Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

MONDAY, 7 NOVEMBER 1898

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Local Works Loans Act r7 NovEMBER.] Amendment Bill. 1025

MONDAY, 7 NOVEMBER, 189b,

The SPEAKEF. ',oak the chair at half-past 3 o'clock.

PETITION. 8UPP~ESSION OF GAliBLING ACT AMENDMENT

BILL. Mr. P ETRIE pregented a petition frnm fifty

officers, members, and adherents of t.he Baptist church at Albion against the amendment of the Suppression of Gambling Act.

Petition received.

LOCAL WORKS LOANS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND READING. The TREASURER : In moving the second

eading of this Bill, I would like to call to mind -although no doubt the fact is well within the recollection of hon. members-that four years ago we passed a Bill extending the time for the repayment of the principal moneys of loans to local authorities borrowed from the Government. It wa~ opllional with the local authorities whether they took ad vantage of this extension of time, and all of them did not avail themselves of the privilege, although a 5reat number did. We are now asking for a further extension of l;ime for two years, and I think we are justified in doing this. Although the colony is in ever so much better a position than it was four years ago, still some of the local authorities would be ~ble to g;o on with a number of necessary improvements'if they got this further extension.

1898-3 s

Mr. DAWSON: What local authorities are ask­ing for it?

The TREASURER: Numerou' local autho­ritie3 have asked for it. A deputation waited on the Premier some time '1go, and asked for it. I think we can tl.fforrl to give the two years' further extension, and then there should be no need for any additional extension to any local authorities. A great number of them at·e in a mu<::1 better position now than they were four years ago, nnd this extension will enable them .to carry out a number of necessary works. I move that the Bill be now read a second time.

:!\Ir, DUNSJ<'ORD: I certainlv 'think we &hould have some more information, because this means a matter involving many thonaands of pounds at least. We have received no information as to what lonl authorities this would apply to.

The TREASURER : It would apply all over the colony.

Mr. DUNSFORD: \Ve should have a list. As much daylight should be let into these mat­ters as possible, where it means money from either the consolidated revenue or from the loan fund. I n•>tice also that the rate of interest is to be 5 per cent. 'rhat is a matter that the GoYern­ment should go fully into. Are they justified, in the present state of the monPy market, in charging 5 per cent. to local tl.uthorities which are in a state of-I would not like to s"'y insol­vency-but in temporary financial difficulties? I do not see that the Government are very con­sistent in thus continuing this very heavy rate of interest when at the same t me they acknow­ledge that these bodie"' are in need of financial as"istance. I for one object to this class of legislation going on. \Ve are continually being asked to trust the Government-to take every­thing on trust. Wby, goodness gracious me! if we are legislators, and if we are here for this purpose, surely we should be t:;-ken into the confideric'l of the Government. It 1s a very easy matter to gi \'e us a list of the local authoritie~ to which the Bill would apply, and we would then see if we were justifi<·d in giving them this exten­sion. I do not know if we are justified, and I for one fail to see why we should be asked to vote for the second reading of such a Bill in the dark. I hope the Premier will give us fuller information than we hav0 received from the Treasurer.

The PREMHJR : The hon. member neerl not be so apprehensive as to any sinister motive in connection with thio Bill. It· is merely the answer to a request Jn eferred by several local authorities that thev should have a little more time to pay their in;lebtedness. It s3.ys a great deal for the honourable conduct of the local authorities throughout this colony that several of them have paid up the amounts due by them to the GovernmPnt without takingaclvantage of the previous indulgence extended to them ; but there arc some local authOl'itieJ that have nndertaken public works, and, having a large amount of mon•·y to provide for, they feel it would be a conceo;sion to have an ad :litional couple of years in which to paY. I think they asked for three years, but I believe that two years will be sufficient to enable them to " tnrn the corner" and repay their advances which have been helrl in abevance in the me.,nt.ime. \Vhen the Bill get" into committee the information sought for by the hon. m• mber-and vc·ry properly asked for-can be fnrnished as to the local authorities which h>we not paid up in full. I do not think the list is a very long one. Nevertheless it is desirable that a request of this sort should he conceded, espech!ly a~ it entails no loss to the State. Tbe Yali1e of real estate, and con­sequently of ratable property,· i~ improving, and hence the security to the State 1s better than

1026 Local Works, Etc., Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Townsville Loan Act Repeal Bill.

it has been in the past, owing to the improved state of the colony. As to the rate of interest, there has been no request up to the t•resent that it should be reduced. It must be remembered that when the Government borrowed the money originally to provide for these loans to local authorities it cost the State very nearly the amount which they have hitherto charged to the public bodies ; and as no request has been made to lower the rate-in fac•·, It is very seldom rates on continued bans are reduced-there is no occasion to consider the question. Believing that there can be no objection to granting the extension to local authorities for the time asked, I hope the Bill will pass its second reading.

Mr. STEW ART: I think we ought to have the information asked for by the junior member for Charters Towers now. What is the position in regard to this Bill? Here we have certain debtors to the State who want an extension of time, and the Government comes to this H~use, which is practically the directorate of the State, and aRks for permission to grant this extension, withholding at the same time the names of the debtors who desire this privilege.

The PREMIER : You will find most of them in the Auditor-General'" report.

Mr. STEW ART: I do not think that is a business method of doing the thing'.

Mr. KEOGH: Your own town, Rockhampton, may want a loan.

Mr. STEW ART: I do not aspire, like some hon. members, to be continually looking at my own electorate. I come here not to represent one single corner of the country but the entire country; if I cannot be here on those terms I would rather be out of here. That is the posi­tion I take up; other hon. members may take up what position they choose. I look upon myself as a trustee for the entire country. Before ask­ing the House to commit itself to the principlPs of this Bill the Treasurer should give the informa­tion aeked for. We have had any amount of examples of this sort of thing in the ordinary business of the country lately-men allowing things to go through without getting sufficient information, and finding out afterwards that they have landed themselves in difficulties. The Premier says we shall get the information when we get into committee ; b.1t before we get into committee we shall have committed ourselves to the principles of this Bill. If we had the information before us now we could deal with the Bill in an intelligent faohion. We could ascertain the position of the local authorities who require this extension of time and see whether they are rating themselves as they ought or whether they are trying to shelter themselves behind the State, as I am sorry to say some local bodie' seem to be only too desirous of doing. I decidedly object to domg anything in the dark, and if we wait until we get into committee it will be too late as we will have committed ourselves to this extension of time, and any protest we may make, if we find protest desirable, will go for nothing.

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON: !approve of the principle of this measure, bnt I am a little confused with respect to it, as the first part of it appears to contemplate the suspension of the half-yearly payments of principal and interest, and I find later on that it means principal only. I ask the Treasurer if we are to understand that the principal only is to be suspended?

The TREASURER: Yes, principal only. N,Ir. MACDONALD-P ATERSON: Consider­

ing that the proposed suspension is only to be for two years, the clause should refer to "each" year and not to "every" year. By the use of the word "every" some friends of mine have been led to believe that it was intended to apply to a further extension than two years. I do not

agree with the simple application provided for in clause 2. The Bill may be operated "upon written application by a local authority signed by the chairman." I think the written applica­tion should be accompanied with some sound and valid reasons for making it; the Treasurer should be satisfied that the reasons stated are ample to justify him in calling in the benefit of this Act to suspend the payments. A mere formal applica­tion is not, I think, sufficient.

The PREMIER: The Governor in Council "may."

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON: Yes, but provision is made for a simple written applica­tion without any qualification whatever, and I respectfully suggest that the local authorities desiring to take advantage of the Bill should accompany their applications with the reasons upon which the applications are based, such reasons aR may justify the Government in giving any consideration whatever to those applications. 'rhose are matters of detail, and I entirely concur with the principle of the Bill.

Mr. J ACK80N: I did not consider there would be any opposition to this Bill, which I take it is meant to apply to all local authorities. If it was meant only for isolated cases the Bill would require further consideration. It is de­finitely provided in clause 2 that the Governor in Council may deal with different applications, and I take it for granted that the Bill is meant to apply to all local authorities in Queensland sending in applications.

The TREASURER : The Bill says so. Mr. J ACKSON: It says that any local

authority may make application-that is essential -but it does not say that the Governor in Council is bound to accede to the application. I believe that the local authorities throughout Queensland have been asking for something of this sort for a considerable time, and thiR Bill is simply a stopgap to tide over the time which must elapse before the Locttl Authorities Bill is introduced­probably next session-when the whole question will he dealt with. I have no objection to offer to this Bill. ·we will get. the information promised when we get into committee, but I think mem­bers could get that information for themselves as I am undn the impression that it is in the Auditor-General's report.

Que,tion put and pas>ed ; and the committal of the Bill made an order for to-morrow.

ACTING CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES. On the moticnof the PREMIER, it was resolved

that, in the absence of the Chairman of Com­mittees, the hon. member forOxley, Mr. Grimes, do take the chair for this day.

TOWNSVILLE MUNICIPAL LOAN ACT REPEAL BILL.

COMMITTEE. On clause 1-" Repeal of 61 Vie. No. 12"­Mr. McDONALD asked if the Treasurer

would give the Committee the reasons why the repeal of the Act was asked for?

The TREASURER: On the second reading he explained to the House that last year they passed a Bill through the Assembly empowering the Townsville Municipal Council to borrow money for three separate purposes--to pay off the Government rlcbt, to extend their water­works, and to erect buildings on some vacant ground they.had. The erection of the buildings was estimated to cost £24,000. The Upper House, he was sorry to say, omitted the third item. The municipal council considered that the Act, as it stood, was of no use to them. They had no means to borrow monev to huild on the vacant land, as the Act cut down their borrow­ing powers from twelve months' to six months' rates. They were in a worse position, therefore,

Supply. [7 NovEMBER.] SupplJJ. 1027

than they were before the Act was passed, and the repeal of the Act would place them on their former footing of being able to borrow up to the amount of twelve months' rate,.

Mr. SMITH: Has anything been done under the Act?

The TREASURER : No. Mr. DUNSFORD : Had the Townsville

Municipal Council any guarantee that they would be able to borrow money from the Govern­ment, for the purp,lses named, if the Act was repealed? If not, he failed to see how the repeal would put them in a bettEr position.

The TREASURER : The late Treasurer was in fa.vour of lending the rnonE>y, and as far as he could see the present Government would have no objection for the erection of those buildings on the market reserve if the Act was repealed. The council previously objected to pay 5 per cent. for the loan, and the Act enabled them to borrow money at 3~ per cent. in the open market if they could get it. If the Act was repealed, and they borrowed the money from the Government, they would have to pay 5 per cent. for it.

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON: He saw no objection to the clause. The wisest course, when the Bill was mutilated elsewhere last session, would have been to drop it; but that was not don(". and the Government were now taking the only practical means to restore the council to the position they were in before they applied ~or the Bill of last year. They were then at liberty to apply to the Government for the money; if the Act was repealed they would once more be at liberty to apply to the GoYern­ment for the money. There was no harm in that.

Mr. McDONALD: He quite understood thB meaning of the Bill. He wanted to know how much better off the Townsville people would be. If they could have borrowed money where was the necessity for the Bill of last year?

The TREASURER: They wanted to get the money at a lower rate of interest than the Government charged.

Mr. McDON ALD : He recognised that the Upper House knocked out the best part of that Bill, for he was under the impression that the erection of market buildings on the land in question would return a very handsome profit on the investment. When that portion of the Bill was knocked out he, along with other members, regretted that the Go\·ernment accepted it, and that Townsville should be debarred from that source. of revenue. If the present Bill merely placed the Townsville people in the position they were in before, and they were prepared to ask the Go~Ternment for the money, he had no objection to it.

Clause put and passed. The House resumed ; the AcTING CHAIRMAN

reported the Bill without amendment, and its third reading made an Order of the Day for to-morrow.

SUPPLY. RESUMPTION m• COMMITTEE.

SHERU'F. The HOME SECRETARY moved th:tt

£4,790 be granted for the Sheriff's Department. There was an increase of £100 for the Sheriff himself. The late Sheriff had been appointed chairman of the Public Service Board, and the office of sheriff was now held by Mr. Pinnock, whose salary as police magistrate of Brisbane was £700 a year, and who therefore received nn increase in being transferred to the office of sheriff. This Estimate was framed before the vacancy occurred in the office of sheriff. Captain Townley, the former Sheriff, previously receiver! a salary of £800 a year, which was reduced in 1893 to £600. He had up to that time been receiving £700 as sheriff and £100 as cam ptroller of prisons.

The corn ptrollership of prisons was taken from him in 1893, and at the same time his salary as sheriff wa·; re luced from £700 to £600. This Estimate was in the nature of a r<'•,toration ; still it would have left Captain Townley in receipt of £100 a year less than he received before 1893. However, he had gone to another post, and the ad vanc•o of another £100 had enabled Mr. Pinnock to be transferred without an increase of salary. There were also some small increases. There was £20 to a clerk, l\fr. D~vis, whose salary had only been increased £10 within the last four years.

Mr. STEW ART: ·would the hon. gentleman kindly inform the O.>mrnittee what were the duties of a sheriff?

The H0:\1E SECRETARY: He was the executive officer of the Supreme Court. To him was entrusted the carrying out of the orders made from time to time by the Sunreme Court, and he was over a dep~rtment 'of some im­portance. If it were not for the Sheriff's Department the legal machinery of the colony would be at a standstill-people would snap their fingers at the orders made by the court from time to time. All executions and arrests under ea 1·es and things of that S•)rt were done in his department; and it wa' his duty to hang a man if he could not eet somebody else to do it.

:;1r. STEWART: It was astonishing how funny the hou. gentleman could become when it suited him.

The HmiE SECRETARY: I am not funny at all. Mr. STEW ART: 'rhis was no funny business

at all. They were asked to v<>te between £4,000 and £5,000 of the taxpayers' money, and he did not think the work was so heavy or so important ns to warrant the payment of £7_00 for the Sheriff, and £430 for an officer to assist the Sheriff in doing nothing. The hon. gentle­man said the judicial system of the colony would come to a stanrlstill bnt for this officer.

The Ho:llE SECRETARY: I did not. say that. You are always misquoting me.

~Ir. STEW ART : The hon. gentleman said this peroon was the connecting link lwtween the courts of justice and the execution of the law. If so, he wc.s a most expensive link, and one that might very easily be done without. The hon. gentleman inferr~d that sentences of the court could not be CTI.rried out but for eh is person.

The Hmm SECRE'fARY : But for his depart­ment.

Mr. STE\V AR'r : He had never seen t,he Sheriff at any conrt when persons charged with criminal offences were brought up for trial. They were brought by the governor o! t~e gaol and taken back again by that offimal If they were sentenced. He believed the Sheriff, or his assistant, or any person from the Sheriff's office very seldom saw them. Even if they did, the expenditure was wanton extravagance. The hon. gentleman had explained about the addi­tional £100 appearing on the. Estimat~. but he (Mr. Stewart) objected to the Ide\1 that If a man was in receipt of a particular salary, and was removed to another place, he could not be paid a less salary than he received i~ h!s previous pos~tion. Suppose the Railway Cummi,sJOner was appomted Sheriff, would the hon. gentleman ask the Com­mittee to give th<1t gentleman £1,500 because he had been in nceipt of that salary in his previous situation? He did not know whether the hon. gentleman ,vould, bnt that principle he,d been car1ied out right through the Civil Service. For a number of years the duties of sheriff had been performed for £600 a ye.cr, and that was quit~ a sufficient salary at the present time. The,duties of the pr·sition could not be very onerous rf they could be performed by a gentleman who :vas long past the retiring age in the Civil ServiCe.

1028 Swpply, [ASSEMBLY,]

The present holder of the position was, he be­lieved, seventy years of age. If he was in a humble position in the Civil Service he would be bundled out neck and crop as an indi­vidual unfit to e"'rn his salary ; but because he was in the higher or inner circle of the service he was pitchforked into a position where he was not called upon to do anything for his money. They h"'d been told-and he believed it-that the under sheriff did all the work, and that the other gentleman simply drew his salary. If the Government thought more of the great suffering public outside than they did of their pet Civil servants he asked them to abolish that office altogether, and let the under sheriff perform the duties, if there were any duties to be performed ; but he believed that the duties were merely manu­factured for the purpose of giving somebody a billet. If there were the slightest chance of carrying an amendment he would have moved a reduction of the item, but he must protest against the expenditure as a piece of wanton extravagance.

Mr. McDON ALD: They were always told that when a new officer was appointed to a vacant position he received a rise, although he was paid .£50 or £100 a year leRs than the previous occupant received. And that was said to be done on grounds of economy. vVhy not follow out the same principle in connection with the office of sheriff? In the past they had considered that the position of sheriff was worth £600 a year, but now it was proposed to pay .£700. In the event of anything happening which might cause the present occupant of the position to resign, would his successor be entitled to £700 a year? That was a matter which should be seriously con­sidered. Probably the hon. gentleman would tell them, as they had been told in connection with other offices, that the present Sheriff was under the Act of 1863, and that if he retired they would have to get a new sheriff at £600 a year, and pay the retiring officer his pension.

The HoME SECRETARY : That i~ quite true. Mr. McDONALD was glad the hon. gentle­

man accepted that position. The gentleman who now held the office of sheriff could retire whenever he thought proper, and his pension would be based on a salary of .£700 a year, and then the incoming sheriff would be entitled to £700 per annunJ. He thought £600 a year was quite sufficient for the position. It was quite evident that therewa• not much to do in the office, otherwise those who were in charge of the Depart­ment of Justice would not have selected the gentleman who had been appointed, because he was past the age at which he could indulge in active work. He moved that the item be reduced by £100.

The HoN. G. THORN pointed out that as Police ::\![agistrate of Brisbane, Mr. Pinnock had received .£700 a year, and that during the time he held that position he fulfillerl his duties well. He could quite understand the hon. member for North Rockharopton objecting to the salary, because thne was no hangman appointed for the Central division. He had no doubt that that was the reason why the hon. member did not want to see a sheriff in the Southern division. He was very much surprised that the hon. mem­ber for Rockhampton was not up in arms long ago in the interests of that city. He began to think th"'t if they did not want a sheriff in Rockhampton they did not wantlonein the North, which was an additional reason why Mr. Pinnock should receive this increase, because he would have to perform other duties than those apper­taining to the Southern division. As they had not a sheriff at Rcckhampton he would like to know who performed the dutiee of that officer there ? It was evident that there could be very

little work done at the Central Supreme Court, and that raised the question whether they should not do away with the whole paraphernalia of that court. He should like some further infor­mation on the question.

Mr. STEW ART was much obliged to the hon. member for Fassifern for giving him an additional argument in regard to this position of sheriff. Why were sheriffs required in the Southern and Northern Courts if they were not required in the Central Court? Did it mean that the decrees of the Central Court were sent to beexecutedPither to the Southern or theN orthern district? Perhaps it was done without the intervention of a sheriff at all, and if so then there was no necessity for a sheriff at either of the other courts, and therefore the Government had no right to ask them to spend these thousands of pounds unnecessarily. Would the hon. member tell them that the . position of sheriff was as important as that of the Under Secretary for Agriculture, who received only .£500 a year, or the Under Secretary for Works, who received .£600 a year? The more he looked into the matter the more it appeared to be purely a Government job-a billet manufactured for some leading hanger-on to the Government, and the colony could not afford that sort ofthing. He did not know whether the hangman came under this vote or not, but he believed that wme time ago the late Home Secretary told hon. members that he had received a remonstrance from that individual filling the position of hang­man against the number of reprieves that had been granted lately. There had not ]:>een an exe~u­tion in the colony for a very long t1me, and w1th regard to the Central division the people there were a particularly moral lot. The only thing they wanted was severance from the South, and if they got that they would be perfectly happy. He should support the amendment, and thought there should be some intelligible 1·eason given before the Government insulted the Committee by proposing such a vote.

Mr. BATTERSBY: A promise had been given by the late Home Secretary that when an officer retired sleps should be taken to reduce the emoluments belonging to that 0ffice, noma tter who was appointed; but here the Government proposed to increase the salary. He could see no reason for the increase, although he admitted that the officer who had just been appointed was quite competent to fulfil the position. All he had to do apparently, was to sit beside the chief and se~ that nobody assassinated him, but there were a lot of policemen there to look after that. There was another gentleman who had been some thirty· three years in the service, and had for some time filled the position of under sheriff, and it was a slight to him to have put anybody over )lis head. He intended to vote for the reductiOn for that reason. He gave way to no man in his respect for Mr. Pinnock, but he was tired of promises never being fulfilled. The sooner the House put its foot down the better.

:dr. DANIELS : This was what he called an old age pension. There was absolutely nothing to be done in the position of sheriff, and judging by what they knew of the gentleman now in that position if there was any work he was not able to do it. It appeared that the increase had been made to suit the present occupant of the office. He had held a good pos1tion in the service for many years, and there wa.~ no reason why a position should be fol!nd for him which practically meant a penswn. "When lengthsmen were discharged at the age of sixty it was said that they ought to have saved enough out of their 6s. a day to keep ther;t in their old age, but when a man in tbe upper 01rcle was unfit for work a big salary was found for:

Supply. [7 NoVEMBER.] Supply. 1029

him in a position where he would have nothing to do. It was immaterial what high salary was proposed to be increased, there were hon. gentle­men on the other side who believed it should be higher; and no matter how low wages were reduced, there were those on the other side who contended they were good wages and better than could be got outside the Government service. That was the position.

Mr. FINNEY: It is not. Mr. DANIELS : That was the position, and

the hon. member for Toowong knew it. Mr. FrNNEY: All members on this side do not

support reductiom in labourers' wages. Mr. DANIELS: Neady all of them did.

Those who did not support it were so few in numbers that they could not be noticed. He did not think a sheriff was wanted at all. All he had to do was to sign a receipt for his salary once a month, and what work there was to do was done by the under sheriff and the clerks. He should <mpport the amendment.

The HOME SECRETARY: It was not a fact, as stated by the hon. member for Cambooya, that the increase was made for Mr. Pinnock. If the hon. member had taken the trouble to notice the date of the death of the late Mr. Drew, which had indirectly caused the vacancy, he would have found that the Estimates were framed long before that event took place. Of course it was like the h0n. member to make such a state· ment.

Mr. DANIELS: It is perfectly correct. The HOME SECRETARY: He had shown

the hon. member how he could satisfy himself that it was not correct.

Mr. McDONALD: We do not know when the Estimates were framed.

The HOME SECRETARY: The hon. mem­ber knew they were in the hands of hon. mBm· hers before Mr. Drew died. Surely that ought to be sufficient. He would also point out that if it had not been that the salary was on the Estimates at £700 Mr. Pinnock unquestionably would never have accepted the position.

Mr. KEOGH : Let him retire. The HOME SEORETAitY : Then the

country would have to pay a retiring allowance of about .£500 a year and pay the Sheriff as well. If the item was not passed Mr. Pinnock would claim his retiring allowance, and someone else would be appointed at .£600 a year, so that the country would be paying- .£1,100 instead of £700, or a difference of .£400 a year. Was that what hon. members called economy?

Mr. McDONALD : The hon. gentleman tried to bamboozle the Committee into voting against the amendment by telling them that the country would lose £400 a year. That story had been told to them repeatedly by Sir Horace Tozer when Home Secretary, but no one had retired.

The HoME SECRETARY: "What would have happened if the reductions had been made?

Mr. McDONALD: They had been made. Was not the secretary to the Agent-General, who was entitled to a retiring allowance, reduced, yet he had no!; lBft the service on his pension. That sort of thing would not hold water, because a man was likely to hang on to a situation where he had little or nothing to do. Mr. Pinnock had been put there because there was nothing to do. He was becommg unable to perfcrm the work of police magistrate. Complaints had been made about the under sheriff not getting the position. He had· been thirty-four years in the service and did all the work, and if the position was necessary, why had he not got it ? Surely persons should be recompensed for the service they performed for the State. The present Government might; not be the only Government that had done it, but there seemed to be a special liking on the part of Governments for pitchforking highly

paid officers into the easiest and best billets, quite irrespective of the superior merits of others. They would have got better service if they had appointed the under sheriff to the position of sheriff, and allowed Mr. Pinnock to retire on his pension. He "as informed that the principal duty of the Sheriff, beyond signing a few docu­ments, was reading the papers, or something of that sort, and the under sheriff had to perform the work of the department. He hoped the Committee would vote for the reduction as a protest against Mr. Pinnock's appointment. .

Mr. STEW ART : The hon. gentleman m charge of the Estimates had sedulously tried to throw dust in the eYes of the nommittee on this subject. He had told hon. members that if they voted for the amendment it would entail an extra expenditure on the State of about £,100. That might be, but if the Government had any care for the money of the taxpayers they could have allowed Mr. Pinnock to retire on his pension of £500, promoted the under sheriff to the position of sheriff at a salary of £500, and appointed the clerk to be under sheriff, raising his salary from .£175 to .£200. That a.rrange­ment would have f\ffected a clear saving of £200 a year. He again asked what the duties of the Sheriff were? He could gauge the duties of Mr. Ryder, UnderSecretary to the Home Department, and could easily imagine that he earned his salary of £700 a year, but what on earth did the Sheriff do to earn .£700?

Mr. LEAHY: Of course it was the duty of the Home Secretary to defend the Estim~te8.

The ROME SECRETARY :' They are not mine­they are the late Premier's Estimates.

Mr. LEAHY : The hon. gentleman was also right in saying that they had had the Estimates in their hands before the death of the late chairman of the Public Service Board, so that the increase of .£100 to the Sheriff had not been meant as a rise to Mr. Pinnock.

The HOME SECRETARY: It is not a rise in any case. Mr. Pinnock was already receiving £700 a year.

Mr. LEAHY : £650, I think. The HoME SECRETARY : N o-£700. Mr. LEAHY: That certainly altered what he

had been going to say to some extent. How­ever, it certainly was a rise to the office, if not to the man.

The HOME SECRETARY : It is a restoration. Mr. LEAHY : At all events, it waB a rise

from what had been paid to the late Sheriff. He was not one of those who objected to a rise under any conditions. When the work of an official increased, he believed tbat he should receive a rise for the greater responsibilities and burdens imposed upon him; but he understood that of late years the law work of Queensland had been decreasing very rapidly, and consequently there must be a decrease in the work of the Sheriff's office. As a matter of fact, there was very little to do. The Rome Secretary had informed them that the law required that there should be both a sheriff and an under sheriff, and if that was so the argument of the hon. member for Rockhamp­ton North fell to the ground.

Mr. STEW ART: Appoint the clerk under sheriff.

Mr. LEAHY: Then they would have to appoint a clerk to do the work the present clerk did. As to Mr. Pinnock retiring-, he was more likely, now that he had had the higher honour of being Sheriff of Queensland, to retire than if he had remained police magistrate for the city of Brisbane. He thought he ought to have retired long ago. When a man was over seventy years of age he became crotchety, and was incapable, for instance, of entering into the circumstances which led to youths of fourteen, fifteen, or twBnty years of age appearing before him. In

i030 Bupply. [ASSEMBLY.] SupplJI.

many respects he had been a very useful man, but it was a mistake to continue him in the service after his usefulness was gone. If Mr. Pinnock had not been drawing £700 a year before, he would certainly have voted for the amendment.

The HOilfE SECRETARY: He would not have got the .£700.

Mr. LEAHY : The £700 was on the Esti­mates.

The HoME SECRETARY : Yes ; but I should have asked the Committee then to reduce it.

Mr. LEAHY : When he rose he was under the impression that Mr. Pinnock's salary as police magistrate was £650, and had that b~en so he would have voted for the amendment. As it was he did not see how they could get out of voting for the .£700 ; but at the same time he entered a protest against raising the salary for an office where there was no increase in the work to he performed. The hon. gentleman would admit that there had been no increase of work in that office?

The HOME SECRETARY : I am not in a position to say; but I do not think it has decreased.

Mr. LEAHY : It was a well-known fact that law proceedings generally had decreased in the last few years, and the one followed the other.

Mr. KEOGH: The only thing he regretted was that the amendment did not propose to sweep away the whole of the salary in question. He had followed the career of Mr. Pinnock for twenty-five years, and no man in that Chamber had a more painful recollection than he had of the political dodgery which had been exercised in favour of that individual. He was brought from Warwick to Ipswich; and it Reemed a curious coincidence that Captain Townley, the gentleman he now replaced, was police magistrate of Ips­wich at that time, and there was not a more honourable man in Queensland to-day than Captain Townley. This individual, Pinnock, was brought from Warwick to Ipswich to try what were called "the Porteous cases," and he had no h~sitation in saying-and there was not a man m the Chamber who could contradict the statement-that he wag brought there for the purpose of convicting men who were actually innocent. And he di<l do so. Hence the reason he had occupied the position of chief magistrate of Brisbane-through the political influence exer­cised at that period. When that officer was brought from Warwick to Ipswich it was a fore­gone conclusion that those men would be con­victed. One unfortunate young fellow Jimmy O'Sullivan-the son of a former membe; of that House whose name was revered, l'addy O'Sulli­van--died through that very action, and Pinnock was the man who could be blamed for it.

The HOME SECRETARY: No, no! Mr. KEOGH: Yes; and be himself suffered

at the time, and suffered innocently, at the hands of Pinnock. He had no hesitation in saying that ~very memJ:ler of the party convicted on that occasiOn was as mnocent as he (Mr. Keogh) was.

Mr. :FINNEY: ·what occasion ? Mr. KEOG H: In connection with the Porteous

riots in Ipswich, this very Monday twenty-five years ago-Guy Fawkes day. This man got his position as chief magistrate in Brisbane by convicting those men in what we called the "State prosecutions." He was no more entitled to .occupy the positirn of police magistrate of Brrsbane than he (Mr. Keogh) was, but the Government of the day promoted him from \Varwick to Brisbane because he did their dirty wcrk for them, otherwise he would have been sent out to the back blocks, and that was the place to which he 011i!ht to have been sent.

Mr. McDoNAI,D: We don't want him. Mr. KEOGH did not suppose they did. A

man capable of doing the dirty work that man

did had no right to occupy the prominent position he had occupied, or the position he was now to occupy as sheriff. The Government had lowered their dignity by appointing a man of that description to the position of sheriff. Why was not the man who occupied the position of under sheriff, and who had worked his way up for thirty-four years-why was not that man placed in the position? No. no ! of course not. This man was not able to carry on the business from old age and incapacity. He was a fossilised indi­vidual, and one of those men who had no right to occupy such a position. .\V~y should he not retire at once and be done w1th 1t? The Home Secretary had said that the reason was that it would save .£300 or .£400, but he said let the man retire and give him his pension. He would sooner see the country saddled with double that amount and do away with such a political nondescript as he was. He had no hesitation in saying that the man now occupying the posi­tion of under sheriff was a far superior man to the man now above hiru. It had been shown that the position did not entail much work, and the money paid for it was rather more than it was worth, but the position was an honourable one, and why should not the man who had rigen from the ranks get it instead of bringing a man in from another department to place over him? He did not think that a proper way of doing business, and while he had a voice in that House he would raise it against any undue influence being brought in matters of that description. He was only sorry that the amendment was not tu strike out the whole amount for that item.

The HOMJ<~ SECRETARY : The hon. mem­ber had indulged his feelings with regard to Mr. Pinnock. He was smarting under a wrong which he >aid had been inflicted upon him by Jliir. Pinn0ck, but that, of course, was a matter of opinion.

Mr. DAWSON : Do you think he deserved it? The HO~IE SECRETARY was not there to

express an opinion, but under the circumstances no one could wonder at the hon. member feeling strongly with reference to Mr. Pinnock. He had, however, gone beyond what a sense of justiCe should have induced him to s"'y with regard to that gentleman. The magistrate, in the case referred to, had a duty to perform, and he "as c~ertain, from what he knew of Mr. Pinnock, that he would act in a thoroughly conscientious way, and in accordance with the law and the facts put before him. He would have to be a very bold man who would attempt to influence any decision Mr. Pinnock might give. But the hon. member for Rosewood had been putting the blame on the wrong shoulders. \Vhat Mr. Pinnock did was to commit for trial, and the hon. member's complaint should really be against the jurors who decided th6 case. The hon. member omitted to mention that fact.

Mr. SrM : Is not that a gross injustice, if he should not h"'ve done so?

The HOME SECRETARY : But the jury convicted, and that was a sufficient justification for anything the magistrate did.

lVIr. KEOuH : It was against the facts. The HOME SECRETARY: That was an

attad< upon the jurors, and the hon. member should show that there was corruption in the choice of the jury.

Mr. KEOGH : I don't want to bring the jury into the discussion, but I will if you like ..

The HOME SECRETARY : He drd not want it. They were already going a long way beyond the question at issue. The result of the cases showed that Mr. Pinnock could have done nothing else than commit; he would have failed in his duty bad he not done so if there was a primd facie case made out. He thought he

Supply. [7 Nov:FJMBER.] Supply. 1031

o';lght .n?t to sit down without saying that, in hts opm10n, the career of :M:r. Pinnock, during the twenty years he had presided over the police court in Brisbane, was a sufficient answer to any charge the hon. member for Rosewood had allowed himself to bring against him.

:M:r. TURLEY : The position put forward by the hon. member for Bulloo was the most tenable one-namely, that Mr. Pinnock should have been allowed to retire from the service. Three years years _ago he (Mr. Turley) mentioned several cases m the Chamber regarding Mr. Pinnock, and at that time there were two hon. members, who now , occupied seats on the front Treasury bench, who were of opinion that Mr. Pinnock ought th~n to have been retired from the bench. But n?thmg was done until, on the removal of Captam T~1':"nley, he wasputintothepositionof a sort of pohtwal dummy. If the office of sheriff was a purely ornamental one as had been stated it oug~t to be abolished, aX:d he was sure th~ Committee would back up the Minister if he brought sue? a proposal before it. In any case t!te Committee would be perfectly justified, Simply as a matter of protest, in voting for the motion to reduce the vote by .£100.

Mr. SIM: Without instituting comparisons t~at were. " ?~orous" as to the capabilities of different mdividuals, he wished to enter his prqtest against the appointment of Mr. Pinnock on the ground that it was a gross injustice to an old and valued servant of the State, who had been passed over. He wished to know on wh:.t principle promotion was given in the public service. The Home Secretary was an officer of the Defence Force. How long would discipline be preserved in that body if men who had deserved well of their country and who had rema!ned in the ranks for years, ~hould be passed over m order that some favourite officer might receive undue promotion?

The HoME SECRETARY : There is no promotion in this case.

Mr. SIM: The gentleman occupying the position of under sheriff had faithfully served the country for thirty-three or thirty-four years; he had bean promoted very slowly; he had done all the work that had to be done for many years to the satisfaction of successive Governments· and to hii;n the promotion ought to have been given. He did not think the principle followed was a good one, nor was it one calculated to render the public service more etlicient. He intended to support the amendment. T~e HOME SECRETARY: The public

servwe had been for many years regarded as one-that was, a man might be transferred from one department to another-and that had con· duced t? effi9iency rat~er than inefficiency, because m filling vacanmes there was a wider choice than if promotions were restricted to the particular department in which a vacancy arose. The hon. memcer had referred to defence matters, and had spoken as if this transfer were p_romo~ion to Mr. Pinnock. It was not promo­tiOn; It was merely a transfer from one office to another at the same salary.

Mr: SiiY~ explained th_at he had not complained of ~his bemg a promotiOn for Mr. Pinnock but of It being a depreciation of one who dese'rved promotion.

The HOME SECRETARY: 'l'he Public Service Boa;d had to be consulted in this matter. I.t _was their re9om:nendation, and it was en­tirely at the nommatton of the late Premier than whom nobody knew better who was best ahle to perform the duties, and who wa,; most entitled to promotion.

.Mr. DAwsoN: Do you say that the late Pre­nuer recommended that?

The HOME SECRETARY: Yes, distinctly. Mr. DAwsoN: Then you ought to be ashamed

to say so. The HOME SECRETARY: Not if it was

true. Mr. DAWSON: It is not true. The HOME SECRETARY: He could prove

to the hon. member that it was on the recom­mendation of the late Premier; the hon. mem­ber was making a very rash •tatement.

Mr. DAWSON: You are making a very rash statement.

The HOME SECRETARY: He had know­ledge of the fact, and he believed there was documentary evidence to show it.

Mr. DAWSON: In the box? The HOME SECRETARY: No doubt the

Under Secretary could produce it. The hon. gentleman had committed himself to telling him that he was a liar. Re challenged the hon. mernber to the proof.

:M:r. DAWSON : It is not necessary. ~!fr. McDoNALD: If you have the proof you can

make him one. The HO:M:E SECRETARY: He had the

knowledge that it was so, becausetheLtte Premier proposed it to his colleagues. He appealed to all his colleagues on the question, and the hou. member told him he was saying that which was false. •

Mr. DAWSON: Yes, I do. The HOME SECRETARY: Then the hon.

member was himself making the most absolutely fal$8 statement ever made in that Chamber. . Mr. DAWSON: \Vhy do you nt1t bear your own

sms-not put them on somebody else? Mr. SIM : The Home Secre'ary and the

Government h>td not attempted to show that the under sheriff was incapable of disch,wging the duties of sheriff, and that being the case, he should have received promotion in the ordinary course by reason of seniority. It was desirable, in the intere9ts of the public service, that seniority, together with efficiency and good character, should be recognised in making promotions. A gentleman of Mr. Pinnock's age, after the long year;; of service he had seen, ought to retire and begin to think of another world.

'l'he HOME SECRETARY: He had It from the Under Secretary that the late Premier-he said this to the senior member for Charters To wE>rs-the late Premier commis,ioned-person­ally directed-the present Chairman of the Public Service Board to offer the position to Mr. Pinnock. Captain Townley was vacating the position of sheriff, and he was by the Govern­ment proposed for the position, with the con­currence of the late Premier. In fact, Captain Townley was the late Premier's nomination, and he commissioned Captain Townley to ascertain from Mr. Pinnock whether he would accept the position of sheriff. He did not know whether the hon. member would say Captain Townley was a liar or not.

Mr. McDONALD: The hon. gentleman had distinctly told the Committee th:.t in all these appointments it was left to the Public Service Board.

The HoME SECRETARY : To recommend. Mr. McDONALD was dealing with what the

hon. gentleman had said, not with the Act. He distinctly stated that the Public Service Board made these appointments.

The HoME SECRETARY : I did not, You ought to know that could not possibly be so. They can only recommend.

Mr. McDONALD: They all knew that; but he was saying what the hon. gentleman ·stated just now. Then the hon. gentleman said this Public Service Board was nothing but a huge political machine, to be used just as the Govern­ment thought proper-that they were nothing

1032 [ASSEMBLY.]

more or less than a set of tools in the hands of the Government. The hon. gentleman had told the Committee that the Government could make the Public Service Board appoint whoever they thought proper-anybody who was prepared to do any of their dirty work. Those were the people recommended to the Public Service Board for these positions. Was it on those lines that the late police magistrate at Charters Towers got that position-owing to services rendered to the Government in connection with various strikes? He supposed the Government used the same putty members of the Board-squeezed them as they liked-to appoint any person who would do their dirty work on these particular occasions. The hon. gentleman had given the whole case away. He (Mr. McDonald) had an idea that the Public Service Board were at all events above reproach, and that though they might do a, thing stupidly, they would not do it at the dictates of the Government, but the hnn. gentle­man had told them that the Board were merely in the hands of the Government and did as they were told.

The HOME SECRETARY was sorry that the. hon. member should make misstatements of that kind. If he was more familiar with the Public Service Act he would know that it would be an utterly foolish statement for anybody to make-that the Public Service Boa,rd made appointments. •

Mr. McDoNALD : Y on said so. The HOME SECRETARY: What he said

was that the appointment as made on the recommendation of the Public Service Board, and that was so; but that before any recom­mendation was made by the Board the late Pramier saw the new chairman-that was before Captain Townley wa;, actually appointed-and asked him to o'certai.n from Mr. Pinnock whether he would accept the position of sheriff.

Mr. McDoNAI,D: You said "directed" before. The HOME SECRETARY: If he used that

word it was not exactly correct, but he also said that the late Premier " commissioned " CarJtain Townley to ascertain from Mr. Pinnock whether be would accept the position. Captain Townley was not appointed Chairman of the Public Ser­vice Board until aft"r Mr. Byrnes's death.

Mr. McJlONALD understood the hon. gentle­man to state distinctly that the late Premier commissioned the Public Service BG.>rd--

The Ho~IE SECRE~'ARY: No; commissioned Captain Townley.

Mr. McDONALD: Under those circum. stances the hon. gentleman had withdrawn from his position, and he would say no more on the subject.

Mr. STEW AHT: The admis·,ion nL·de by the Minister ehould, open the eyes of the public vdth regard to the way in which the taxpayers' money was squandered. JTor a number of years com­plaints were made that public offices were distributed a" a reward for political services or political influence, and to do"'" ay with that the Public Service Board was appointed. Now they found that the Public Service Board was merelv a puppet-a dummy that stood between the Go. vernment and the ser.vice-and that favouritism went on in the service just as it did before, or a great deal worse. The Corr_mittee ought to be very glad th:tt the hon. gentleman had let light into a few of the dark places and urookerl crannies of the Government. The Gm-ernment appeared to be something like the heathen Chinee-their ways were rather peculiar. :First the hon. gentleman told them that JYir. Pinnock was "ppointed· on the recommendation of the Public Service Boar.ct, and later on, when he found that that cock would not fight, he said the ate l?r.emier recommended the appointment. He did; not wonder at the senior member for Ghar.ters

Towers objecting to that continual throwing of the blame for the actions of the Government on a man who was dead.

The HOME SECRETARY : There is no blame in this matter; it is to his credit.

Mr. STEW ART did not wish to discuss the actions or alleged actions of a man who was not present, but if the Public Service Board was merely a puppet that was pulled by the Govern­ment then the sooner the Board was abolished the better, and they could sp.end that £3,500 a year on roads and bridges in the rural parts of this badly governed colOJ?Y· But he wal?ted to know what were the dutws that the Shenff per­formed for £700 a vear, and he should continue to ask that questi~n until he got the informa­tion.

The HOME RECRETARY: He had told the hon. member several times that the duties of the Sheriff were to carry out the orders of the Supreme Court in its civil jurisdiction, and that practically, unless that department were in exist­ence, the orders and executions of the court would be usele.'s and abortive. There was a good deal of work to be done by the department, and it was by no means overmanned.

Mr. BROWNE intended to support the amendment, and was not going to take any account of the great services of Mr. Pinnock, or the great crin;es he was alleged to have com­mitted, or whether the late Premier directed the Chairman of the Public Service Board--

ThA HOME SJ<iCRETARY: What he said was that the late Premier spoke to Captain Townley, and asked him to ascertain fro_rr; Mr. Pinnock whet her he would accept the pos1t10n of ,heriti, and that Captain Townley was not Chairman of the Public Service Board at the time.

Mr. DAw~ox: You said "directed" Captain Townley.

The HoME SECRETARY : If he said "directed" he withdrew the word, but he also used the word '' con1missioned."

Mr. BROWNE was going to suppovt the re­duction, because he objected to the more highly­paid Civil servants being treated on different lines from those on which the lower paid officers were treated. One of the chief arguments advanced in favour of paying the present Sheriff £700 a year was that be had previously been in receipt of that ealary. But lengthsmen, school teachers, stationmasters, and other lowly-paid officers were not dealt with in that way. lf a lengthsman on the Northern line, receiving 7s. per day, were shifted on account of ill-health to the Southern line his wages would be reduced by ls. per day, and a police magistrate or a school teacher in the lower grades would be tteated in the same way. But immediately they cune to deal with a high-class Civil servant another rule wa~ applied, and in this case the officer in question was removed to a sort of political Dunwich with an old-age pension equal to what his salary was before. All Civil servants should be treated alike, but if they were to have two ,.q;ts of rules, then the public should know it at once. It was because there were di!l'erent rules that he should support the amendment.

The PRE;cviiER : He might inform hon. members that this vote was originally considered by the late Premier, and it was through his action that this increase was given. It was originally intended as a restoration to Captain Townley, who was severely retrenched some. years before, and at that time none of those circumstances had occurred which led to Captain Townley being transferred to the Public. Service Board. But after Captain Tov;,nley had been tJran:;ferred, it was also decided by the late Premier that the £700 should stand, because Mr. Pinnock, who had been appointed Sheriff, had been receiving

Supply. [7 NovEMBER.] Supply. 1033

that sa.lary as senior police magistrate in Bris­bane. If M:r. Pinnock were to retire he would draw a handsome pension under the Act of 1863, and this office would still have to be filled at £600. Seeing that this vote did not increase the annual charge upon the revenue, he trm,ted that it would be allowed to pass. .No doubt all that he had said had been said by the Home Secretary, but he wished to add his testimony to the fact that these matters had been arranged by the late Premier, who specially nominated Mr. Pinnock for the position of sheriff.

Mr. BOLES: He had often heard it said that Governments recognised the services of its officers, but they always began with the highly­paid officers, when, in common justice, they should commence with the lower grades. It seemed from the remarks of the Home Secretary that this office was practically a sinecure, and the Government had filled it by the appointment of an officer who had long passed the usual term of life, at a salary of £100 more than his pre­decessor received. In common decency a man of seventy years of age should retire and give ~ome­body else a chance. There was also the argument that Mr. Pinnock would not live for ever; he must "peg out" in the course of a few years, and his successor would al&o expect to receive £700 a year. It seemed that there was a tendency to bolster up highly-paid officers, and although he would be prepared to agree to the increase of certain high salaries if he thought the administration of public affairs would be thereby facilitated, this office was an absolute sinecure. As had been said, they were able to do without a sheriff in the Central district, and therefore he thought this vote might very well be reduced, and he should vote for the amendment.

Mr. LEAHY: As the matter of qualification had come up, he should like to say a few words upon it. He thought they were entitled to know from the Government the principle upon which they made promotions. He wished to know if it were not likely that a man who had filled the position of under sheriff for some thirty-four years, and had acted for the Sheriff on many occasions, and practically did all the work, was not more competent to fill the position than a man who had no knowledge of the office at all? There could be no doubt that, if he had the same natural ability, the former would be far more efficient ; and be had no hesitation in saying that this position should have been given to the under sheriff. There seemed to be some idea that a man must be blue-blooded to fill this position, but that rule did not apply here to the Supreme Court bench, l\nd therefore it could not apply to the Sb eriff. But he believed that Mr. Gallwey did possess that qualification too. He knew the people he was descended from in the south of Ireland, and they were a race of gentlemen. He did not wish to raise thi' question, but as it had been raised before he wished to say that Mr. Gall wey was as well qualified as anyone else. He saw no reason why he should be passed over.

The HmiE SECRETARY : I have not heard that question raised.

Mr. LEAHY: He knew' that it had been raised before. It was raised bv the Public Service Board when the under sheriff was appointed to his present position. The action of tbe la.te head of the Government had nothing to do with the question. The present Government had to take the responsibility of their actions. He did not care who was appointed ; the Govern­ment had no business to fall back on what had been the opinions of their predecessors. The probability wa~ that he knew as much about the history of the question as any man in the House, but he was not going into that matter. He did not care what Government was in power,

whether the present or the late Government ; he should take the same action. If the late leader of the House wag present, and the appointment had not been given to the under sheriff, he would have made the same protest. The appointment should cevtainly have been given to the under sheriff.

The PREMIER could say nothing but what was highly eulogistic of the under sheriff, who was a most worthy officer--one of whom he could speak in the highest terms. But the hon. mem­ber for Bulloo forgot that promotions in the vublic service rested upon certain gntdes a;td classifications upon which the Public Servwe Board acted. Consequencly wh~n the. position of sheriff became vacant the Public Servwe Board were consulted as to the officers anpearing within a certain classification who wo'uld be eligible for the position. They must have regard to the list of classified officers, who were graded according to their salaries and seniority, and the Board endeavoured to obtain an officer for the appointment from the Jigt most nearly approximating to the class in which the vacancy oocurred. Of course the Government accepted the full responsibility for the appointment, which was a Yery excellent one, and hacl the fullest approval of the Cabinet at the time. The recommendation was received before Mr. Pinnock was appointed to the position.

Afr. STEW ART: Who prompted the Public Service Board ?

The PREMIER : The Government did not condescend to such underhand procedure.

Mr. McDaNALD : You said yourself that the late Premier recommended the appointment.

The PREMIER: He said that the recom­mendation of the Board came with the late Premier's approval, and action was taken.

Mr. McDoNALD : You take the same ground as the Home Secretary.

The PREMIER : They both gave an exact statement of what occurred. There was nothing to conceal. Everything was open and above­board, and if necessary there was any amount of corroborative evidence as to the feeling of the late Premier. But he would not shelter himself behind his action, because he quite approved of what was done. He gave his heartiest concur­rence to it, and had he been leader of the Govern­ment at the time he should have done precisely the same thing. As to reducing the salary of a gentleman who had served the colony as faith­fully and well as Mr. Pinnock, it would be highly unworthy of Parliament. He sincerely trusted that a better feeling would prevail ; that hou. members would recognise there was such a thing as according to an old officer who had served a colony well such a mark of distinction as was conveyed by the title of "Sheriff."

Mr. McDoNALD : Is this promotion? The PREMIER presumed that the titular

distinction of "Sheriff of Queensland" would be regarded as promotion, as the office ranked higher than that of senior magistrate of the metropolis.

Mr. BATTERSBY asked whether the Public Service Board had made a recommendation to increase the salary nf the Sheriff from £600 to £700 a year; also whether they recommende.d that the office of seniormagistratein the metropolis should carry a lower salary than it had formerly carried? If the Board bad made those recom­mendations, would the Premier tell them why they had been made ?

The PH,EMIER could not state that any recommendation came from the Board to increase the Sheriff's salary; but in face of the retrench­ment that officer had suffered some years ago, it was recognised-as the records of Hansara

1034 Supply. [ASSEMBLY.]

would show-that he was entitled to have his oalary reinstated as early as possible. The original salary was £800, and Captain Townley, who was a most worthy officer, had been re­trenched £200 a year. It was intended this session to partially restore his salary.

Mr. DAWSON: Tell us some of the services he performed.

The PHEMIER: He was a very old member of the service. He had been a police magistrate and Comptroller-General of Prisons, as well as Sheriff, a11d he had served for long periods in some of tho,e offices. He had actually been retrenched 25 per cent. instead of the 10 per cent. which other officers bad been retrenched. Several representations bad been made by the late Premier that his salary should be restored in full, but it ha_d been considered that a partial restoration at predent would be sufficient.

Mr. DAWSON: You restored the salary after he left the office.

The PRE~IIER: No. The Estimates were framed before he harlleft the office. The vacancy in the Chairmanship of the Public Service Board did not occur until after the Estimates had been framed. If Mr. Drew had not died, the £700 would h::we been paid to Captain TC>wnley. Mr. Pinnock had been appointed Sheriff at the same salary that he had as police magistrate. The action of the Government had been perfectly aboveboard in the matter. Mr. Pinnock was by no means worn out. He did not hold the opinion that because a man happened to be a certain age his intellectual faculties became impaired on !Jis attaining that age. Mr. Pinnock was an excellent officer, who had been appointed to a position which he could very worthily fill.

Mr. CURTIS thought that when a man reached the age of seventy he should retire and make room for someone else. If J'.Ir. Pinnock preferred to remain in the service to retiring on an allowance of £500 a year, he should be satis­fied with the salary paid to his predecessor. He agreed with the suggestion of the hon. member for Bulloo that the under sheriff should have been appointed. The expenditure under the arrange­ment he had suggested would be no more than under the present arrangement, and therefore he felt justified in voting for the amendment.

Mr. BATTERSBY: The Premier had not answered his question with regard to Mr.Murray. He understood that he was getting £600 a year, although he occupied the position Mr. Pinnock had filled at £700 a year.

The TREASvRER: Mr. Murray is getting £650. Mr. BATTERSBY: Why Bhould he not get

the £700 If he was worth it? It appeared as if Mr. Pinnock had been transferred and had tftken his emoluments with him.

'l'he PREMIER : The vote for magistrates had already been discussed, and he had explained his intentions in the case <•f any change. The Home Secretary had not yet made his appoint­ments to the magistracy of Brisbane, but the gentleman to whom the hon. member for More­ton had referred was drawing £650, and Mr. Pinnock had carried his salary with him. His colleague informed him that, in the case of any changes he might make in the magistracy, the officers would carry their present salaries with them.

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON hoped that the division would be taken at once. It was unfortunate that the Premier had been absent, because he had on!;• repeated what the Home Secretary had previously told them. He was glad to have the reiteration, but they had lost an hour in consequence of having the same thing said over and over again.

Th•' SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC IN­STRUCTION : If the Premier had been absent it was on official business.

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON; I am not finding fault with his absence.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC IN­STRUCTION : With regard to the fact that something had been said before, that was no novelty in that Chamber. If they were to con­fine themselves to something which was original, they could get through the business in.a month. Two objections had been taken to this salary. The first was on the ground of economy; the second was that the under sheriff should have been appointed. There was one good ~eason why the under sheriff had not been appomted, and that was because his classification would not justify the appointment. Within the last twelve months he had been desirous of appointing the next officer in the Orphanages Branch to suc­ceed the late Mr. Horrocks, but the Public Service Board pointed out that. tha~ officer did not hold the necessary class1ficat10n. In the case of Messrs. Pinnock and Gallwey there was a distinct classification, Mr. Pinnock being very high np in Class I. and Mt:· Gall~ey being iu Class II.; and while the Pubhc ServiCe Board treated the whole of the departments as one ser­vice, tbey did not pnt a~ officer of ~he second class into a vacancy whiCh was considered one which should be filled by an officer of the first class. That might be one very good reason why this office was not con~idered one which should be given to Mr. Gallwey. He was informed that during his absence an hon .. n;em~er c;m the other side had expressed his dismelmatwn to accept the statement of the Home 1:'\ecretary that the nomination of Mr. Pinnock was more expressly the work of the late Pr<;mier. At the risk of being charged with repea:mg ~hat other members had said, he thought m this case _he was justified in bearing testimony to the entire accuracy of the statement n,ade by the Home Secretary. After some consideration Mr, Byrnes came to the conclusion that it. was desirable in the public interest to nommate Mr. Pinnock. That was an absolute fact, and he thought the hon. member for Charters Towers would accept what he said as being prompted o'!IY by a desire for the tr~th in. the matter. With regard to the other pomt raised, Mr. Pinnock was entitled to retire on a pension of £500 and if he had done so they would have h~d to fill the positions of sheriff and police magistrate, and it would have been a loss to the State of some £300 or £400. In this case the Government might fairly say that the appointment had been made, not only in conformity with usage, but that it had effected economy so far as the public expenditure was concerned. Whatever the duties of the office of sheriff might be, no hon. member had at­tempted to show that Mr. Pinnock could not perform them with satisfaction. There :need ~e no apprehension on the score of Mr. Pmnock s age that he could not perform the duties. They knew that most onerous duties were successfully performed bv men of very advanced age. They had the examples of Queen Victoria, and of men like Moltke and Gladstone, and of others whose opinions were held to be o! supren;e impo':t"nce, discharging their responsible duties admirably, and better than anyone else could be expected to perform them for some time. The objection on the score of Mr. Pinnock's age could not be sustained, though it might be justifiable as a general objection. .

Mr. DUNSFORD: They were gettmg some more Cabinet secrets this evening, and he was surprised that the Government should endeavour to plrtce the responsibility for this appointment on a dead man's shoulders.

Supply. [7 NoVEMBER.] Supply. 1035

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : They don't in the least. They accept the re­sponsibility.

Mr. DUNSFORD : They had two versions of the appointment given. They had the Home Secretary placing the responsibility on the Public Service Board--

The HoME SECRETAUY: No. Mr. DUNSFORD: That was the first thing,

and they had since backed down from that position, and were now shoving the responsi­bility upon the late Premier.

The HOME SECUETAUY: No. Mr. DUNSFORD: Let the hon. member

read in Hansa.Td what he said, and let the Premier and the Secretary for Public Instruction read what they ha-d repeated, and they would find that it was that the responsibility for the nomination of Mr. Pinnock was upon the late Premier.

The HOME SECRETARY: No. Mr. DUNSFOUD: It was clear the Govern­

ment were shunting all responsibility from their own shoulders. It was worse than that-it was overriding the Civil Service Act. It had never been i~tended that the Ministers should fetch influence to bear upon the members of the Public Service Board, but that the members of the Board should have a free hand in all these appointments. Yet they were invited to under­stand that bec::tuse the late Premier-who was not alive to deny the statement-desired that a certain man should be placdd in the position and was backed up afterwards by the other members of the Government that appointment had been made-not because of the merits of the man •>r because he deserved an increase of salary--

The HoME SECRJ<;TARY : There is no increase of salary.

Mr. DUNSFORD: There was an increase in the salary of the position. They had also been told, as a reason for the appointment, that Mr. Pinnock would have fallen back upon his pension and would have retired. Mr. Pinnock waE seated in a very good position as police magistrate, and they should know whether he had stated that he desired to leave the bench. Did he issue an ultimatum that unless he received that position he would fall back on his pension? Yet that was put before the Committee to influ­ence their votes. That was not correct. It was probably found that for some reason or other Mr. Pinnock-whose actions as a police magis­trate he did not wish to criticise-should be shifted to some other position where the responsi­bility and the work were not so great, and where he could still continue to draw his salary. It was admitted that there were other persons in the department who from merit alone should have received the position. Mr. Gallwey was evidently the most entitled to it, and there were also Captain Pennefather and Major Lewis who were far better entitled to it than Mr. Pmnock. Bnt it seemed that when it suited the Govern­ment they could override the Public Service Act and force the Public Service Board into appoint­ing anyone whether fit for the position or not. The Act stated distinctly that the Board had the right to nominate; but in that case they had been distinctly told that the nomination had been made by the late Premier. Section 34 of the Public Service Act provided that '"lhe Board shall submit to the Governor in Council the name of the officer whom they recommend for promotion." It also provided that if the Governor in Council did not approve of the recommendation they might remit it to the Board for reconsideration. The Premier did not come in at all in the matter, nor any other member of the Ministry, until they were called upon by the Board. It was evidently customary for the Cabinet to override the Act and to force their

own nominees upon the Public Service Board; and that was a position the Committee had just cause to complain of. With regard to salary, the Pretnier stat~d that Mr. Pinnock carried his salary with him. Why should he? If he had been appointed to the position of night-watchman would he have carried his salary with him? Was it because he was an old officer? His experience of the lower grades of the service was that they did not carry their salari~s with them but their swags, and when old they were sent to Dunwich. But the "curled darlings" of the service carried their salaries with them wherever they went, even to their graves. The salary of the office "as pre­viously £600 a year. It had now been increased to £700 because the present holder of the office hap­pen~d to be in receipt of that amount as police magietrate. It waR a crying shame to go outside the department for a "heriff merely because it suited the Government to remove a police magis­trate from the bench whom they were not game to retire on his pension. These were their charges against the Government: That to suit their own ends in removing an officer who was not fit for a certain position they had overridden an Act of Parliament, that they had forced that man upon the Public Service Board, that they had increased the salary of the office by £100, and that they had placed Mr. Pinnock over the heads of deserving officers.

Mr. :MoMASTER: It would be a very great injustice to reduce the salary because Mr. Pinnock happened to have been removed from one office to another, and then ask him in a year or two to retire on the lower salary. Some hon. mem hers opposite seemed to think that Mr. Pinnock was incapable, and ought therefore to have been removed from the bench. Those who knew Mr. Pinnock knew that he was sound both in body and mind, and that he was thoroughly capable of carrying on his duties as police magistrate. Those who said otherwise did not know Mr. Pinnock.

Mr. KEOGH: 'Ne know him perfectly well. Mr. McJiiiASTER : He dared ,ay the hon.

member did know him perfectly well, but he would like the hon. member to keep that know­ledge to himself. He believed the under sheriff was an excellent officer, and no doubt the day would come when he would be promoted to the position, but he could not be promoted, it had been explained, until he got into No. I. class.

JWr. McDoNALD: How is he to get in? Mr. McMASTER could not tell th~ hon.

member; bnt as long as there were officers in No. I. class capable of being promoted, they were entitled to the promotion; and when No. I. class was exhausted some of No. II. class were brought into No. I. Mr. Pinnock, if he had chosen, could have retired--

Mr. KEOGH: A good thing if be had. Mr. McJiiiASTER : A good thing if the hon.

member for Hosewood would retire. Previous Governments had asked a good many men in the prime of life-men capable of doing good work­to retire; but was that any reason why the present Government should ask an officer capable of doing good work to retire?

Jlilr. DAwsoN: He is not capable. Mr. McMASTER: He was capable. The ACTING CHAIRMAN : I ask h01:i'.

members to keep order, and allow the hon. member addressing the Chair to speak.

Mr. McMAS'l'ER: He had been more or less on the bench with Mr. Pinnock for the last nine or ten years, and nobody could p•Jint a fin;;-er at him and say he was not as just a man as ever sat on the bench.

Mr. KEOGH : I can. I say he has not been, and I am prepared to prove it.

1036 Supply, [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

Mr. McMASTER: He believed the hon. member was at cross purposes with 1\fr. Pinnock at one time. That was not Mr. Pinnock's fault; it was the misfortune of the hon. member for Rose wood. He should not cross swords with the law; but unfortunately he was not able to con­trol himself at that time, and found fault with the volice magistrate because he did his ducy.

Mr. KEOGH: I deny it. He did not do his duty. Mr. McMASTER : If he had not done his

duty he would not have been so long on the bench.

The ACTING CHAIRMA}[ : I ask hon. members to maintain order and not interrupt the hon. member who h "~ddressing the Chair.

Mr. McMASTER: Was it not a fact that when the hon. member came acrms Mr. Pinnock there were two other magistrates with him on the bench?

ll1:r. KEOGH : No, there were not. Mr. Mc:\'IASTER: He would let that go. He

said it would be an unjust act on the part of this Committee to reduce the salary of this officer because the Government thought he deserved promotion in position if not in salary. The hon. member for Port Curtis said it was time he retired because he was seventy year> of age ; but Mr. Pinnock was as clear in his judgment as any man that ever sat on the bench in Brisbane, and very few of his decisions had ever been appealed against. Perhaps the hon. member would like to see hi:n (Mr. McMaster) retire on account of his age, but he had no intention of retir­ing, because he felt that he was capable of doing a good deal more work yet. The salary previously paid to the gentleman holding this position was £800 a year, and he was retrenched in 1893 more the,n any other officer in the service. He asked whc:ther the Government ought not to have reinstated Captain Townley before he left the office of sheriff, and whether it was not an lwnest action now on their part to restore the salary to what it was in 1893. Now they were saving .£100 a year by allowing Mr. Pinnock to take his salary with him, aucl he was certain that the Committee would not do such an unjust act to one who had been a faithful servant of the State for thirty years as to take .£100 off his salary, and thus cause him to receive a lower pension when he retired than he would receive if they allowed the vote to pass.

Mr. CRIBB : He did not speak before tea because he wished the hon. member for Rose­wood to be present while he was making the remarks he intended to make. He thought the hon. gentleman had, allowed his personal feelings to override his judgment in speaking of Mr. Pinnock. He (Mr. Cribb) had known that gentleman for many years, and he did not think it was possible to find a more conscientious magistrate anywhere in the colony. The par­ticular cas8 referred to by the hon. member arose out of some riots that occurred in Ipswich; and local feeling at the time ran very high. It was therefore considered advisable that the preliminary trial should not be held before the local magistrate, and the Government of the day appointed three old and mo~st experienced police magistrates-Mr. Pinnock, Mr. Elliot, and his (Mr. Cribb's) late brother-to hear the case, and they performed their duties impartially. As to the prisoners not having had a fair trial, he contended that they had as fair a trial as it was possible for any person to have.

Mr. KEOGH rose to a point of order. He really could not understand what the hon. member was talking about.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN : There is no point of order.

:Mr. CRIBB had no wish tn bring up those old matters, but he thought the hon. member for RosewoPd should not allow his personal feelings

to influence him on the question before the Com· mittee. With regard to the trial, the three magistrates to whom he had referred, after a long and exhaustive hearing, decided, not that the prisoners were guilty, but that there was sufficient evidence to send the case to a jury, and the prisoners were therefore committed for trial. Afterwards the case was tried before the late Chief Justice, Sir Charles Lilley, and a jury, and the prisoners were found guilty of the lesser offence. One of the accused, Mr. O'Sullivan, was a personal friend of his, and though they might not at times agree on political matters, yet what took place on that occasion did not make any difference in the strong and warm personal feeling existing between them. With regard to the salary proposed to be paid to the present Sheriff, it was only a partial reinstatement of the salary previously paid to Captain Townley, and Mr. Pinnock was not receiving any increas~ed emolument. There could be no question but that Mr. Pinnock was able to render good and useful service in his new position ; he had faith­fully performed the duties of his previous office, and he saw no reason why that gentleman should not receive the same salary as he had before. If Mr. Pinnock retired he would be entitled to a pension of about .£500 a :year, 80 that there was actual economy in appomting him as sheriff instead of allowing him to retire.

Mr. KEOG H rose to speak with a great amount of diffidence. He must say that he did not understand a great deal of what had fallen from the hon. member for Ipswich, but he understood the hnn. member to assert that he was an Orange­man. He (Mr. Keogh) was neitheraRibbonman nor an Orangeman, or a member of any other "ism." He was simply a member of that House, and belonged to no section that would tend to '' ism." The Home Secretary had informed the Committee that he (Mr. Keogh) was rather excited when he brought up that matter before tea. He was no more excited then than he was at the present time.

The HoME SECRE'rARY: Oh, yes, you were. Mr. KEOGH thought that sufficient had been

done to him and the party with which he was connected on that occasion to justify him in expressing his feelings in the strongest language possible. Perhaps the hon. gentleman himself would have been excited if he had had to undergo the indignity that was heaped upon him and his fellows on the occasion referred to, and would feel the same as he did then, and as he felt now.

The HalitE SECRETARY: I said so ; I said it was not to be wondered at.

Mr. KEOGH: That indignity was heaped upon him simply for appearing and standing in a room, and for the action Mr. Pinnock took on that occasion he was given the position of police magistrate of Ipswich.

Mr. McMASTER: Nonsense. Mr. KEOGH asked any member of the Com­

mittee to prove otherwis8 than that Mr. Pinnock was given the position of police magistrate of Brisbane for no other reason than that the Govern­ment of the day were not prepared to accept the verdict of an honourable and straightforward man like Captain Townley. They would not allow Captain Townley to sit on the bench, and they imported this individual from 'Warwick for that purvose. ~What was the issue? He was convicted, fined .£30, and got six weeks.

Mr. McMASTER: Not by Mr. Pinnock. Mr. KEOGH: Not by him, but by his action,

although he was no more guilty than the hon. member for the Valley. The hon. member said h~ seemed to he somewhat annoyed about it. Certainly he was ; but he was chained to another gentleman, Mr. O'Sullivan, who was now dead, and taken through the streets of Brisbane like a malefactor. How would the hon. member lill:e

[7 NoVEMBER.] 1037

to be treated in that manner ? All this was done by the man who was now occupying the high position of sheriff. He admitted that he was not appointed police magistrate by the present Go­vernment, Lut it was by the Macalistercrowd, and the present Government were carrying on that action by giving him this position. He had been an incompetent police magistrate, and the lawyers who practised in his court, and those who pleaded before him, knew it. He was one of those crochetty individuals, and had no right to occupy that position ; and he had no right to be Sheriff of the colony. The man who ought to occupy that position was now his junior, although he had been thirty-four years in the service. The Home Secretary bad said that the country would be some £300 worse off if Mr. Pinnock were pensioned, but the colony could very well afford to lose that if it would mean that Mr. Pinnock would fall into that oblivion to which he should have retired long ago. He had no hesitation in saying that Mr. Pinnock had been proved to be an incompetent magis­trate, and he would like to see the whole of the item struck out. In fact he would vote against anything that would place Mr. Pinnock in such a high position. He did not wish to go into the ques~ion of why Mr. Gallwey had not been appomted, but the reason was well known. It was simply because of his religious tendencies.

An HoNOURABLE MEMBER: No, no. Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON said he

was within a few miles of Ipswich when the circumstances referred to by the hon. member occurred, and he was not sorry for some reasons that this matter had come up, because "out of evil cometb good." The hon. member for Rose­wood bad been nursing his wrath to keep it warm, but it had taken him a quarter of a century to warm it up ready for delivery on the appointment of Mr. Pinnock to this position.

Mr. KEOGH: I never had a chance before. Mr. MACDONALD-P ATERSON : It had

only recently dawned upon the hon. mewber that there was such a person as Mr. Pinnock, and there was no doubt that his incompetency had been much enlarged in his mental vision within the last few weeks. Why did the ban. member raise the point when they knew that Mr. Pinnock was in his present position, directly or indirectly, through the action of the late Premier?

Mr. KEOGH: We do not know it. Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON: It bad

been alleged by the Home Secretary, and they were hound to believe it.

Mr. DAWSON: Why are we bound? The HOME SECRETARY: You know it is true. Mr. DAWSON: I know it is not true. Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON: He did

not wish it to go forth to the country that the Government had made this appointment upon spurious grounds, and for discreditable reasons.

Mr. KEOGH: I said nothing against the present Government.

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON had no doubt the hon. member had been the victim of the circumstances he had so graphically de­scribed, but good had come out of evil, and they had had a speech from the hon. member full of eloquence and phra>eology that he should never forget. Now, with respect to Mr. Pinnock's appointment .. It would be useless to traverse the ground which had been gone over by Ministers as to .£700 a year having been fixed as the salary of the previous occupant of the posi­tion. It so happened that the salary of the retiring police magistrate and the retiring sheriff coincided, and that was quite sufficient to justify Mr. Pinnock drawing the salary. The hon. member for Rosewood had bad ample opportunity during the many years he had been outside the

House, and the whole time he had been in it, of attacking the capacity of Mr. Pinnock and the way in which he performed his dutie•. vVhy did he not attack him while he was sitting on the bench, from day to day, dispensing justice? If he was unfit to hold the scales of justice, why did the hon. member wait until he had been removed to the superior position of sheriff, with, perhaps, lighter duties, before he made such an onslaught upon one who was regarded ;ts eminently fit to occupy a high position in the public service?

Mr. KEOGH : "It is never too late to mend." Mr. MACDON ALD-P A'fERSON: The argu­

ment of the hon. member would not hold water for an instant, and, as pointed out by the Premier, the position held by Mr. Pinnock carried no additwnal emolument, but was simply an added and worthy dignity.

Mr. BATTI<~RSBY thought it time they got back to the question-which was a proposed reduction in the salary of the Sheriff-and came to a vote. If he had said half of what had been said by the hon. members for Rosewood, Forti­tude Vallev, and North Brisbane he would not only have 'been susp·ended for a fortnight, but hung, drawn, and quartered. In reference to what had been said by the hon. member for Charters Towers as to the way in which the Public Service Board perforwed their duties, he could quote one case : The chief clerk in a cer­tain department died ; the Board made a recom­mendation, and Ministers agreed with it; but someone began to pull the rtrings outside to get another person appointed, and the recommenda­tion was sent back to the Board, but they declined to alter it, and to this day that department waH doing without a chief clerk. The Board did good in that case by sticking to their guns.

Mr. STEW ART : It would be a bad thing if it went forth to the countrv that the exception taken was purely a personal matter as regarded Mr. Pinnock. He did not know him, and never saw him ; but the objection be took was that the salary was much too high for the position. If the Under Secretary of the Home Department was sufficiently paid, then the Sheriff was very much too highly paid. On the other band, If the Sheriff was only paid what he deservt•d, then the sooner Mr. Ryder's salary was doubled the better. The Secretary for Public Instruction bad given them a disquisition upon the method by which promotions were made. He said the system cf the Public Service Board was that if a vacancy occurred in Class I., they endeavoured to fill it with a person in Class I. If there was no suit­able person in that class, then they went to Class II. Suppose the position of Under Secre­tary to the Post Office and Superintendent of Electric Telegraphs fell vacant, would it be possible to find a person in Class I. to fill the position?

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION : If he was suitable. That is the qualification.

Mr. STEW AUT : Surely for the position of sheriff it required a man who knew something of the duties. He did not know Mr. Gallwey, but he had performed the duties of under sheriff for many years, and was it not natural to suppose that he would know more about the dutieB of sheriff than a metropolitan police m•gistrate? He should imagine that the aim of the Government would be to get the man most suitable for the position, no matter from what class he was t'<ken-even supposing he had to come from Class V. It was simply ridiculous to say that a position worth £700 a year must be filled by some other person drawing .£700 a year. They ought to have ,;ome definite information as to whether the position was really worth £700 per annum or not. Another fact he would like to mention was that in 1888 the Sheriff also dis­charged the duties of inspector of JJrisons, for

1038 Suppl!J. [ASSEMBLY.] Suppi!J.

which he received £100 a year, or £800 in all. Since then the office of comptroller of prisons had been create:J, carrying with it a 5alary of .£600 per annum, so that now they were paying £1,300 for services which in 1888 were performed for £800. Did hon. members call that a 'aving, or wa.e it merely creating new billets? If the Sheriff was able in 1883 to discharge the duties of inspector of prisons, surely the ·sheriff now could do the same thing. In the interests of the service, a man of Mr. Pinnock's a.ge should retire and make room for a younger mm1. He had shown that, while the Government claimed to be saving money by the transaction, they were pay· ing more than they had p&id ten years ago.

The SECRETARY :B'OR PUBLIC IN­STRUCTION: The hon. member for Chartem Towers bad referred to his having said that the late Premier had nominated Mr. Pinnock for the position of sheriff. It was quite possible that he had used the word "nomination," but there was more than one meaning to the word.

Mr. DAWSON: I do not know that there is more than one meaning. I would like to know what is the other meaning.

The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC IN­STRUCTION : There were a great many ways of using the word. For instance, there was the technical nomination of the Public Service Board, after which the Premier had made his recom­mendation He only meant that the recom­mendation of the late Premier had been one which had been agreed to by his colleagues, and that recommendation had in all probability followed the nomination of the Public Service Board. He repudiated any impression that the Government had in this particular case departed from the customary practice.

Mr. DAwson: Do you withdraw the word "nonTination ?"

The S]!]CRETARY FOR PUBLIC IN­STRUCTION would withdraw the word if it was understood to 5ignify that it was a nomination which had superseded that of the Public Service Board. The hon. member was probably aware that in the first place there was a nomination made by the Public Service Board, and then there was the agreement of the responsible Minister with that nomination, which was all he had endeavomed to allude to. He wished to corroborate what his colleague had said-that the late Premier had nominated Mr. Pinnook as the gentleman who, he thought, was, on the whole, Lest fitted to discharge the duties of sheriff.

Question-That the item "Sheriff" be reduced to .£600-pnt ; and the Committee divided :­

AYEs, 24. Messrs. Glassey, Sim, Keogh, Jackson, Kerr, Browne,

Hardacre, Curtis, Boles, Jenkinson, Battersby, Groom, Drake, Fogarty, Fitzgerald, ·rurley, Dibley, Dawson, Dunsford, ~i:cDonald, Stewart, .McDonnell, Daniels, and King.

No>:s, 28. Messrs. Dickson, Foxton, Philp, Dalrymple. Murray,

Chataway, .\!Iacdonald~Paterson, Fraser, Finney, Smith, Stephens, Bridgr~. S~ory, ~ic::\..:Iaster, Leaby, Castling, Hood, Bartholomew, Stumm, Corfield, Stoclart, Callan, Lord, Newel!, Srnyth, Co11ins, Hamilton, and Annear.

Resolved in the n;;gative. At twelve minutes past 8 o'clock, Mr. ANNEAR

took the chair. Mr. McDONALD asked if the increase down

for the clerk frCJm £155 to £175 had been recommended by the late Premier?

Mr. STEW ART: The hon. gentleman had told them that without a sheriff the whole of the legal machinery would come to a standstill. That would make the people of the Central district uneasy, as they had no sheriff for their court, and he would like to know by what con­trivance the hon. gen~leman got over the neces­sity for sheriff for the Central Supreme Court.

The HOME SECRETARY : They have a sheriff. Mr. STKW ART : Did the hon. gentleman

mean that the police magistrate at Rockhampton acted as sheriff?

The HoME SECRETARY: Yes. Mr. STE'iV ART : A;; he got no extra salary

for the position he assumed that the work must be very light.

The HoME SECI\ETARY: It is very light at Rockhampton. I don't think they should have a Supreme c .. urt there myself.

Mr. KERR : The people of the Central portion of the oolcny had as good a right to a Supreme Court as the people of Brisbane had to their court. The Home Secretary should under­stand that Rockbampton was not the Central district; there were other portions of the district quite as important as Rockhampton. It might satisfy the h~n. member for Rockhampton North that there should be no Supreme Court, but it would not satisfy the people in other portions of the Central district.

Mr. STE\V ART : There seemed to be a false impression abroad abou~ him. Hon. members appeared to have run away with the idea that he did not want a Sunrem(' Court in Rockhampton.

Mr. KERR: The Home Secretary said so. Mr. STEW ART: Then the Home Secretary

was under a misapprehension. The HOME SECRETARY : Based prinicipally

upon your arguments the other night. Mr. STEW ART: It did not follow from his

criticisms upon the Supreme Court at Rockhamp­ton that he thought a court should not exist there. His complaint had been th;tt they were spending a great deal of money for very little work there. He thought it might be made much more useful to the Central district generally than it was, but he still considered it a useful, excellent, and neces­sary institution.

Question put and passed.

NORTHERN SHERIF~'. The HOME SECRETARY mnvec1 that £870

be granted for the Northern sheriff. Mr. STEW ART: Perha]'S the hon. gentle

man would explain how it was that the sheriff for the Northern division got £320, while the duties of the office in the Central division were performed for nothing. Surely the bu"iness of th~ office in the North could not be so much greater than in the Ce~. tral divi~ion?

The HOME SECRETARY: He was in­formed that that was the case. Moreover, if he remembered rightly, the statute provided for the appointment of a Northern sheriff. He under­stood that the duties were so much heavier in Townsville than in Rockhampton that it was impossible for the police magistrate of Towns­ville to perform them. There had always been a Northern sheriff from the time the court was first held at Bowen.

Question put and passed.

DISTRICT COURTS. The HOME SECRETARY moved that£9,905

be granted for District Courts. There was an increase of .£20 to the registrar, and £10 to the clerk at Brisbane. From personal knowledge he could speak of the excellent work done by Mr. Carvo'fo, the Registrar, who was a very old offic,,r, and had not had a rise in salary for many years. A new item was £40 for a bailiff 11t

Mount Morgan. Mr. STEW ART: Would the hon. gentleman

tell the Committe,, how· it came about that the District Court judges did not have associates and ti pstaffs ?

The HOME SECRETARY : The reason was that wherever a District Court was held the registrar acted as associate and the bailiff as tipstaff.

Su-pply. [7 NovEMBER.] Supply. 1039

Mr. STEW ART : It appeared to him that their system of administering justice might be very much simplified. They had two sets of judges continually following each other around the country and two different sets of courts, one dealing with sums of over £200 and the other with sums under that amount. It would be very much better for the public if all those matters were dealt with by one set of judges. He found on going over the work done by the District Court judges that they were three-fourths of the year idle. He had made out a list of the time occupied by the judge of the Central divi­sion, but had omitted to bring it with him, and he was perfectly shocked at the time that that official was idle. There was one way in which the services of the Central Supreme Court judge might be utilised : he might do both the Supreme Court work and the District Court work of the division. Of course that would not suit the lawyers, who liked to take cases into the Supreme Court because the fees were higher; but the interests of the public would be much better served, and their pockets considerably saved. The present system played beautifully into the hands of the legal profession, but it led to the people being fleeced to a much larger extent than they ought to be. He thought the time had come when some method of cheap and ready administration of justice should be brought within reach of the people.

Mr. McDON ALD : 'rh ere was a sheep-ste.Uing case at Hugbenden some little time back, in which a man was committed for trial. After the committal the principal witness, named Simpson, went off to Melbourne. On his return he put in an applic01tion for a guinea a day expenses for being brought from Melbourne, which was dis­allowed. He was informed- he did not know whether it was correct-that that ~rentleman had received from the Crown .£70 odd for his expenses to Melbourne and back. Was there any truth in it?

The HOME SECRETARY: He had no information as to the case at all, but if the hou. memher would give him the name he would undertake to make the inquiry. The Under Secretary could not remember any such payment having been made.

Mr. McDON ALD : He was merely asking for information. The case turned out to be a frivolous one. If the witness was bound over to appear he went away at his own risk, and the State had no right to be put to the expense of fetching him back, more especially as the application had been distinctly refused by the court. The man committed was named Gray, and he was afterwards acquitted. He hoped the Home Secretary would inquire into the matter.

The HOME SECRETARY : If Mr. Simpson was not bound over to appear at the trial there was nothing to prevent him going to Melbourne or anywhere else, and the department would have to pay his expenses if he WRS brought up. If he was bound over to appear it was a different thing. He would make inquiries.

Mr. BROWNE noticed that the sum put down for allowances to witnesses and jurors­£4,000-was the same as last year. When the .Jury Bill was passed at the commencement of the session the late Premier said it was his intention that jurors should be paid on a higher scale. Was it the intention of the Government to give higher fees?

The HOME SECRETARY: This Estimate was framed before the Bill was introduceil, and it was possible that a further sum might be required.

Mr. BROWNE : Do you intend to raise the fees?

The HOME SECRETARY: Yes. Inquiries were being made in the other colonies with the view of arranging a new scale of jury fees.

Mr. MoD ON ALlJ: Another matter that ought to be inquired into was the question of jndi-jes' travelling expenses. He thought the best thmg to do was to give a stipulat.ed amount to the judges instead ?f voting a lump suJ_U and letting them draw agamst that sum for then expense·'·

'!.'he HoME SECRETARY: The District Court judges get 30s. a day.

Mr. McDONALD thought it was something very large when a judge could g_ive 7s. fl<l. fo: a shave in a Northern town, and tip a per,on with 7s. Gd. for carrying a little bag, such !H a school­boy carried to school. Of course, that came out of expenees. \Nhere the amount was fixed at 30s. a day it did not matter so much, but in the case of the Supreme Court judge,, who were allowed to draw cheques against the amount voted, it became a bit serious. He thought even 30s. a d»y was too much, and that it could be reduced to £1.

Mr. .JENKINSON noticed that with the exception of Brisbane, Ipswich, and Rockhamp­ton the bailiffs received only .£40 a year each. Th~ bailiff at Gympie had performed his duty faithfully and well for a number of years ; and was now getting on in years. He hoped the Home Secretary could see his way to give that officer a little increase.

Mr. STEW ART said there were three District Court judges, anr! £1,800 was put down for travel­ling expenses. 'I.' be amount spent last year was .£1, 700. Th»t was about £600 each. At 30s. a day that would mean 400 days travelling per annuTn.

Mr. KERR : The vote is for Crown prosecutors as well.

Mr. STEW ART: Could the Home Secretary tell the Committee how many days the judges were travelling last year?

The HOME SECRETARY: .Judge Paul, 151 days; .Judge Miller, 137 days; Judge Noel, 234 days; and .Judge Mansfielil, three days. Altogether 525 days.

Mr. DUNSFORD : It was remsrkable that a second-class village like Ipswich should always be o-etting large sums in comparison with what wa~ received by even cities in other parts of the colony. The bailiff in a sleepy hollow like Ipswich received £75, while the bailiff in Charters Towers whose duties were far greater, received only £40. The bailiff in Brisbane received .£170. Right through the J:<Jstimates lpswich had received special tre:.ttment. Of course just now that place returned two out-and-out supporters of the Government. He did not know whether that vote and others were a reward to Ipswich for being so loyal to the Government, but there must be some reason why it was singled out for special treatment. The only other places where the bailiffs received more than .£40 a year were Rockhampton, where the salary was £nO, and Brisbane where it was £170.

The HOME SECRETARY: The reason for the difference was that in Brisbane the District Court was et separate and d1~tinct institution from the court of petty sessions, and the bailiff had no other duties to perform than those of bailiff of the District Court, which were very responsible duties, for which £170 a year was not too much. The bailiff at Ipswich did no other duties in cmuection v.ith the Government than the duties of bailiff of the District Court; but in nearly all the other cases the office of District Court bailiff was held by a person who had other duties to perform for the Government.

Mr. DUNSFORD was not satisfied with the explanation of the Minister. The work o :a bailiff at Ipswich was not nearly so great as the

1040 Supply. [.ASSEMBLY.]

work of the bajljff at Charters Towers, and yet the salary at the former place was nearly double of that paid to the bailiff at Charters Towers.

The HOME SECRETARY: How many courts sit at Charters Towers?

Mr. DU:NSFORD could not say how many courts were held there, but the population must show the hon. gentleman that the business there must be greater than it was at Ipswich.

Mr. STEW ART: There were 341 cases at Charters Towers last year, and seventy-four at Ipswich.

Mr. DUNSFORD: Very nearly five times as much business was done at Charters Towers as was done at Ipswich, and yet the bailiff at the latter place received nearly double the salary paid to the bailiff at Charters Towers. Was that officer another of those old officers who car­ried their salaries with them ? Or was he in the good graces of the Government? He moved that the item "Bailiff, Ipswich, £75," be reduced to £10.

The TREASURER pointed out that the Dis­trict Court bailiff at Charters Towers was also Supreme Court bailiff for that district, for which he received £125 per annum, so that his total salary was £165 a year.

The HOME SECRETARY : If there were a Supreme Court bailiff at Ipswich he would pro­bably be the same man as acted as District Court bailiff, but there was no Supreme Court bailiff there, as Ipswich was so near Brisbane that it was found more convenient and economical to do the Supreme Court work from Brisbane.

Mr. FOGARTY could not support the pro­posed reduction, for £75 was not a very extrava­gant salary or wage, but he should like to place all those bailiffs on a similar footing as regarded salary.

Question-That the item be reduced to £40-­put and negatived.

Original question put and passed.

INSOLVENCY, INTESTACY, AND INSANITY. The HOME SECRETARY moved that

£2,49~ be g-ranted for Insolvency, Intestacy, and Insamty. There were statutory increases to the deputy curator and the accomitant-£30 and £20 respectively. The salary of the former had not been increased for many years, and that of the latter was considered too small for the duties he had to perform. There were also some small increases of £10 each, and provision was made for a female typist.

:Mr. CURTIS : It had been contended, and with very good reason, that no increases should be granted to Civil servants unless there was an increase of work done, but it appeared to him that the Official Trustee seemed rather under­paid in comparison with other officers. In 1893 the cost of running this department wlils £3,172, but this year it was only £2,494-a very large reduction. The officer in question entered the service in 1865 and was appointed to his present posrtion in 1885 at a salary of £500 a year, but till 1894 there were also a Curator in Intestacy and Insanity receiving £700 a year, and an accountant in insolvency receiving £400 a year, so that the three officers together received £1,600. At the time of the retrenchment these three offices were amalgamated under Mr. Hall, who was now doing for £600 a year, the work that it previously cost £1,600 to do. He did his work satisfactorily, and controlled liquidators' accounts and the accounts of public companies. He also understood that the Insanity Act was a very difficult one to administer, but it had always appeared to him, during twenty-five years' ex­perience of the department, that the work was done in a thoroughly business-like way. They had recently granted increases to certain Under Secretaries and others, a.nd he thought this officer, who was one of the most efficient in the service,

was better entitled to an increase than most of them. He would sugge~t to the Minister that the matter should he taken into consideration next year.

'rhe HOME SECRETARY: He knew the work in this department had greatly increased since those three offices had been amalgamated, and a grea& deal of economy had resulted. They might fairly assume that the three officers re­ferred to by thP hon. member for Rockhampton were not very fully employed, but the present officer.'' were very heavily worked, and the branch offices at Rockhamptou and Townsville had not tended in any way to decrease the amount of work transacted at the bead office. In fact, the tendency had been the other way. Mr. Hall was an excellent officer, and he thought the question of increasing his salary bad been under con­sideration, but he could not say why no increase appeared on the Estimates.

Mr. DRAKE : Put it on the Supplementary Estimates.

The PREMIER: There will be no Supplementary Estimates for salaries this year.

The HOME SECRETARY: He did not. know of any recent increases of salaries being put on the Supplementary Estimates, unless a man was transferred after the Estimates were passed.

Mr. GROOM: It has been done after an expres­sion of opinion by the House.

The HOME SECRETARY: He did not know how they could take an expression of opinion, because no increases could be proposed. However, he wonld bring the matter under the notice of the Secretary for Justice, who would no doubt take it into serious consideration.

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON was sorry to hear that there were to be no Supplementary Estimates for salaries this year, but he could affirm all that had been said by the hon. mem­ber for Rockhampton in rel'(ard to this officer. What had fallen from the Home Secretary con­firmed the statement made the other night, that the decentralisation of the department had not reduced the volume of work or the responsi­bility of the head office, and be had great sympathy both with the Official Trustee and with his deputy, who must not be forgotten, as he con­sidered they were both underpaid. The work that bad to 'be done by the Official Trustee was very technical, and required certain qualities of mind, but this officer was a man of ability, and his work was congenial to him, and under those circumstances they might depend that it would be well done. It had been a great benefit to the colony to have all liquidatots appointed by creditors in private assignments of estates brought under the control of the Official Trustee. 'rhat department alone brought him a large amount of work and responsibility, and it was one ot the best paying departments in the State. In the early days the official assignee pocketed all the commissions, and made a good deal of money out of them. Since the pa~sing of the Act of 1893 the revenue of the department had totalled between £R,OOO and £11,000 yearly, and considering the efficiency of the various officers he thought they deserved more consider~.tion. Considering the responsibilrlies of the position, he thought that the deputy also received a salary altogether too meagre. He wished to add his testimony, founded on observations which he had heard from the commercial and legal circles, as to the satisfactory and excellent manner in which the department was administered.

The HOME SECRETARY was in a some­what difficult position, because the deputy curator hoppened to oo a relative of his own, hut he might mention that the Public Service Board had recommended that, like the other deputies,

, he should be put in another class. During the

Supply. [7 NOVEJ!d.BE.R.] Swpply. 1041

present year, however, the Government decided that he should only receive the statutury in­crease.

Mu. DRAKE did not think the deputy was at all overpaid, because even with the increase he got somewhat less than the other deputies. It seemed rather ~ard upon t~ose officers _that they should J.e deprived of an mcrease this year if they deserved it. 'l'hough he did not know upon what grounds the incre,•se had been mnle this year, he thought a very good case could be made out for the head of the department. One strong point in favour of it was that since 1893 the t_hree offices ha~ been amalgamated, and tha.t previOus to that time there wPre tr1ree depart­ments, the salaries in which aggregated £1,GOO. Mr. Hall took up the combined positions at £o00 theref~re making a S!'tving of a clear £1,000 a year: and this had been gomg on for five years. It wa.~ a genuine case of saving through re-organisation, and the work had been done so well that he thought some encouragement should be given. It seemed very hard that, for some reason which had not been explained, no increase appeared on the Estimates. The Minister could not this year give any increases though he was convinced they were thoroughly well deserved. He was sorry that the head of the Government took up that hard-and-fast position.

Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON pointed out that during the pa't three and a-half years the total revenue of the department ha·i been over £27,000, and that was money which years ag~ med to go into the pocket of the official assignee.

Jliir. GROOM: What has the expenditure been? Mr. MACDONALD-PATERSON: The ex­

penditure appeared on the Estiin•ttes. For this year it was £2,494, including .£()0 extra for a typist.

The PREYI:IJ!JR: The Of!lcial Trustee and Curator in Insanity and Intestacy was a very excellent officer, and no one was better seized of the fact that he deserved higher remaneration than he was. At the s•tmP time it must be borne in mind that the Estimates had be-·n framed having in view the financial position of the colony at the time ; and were he to allow of the. introduction of ~upplementary Estimate~ to mcrease the salar1es of the multitude of officers whose claims were so constantly ad vo­cated by ho:I. member~, it would open the f!ood­gat.es to an ~ncrease of expenditure which might serwusly d1sorgamse the financns of ti-Je vear. He therefore had to set his foot down ~Ipon fur~h.er expenditure this year, but should the pos1t10n of the colony warrant it anrl should he be in a position next year to gi;e effect to the view~ which had been expressed in regard to certam officers, he would bear the ob,ervations of hon. members in mind. It would interfere with the equilibrium of the finances to introduce Suppl~:nentary Estimates _this year, and while h~ received the representa+wns of hon. memhers With due respect, yet he felt bound for this yor to adbere to the form in which the Estimates bad been introduced.

Mr. B~ TTERSBY was very sorry to hear the Premier say that if the finances justified it next year he would cnnsider the question of granting increases to officers w he were well paid now. Hon. members were making ele.·tioneering speeches. He would prefer that the money should be spent in opening up the interior of the country.

Mr. DRAKE did not think there was anv party in th~ Committee which was generally it1 favour of mcreases, nor any pa;·ty which was opposed to all increases. The point they did not agree upon was where the increases should be

l898-3T

made. The Premier seemed to speak as if there was a geth"ral desire to force the Government to increase salaries all round.

The PREMIER: In many instances. Mr. DRAKB : The number of instances in

which efforts hac! been made to get salaries reduced wa' far greater than the number of efforts which had been made to have salaries increased. 'In fact, the number uf ca~es in whicb increases had be"n advocated had been very few indeed. The J<~"timates for the department in 1893 amounted to £3,172, while this year they were only aske ·1: to vute £2,494-or .£650 le"~ than in 1893, in spite of the fact that the work of the department had considerably increased.

The SEOJ\ETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: did not know whethe: the hon. member for Enrcggera was urging that the increased salary should be given to the officer or to the office. He understood that the hon. mem er was urging that an incre ;sed salary should be paid to a cer­tain officer, with whom he appeared to be per­sonally acquainted.

Mr. DRAKE : Why do you think so? 'l'he SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE:

B-ecause the hou. member s>tid that he wa> a very excellent officer. He had nothing whatever to say against thB officer in question. He did not know him; had never seen him. But as a general principle there mu:;t be some high-water m~rk for the salari,s that offices carried. It appeared that the high-watBr mark for under secretaries wa• £800 to which under secretaries worked up, and in sub-departments it seemPd rea>onable that the high-water mark should be £600. Some offic -rs in charge of sub-departments were not recei dog £600 but- no doubt they hoped that they would be gradually increased up to the hig-h-water mark. It ""'" quite impo,,,ible that length of service bhould continually count, no matter whether an officer occupied the same position or received pr.:nnotion. If he recei\ed promotion, increased sctlary would necess-J.rily follow, hnt there must be some limit !'Ut to the salaries which tht1 positions of h<'>tds of ''ab-departments car­ried.

Mr. GROO~f: He ventured to think that, if the h;m. guntleman were not V• oted with Minis­tu·ial responsibility, hL would have delivered a very different speech. The.y were called upon to look at the salaries of different officers.

The SECRE'J'AIW b'OR AGRICULTt'RE: Officers or offices?

:Vlr. GROOM: Officers. He made the dis­tinction to satisfy the hon. gentleman. Mem­bers like the hon. member for Enoggera, who had been in the House for tt long time, neces­sarily ca.me to know officers and their duties, and were able to pick out th~ drones from the bp,>s, A clnse scrutiny of the E'ltimates con­vinced him that some officers were grossly overr1aid, while manv d~,;erving officers were gro-sly underpaid. He could pick out one mnot dPserving officer, who bad J,eld a very high and rc.,punsible pusition for many years, but "ho had not received single increase for fifteen years; while he ('<1Uld mention another man who, up to within a verv recent date was sat.iHfied with £250, harl heen placed ovor the heads of more deserving officers, ancl was rPcc·iv­ing an increase of something like £150. When they saw such anom"lies, they would not be doiug their dut-y if they did not refer to them wh1-'n discu:-;sing the EB>hnate.s. As to the stHte~ ment of the Premier t ha.t if he acceded to the requesls winch had been made during the dis­cussion of the Estimates he wonld open theflood­g-ttes to such an expenditure as would seriously embarrrrss th~ financial position ,,f the colony, the statement was not justified by facts. He ventured to say that the increases whi9h h;td

1042 [ASSEMBLY.] Supply.

been advocated would not amount to £500 in all. Surely they had common sense enough to discuss a question like this, and not be deluded by such fallacious statement' ! If they found a deserving officer, who was at the head of a department which produced thousands of pounds of revenue, receiving a salary which was quite incommen­surate with the duties he was called upon to perform, it was their duty to rise al'd say so. He did not kno''' whether it was due to their want of illfluence, bnt he noticed some most dPservi•-g offic rs who were constantly being O\ Prlo"k' d. The Cidl Service was larg• ly honeycolllbed with di~s ti.sfaction in c ITI;;t>qUPLce of t.tte partial \vay in v. hid1 increast"S had been dbtributed. If that was so, it W»S the dntv of hon. members who repre.,ented tho•·-e gentle-men-like the hon. mem­ber for J!~noggera-to stand up and vindicate the cause of those men. He did not believe in any hard-and-fast rule, saying that no increases in salary should be placed on the Supplementary E'timate". During his parliamentary career it h"d freqnently happened that Ministers, after hearing an expression of opinion from the Com­mittee upon really deserving caws, had placed !ll(;rcases on the Sl![•plementary Estimates, and If It had been done m the past it could be done now.

QLiestion put and passed.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.

The HOME SECRETARY moved that £850 be granted for Friendly Societies.

Mr. TURLEY asked the Premier whether there was a possibility of anything being done during the present seo"ion in connection with the matters w hi eh had been submitted to him recently by a deputation from the friendly societies?

The PREMIER: He had inquirer! into the matters brou:.(ht before him by the deputation to which the hon. member referred, and found that to interfere with the registration fees WOLild require legidation which could not be attempted thi" session. Some attempt, however, would be made to reduce the fees for valuations and other minor matter~.

Mr. BATTERSBY want€·.! to know why £850 should be spent on this branch of the dep:wt­ment? Surely one clerk could keep a register of the frien clly societies?

Mr. KERR was Korry the Registrar of Friendly SociPties was not present, because as a member of a friendly society he had a very strong objection to the way in which that officer per­formed some of his duties. The Chairman had hims. If a good knowledge of friendly societies, and would agree that they had rendered a gteat amount of asoi~tance to a very large number of people in this colony. The tables of the society with whiuif be was connected had heen compiled bv a gent!• man who was well known in the United Kingdom as an actuary of high ex­perience, and the tables in nse hy the Manchester Unity and the Ancient Order of Foresters­the two largest societies in the U rtited Kingrlom -were much the 8ame. The valuations t.howed thnt some were worth 25s. in the £1; some 22s. in the £1; and oth•>rs 20s. in the £1.

Mr. Dv~sFORD : \Vhat dt.RS that mean? Mr. KERR: It me ms that if their a;;sets were

realised they could pey £1 5''· for every £1 of t.heh· liahili":ics. ~lany C•f the societi~' were Jabnuring nndPr very great difficulties, and yet ''1r. Rendb took sevt raJ of them to task became they paid so much for management. Mr. Rendle W»s surely nnt aware of the fact that out of their "management" they paid doctors and chemists, and that in places like Croydon and outside places they were compelled to pay much higher fees to doctors and chemists than in

a place like Brisbane. In the case of the society to which he particularly referred, the branch at Croydon was worth £1 5s. in the £1, and a branch at Barcaldine was worth £1 3s. in the £1 at the last valuation. The members of the societie• complained that Mr. Rendle based his calculations upon false premises, and therefore came to wrong conclusions. The friendly societies were doing good work and saving the colony a vast amount of money, because if they did not exist the vote for charitable institutions would lwve to be ve1y much increHsed. What the members of the societies asked was that there should be an independent valuati m ,.f the societies made by an officer of experience. The valuations in connection with the society at Croydon were based on the tables of the actuary to w horn he had referred. They took the highest amounts laid down in the Engli:;h laws, and they found that it was worth £1 5s. in the £1, and yet the Registrar of Friendly Societies in Queensland expressed the opinion th:.t their funeral fund was not up to the am<mnt he expected it to be. That was all very well fur the registrar, sitting in his office in Brisbane, but he must be aware that every branch of a friendly society, at their district and annual meetings, had power, when any fund fell below a certain amount, to make a levy upon every member until it was brought up to a proper state of efficiency. Why was the registrar so determined to impose burder,s upon struggling men who had all they could do to make their weekly payments? There was no reason why their rnone:'i should be collected and invested at less than 3 per cent. when, ash" had said, a general levy could nt any time be made. The amount charged for valuation was very much in excess nf what was charged in the old country. The societies did not ask that the State should be at a loss, but that the fees should be made very much smaller.

The PREMIER : The representations made by the deputation referred to were duly noted by him, and sent on to the Crown Law Officers for consideration. He might say that Mr. llendle was a most energetic and c'apable officer, and was working in the true interests of the friendly societies. While he could not promise relief in the matter of registration fees, that being fixed hy legislation, the intention was that Mr. Rendle should do the valuations gratuitously. It was also intended that Gazette charges and other minor fees should be remitted. There would therefore be substant;ial relief. It was very desirable that the officer who made' the valuations, should be a thoroughly competent man. Many institutions had been led to their ruin by valua­tions not being reduced to their proper dimen­sions. He had no reason to doubt that Mr. Rendle W<•uld do full justice in that direction. Possibly he might not give entire satisfaction, hut until il; could be clearly demonstrated that :Mr. Rendle was careless or unable to prodde reliable valuations, he should be very reluctant to take from him the responsibility for the work which he conduct<cd in the true interests of the societie" themselves.

Mr. TUIU~EY asked what was the amount of the fees received from the various friendly societies?

The HOME SECRETARY : The fees amounted to some £200 or £300 a ypar. That was wl-at was proposed to be remitted.

Mr. GR00::\1: It was never int~nded that any fees paid by friend.y oocieties should in any way be con,iclered as a compensation for any sums voted by Parliament to inquire into their stability and financial soundness. ln 1876 a select com­mittee inquired into the matter, and upon their report Parliament passed Sir Stafford N orthcote's Friendly Societies Act, with modifications suited to the colony, and stipulated that a registrar

Supply. [7 NOVEMBER.] Supply. 1043

should be appointed, at an adeqn<tte salary, whose actuarial knowledge and gem·ral efficiency should be of such a char~cter as to inspit'egeneral confidence in all members connected with tbo-;e societies. The late Premiet· improved upon that Act, and conwlidated the laws of England with various amendments. As was well known, the general body of m-mbera of frienrlly societies were of the working class and the nrti"'" cla ··S

-men who could not go into abstruse c ,lcula­tions, and therefore it was dec:ded to :tpp<lint a competent officer to do that highly speci•tli"ed class of work. Having a number of friendly societies in his town and being a member of two of them, he understood that Mr. Rendle was giving very gener:tl satisfaction, and he would not like that officer to suppose that the general body of friendly societies were not satisfied with him. It was a satisfaction to people to know that there was an offi<'ar in the posi­tion of registrar who would take c.1re that his calculations were accurate, >md not allow any society to appear in a rosy colour when he knew it was not fimmcially wmnd. And it was not only important that the officer in que~­tion should have the confidence of the friendly societies, but that he should have the confi­dence of Parliament. Sir Stafford N orthcote, who devoted almost a lifetime to the considera­tion of the matter, said th et the good done by the>1e societies in the way of inculcati•1g habits of thrift would compms~te for any sum Parliament mL:-ht vote to make sure that they were in a sound fin:1nchl pdsition. The Ml1ry they were now voting should not be taken into consideration in c mnection with the fees, what­ever they were. If they could be remitted he would have no objection; but he .. , .. m]d not like for one moment to see the existence of these societies imperilled, or the officor injttred by supposing that because the fees did not come up to a certain standard, therefore they shunld not vote £400 a year.

Mr. KE RR : He belonged to the second largest frienrlly soeiety in the colony, and he thought the Rockhampton U uited District was a pretty important district. That order had decided to send home, at considerable expense to themselves, its returns to a competent valu<ttor in the old ~onntry to have them valued, because they were not satisfied with the valuation given by Mr. Rendle.

The HoME 8ECRETARY : 'What is the result? Mr. KERR: ThPy had received no result yet.

From what he had hea,rd, Mr. Rendle made his calculations on a wrong hasis. He calcnbtc;d that as soon as a member joined, if he was a married man, the society was liable for the funeral amount for himself and for his wife; and also for a certain amount of sick pay, and he began to build upon that. The valuators in the old country did not lJase their C<olcuhbions upon that, because a large number of members dropped out after paying their cnntribntions for a time, and the society was never called upon to pay anything so far as they were c•>nccrned.

The HOME SECRETARY was glad to have the testimony of the hon. member£ or Toowoomha as ta Mr. Rendle, who wa~ a very capable officer. He knew he was correct in saying that the conditiun of the friendly societies to-r!ay compared very favourably with their condition before Mr. Rendle W<ts appointed registrar. It wa·,, scarcely a fair thing to condemn an <)fficer for being over c:1refnl when that w .s what he was app•)inted for in the intere"ts of the societies themselves. He woulr! very n1uc~ like to see the rp•,ult of the inquiry referrer! to by the hon. member for Barcoo when it came from England. If Mr. Rendle had gone upnn too caution;; lines, possibly he wonld be able to see his way to modify them ; but he thought those who did not

agree with Mr. Rendle's cnlculations would be found to be in error. At all events it would be all the better for them if they were not. In the meantime it was premature t1> cnndpmn hi1n for the extra cwtion h8 took in making his calcula tions.

Mr. KERR: It was hardly just to the friendly societies to say that a great deal of the credit belonged to i\lr. Rend!..- for the position they were in now. The narent branches of the order had enforced theiq~raduated scale, and that had benn the means of increasing the financial sound­nes~ of friendly roocieties a great deal.

:\Ir. TURLEY did not wiHh to take any excep­tion to the qualifications of Mr. Rendle. Per­sonally he did not know very much about that gentleman, but he knew that the deputation which waited upon the Premier asking for certain relief gcwe the hon, grmtleman to understand that, M far as they knew, th" societies were perfe3tly satisfied with the valuations of Mr. Rendle.

Mr. BATTERSBY did not think the general taxpayer<, many of whom had no interest in friendlv societies, should be c~lled upon to pro­vide £850 f.,r the mp ,rvision of the working of those sometie". It had been said that evening that some of those societies were worth fron: £1 5>. to £1 Gs. in the £1, and he thought the (i-overnnvnt should take into consideration the adv1s lbility of levying a t:tx nn friendly societies suffieient to uover the amount voterl hv Purlia­mJ·nt. He had. a son-in-law who died the other day; he was a me'!'lwr of a frienrlly socie:y, an,d came down to Bnshane about four and a-hatf years ago to consult a d•JCtnr, but was k?pt going ha~kwaH!s and forwards withont any improve­mHnt in his condi1ion. He (:\l[r. Bar.tersbv) then took him to Dr. Tbom';on, who rernov..ri half of one of his kidne~·s, and redly kept him alive, but the other kidney becoming affected he ;vas un«ble to r ndt"r him any further assistance. He conld name the friendly s•JCiety doctor to whctm he had ref•·rred.

The CHAIJL\lAN: I would remind the hon. member that we are not discus,ing the ability ,Jf :my doctor in this vot". This is a vote for the Regi;otrar of FriendlY Societies.

Mr. BAT fERSBY hoped that instead of remitting anything to fnendly societies, the Gov<:rnment would levy a tax on such societies snffici nt to cover the vote before the Com­mittee.

Mr. SMYTH wa.s very sorry to hear the hon. mrornber for lVIoreton talk in the way he had done abont this vote of £850. If it were £8,500 it would be money well sp•'nt. When he (Mr. Srnytb) wa< grandmaster of the Manchester Unity of Queensland many year< ago he made the statement that over £2,000,000 were savAd to the Government nf Great Britain by the self­provident w'tion of friendly g,)cieties in that conntry, and since then that amonnt must have more than drmhJ,,d, Ther, was never a half­yearly meeting of those societies but they made a donation to t~1e ho,pit:d, and in other ways they saved the Governn,<'lt what might be calh·d poor rates. If friendlv societies did not exist, the Government would be '"ked to assi't people in many ways, whereas now th(_,y a~sh;ted thetnsel Yes. Such socid.ies wer,, fine inRtitutimw, and he should like t.o see every yonng m'lll join them, as then in times of sicknes,, instefld of being dependent up• m others becan,,e they had neglected to provide for themsel vH, tLr,y would be entitled by righ", and n•>t cs " charity, to an allowanc" from their "OCie'y. He hoped the hon. member for Moreton would make further inrpririPs into t.ho working of friendly ~nciPties.

Mr. BATTERSBY reg.\l"ded the contributions to hospitals by friendly societie' as only another way of robbing the Government, because for

1044 Supply. [ASSEM:B.tf.~

every £1 they contributed the hospital received £2 from the Government. He held that the friendly societies ought to pay for the cost of administration of the Act under which they were working, without requiring anything from the general funrls of the colony.

Question put and passed. STAMP OFFICE.

The HOME SECRETARY moved that £3,070 b·' granted for the Stamp Office. There was prHctically no change in the vote. ,

::\Jr. DRAKE wished to draw attention to a rather curious anomaly in connection with the stamp duty chargeable upon public companies. In the Foreign Companies Act of 1895 th~re was a clause which provided that the Governor in Council might proclaim the fees that should be cha1·geable, and under the regulations so framed the maximum charge was fixed at £100. In the Stamp Duty Act there was no maximum at all. The consequence was that the charge for stamp duty upon a foreign company was in some cases less than that upon a British corn pany with the same capital. Surely that could not have been intended! The ctntv chargeable to a Brit.ish company with £250,000 capital would be £125, but under the regulations a foreign company would only pay £100

The HOME SECRETARY: The matter had not been brought under his notice, but he could see how it worked m1t, and there could be no doubt that such a thing was not intended. They could not reduce the amount payable by British companies without legislation, but they could increase the amount payable by foreign com­panies, by amending the regulations. He would mention the matter to the Minister for Justice.

Mr. DRAKE: He was not suggesting how the anomaly might be removed, but was only drawing attention to its existence.

Mr. GLASSEY asked the Home Secretary if he were aware that last year, during the absence of the late Attorney-General, an arbitration case took place to cnnsirler some compensation claimed from the Government in connection with the Bulimbo, Railway? He thought he was correct in saying that it was the duty of the Attorney­General to instruct the arbitrator on behalf of the Crown, and also that he was correct in saying that the firm of Thynne and Macartney acted for the other side as a pri"ate firm of solicitors. If such were the case, nothinl( could be said too strong in condemnation of such a practice.

The HOME SECRETARY: He was not aware whether what was said by the hon. mem­ber was the fact or not.. But even assuming that it was, he might !Joint out that the Hon. Mr. Thynne was only nominally acting as Minister for .Justice; the Hon. Mr. Wilson pPrforrned the duties appertaining to the office. The Hon. Mr. Thynne knew nothing whatever of what was going on in the office; he merely signed his name to C'>mply with certain statu­tory requirements. The Hon. :'vir. Wilson could not be appointed Minister for Justice because he had no portfolio.

Mr. GLASSEY: He was quite sure that he was genPraily correct in what he had just stated. But a large amount was involved, and even assuming that the Hon. Mr. Thynne was acting only nominally, it was clearly his duty, as a Minister, to defend the rights of the Crown, and not go into court-as actually happened in this case-and endeavonr to involve the Crown in a cnne1derable e>.pensP, tmd browbeat the arbitrator acting for the Crown

The CHAIRMAN: I think the hon. member will see that that question hardly comes under this vote.

Mr. iGLASSEY: Be did not wfsh w ptirsue the question, but he considered such li:ii action tO' be censurable, and it should not be encouraged.

The HOME SECRETARY : He did not take the objection that the hon. member was out of order in referring to the matter oil this vote', because it might look like an effort to shirk the question. He certainly did trot thin'k it caine under this vote, as the legal adviser to thE! Stamp Comrnis~ioncr had nothing to do with questions of railway arbitration.

Mr. LEAHY: The cbnduct of a Minister was under review all the time the Estimates of his department were before them. They could not raise the question of the conduct of a person outside, but he held that the Minister's conduct was in question on every vote of the department. The lion. member was, therefore, perfectly in order, and his action quite right. What ne had referred to was looked upon as a disgrace.

The HOME SECRETARY : The practice had been to take a general discussion on the department r.n the first vote in which the salary of the Minister was referred to. The conduct of the Minister naturally came. in there, but since he had been in the Rouse it had been the custom to confine di~cussion to the particular vote b~fore the Committee. The question raised by the hon. member was in connection with a railway arbi­tration case, and that should properly be dis­cussed on the Railway Estimates. However, it did not matter very much. He had given the hon. member all the information in his possession, and had not shirked the question.

Mr. GLASSEY: He had pointed out that a large amount of money was involved in the case he mentioned. An arbitrator was appointed by the Government, and he had been so brow-beaten by a l\linister of the Crown representing the other side that he had complained to one of that hon. gentleman's colleagues about the matter.

Mr. LEAHY believed the Home Secretary was right as to the practice, but th!lt was merely a matter of convenience. It was a very good practice in ordinary cases, but it did not follow that because they adopted a certain course for the sake of convenience they were debarred from adopting any other course.

The CHAIRMAN : I am of opinion that the hon. member for Bundaberg is decidedly out of order. The hon. member referred to an arb{tra• tion case that took place in cophectlon with the resumption of land for a railway at Bulimba. If the hon. member has anything to complain of in connection with the conduct of Chief Commis­sioner of Stamps he is perfectly in order in discu~~mg the vote. If he goes outside of that he will not be in order.

Mr. LEAHY: Of cot1rse they all regarded the opinion of the Chairman as of great weight.

The CHAIRMAN : It is not my opinion. It is the Standing Order.

Mr. LEAHY: But much as they valuedthe opinion of the Chairman, he was not the final arbiter. Any hon. member had the right to question the Chairman's ruling, and the House was the judge.

The HOME SECRETARY : It can only be doue on motion.

Mr. LEAH'Y : Any hon. member had the right to rno~'e a motion that the Chairman's ruling be disagreed to. He did not wish to pursue the rna.tter further thap to say that much as they valued the Chairman's ruling it was not final.

Mr. GLASSEY: He had raised the question because they were dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Justice, and he had referred to a case in which a colleague of the then Attorney-General wa" acting in a dual capa:city. A Minister of the Crown should defend the

AdJou1'ntn(!'IJ-t. [8 ;NoVEM1Jj;l~.] Additional Sitting Day. 1045

O,row!J~ and iu th!l ~ase he hll<d mentioneQ. it was Y~ry quest)onabl!l gonduct fo;r .tbe Minister to oppose the il).);erests of the 0;r.own.

.Q~es.tjo,n ;put apd p:tssed.

PATENTS, The HOME SECRETARY moved that

£1,p0j} be granted ·for patents.· QR,estion ,P)lt and passe.;!.

REGISTRAR OF TITLES.

The HOME SECRETARY moved that 4l7;585 b!l )$ranted for th.~ Registrar of Titles. 'Fhere were a few smaH i11creases in the lower _s_alaries. · · · ·

Mr. GLA8SEY ask<'Jd if th.e Minister would re.commend :to the Mini•ter for .Justice an in­·Prea.~e jn the typis.t's salary ? .£60 a year was a very .sm:.tll a.mount.

'l'he HOME SECRETARY: He would be very f;l"lad to Q.o so. The supply was much greater ·thap the demand. . There were many young laches, not only typists, but shorthand writers, w.l;to were glad to accept that salary.

Quel!tion p1,1t and passed.

''ll'he ;House resumed; the CHAIRMAN reported progress ; the r.esolutions were ordered to be received te-movrow, and the Committee obtained leave to sit again to-morrow.

MINING BILL. COJI:!l\:[ITTj;))ll.

On clause 1-" Short t.itle and division of Apt"- .

:(\fr. GLASSEY hoped that the Minister would not proceed with the Bil.l, .but would take it to-morrow.

The .SEOE.~'TARY ,FOR MINES said that the ·~se cl:wse was only iorm:;tl, and· they might ,pass It.

The PREMIER did not think there .could be . any disc.ussion.on .that clause, which was merely th<;~ i.ndex of the Bill. They might pass it, and th® the.y ,would proceed no further .that night.

Mr. ]Y!:cDON ALD understood that the reason for going into committee was merely to move the Chairman out of the ehair at once. If it was merely a formal matter, why did not the Government tell them straight .out what they were going to do? There might be a good deal in t.he clause, or there might not. If there was nothing in it, what was it in the Bill at all for? As a matter of fact copies of the Bill had not yet ·been distributed.

Ql;tuse put and pass<;!d.

The Ho.use resumed ; the QHAIRM.A;N reported progress; and the Committee obtained leave to sit ag<J.in to-morrow.

ADJOURNMENT. The PREMIER : I move that this House do

now adjourn. The business ·to-morrow, after formal businees and the thlrd readinfil:S of the Bills dealt w,iuh to-day, will be th<;l Local Works Loans Act Amendment Bill in committee, and after that t,he Mining Bill in committee. I may ·take this opportunity of stating, .for thA informa­tion of hon. members, that, if convenient, we will sit at the usual hour on '\Vedn<)sday, notwith­standing the fact that it is a holiday, in order that the wqrk of the session may be disposed of as early as possible.

Mr. GL.A.SSEY: I ,have not the slightest obj~ption ,~o sitting .on '\Vednesda.y, but t!J.ere W.<J.s a t,<tmt 1,1nd,e,rstanding that we wo.uld not sit:unti)..(l(fte.r tea qn Wedne~day, and on that i\mt\W:ll,ta,nding so,roe .hon. !illember.s on this s,ide

have arranged to go away, and having ma<Je tl;tose arrangements it is diff.cult to alter them. At the same time we are auxious to assist the Go­vernment to get on with the business. I hope that when a tacit understanding is come to in the future it will be ad!,ered to.

The PREMIJ<JR : M<>y I be permitted to say a wore! in reply tn the hon. gentleman? I quite agree with the hon. gentletnan tbat there wa8 a tacit understandmg last week, but I understood that the hon. member's "ide of ttte House were .consulted, and were quite agreeable to ~it on the whol.e of Wednesday.

Mr. GLASSEY : The arrangement was to meet after tea.

Mr. BOLES : I am exceedingly pleased that tl;le P~mier is at last prepared to go on with the business. vV e have been sitting here for fo.ur months, and very lit.tle has been done as yet. I want the business of the country to be Clone, even if we have to sit on l!'ridays. I do not want to hang about Queen .stre9t for two or three days merely bec<J.use some hon. members wish to go out of town.

Mr. McDONALD: I am very glad to hear the hon. member £or Port Curtis say that he is anxious to see business done, because I under­stand he has only b.een here <J.bout six days this session. Personally I hope that the Government will sit .on other holidays, as many hon. members come here from great distances. However, I was under the impression that we were not to meet until after tea. on Wednesday, and that was ,the general imp;ression. I would like the Govern­ment, or whoever has <;lharge of such affairs, to state definitely io future what they want, so tha,t hon. members may know exactly in what position they stand.

Question put and passed. The House a!ljournedatthirty-one.minl,ltes past

10 o'clock .