AUSTRALIA TO-DAY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume L, Issue 15192, 4 January 1913, Page 5

AUSTRALIA TO-DAY.

COMPULSORY FRANCHISE.

[from OUR own

Sydney, December 28* With seven Parliaments hard at work malting laws for the comparatively small Australian community, it is not surprising that many people lose county and have to be given repeated reminders regarding the latest obligations imposed upon them by the Federal or State Legislature. It is not yet generally recognised that under the Commonwealth . Electoral Act,, if am eligible elector fails to have his or her name put on the rolls, a fine not exceeding'£2 may be inflicted. One clause of the Act provides that the GovernorGeneral may, by a proclamation directing the preparation of new rolls, declare that this shall be done under a system of compulsory enrolment. The Commonwealth authorities have this weeki in Melbourne, brought the first court case under these provisions, and the elector in default was fined five shillings. This case was meant to serve as a warning, and the Crown asked for only a nominal penalty and no costs. But it is intendedj now that publicity has been given, to ask for severe penalties in further cases. ~ln view, 'of this there can surely be no doubt about the democratic tendency, of Australian legislation. Of course, the next step will be to devise penalties for cases in which electors fail to make "sound and intelligent" use of the compulsory right to vote.

Counter Lunch. : Christmas has been brightened for a remarkably numerous class oy' the termination of the tight against the giving of free counter lunches Dy the hoteikeepers of Sydney and suburos.. After holding out lor -■ three months, the hotelkeepers, on the eve of Christmas, formally declared off their resistance to the business. From the outset there was not unanimity in the trade, and when. several of the prominent houses went back on the compact by surreptitiously /handing sandwiches to their best customers there was a general scamper to keep trade. It is not only the park "dosser", and the "Weary Willie" who delight in the free counter lunch. The habit of enjoying it has become so widespread and fixed that directly the free counter lunch was missing hotelkeepers all over the. place began to complain of a serious falling-off in trade. It has been estimated that while the lunch boycott was on some 20 hotels in one block in the city suffered a shrinkage of about £1000 between them in their weekly takings. It costs some of the hotels as much as £50 a week to supply these lunches. Leaders in the lunch abolition movement believed that although there might be a reduction in liquor sales for a few days the drinking public would very quickly accept the situation, and receipts would speedily get back to' the normals However, ; experience has , been to the contrary. Some of them aro now making their free counter lunches more sumptuous than before, and roast duck has been added to ham, beef, curried chicken, sausages, sandwiches, sardines on toast, and a great variety of other eatables. Australasian Defence. : Although nothing definite has been disclosed, the Commonwealth Ministers have let it b> made known that the talks which they have enjoyed with the New Zealand Minister; for Defence, Mr. Allen; have helped greatly towards a better understanding between the Commonwealth and the Dominion concerning defence matters. It was not expected that the conferences which Mr. Allen had with the Commonwealth authorities would be followed immediately by announcements of the terms of a new arrangement regarding defence, particularly the naval part, but what our Prime Minister and Minister for Defence are telling us about their chats with Mr. Allen, leads us to believe that there is, now a decidedly better prospect for the early achievement of increased unity in plans and action between the Dominion and Australia for Imperial de-! fence in this part of the world. Electrification. No time is being lost by the railway commissioners of Victoria in carrying out essential, preliminaries in connection with the big scheme for the electrification of the Melbourne suburban railways, of which Parliament has approved. Arrangements are being made for the acceptance of the tenders recommended by Mr. Merz, the English export, whose advice is being acted upon. The whole of the £300,000 authorised by Parliament as a first instalment is likely to be spent during the coming year. An amusing little story is told in connection with the exhaustive questioning to which Mr. . Merz was subjected by a Select Committee, which had to inquire on behalf of Parliament. The chairman of the committee, Mr. Mackey, is of Scot-* tish descent, and this, combined with his professional proclivities as a lawyer, was responsible for a lot of canny, cautious questioning by him. To fortify himself; for the task, ! Mr. Mackey studiously assimilated the contents of an elaborate article on electrification, to be found in an important scientific lexicon. Thus equipped, Mr. Mackey; tried the expert here, and tried him there, but Mr. Merz was not to be caught. Finally Mr, Mackey asked Mr. Merz whether he agreed with the conclusion of the writer: of the article which was the foundation! of Mr. Mackey's interrogations. Then, it is reported, Mr. Merz, with a twinkle, in his eyes, said: "Certainly, I wrote the) article myself This, perhaps, accounts for the fact that Mr. Mackey, when explaining things to the House, said Mr. Merz could not be regarded as a perfect) witness.

Preference to Unionists. II .Naturally, the decision of Mr. Justice Higgins, president of the Commonwealth Arbitration Court, to enforce preference to unionists on the Brisbane Tramway Company is, for the time being, the most discussed item in connection with ' industrial affairs. Whatever its merits this decision will inevitably add to the industrial ferment, of which Australia has its full share. Mr. Justice Higgins justified his determination by what he termed an "obstinate policy of antagonism" by the company towards an organisation of employees such as the industrial laws of the Commonwealth were intended to promote, and by reference to a refusal by the representative of the company ,to give an undertaking that there would be no discrimination to the disadvantage of members of the union. There is, of course, no novelty in contentions.about the right of employers to conduct their businesses in their own way, on the one side, and about the wrongfulness of tyrannous coercion of wage-earners on the other side. Both contentions are being fought out with much elaboration (|.nd warmth in the press and elsewhere. It is more than likely that demands for preference to unionists will in future be made more frequently and with greater insistence in cases brought before the Commonwealth Arbitration .Court.