Untitled

Evening Star, Issue 14512, 2 November 1910, Page 6

“ Arran finally disposing of the Constitu

tion Act Amendment Bill Constitution the House of RepresentaTinkering. lives rose till after the Cup meeting.” So ran a recent cable message—possibly the most important that has been sent from the seat of government in Australia for a long lime. Yet, such is the state of political thought and activity in the Commonwealth at the present time that a measure tho probable effects of which are fraught with such vast importance to every individual citizen is permitted to pass with scarcely a ripple of protest from those most intimately concerned. What tho Bill of tho Federal Government proposes to do is to take the first big step towards converting tho Commonwealth of Australia from a federation of independent States to a union of comparatively petty provinces, the individuality and powers of which will bo merged in one supreme, dominating, and central authority. The Bill, which was introduced by Mr Hughes, the Federal Attorney-General and Acting Premier, sets out to do tho very things that eleven years ago the wisest, ablest, and most experienced of Australian statesmen, in full Convention assembled, and after nearly two Tears of patient and exhaustive investigation, declared should not be done. Australia did not ask and did not vote for a Union like that of South Africa. Mr Fisher, according to the cabled report of his Capo Town interviews, apparently regrets this. He is made to say ; “ You have been guided by our experience, and avoided our mistakes.” It is these mistakes, presumably, that the Federal Government’s Constitution Amendment Bill is to rectify. But patriotic and anxious critics, who have not forgotten the strenuous days before the Federation, and who remember exactly what they wanted and what they educated the masses of tho people to look for, are alarmed at the audacity of the Government, and disheartened lest the apathy and indifference of the public should allow what they regard as a great wrong to be perpetrated. Whether theirs be the best form of government or not, whether a Union is preferable to a Federation, is not now the question. The Australian peonle, through their separate Legislatures, declared for a Federal Union, and no mandate has since been given by the States or tho people to tho Fisher Government to drop the Federation and convert it into a Union. What we do know (for New Zealand, it will bo recalled, was interested in tho discussion) was that after a prolonged and exacting examination of the Canadian, the German, and the Swiss forms of government tho statesmen of Australia, whose policy was ultimately approved by a majority of’their fellow-colonists, drew up, advocated, and carried through tho Constitution which was proclaimed at Sydney on January 1, ISOI. No responsible statesman contends for a moment that amendments to the Constitution will not at any time be necessary. On tho contrary, such a probability was clearly foreseen, and due provision made for giving effect thereto. But what is contended and strongly held is that constitutional amendments should not be undertaken light-heartedly; that they should bo thoroughly pondered in all their different aspects and possible bear ings, both by the State Parliaments and the citizens; and that they should most certainly not strike at the very roots and foundations of that Constitution which it is proposed to amend. In other words, the Federation must not bo changed into some thing else. If these arguments and convir tions be sound under ordinary and normal conditions, how much sounder are they when it is sought to amend the Constit" tion, not as the result of months of anxioiv consideration and after a full understand ing of the proposed change, but on th' ipse dixit of a Ministry who happened to have a majority, and who for theii own purposes demand it? What Mr Hughes’s Bill will do is to take from th> States all voice in the regulation and control of the trade, commerce, and industries of the States. That is not to amend, but. as the 1 Argus ’ says, to “ dynamite ” the Constitution. In tho 123 years of, its existence the Constitution of tho United f-'tates has been amended only fifteen times, i Pen of these wore in the first lour years |of its existence; one or two wero the outcome of four years of sanguinary Civil War; and there has not been one during the last forty years. When Qo- ) vernments start tinkering with the Con--1 dilutions of their country, it is time for ! the body politic to rouse itself.