyweights the gold yield could be doubled, or even quadrupled, and employment given to 20,000 or 30,000 extra men at the highest wages paid in any industry in Australia. This increased employment rests entirely upon the question of whether new batteries and reduction plants shall be erected. Ever)’ stamp that is put down will crush four or five tons a day, and. as it cannot crush ore of less value than 10 dwts. to the ton, it means that every stamp that falls will turn, out about £S a day, and every stamp will find employment for about five miners at from £3 1 5s. to £4 per week. The people in the Eastern States benefit from the wages- paid in Western Australia, because very many of the miners have left their wives and families here, and the amount sent through the money order office to these States is about £30,000 per month. The very rich mines are not the most profitable mines for Australia. The most profitable mines are the low-grade mines. These require a large number of workmen, and the division of the wealth is infinitely more in favour of labour than in favour of capital. In a rich mine huge dividends are paid and few men employed, but in a low-grade mine a number of men are employed, and the dividends are comparatively small. Those are the mines that we wish to open, up in Western Australia. Speaking generally, the mining plants of Australia are not nearly so modern as are those at Johannesburg,

Cripple Creek, United States of America, and other gold-mining centres. The goldmining machinery in Victoria is valued at £1,914,000, the gold-mining machinery in Queensland is valued at £1,591,000, “and that in New South, Wales at £861,S28. Coghlan does not give any figures as to the value of the gold-mining machinery used in Western Australia, but - from the “fact that over £3,000,000 worth was imported in one year, and that a return which I have obtained shows that the value of themachinery used by 66 mines there is £2,577,665 - it must be- enormous. We must have expensive machinery if we are to treat these very complicated and refractory ores at a low cost. In Johannesburg they have even more expensive machinery than is to be found in Western Australia, and the result is that although the gold mines there are of low grade, yielding from 5 to 8 dwts. per ton, they are not only worked successfully - of course, they have cheap wages - but they return big dividends. There they have no obstacles placed in their way. Scarcely any mining machinery imported, into the Transvaal pays duty, and the British Government have stated recently that they intend to reduce whatever disabilities there are in the way of the importation of mining, machinery there. The mining industry of Australia which has done and is doing so much for the prosperity of the country should not be handicapped any more than are other fields which are worked under better conditions. The machinery used in the mines can be divided fairly into two classes ; first, machinery which can be made in Australia, and, secondly, that which cannot be made here except at increased cost. I would say at once that, with the exception of patented machinery, there is practically no machinery that cannot be made in Australia for gold-mining purposes ; but there is a large quantity of mining machinery that cannot be made here, except at a very increased cost. Western Australia purchased all the machinery that it could obtain in the eastern States when the manufacturers in those States had no advantage whatever over the manufacturers of the outside world, save that the cost of transport was less ; but now it is –proposed to give them an advantage of 10 per cent. Western Australia has imported from the eastern States at least half of the mining machinery which it uses. The machinery thus imported is of the best qualit)’, and as good as any that could be obtained from abroad. The cost of carriage is less, the delay in delivery, which is an important consideration, is less than it is in connexion with machinery imported from abroad, while those requiring machinery are able to superintend its manufacture here. It is to the interests of the miners of Western Australia to obtain all the machinery they can, either here or in that State, so that its manufacture can be under their supervision. The reason that certain classesof machinery cannot be made here, except at greatly increased cost, must appear obvious. Different kinds of machinery are required for different mines. If gold were found in ore of the same character throughout Australia, I should say at once that all the mining machinery required could be made here. But that is the whole crux of the question. The ores are of different descriptions, not only in every State, but they vary in the different States. Kalgoorlie is the only gold-mining centre in Australia where we find tellurium in connexion with gold, and the telluride ores of that district are some of the richest in Australia. They require special machinery, and it is impossible for manufacturers here to lay down a plant, and manufacture that machinery at anything like the price for which it can be manufactured in the United States, Germany or Great Britain. There they can manufacture that class of machinery for all similar ores throughout the world. At Cripple Creek, which is one of the greatest telluride fields in the world, machinery is used that can be used probably in Kalgoorlie, and the manufacturers there can produce it. Machinery of that class will still have to be imported, even if we impose this duty. The best mining machinery in the world is made in the United States of America.

Senator McGREGOR:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP

– Would it have been made there but for protection 1

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

– It is being made there after 100 years or more of protection. No doubt if the policy of protection had prevailed in the Commonwealth for the same period, it would be possible to make all mining machinery here. But is ou r mining industry - whichis languishing at the present time, and which produces a quarter of the gold of the world - to stand back for 100 years and suffer this disability in order that the manufacture of mining machinery may be perfected in Australia? Such would be a very short-sighted policy. In Kalgoorlie we have not only telluride but, sulpho-telluride ores, which are among the most refractory in the world, and there are scarcely two reduction plants in the field which are alike. Some plants, erected at great expense, have been found to be unsuitable for the requirements of the mines, and consequently fresh machinery has had to be imported. I suppose at least £600,000 worth of machinery has been introduced on the Kalgoorlie field, and found to be unsuitable. In Broken Hill, which is one of the greatest silver-mining centres in the world, machinery has been erected at a cost of nearly £1,000,000, but there is not a mine on the Barrier which is paying dividends with the exception of the Broken Hill Proprietary. Many of them have had to stop work. During the last few years the number of men employed on the mines there has been reduced by nearly one-half, and if we impose this additional burden, then, as the Mining Standard says, we shall practically kill that district. Of the £1,000,000 worth of machinery owned by the mines at Broken Hill, three-fourths was obtained in Australia, the greater portion of it being made by the great mining machinery firms of South Australia. The remaining one-fourth, however, consists of machinery which cannot be manufactured here. Machinery of that class will still have to be imported, and if this duty is imposed the people of Broken Hill will have to bear an additional burden purely for revenue purposes. The great industry in Broken Hill, which has practically created a new province for Australia, is in a very perilous condition. The price of its minerals, silver and lead, has fallen enormously, and, as I have said, there is only one mine there which is paying dividends, and those are now very small. I desire to show what would be the increased cost of this machinery as the result of the imposition of a duty of 15 per cent. I have taken out figures showing the value of the machinery, which three mines actually working in Western Australia have had to purchase, and the increased cost by reason of the 15 per cent, duty, as well as the increased cost of the extraction of the gold from the ore.

Senator Playford:

– They have their machinery.

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:

Senator O’CONNOR:

– There, are two persons who are interested in importing goods from abroad - the person who makes them at the other side of the world, and the importer on this side. However Senator Pulsford may describe his efforts, they will be regarded by every impartial person as the strongest that have been made here to aid one industry, and that is ‘ “the great importing industry” of Australia. Senator Matheson interjected that it was the owners of the non-paying mines who wished to have this machinery imported free ; and it may be assumed that even in Western Australia there are some mines which do not pay. But is that any reason why the owners of these mines should not contribute some portion of the revenue of the Commonwealth ? We have imposed high duties in connexion with a great number of other industries, and the persons affected have to pay. If we did not impose those duties, where would our revenue come from ? I should like to direct attention for a moment to the amount which is involved in this particular item. It is very difficult to separate mining machinery fi om other machinery. Under the head of machinery and engines generally, a very large amount of revenue is collected. A 25 per cent, duty on machinery and engines was estimated to yield £80,500. Unfortunately, in the collections the amount paid on machinery and engines only has not been separated, but under item 78, which includes machinery of all kinds, £230,237 was collected in six months. I take it that it is intended to suggest that the duty on each article included in this item be reduced to 10 per cent. A reduction of the duty to 10 per cent, must involve a very large amount of revenue. It is very difficult to say what the exact amount is, but taking the collections for the six months at £230,237, it will be realized that an enormous amount of revenue is involved. It is proposed by honorable senators to give up 33 per cent, of the duty. Do not they anticipate that there will be a loss of revenue ‘! There must be a loss of revenue, and how is it proposed to make it up? Time after time, suggestions for the reduction of duties have been carried in spite of my warnings that we were sacrificing revenue which we could ill afford to lose. According to the calculations I have been able to make, the suggestions which have been agreed to so far will, if they are acted upon, involve a loss of £119,000 to the revenue. Honorable senators opposite seem to be pursuing this course of cutting down duties and throwing away revenue, apparently with very little object, and with very little regard to the consequences. It will be found that some very radical changes will have to be made in these suggestions if the Tariff is to be effective for one of its main purposes. The question of the rate of duty to be imposed on this line was thrashed out in the other House. Every possible representation was made from each side. It was arranged that a large number of machines and tools should be placed in the exemption list, and that the duty on this machinery should be reduced to 15 per cent, all round. That is the compact which will finally settle this question. If we wish to have any regard to the practical question of settling the Tariff at the earliest possible date, is there the least use in our sending to the other House a suggestion that the duty on this line should be reduced to 10 per cent. ? It will be the greatest waste of time to do so. It is a most extraordinary position that the Tariff is to be framed not on any general principle which is applicable to the whole of Australia, which will make every interest contribute, and benefit every interest, but on some plan, the details of which we do not know, but which produces this strange result that, in some cases, a high protection is left on the article. In many instances, no attempt has. been made to deal with the duties. Duties amounting to 80 per cent,, 60 per cent., and 50 per cent, have been passed without a word. For what purpose have these high protectionist duties been left in the Tariff 1 To get the support of particular senators who, otherwise, would not support extreme free-trade views. If that is the way in which the Tariff is to be framed, it is not creditable to the party which is carrying the suggestions here. It will not be creditable to the Parliament if such a Tariff ever becomes law, and I do not think it will. I believe that when the whole thing comes to be panned out, the suggestions will assume a very different shape.

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

-Col. Neild. - I rise to order. For some time the honorable and learned senator has not said one word on the question before the Chair, but has persistently hectored and lectured the committee in a manner which is wholly unparliamentary and absolutely without precedent. I ask that he may be confined, as other honorable senators have been, to the question before the Chair.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Senator- Dobson). - It is usual to allow a Minister of the Crown a little more latitude than others.

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
NEW SOUTH WALES · FT

-Col. Neild. - No ; it is. against parliamentary law.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN.- I was just about to remark to Senator O’Connor, that if he continued that line of argument, I should bo compelled to allow other honorable senators to follow him, and that I thought it was hardly relevant to the question ; but I understand that he has done with that point.

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

– I understood you, sir, to say that you would allow a Minister greater latitude than any other honorable senator.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN.- I said that it was usual to allow a Minister a little more latitude.

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

– It certainly is not usual to allow a Minister any latitude in making accusations against his opponents.

Senator O’CONNOR:

– I do not wish, sir, to take any advantage of your ruling, and I propose to deal with the item now, keeping certainly very much more closely to the point than any speaker has done during the last three-quarters of au hour. I wish to call attention to the number of persons employed in the making of . machinery of all kinds, engines, and iron- work generally. According to Cog/dan, 16,462 persons are so employed. That is a very large number of persons, and their interests are dependent upon these industries. We have to consider three points. In the first place, are we going to give up the revenue involved in a sacrifice of 5 out of 15 per cent. ? Ought that to be done without some justification ? In the second place, if either of these industries are to be affected so that employment will be lessened, or if the mines in Western Australia are to pay 5 per cent, more, which of the two considerations ought to be the choice of the committee 1 There can be no question about it that the various industries which have to do with the making of machinery are amongst the most valuable which Australia possesses. They may be described -eis mother industries. They attract to themselves a number of other industries, and they employ, and will employ, a largely increasing number of people. The market for their products in Australia is endless. There is no industry which we have dealt with that is anything like so important in regard to the number of persons or the interests affected. The extra 5 per cent, will to a large extent affect companies whose capital is owned in England and in other parts of the world. Is it better that they should pay 5 per cent, more upon their machinery, or that we should very largely damage the interests of a number of people employed in this continent ? No question can be raised as to the increase of cost to the consumer in regard to ordinary mining machinery. . Senator Smith himself has admitted that in Victoria, where there was a duty of 25 per cent., the cost of mining machinery is lower than in any other part of Australia. In addition to that, in a continent containing so many miners, one would suppose that if this duty were a tax upon their industry, we should hear complaints from them. Surely t in Victoria, where there was a 25 per cent, duty On mining machinery, the miners could not be expected to be protectionists if the duty injured their industry. But there are no more staunch protectionists in Victoria than the miners. These facts are very much more cogent than are hours of such generalities as ray honorable friend has been giving us.

In Canada there was a protection of 25 per cent. - 30 per cent, in some cases- - on machinery ; -and Canada is going ahead rapidly in the manufacture of mining and agricultural machinery in consequence of the duty. Do the Canadian farmers and miners object to it ? No : because they have realized, as Australia will realize before this Tariff has been very long in operation, that the policy which underlies it is one .which enables every one to benefit, because everyone’s industry is aided. It is only in that way that America and Canada have become great manufacturing centres ; and it is only by every class benefiting, as every class must, from the general prosperity, that we can have anything like a national policy. That pOliCy cannot be pursued if every time a mining company wants to pay more dividends a’nd to save money for its shareholders in other parts of the world, its representatives are to cry out because of an extra 5 per cent, which they are asked to contribute to the revenue through the Customs.

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

– I understand that we are discussing the item, “ Boilers, pumps, machines, and machinery, n.e.i.,” and it has been said that there is no duty in New Zealand under this heading. But, if honorable senators will be good enough to look up the statistics, they will find that boilers are protected in New. Zealand to the extent of 5 and 20 per cent., pumps 5 and 20 per cent., and machinery 5, 10, and 20 per cent. I can understand the representative of the mining companies in Western Australia, Senator Smith, striving to secure this reduction. He has given as a reason for it that in one case a mining company, whose output is 195,000 tons, would have to pay under the 15 per cent, duty £3,200, whereas if the duty were reduced 10 per cent, it would have to pay £2,200. ‘So that the company would save £1,100 on an output of 200,000 tons, which, at the rate of £2 per ton, would be worth at least £400,000. It is absurd, to my ‘mind, to advance that case as a reason why there Should be a duty of 10 per cent, instead of 15 ‘on mining machinery. Of course, the companies do not care where their mining machinery comes from or who makes it, so long as ‘it is cheap. I am going to quote an extract from a free-trade writer in regard to Japan. He says -

It is’ significant that a good deal of the Japanese imports is represented by English machinery, anil some of these machines have been brought to assist the Japanese - who have enormous iron and coal deposits side by side - to fabricate machinery in competition ultimately with foreign makers of the same article.

If this duty be reducedwe shall have Japanese machinery coming in here soon, for the Japanese are a progressive nation. Senator Pulsford, a little while ago, flatly contradicted the statement that he ever referred to the importing of goods as the “ great importing industry.” But on the 16th May, speaking in the Senate, the honorable senator said, as reported in Hansard -

I am looking at the question all round. The Government must not forget that they came into office pledged to avoid destruction, and I am showing that in oneyear they proposed to smash a great industry in New South Wales.

Senator O’connor:

– What industry?

Senator Pulsford:

Senator HIGGS:

– These investors are absentees, who care very little about Australia so long as they draw their dividends. Unlike ourselves, they have not to take a share in the trials, as well as the successes, of the Commonwealth. On Senator Smith’s own showing, three-fourths of the mining machinery used is manufactured within the Commonwealth, and it is not just .that this industry should be subject to the competition of cheap-labour countries in other parts of the world. In this discussion there seems to be only one State under consideration, namely, Western Australia, which has a Tariff against all the other States of the Commonwealth, and which will continue to exercise that Tariff for another five years. This question will be decided by one or two votes, -and T urge Senator Sargood and others to consider the 16,000 persons who are now employed in the manufacture of mining machinery. J ask those honorable senators to go’ further, and consider the wives and families of these 16,000 men, and to ask themselves whether they will n ot be doing a great wrong in voting for the suggested reduction.

Progress . reported.

Senate adjourned at 9.57 p.m.

Cite as: Australia, Senate, Debates, 2 July 1902, viewed 22 October 2017, <http://historichansard.net/senate/1902/19020702_senate_1_11/>.

View PDF View XML View in Voyant

Senate 2 July 1902

QUESTION

TEMPORARY OFFICERS

Senator PEARCE:WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator O’CONNOR:Vice-President of the Executive Council · NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

QUESTION

MILITARY AND NAVAL FORCES

Senator O’CONNOR:Protectionist

QUESTION

ENGLISH MAIL SERVICE

Senator PEARCE:

Senator O’CONNOR:Protectionist

CUSTOMS TARIFF BILL

Senator HIGGS:Queensland

Senator BARRETT:Victoria

Senator Major Gould:

Senator BARRETT:

Senator Major Gould:

Senator BARRETT:

Senator Matheson:

Senator BARRETT:

Senator O’CONNOR:Vice-President of the Executive Council. · New South Wales · Protectionist

Senator PULSFORD:New South Wales

Senator O’CONNOR:NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT

Senator PULSFORD:

Senator STYLES:Victoria

Senator Pulsford:

Senator STYLES:

Senator CLEMONS:Tasmania

Senator Styles:

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator Styles:

Senator CLEMONS:

Senator Clemons:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Clemons:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Pulsford:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator PULSFORD:New South Wales

Senator HIGGS:Queensland

Senator O’CONNOR:Protectionist

Senator Pulsford:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Pulsford:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Clemons:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Clemons:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Clemons:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Major Gould:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Major Gould:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Major GOULD:New South Wales

Senator Higgs:

Senator Major GOULD:

Senator O’Connor:

Senator Major GOULD:

Senator O’Connor:

Senator Major GOULD:

Senator STYLES:Victoria

Senator O’Keefe:

Senator PULSFORD:

Senator Pearce:

Senator HIGGS:

Senator Lt Col NEILD:New South Wales

Senator CLEMONS:Tasmania

Senator O’CONNOR:Protectionist

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Clemons:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Clemons:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senator Clemons:

Senator O’CONNOR:

Senate
2 July 1902

Senator PEARCE:
WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Senator O’CONNOR:
Vice-President of the Executive Council · NEW SOUTH WALES · Protectionist

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

Senator HIGGS:
Queensland

Senator BARRETT:
Victoria

Senator O’CONNOR:
Vice-President of the Executive Council. · New South Wales · Protectionist

Senator PULSFORD:
New South Wales

Senator O’CONNOR:
NEW SOUTH WALES · PROT

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

Senator PULSFORD:
New South Wales

Senator HIGGS:
Queensland

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

Senator Major GOULD:
New South Wales

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

Senator Lt Col NEILD:
New South Wales

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

Senator DAWSON:
QUEENSLAND · ALP

Senator HIGGS:
Queensland

Senator STYLES:
Victoria

Senator BARRETT:
Victoria

Senator PULSFORD:
NewSouth Wales

Senator McGREGOR:
South Australia

Senator Major GOULD:
New South Wales.

Senator STEWART:
Queensland

Senator CLEMONS:
Tasmania

Senator O’CONNOR:
Protectionist

Senator STANIFORTH SMITH:
Western Australia

Senator McGREGOR:
SOUTH AUSTRALIA · ALP