THE FEDERAL CONVENTION.

Evening Post, Volume XLI, Issue 77, 2 April 1891, Page 4

THE FEDERAL CONVENTION.

YESTERDAY'S SITTING. DEBATE ON THE CONSTITUTION BILL. [UNITED I'RIBS ASSOCIATION.] Sydney, Ist April, Tho Sydnoy Morning Herald says that the Conatitntion Bill in ita terse, luoid brevity, ia a maatorpieoo of draftmanßhip. Tho Daily Telegraph considers the short title of tho Bill ir a misnorror, as by the ftyatom of representation every man is obliged to vot\ i ot as an Australian, but as a Now South Welshman, a Viotorian, &'!., consequently both Houses uro i-tate Honse-i, while tho pooplo of Australia have no direct representation at all. Owing to tho funoral of Mr. M'Crossan tho Convention did not meet till 11.30 this morning. Sir George Drey gave notioe of motion to the effect that previous to the Bill oonati tilting the Commonwealth being laid before tho British Parliament it should be submitted and adopted by a majority of a plebiscite) of tho pooplo of Australia, and each voter should give a single vote. On Sir S. Griffith's motion to send tho Bill to the Committee of the Whole, the Hon. H. J. Wrixon proceeded to traverse the provisions, and from the tenor of his remarks so far it appears that the ground covered by the debate on the resolutions will bo gone over again. The Hon. R. C. Baker (South Australia) addressed himself to the question of State rights, and contended that the very quintessence of Federation had been omitted in tho Bill by curtailing tho power of the Senate. He ridiculed a ooncern which protooted tho rights of the majority. The latter was quite capable of protecting itself, bat the minority should be proteoted. It was absurd to suppose that they could rule a majority. The inevitable result of concentrating all power in one branch of the Legislature would bo that the Government would not rule for the people or by th« people, but would rule by the peoplo of Victoria and New South Wales for the rest of Australia. They would find four oauaes oporating to mako tho Senate a dummy House, namely, the right of initiation of monoy Bills, their ufusal to allow alteration of money Bills, responsible Government, and that the Kzeoutive would belong lo one Houso, with a Senate deprived ot its powors. It was quite unlikely that men of ability would aocept seats in such a Chambor. He doubted if the Bill would be passed in its presont form. With such a weak and impotent Senato the smaller States oould not safely join the Federation. Hon. A. J. Clark (Tasmania) defended the Bill, and said every citizen would, if the Bill bwame ia.fr, be undor the protection of two Governments— State and Federal. The clause leaving the election of Governors to the State was not, ho considered, intended as a direot invitation to the States to go in for popular election. He believed the system at present prevailing would be retained for a very long time to come. He oppoeed giving original jurisdiction to tho Supreme Court, and would use every effort to seoure its repeal. The Executive officers would hire all tho power Ministers of the Crown oould by law poesesß, and he thought they would have snffloiont power under the olause regulating oommoroo to prevent differential rates on tbo railways. The motion was carried. In committee, the Hon. J. Munro, Premier of Viotoria, in roferring to the Bill, said "Commonwealth" was not a happy title, and moved that it be omitted, with the view of inserting " Federated States." Considerable discussion followed, during whioh several members opposod the title, on the ground of its connection with Cromwell. On the other hand, the supporters of the title pointed out that the term was used in England befor* the days of Cromwell, and that the term was equally applicable under ■> Monarchy or a Republio, meaning, as it did, the common good of the people. When the Bill was before the Constitutional Committee Sir George Grey suggested that "Federal Australia" should be the title, hut since the discussion to-day he thought "Commonwealth" was the beat thsy oould adopt. On a division Mr. Munro's amendment was lost, 26 voting in favour of the retention of "Commonwealth" and 13 against. The olause containing the short title of the Bill was passed. The first eight preliminary clauses of the Constitution Bill were passod with slight and unimportant amendments. Chapter 1., " Legislature," was next dealt With. Clause 1, vesting powers in Her Majesty the Queen and Parliament, was passed. Clause 2, Governor-General. Sir George Grey moved the omission of the words " tho Queen may from time to timo appoint," with the view of inserting " Governor-General be oleotcd." Mr. Munro pointed out that even if the Governor-General were elected or not, he would never have the power which the President of tho United States possessed. The Prime Minister would be the man with power, and he failod to see if they wero to have a Constitutional Govornment in ths Union under tho Crown, how the latter oould have a voice in the Union if it did not have tho appointmont of the Governor. Sir George Groy argued that the Queen did not appoint the Governor. It was the Imperial Government by whom the appointmont was made, and why not, ho asked, let the Ministers of tho Federation advise the Queen in the selection of tho Governor, or, better still, let the people themselves advise the Queen. Sir S. Griffith, Premier of Queensland, expressed sympathy with the views of Sir G. Grey, and believed that overy position in the colonies should be open to the people. Still he did not think that the Governor-General should be direotly elected. If this were done it would oanse a great amount of oanvaßßing in the States, and tha man who was elected would consider himself a nominee of the party which returned him. He believed the question was one whioh would work oat of itself. Hon. C. C. Kingston (South Australia) supported Sir Geo. Grey, inasmuch as that the people should have a greater voice in the seleotion of the Governor than they had at present. Captain Bnssoll protested against Sir Geo. Grey s amendment, whioh he said if oarried Would have an e-rU uffeot In Australia. The whole basis of the Bill was Responsible Government, and if they had an elective Governor he would be either an absolute dummy or an absolute autocrat. He added, " Are we to destroy what is a lick binding the whole British Empire, and take away tic Imperial power ?" Hon. A. Deakin (Yiotoria) thought the Governor-General was a position very few would aspire to aa his voice would oount but very little, and a man occupying the position would and oould do nothing to advanco the particular views whioh he held. Any man who held a position in the Foderal Parliament would be in an infinitely superior position to a social functionary like the Governor-General. It was because he took this view that he thought it would be better for them to plaoe a good man in that position. _ He added that he took so little ooncern in the question of the Governor-General of the young demooraay that he could find no sympathy with Sir George Grey in what was nothing but a ceremonial office. The amendment was negatived on the voices, in fact the only voto in its favour was from the mover of the amendment, bnt Sir George Grey oalled for a division. On the motion being pnt that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question the voting was— Ayes, 35 ; noes, 3 —vis., Sir George Groy, Mr. J. A. Cookburn, and Hon. C. C. Kingston. Tho Hon. R. C. Baker (South Australia) moved an amendment defining the powers of the Governor-General. The disoussiou whioh followed showed that while they had responsible Government the Governor must aot under the advice of his Ministry, and therefore there was no necessity to further define his powers. The amendment was withdrawn, and olanse 2 passed. On olanse 3, salary of Governor-General, Sir H. A. Atkinson moved an amendment to the effeot that the question be left to the Federal Parliament. Mr. Munro said if the amendment were oarried, the Governor-General would be required to be appointed before the Federal Parliament was created, and would require to accept office without knowing what emolument he was to receive. He thought jfiIO.OOO was altogether too small. Tho amendment was withdrawn. Sir J. Cox Bray (South Australia) moved as an amendment that the salary be .£IO,OOO. unless otherwise altored by the Federal Parliament. The amendment was negatived. Mr. C. C. Kingston said that, judging from the majority against Sir George Groy 'a amendment, it appeared to show that the position of Governor-General was not good enough for a free citizen of Australia. They might thereforo err on the side of liberality by paying the Governor a high salary. Sir S. Griffith wished to know whether Mr. Kingston wanted a Constitution under the Crown. Mr. Kingston indignantly declined to recognise that their relation with the Mother Courtry should rest on such a slender foundatici as the payment of .£IO,OOO to the Qaeon for a Governor-General. Sir George Grey moved that the s ilary be JEGOOO, whioh was negatived, and the clause was then passed. The clausos defining tho powers of the Governor-General in regard to dissolution, calling Parliament together, prorogation, annual sessions, privileges and immunities of members of the Senate and House of Representatives were passed. On the olanse dealing with the composition of the Senate being introduced, Mr. Munro said he thought that six representatives from each State, instead of eight as proposed by the Bill, would be sufficient, and moved an amendment to that effect. Progress was reported, and leave given to sit again to-morrow. The Convention adjonrned at 6 o'clock.