FEDERAL CONVENTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVIII, Issue 8530, 2 April 1891, Page 5

FEDERAL CONVENTION.

Press A ssooiation.—Eleetrio Telegraph.—Copyright. Sydney, April 1. Owing to the funeral of the late Mr. Macroasan tho Convention did nob meeb until half-past eleven this morning.

Sir G. Grey gave notice of motion to the effect that previous to tho Bill constituting tho Commonwealth being laid before the British Parliament it should be submitted and adopted by a majority of a plebiscite of the people of Australia, and each voter should give a single vote.

On Sir S. Griffith's motion to send the Bill to committee, Mr. Wrixon proceeded to traverse the provisions, N and from the tenor of his remarks so far it appears that the ground covered by the debate on the resolutions is to be gone over again.

The Hon. 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 the Bill, curtailing the power of the Senate. He ridiculed a concern which protected the rights of a majority. . The latter wag quite capable of protecting itself, but the minority should bo protected. It was absurd to suppose that they could rule the majority. The inevitable result of concentrating all power in one branch of the Legislature would be that the Government would not rule for the people or by the people, but would rule by people of Victoria and New South Wales for the rest of Australia. They would find four causes operating to make the Senate a dummy House, viz., the right of initiation of money Bills, refusal to allow alteration of money Bills, responsible Government, and that the Executive would belong to one House with the Senate deprived of its power. It was quite unlikely that men of ability would accept seats in such a chamber. He doubted if the Bill would be passed in its present form. With such a weak and impotent Senate smaller States could safely join the federation.

The Hon. A, J. Clark (Tasmania) defended the Bill, and said every citizen would, if the Bill became law, bo under the protection of two Governments—the State and the Federal. The clause leaving the election of Governors to the State was not, he considered, intended as a direct invitation to States to go in for a popular election, and he believed the system at present prevailing would be retained for a very long time to come. He opposed giving original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court, and would use every effort to secure its repeal. The Executive officers would have all the powers Ministers of the Crown could by law possess, and he thought they would have sufficient power under the clause regulating commerce to prevent differential rates on railways.

The motion was carried. In committee, the Hon. J. Monro, Premier of Victoria, in referring 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 which several members opposed the title on the grounds of its connection with Cromwell. On the other hand the supporters of the title pointed out that the term was used in England before the days of Cromwell, and that the term was equally applicable under a monarchy or republic, meaning as it did the common good of the people.

When the Bill was before the Constitutional Committee Sir G. Grey suggested that Federal Australia should bo the title, but since the discussion to-day he thought Commonwealth was the best they could adopt.

Onjdivision, Mr. Munro's amendment was lost, 26 voting in favour of the retention of Commonwealth and 13 against. The clause containing the short title of the Bill was passed.

Eight preliminary clauses of the Constitution Bill were passed with slight and unimportant amendments.

Chapter 1., legislative, was next dealt with. Clause 1, vesting powers in Her Majesty the Queen and Parliament, passed.

Clause 2, Governor-Generals. Sir Geo. Grey moved the omission of tho words, "the Queen may from time to time appoint," with a view of inserting " Governor-' General be elected."

Mr. Munro pointed out that even if the Governor-General were elected or not he would never have the power which the President of the United States possessed. The Prime Minister would be the man with power; and he failed to see, if they were to have Constitutional Government in a union under the Crown how the latter could have a voice in the union if it did nob have the appointment of the Governor.

Sir G. Grey argued that the Queen did not appoint Governors. It was the Imperial Government by whom the appointment was made, and why nob, he asked, let Ministers of Federation advise the Queen in the selection of Governor ? Better still, let the people themsolves advise the Queen.

Sir S. Griffith, Premier of Queensland, expressed sympathy with the views of Sir G. Grey, and believed every position in the colonies should be open to the people. Still he did nob think that the GovernorGeneral should be directly elected. If this were done they would have a great amount of canvassing in the States, and the man who was elected would consider himself the nominee of the party which had returned him. He believed the question was one which would work out itself.

The Hon. C. Kingston (South Australia) supported Sir George Grey inasmuch as the people should have a greater voice in the selection of a Governor than they had at present.

Captain Russell protested against Sir George Grey's amendment, which he said if carried would have an evil effect in Australia. i 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 link binding the whole British Empire, and take away Imperial power?"

The Hon. A. Dkakin (Victoria) thought the Governor-General was a position very few would aspire to, as his voice would count but very little. A man occupying the position would and could do nothing to advance the particular views which he held. Any man who held a position in the Federal 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 place good men in that position. He added that he took no little concern in the question of the Governor-General in a young democracy, and that he could find no sympathy with Sir George Grey in what was nothing but a ceremonial office.

The amendment was negatived. The only voice in its favour was from the mover of the amendment, but Sir George Grey called for a division. On the question being pub " that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question," the ayes were 35 and the noes 3viz., Sir George Grey, Mr. J. A. Cockburn, and the Hon. C. C. Kingston.

The Hon. R. C. Baker (South Australia) moved an amendment defining the powers of the Governor-General. The discussion which followed showed that while they had responsible government, the Governor must act under the advice of his Ministry, and

therefore there was no necessity to farther define his powers. s , The' amendment was withdrawn, and clause 2 passed. . On clause 3, salary of the GovernorGeneral, Sir H. A. Atkinson moved an amendment to the effect that the question be left to the Federal Parliament, Mr. Munro said if the amendment was carried, 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 £10,000 was altogether too small. The amendment was withdrawn. Sir .T. Cox Bray (South Australia) moved an amendment, " That the salary be £10,000, unless otherwise altered by the Federal Parliament." The amendment was negatived.

Mr. C. C. Kingston said that judging from the majority against Sir G. Grey's amendment it appeared to show that the position of Governor-General was not good enough for a free citizen of Australia. They might, therefore, 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 country should rest on such a slender foundation as the payment of £10,000 to the Queen for- a GovernorGeneral. Sir George Grey moved that the salary be £6000, which was negatived, and the clause was then passed. The clauses defining the powers of the Governor-General in regard to dissolution, calling Parliament together, prorogation, annual sessions, privileges and immunities of members of Senate and House of Representatives were passed. On the clause dealing with the composition of the Senate, Mr. Munro 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 adjourned at six o'clock. OPINIONS of the press. The Sydney Morning Herald says that the Constitution Bill, in its terse, lucid brevity, is a masterpiece of draftsmanship. The Daily Telegraph considers the short title of the Bill is a misnomer, as, by the system of representation, every man is obliged to vote not as Australian bub as New South Welshmen, Victorian, etc., consequently both Houses are State Houses, while the people of Australia have no direct representation at all.

STATISTICAL RETURNS. A return attached to the report furnished by the Finance Committee shows that there are 64,000 males of military age, and 1,067,406 of supporting age in Australasia, exclusive of Maoris. It is estimated that the population of Australasia last December was 3,900,000. The amount of import duties received was equal to £2 6s 5d per head of the population, and the cost of collecting Customs and excise duties averaged 2'9 per cent.

The following estimate of the expenditure of a Federal Government has been prepared on the basis of the present population :—Civil Government, £639,000 ; collection of revenue, £270,000; defence, £750,000; {loss on services, £200,000 ; interest on works taken over by the Federal Government from various colonies, £367,000 : t0ta1,226,000, being equal to lis 5d per head of tho population.

The imports of Australasia during the year ISB9 amounted to £69,043,423, while the public expenditure, including payments to sinking fund, totalled to £25,401,554, being equal to £7 12s 2d per head. Tho revenue of the Post and Telegraph and Money Order Departments was £1,955,298, and the expenditure £2,080,623, the deficiency being equal to 8d per head. Australasian loans, up to the end of 1889, as t far as can be stated, amounted to £181,847,271, the interest payable being £7,545,996, at the rate of 4.49. The expenditure on defence, in 1889, amounted to 3s 9d per head of population. The defence force numbered 29,624 men. The amount of loan money expended in fortifications was equal to 9s Sd per head. The Constitution Bill is divided into eight chapters, containing a total of 131 clauses.