REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON FEDERATION, TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE, AND APPENDICES.
Presented to both.Houses of the General Assembly by Command of His Excellency.
NEW ZEALAND. BY AXTTHORITY : JOHN MACKAY, GOVERNMENT PRINTER.
1901,
CONTENTS.
I. Commission ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... v. 11. Eepoet ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... vii. 111. Minutes op Proceedings ... ... ... ... ... ... ... xxv. IV. Witnesses examined .... ... ... ... ... ... ... xli. V. Evidence ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 VI. Appendices :— Exhibit 1. Eeturn of Wages in various Trades in the Colonies ... ... ... 707 „ 2. Eeturn of Wages in various Trades in Victoria ... ... 708 „ 3. Eeturn of Wages in various Trades in New South Wales ... ... 712 „ 4. Union Bate of Wages in New South Wales ... ... ... 717 „ 5. Number of Persons employed in various Trades in New South Wales... 718 „ 6. Number of Persons employed in various Trades in Victoria .., ... 719 7. Number of Chinese employed in the Furniture Trade in Sydney ... 719 „ 8. Horse-power and Value of Plant in the Manufactories of New Zealand and Australia ... ... ... ... ... ... 720 „ 9. Value of Production of the Manufactories of New Zealand and Australia 720 „ 10. Total Value of Production of all Industries of New Zealand and Australia, and the Total Value distributed among the various Industries ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 720 „ 11. General Statistics of New Zealand and Australia ... ... ... 721 „ 12. Agricultural Statistics of New Zealand and Australia ... ... 723 „ 13. Agricultural Statistics of Victoria for 1900-1 ... ... ... 724 „ 14. Value of Sugar imported from Fiji and Australia, and Duty paid thereon 725 „ 15. Exports from Provincial Districts of New Zealand to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World ... ... ... ... ... 726 „ 16. Exports from New Zealand to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 735 „ 17. Imports to Provincial Districts of New Zealand from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World ... ... ... ... ... 736 „ 18. Imports to New Zealand from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 745 „ 19. Interchange of Trade between New Zealand and the separate States of the Commonwealth ... ... ... ... ... ... 746 „ 20. Interchange of Trade between New Zealand and the Commonwealth ... 748 „ 21. Tabular Statement of Exports of New Zealand Produce to the various States of the Commonwealth ••■ ... ... ... ... 749 „ 22. Tabular Statement of Imports to New Zealand of Produce of the various States of the Commonwealth ... ... ... ... ... 750 „ 23. Value of Imports and Exports of New Zealand from and to each Country and State for 1899 and 1900 .... ... ... ... 751 „ 24. Due Dates and Bates of Interest on State Loans on 30th June, 1899 ... 753 „ 25. Letter from B. L. Nash, Financial Editor of Sydney Daily Telegraph... 755 „ 26. Letter and Tables from E. M. Johnston, Begistrar - General and Statistician, Tasmania ... ... ... ... ... 755 „ 27. Letter from the Secretary, Trades Hall, Dunedin ... ... ... 757 „ 28. Eesolutions carried by the Otago Knights of Labour ... ... 757 „ 29. Letter from the Secretary, Workers' Political Committee, Dunedin ... 759 „ 30. Memorandum by His Honour the Chief Justice of New Zealand on Appeals from the Appeal Court of New Zealand ... ... ... 759 „ 81. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act ... ... ... 760 „ 32. Letter from W. T. Glasgow, with Customs Eevenue, 1900-1901 ... 774 VII. Index ... 775
EEEATA.
On account of the absence of the Commissioners in Australia the questions in the earlier part of the evidence were not revised by them, but in all cases the evidence given by each witness wae sent to him for correction. The following errors occur : — Page 8, question 142: For "to the Bluff," read "from the Bluff." Page 11, question 199: For " shipping countries," read " shipping companies." Page 11, question 201: For " factory," read " Victoria." Page 11, question 203 : For " steamers," read " consumers." Page 43, question 324 : For " same way," read " same weight." Pags 44, question 344 : For " particularly dangerous," read " particularly advantageous." Page 44, question 356: For " section 84," read " section 74." Page 61, question 716, line 12 : For " to compete successively," read " to compete successfully." Page 108, question 1866: For "that would be the attempt," read " that would be the tendenoy." Page 169, question 370 : For " State Commission," read " inter-State Commission." Page 178, question 494: For " from the atom of the organism," read " from the atom to the organism." Page 180, question 546: For " able to produce," read " unable to produce." Page 182, question 580: For " only contention," read "natural intention." Page 200, question 1053 : For " imported," read " exported." Page 210, question 1285 : For " railway communication," read " reliable communication." Page 216, question 1377: For " a deferential tariff," read " a preferential tariff." Page 294, question 722: After the words "a coterminous," add the word "boundary." Page 557, question 237 : For " an B£-per-cent. tariff," read " an £8,500,000 tariff." Page 601, question 721: For " Federal Parliament," read " Federal Commonwealth." For " inter-free-trade," wherever occurring, read " inter-State free-trade."
4
1901. NEW ZEALAND.
FEDERATION COMMISSION (REPORT OF THE), TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS, EVIDENCE, AND APPENDICES
Presented to both Houses of the General Assembly by Command of His Excellency.
COMMISSION. Victoria, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland Queen, Defender of the Faith. To our trusty and loving subjects, Harold Beauchamp, Esquire, the Honourable Charles Christopher Bowen, Thomson Wilson Leys, Esquire, Charles Manley Luke, Esquire, John Andrew Millar, Esquire, William Eussell Eussell, Esquire, John Roberts, Esquire, Walter Scott Reid, Esquire, the Honourable Colonel Albert Pitt, and the Honourable Major William Jukes Steward, all of our Colony of New Zealand : Greeting. Whereas the Governor of our said Colony hath, by and with the advice and consent of the Executive Council thereof, and on the request of the House of Representatives thereof, as testified by a resolution of the said House dated the eighteenth day of October, one thousand nine hundred, deemed it expedient that a Commission should be forthwith issued for the purposes and in the manner hereinafter set forth: Now, therefore, know ye that we, reposing great trust and confidence in your zeal, knowledge, and ability, do by these presents constitute and appoint you, the said Harold Beauchamp, Charles Christopher Bowen, Thomson Wilson Leys, Charles Manley Luke, John Andrew Millar, William Hussell Russell, John Roberts, Walker Scott Reid, Albert Pitt, and William Jukes 2 Steward, to be our Commissioners, and you, the said Albert Pitt, to be Chairman of our said Commission, for the purpose of inquiring as to the desirability or otherwise of our said colony federating with the Commonwealth of Australia, and becoming a State under the Imperial Act known as " The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act," special regard being had in such inquiry to the agricultural, commercial, and industrial interests of our said colony; to the question of the defence thereof; to matters of a judicatory nature; to matters affecting the Customs, railways, and postal arrangements of our said colony; to matters affecting the public indebtedness of our said colony, the public indebtedness of the colonies under the Commonwealth; and in respect to the social and political
A.—4
VI
bearing of the question; arid generally to all matters which in your opinion may be of assistance in enabling Parliament to arrive at a proper conclusion in respect of the subjects of this inquiry. And if you are of opinion that for the present the federation of our said colony with the Commonwealth of Australia is premature or inadvisable, you are to inquire and report as to the establishment of a reciprocal treaty or agreement between the said Commonwealth and our said colony ; and if in your opinion the latter course is the more desirable, you will inquire and indicate in your report the lines upon which such reciprocal treaty or agreement should be based. And for the better enabling you to carry these presents into effect, we do authorise and empower you to make and conduct any inquiry under these presents at such place or places within the Commonwealth of Australia or of our said colony as you may deem expedient, and to call before you such persons as you may judge necessary, by whom you may be better informed of the matters herein submitted for your consideration, and also to call for and examine all such records, books, documents, and papers as you consider likely to afford you the fullest information on the subject of this our Commission, and to inquire of and concerning the premises by all other lawful ways and means. And our further will and pleasure is that you, or any five or more of you, do report to us under your hands and seals, with as little delay as is consistent with a due discharge of the duties hereby imposed on you, your opinion on the several matters herein submitted for your consideration, with power to certify to us from time to time your several proceedings in respect of any of the matters aforesaid if it seems expedient for you so to do. And we further do declare that this our Commission shall continue in full force and virtue until the thirty-first day of May, one thousand nine hundred and one, and that you, our said Commissioners, or any five or more of yon, shall and may from time to time proceed in the execution thereof, although the same be not continued from time to time by adjournment. In testimony whereof we have caused these our letters to be made patent, and the Seal of the said Colony to be hereunto affixed. Witness our Eight Trusty and Well-beloved Cousin Uohter John Mark, Earl of Eanfurly, Knight Commander of our Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, , s Governor and Commander-in-Chief in and over our Colony of New Zealand and its Dependencies ; and issued under the Seal of our said Colony, at Wellington, this twenty-sixth day of December, in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred, and in the sixty-fourth year of our reign. RANFURLY, Governor. Approved in Council— J. F. Andrews, Acting-Clerk of the Executive Council.
EEPOET.
To His Excellency the Eight Honourable the Earl of Ranfurly, Governor of the Colony of New Zealand. May it please your Excellency,— We, the Commissioners appointed by the Commission of the 26th day of December, 1900, under the hand of your Excellency and the Seal of the Colony, for the purpose of inquiring as to the desirability or otherwise of the Colony of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia, and becoming a State under the Imperial Act known as " The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act"—special regard being had in such inquiry to the agricultural, commercial, arid industrial interests of the said colony ; to the question of the defence thereof; to matters of a judicatory nature; to matters affecting the Customs, railways, and postal arrangements of the said colony; to matters affecting the public indebtedness of the said colony ; the public indebtedness of the States of the Commonwealth; and in respect to the social and political bearing of the question, and generally to all matters which, in the opinion of the Commissioners, might be of assistance in enabling Parliament to arrive at a proper conclusion in respect of the subjects of the inquiry—have now the honour to report to your Excellency as follows :— Summary of "The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act." Before dealing with the particular subjects mentioned in the Commission, it will be convenient to indicate in general terms the scope of the Act constituting the Commonwealth of Australia. This Act was passed by the Imperial Parliament on the 9th July, 1900, and is cited as " The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act." In accordance with its provisions the Act was proclaimed to take effect on the Ist January, 1901, and on that day the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Western Australia, and Tasmania became united in a Federal Commonwealth under the name of " The Commonwealth of Australia." The States abovenamed are spoken of throughout the Act as " original States," but under section 121 there is power to admit or establish new States upon such terms as the Parliament of the Commonwealth thinks fit. It is under this enactment that New Zealand would have to seek admission into the Commonwealth. The legislative power of the Commonwealth is vested in a Federal Parliament consisting of the King, a Senate, and a House of Representatives. The representative of the King is the Governor-General, who is appointed by the Crown, and whose powers and duties are denned by the statute. A yearly session of Parliament is to be held, " so that twelve months shall not intervene between the last sitting of the Parliament in one session and its first sitting in the next session " (section 6). The Senate is chosen by the people of the State, voting at present as one electorate, with a certain exception as regards Queensland; and, until Parliament otherwise provides, six Senators are elected for each original State for a period of six years. Parliament may increase or diminish the
A.—4
number of Senators for each State, but so that equal representation of the several original States shall be maintained, and that no original State shall have less than six Senators. The qualification of electors of Senators is that prescribed by the Act, or by Parliament, as the qualification of electors for the House of Representatives, and each elector can only vote once. The House of Representatives consists of members chosen by the people of the Commonwealth, the number of such members being, as nearly as practicable, twice the number of the Senators. The number of members chosen in the several States is in proportion to the respective numbers of their people, and, until Parliament otherwise provides, are to be chosen in the mode prescribed in section 24. Section 25 is to the effect that, in ascertaining the proportion of members, if by the law of the State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections of the more numerous House of Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted; and a subsequent section also enacts that in reckoning the number of the people aboriginal natives shall not be counted. For the first Parliament, however, the number of members is fixed at seventy-five, as stated in section 26. Every House of Representatives is to continue for three years from its first meeting, subject to a power of dissolution by the Governor-General. The qualification of electors of members is that prescribed in each State as the qualification of the more numerous House of Parliament of the State, but in the choosing of members each elector has only one vote. Part IV. contains general provisions applicable to both Houses of Parliament; and in this Part, and in Parts 11. and 111., are enactments as to the procedure and government of each House, respecting disqualification, disputed elections, and other matters affecting the powers and control of these bodies. The legislative powers of the Parliament are chiefly contained in sections 51 and 52. It will be seen that, while some of these are exclusive as regards the Commonwealth, others are concurrent, and may be exercised either by the Commonwealth Parliament or by the State Legislatures; subject, however, to ■ the qualification (section 109) that where the law of a State is inconsistent with the law of the Commonwealth the latter shall prevail. Attention may be called to the terms of section 57, providing for cases of disagreement between the Houses of Parliament, and conferring upon the Governor-General a power to dissolve the Senate and the House of Representatives simultaneously in case of continued disagreement. The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Crown, and is exercisable by the Governor-General as its. representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of the Constitution and the laws of the Commonwealth. Provision is made respecting the Federal Executive Council, Ministers and their salaries, the civil and military services, and for the transfer to the Commonwealth of the Departments of Customs and Excise, Posts and Telegraphs, Defence, Lighthouses, Quarantine, &c. The judicial power is vested in a Federal Supreme Court, called the High Court of Australia, to consist of a Chief Justice and other Justices (not less than two), as Parliament prescribes. Provision is made as to the appointment of Judges, their tenure of office, and remuneration; as to the jurisdiction, both original and appellate, of the Court; and generally to give effect to the enactments. Important provisions are to be found in sections 81 to 105, relating to finance and trade. Section 86 vests the collection and control of duties of Customs and excise in the Commonwealth; section 87 is to the effect that during a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter till Parliament otherwise provides, of the net revenue from Customs and excise not more than one-fourth shall be applied annually by the Commonwealth towards its expenditure, and the balance shall be paid to the several States, or applied towards the payment of interest on debts of the several States taken over by the Commonwealth; section 88 requires that uniform duties of Customs shall be imposed within two years after the establishment of the Commonwealth;
viii
A.—4
IX
and section 89 enacts that until the imposition of such duties the Commonwealth shall make the payments to the States mentioned in that section. Section 92 provides that, on the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States shall be absolutely free. Section 96 enables Parliament to grant financial assistance to any State during a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter till Parliament otherwise provides ; and section 105 allows Parliament to take over the public debts of the States as existing at the establishment of the Commonwealth, or a proportion thereof, with powers to convert, renew, or consolidate such debts; the States in turn being required to indemnify the Commonwealth in respect of the debts taken over. The enactments mentioned are some of the most important; but all the sections from 81 to 105 should be carefully studied to understand the relative rights and duties of the Commonwealth and the States as regards financial matters. In sections 106 to 124 there are various enactments relating to the States and the admission of new States; the powers of the State Legislatures; prohibiting the States from raising naval or military forces, or coining money; providing for the recognition of the laws of the States throughout the Commonwealth; and making it the duty of the latter to protect any State against invasion, and in certain events against domestic violence. There are also powers as to the admission and formation of new States, and altering the limits of States. Section 125 provides that the seat of government is to be determined by Parliament, and is to be in the State of New South Wales, and not less than one hundred miles from Sydney. Meantime Parliament is to meet at Melbourne until it meets at the seat of government. The last section of the Act provides a mode of altering the Constitution by a process of referendum to the electors, with certain limitations and qualifications. As your Commissioners make frequent reference in the succeeding part of this report to particular provisions of the Constitution Act, it has been printed in full in the Appendix hereto. Scope of Inquiries. Your Commissioners, having held a preliminary meeting in Wellington on the 17th and 18th days of January last, and considering that the District of Southland was perhaps the largest exporting district of New Zealand produce to Australia, decided to hold a sitting at Invercargill, and accordinglj' they commenced to take evidence there on the sth day of February following. With the exception of Invercargill, they deemed it unnecessary to hold sittings in the colony outside of the four centres, and therefore they have sat and taken evidence at Invercargill, Dunedin, Christchurch, Wellington, and Auckland. The matters in respect of which their Commission commanded inquiry were of such magnitude, and of such importance to the future welfare of the colony, that your Commissioners determined to make the fullest investigation, both in New Zealand and Australia, into all facts and figures which had any important bearing upon the subjects committed to their consideration. Accordingly, in New Zealand they required the attendance before them of all persons who appeared capable of giving useful evidence. Notice was given by public advertisement of intended sittings, requesting all persons who desired to give evidence to communicate with the Secretary. In each place the Mayor of the city or borough, the chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, the president of the local Agricultural and Pastoral Association, merchants, manufacturers, tradesmen, farmers, and the heads of the various labour organizations were subpoenaed. Your Commissioners proceeded to Australia, and visited the States of New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria, South Australia, and Queensland. In these States they were favoured with the evidence of members of the Federal and ii—A. 4.
A.—4
X
State Governments, leading public men, Government officials, merchants, traders, agriculturists, representatives of labour organizations, and others. They endeavoured to get the evidence" of persons favourable to the federation of New Zealand with the Commonwealth of Australia, as well as of those opposed to such federation, so that the views and arguments held on both sides of the question might be laid before Parliament. They found that the question had been but little considered by the people of New Zealand. The Commonwealth Constitution Act had not even been read by many of those who attended before your Commissioners, and its provisions, generally speaking, were imperfectly understood by many of those who professed to have considered the subject of federation somewhat attentively. Federation with the Commonwealth of Australia has been considered by your Commissioners from the standpoints of how it would affect, — I. Legislative independence ; 11. Public finance; 111. Defence; IV. Postal and telegraphic services; Y. Administration of justice ; VI. Imperial relations; VII. Federal departmental administration ; VIII. Agricultural, commercial, and industrial interests ; IX. The social condition of the working-classes ; and X. The question of coloured labour. I. Legislative Independence. Having regard to the thirty-nine important subjects upon which the Federal Parliament has express power to legislate, under section 51 of the Commonwealth Act, and to the fact that one of those thirty-nine subjects—viz., the thirty-sixth—gives authority to legislate upon matters in respect of which " the Constitution makes provision until the Parliament otherwise provides," and also that the powers of Parliament under the said section 51 are expressed in bare and general terms, it is difficult to say exactly what are the limits of legislation by the Federal Parliament under the Constitution. For instance, the Parliament has power to legislate, so far as the Commonwealth is concerned, with respect-to "trade and commerce with other countries and among the States." "Trade" and "commerce" are very comprehensive terms, and this power would probably be held to authorise the Parliament to pass laws relating to shipping and seamen, having general operation throughout the Commonwealth. Again, the legislative powers of the Parliament upon another subject are expressed in section 51, (2), by the single word "Taxation," the only limit being that any such legislation shall not discriminate between States or parts of States. A law passed by the Federal Parliament dealing with "Taxation" might seriously interfere with the power of a State Parliament to pass a law imposing taxation within the limits of the State. It is also to be noticed that the general power given by section 51, (27), to Parliament to legislate for the Commonwealth under the words " Immigration and emigration " would enable it to pass laws which might seriously interfere with the powers of a State Parliament in respect of such matters. The Federal Parliament has exclusive power to legislate in respect of, — (1.) The imposition of duties of Customs and excise; (2.) Postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services ; (3.) Defence; - (4.) Lighthouses, lightships, beacons, and buoys; and, according to the evidence before your Commissioners, it seems probable that the Parliament will, before long, and with the consent of the States, assume the control of railways.
A.—4
XI
The Federal control of these important services must seriously abridge the legislative powers of the State Parliaments ; and, remembering that " When a law of a State is inconsistent with a .law of the Commonwealth the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid " (section 109), the conclusion is inevitable that the legislative independence of any colony as existing prior to Federation must be seriously impaired when such colony becomes a State of the Commonwealth. The extent of the legislative powers of the Federal Parliament has yet to be tested by experience, and your Commissioners are of opinion that when that test is applied it will be difficult to define or determine the limits of such powers. An argument strongly urged by certain witnesses who favoured the federation of New Zealand was that thereby harmonious legislation would be secured. Your Commissioners are of opinion that federation per se would not secure such harmony, except in matters of Federal concern; whereas, without federating, New Zealand would be able to legislate upon any subject allowed by her Constitution, upon similar lines to any law existing in the Commonwealth. Your Commissioners have given attention to the question whether there is any probability that the legislative powers of the States Parliaments will be hereafter abridged, or the States abolished. From the evidence adduced on thjs point it will be seen that while there are prominent public men who favour the unification of Australia under one Federal Parliament, there is an almost unanimous conviction that the States Governments are in no danger of extinction. Many advocates of State rights, however, believe that the railways must ultimately come under Federal control, and that the functions of the Federal Government will gradually be enlarged in other directions. There can be no doubt that the political power which will accrue to the Federal Government from the fiscal control it exercises over the States, through the possession and administration of large Customs and other revenues, and from the management and construction of railways, will cause the people of the Commonwealth to regard the Federal rather than the State Government as the more important and useful political body. The States Governments mnst therefore decline in power, dignity, and importance, and there is already an active agitation in a majority of the States in favour of' a reduction in the numerical strength of the States Parliaments and Executives. 11. Public Finance. Your Commissioners have considered the question, how the public finances of New Zealand would be affected by the colony becoming a State of the Commonwealth of Australia, as one of the most serious they have had to review in connection with the inquiries committed to them. Great attention has therefore been paid to the financial provisions of the Commonwealth Act, and they have had the advantage of evidence in Australia given by many members of the Federal and State Governments, and of men eminent as financial authorities. It will be seen from the evidence of these witnesses that there are great differences of opinion not only as to what results Federation will have upon the public finances of the several States, but also as to what is the proper interpretation of the financial provisions of the Act. It appeared to your Commissioners that the majority of the electors in the several States in Australia had accepted Federation without having fully understood how the public finances of those States would be affected by the provisions of the Federal Constitution. Whether the Constitution is founded upon desirable lines, or whether a better Constitution could have been devised, are matters upon which your Commissioners are not required to express any opinion. Their duty is to consider and report as to whether the Constitution of the Commonwealth is one which it is prudent or desirable that the Colony of New Zealand should accept, even upon the basis of an original State.
A.—4
XII
The first and most important matter in connection with finance is the fact that, under Federation, uniform duties of Customs must be imposed within two years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and that on the imposition of such uniform duties the power of the Federal Parliament to impose duties of Customs and excise, and to grant bounties on the production or export of goods, becomes exclusive. The Federal Government, almost immediately after its formation, took over the collection of Customs and excise duties .throughout the Commonwealth, subject to " the book-keeping " provisions of the Commonwealth Act (sections 89 and 93). In the several Federal States the proportion of- Customs and excise to total revenue varies considerably; but in some of the States the amount of annual Customs and excise to total revenue approximates closely to the interest payable in respect of the public debt of the State — On the 31st March, 1900, the public debt of New Zealand was ... 47,874,452 The amount of Customs and excise duties received for the year 1899-1900 was ... ... ... ... ... 2,187,859 The interest payable in respect of the public debt for the same year was (including sinking funds) ... ... ... 1,749,394 Absorbing the whole of the Customs and excise duties for the) £aqq 455 year, less ... ... ... ... ... ...) ' Provision is made by section 87 (commonly called " the Braddon clause ") of the Commonwealth Act that during a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter until Parliament otherwise provides, of the net revenue of the Commonwealth from duties of Customs and of excise not more than one-fourth shall be applied annually by the Commonwealth towards Federal expenditure, and that the balance shall, in accordance with the Constitution, be paid to the several States, or applied towards the payment of interest on the debts of the several States taken over by the Commonwealth. Until the Federal Tariff Act is passed no reliable estimate of the fiscal results of Federation can be made. The opinions of financial experts examined by your Commissioners on this subject have varied considerably. After a careful review of their evidence yo,ur Commissioners are of opinion that, in consequence of the smaller amount that would probably be yielded to New Zealand from Customs and excise duties under a Federal tariff than she now obtains, together with her contributions to the expenses of the Federal Government and new services, estimated at ,£IIO,OOO annually, the revenue of the colony would be diminished by at least ,£450,000. This estimate is based upon the assumption that the book-keeping system will be maintained. But if that system be found unworkable in practice, as some prominent financiers predict, the loss to New Zealand under Federation may be much greater. The imports of merchandise of British and foreign origin into New Zealand through the agency of Australian mercantile firms in 1900 amounted approximately to £820,000. If the duties collected on these goods at the ports of first arrival were not credited to the State in which they were consumed, New Zealand, under a tariff averaging 15 per cent., would pay in taxation, on the basis of the imports in the year cited, the sum of £123,000 to the advantage of other States, unless some other method of distribution in proportion to contribution be devised. It has been suggested that the Federal Government should redistribute the surplus Customs and excise revenue pro raid to population; but the unequal consumption of dutiable goods in the several States, a difficulty which especially presents itself in the case of Western Australia, where there is an abnormally large adult male population, creates objections to the general adoption of this basis. The intention of the framers of the Commonwealth Constitution, as evidenced by the provisions of section 93, was that, subject to the provision for crediting the State where dutiable goods are consumed with the duties or excise payable thereon, the Commonwealth should, during the first five years after the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, and thereafter until the Par-
A.—4
XIII
liament otherwise provides, credit revenue, debit expenditure, and pay balances to the several States—according to the book-keeping system as prescribed for the period preceding the imposition of uniform duties of Customs. The Braddon clause, however, for a period of ten years, limits the amount of Customs and excise revenue of the States which the Commonwealth may appropriate for its own purposes to one-fourth of the net revenue. At the expiration of that period there is apparently no express provision in the Constitution prohibiting the Federal Government from applying the whole of the revenues collected from Customs and excise in the several States to Federal purposes, without being under any obligation to return any part of such revenue to any of the States. It is true that section 94 of the Commonwealth Act enacts that after five years from the imposition of uniform duties of Customs the Parliament may provide, on such basis as it deems fair, for the monthly payment to the several States of all surplus revenue of the Commonwealth, and the provisions of that section would seem to imply that the Federal Government must not retain any revenue beyond what is sufficient for Federal expenditure; but to that expenditure no limit is set, and whether any surplus available for the several States is to be paid in proportion to the contribution of each State to the Federal revenue, or upon the basis of the population in each State, is apparently left absolutely to the discretion of the Federal Parliament. In the event of Federal requirements absorbing the whole of the Customs and excise revenue contributed by the States, no doubt the Federal Government would be morally bound to take over the full responsibility for the public debts of the States. Whether or not the provisions of the Braddon clause continue in operation for a longer period than ten years, the serious question remains, How would New Zealand, if a State of the Commonwealth, make up the loss of revenue consequent on her surrender of control over Customs and excise, and her contributions to the financial requirements of the Commonwealth ? Plainly, there are only two ways, viz.: (a) Additional direct taxation, or (b) retrenchment in public expenditure. If the latter method became necessary, another serious consideration would be as to how funds for the prosecution of public works, and for developing the natural resources of the State, could be raised, seeing that the principal source of payment of interest on loans (Customs and excise duties) would have passed beyond the control of the State. The evidence of the State Treasurer of Tasmania shows the difficulties in connection with the public finances of that State which are anticipated under Federation. Two very serious objections appear to your Commissioners to exist as to the financial provisions of the Commonwealth Act. One is that both the Commonwealth and the States dip into the same purse, and the Federal Government, having supreme control, will dominate the fiscal policy of every State. There is no limit whatever to expenditure by the Federal Government, or to the contributions to the Federal revenue which may be required from the States. It is true that so long as the provisions of the Braddon clause continue in operation only one-fourth of the net revenue of the Commonwealth from duties of Customs and excise can be applied annually by the Commonwealth towards its expenditure; yet it is equally true that the Federal Government has the power of imposing direct taxation throughout the Commonwealth. The other objection is that, owing to the Braddon clause, whenever in any financial year the Federal Government require an additional appropriation from Customs and excise for some specific object, as, for example, the payment of oldage pensions, it must necessarily raise from such duties a revenue equal to four times the amount required, notwithstanding the fact that the States Governments may not require for State revenue the whole of the three-fourths returnable under the Braddon clause. Conversion of Loans. —It has been strongly urged by those who advocate New Zealand joining the Commonwealth that there would be a great annual saving of interest to the several States if the Parliament of the Commonwealth, under the powers conferred by section 105 of the Constitution Act, takes over from the States their public debts as existing at the establishment of the Com-
A.—4
XIV
monwealth, and converts, renews, or consolidates such debts. The Federal Parliament in so doing would only act as agent for the States, the latter being bound to indemnify the Commonwealth in respect of the debts taken over. The interest payable in respect of the debts is to be deducted and retained from the portion of the surplus revenue of the Commonwealth payable to the several States; or if the surplus be insufficient, or if there be no surplus, then the deficiency or the whole amount must be paid by the several States. The States, therefore, do not diminish their liability m respect of their debts. It is further alleged that the Commonwealth would be able to save money to the States by converting the loans at a lower rate of interest. Most financiers, however, agree that there is no real saving in conversion, and that the holders of State securities will not part with them except upon getting some other security in lieu thereof- of at least equal value. . Moreover, in the case of New Zealand, the bulk of the public bonds do not mature for many years to come; she would, consequently, be unable to participate in any general scheme of conversion. Financial Assistance to States. —The framers of the Commonwealth Constitution Act seem to have anticipated that the federation of the Australian States must result in financial embarrassment to some of the federating States, and no doubt that was the reason for the provision in section 96 of the Act that during a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter until Parliament otherwise provides, the Parliament may grant financial assistance to any State upon such terms and conditions as the Parliament thinks fit. Your Commissioners were unable to ascertain definitely what was intended by that* clause, notwithstanding that they sought information from several public men who were concerned as members of the Federal Convention in the preparation of the Commonwealth Constitution Act. Whether such "financial assistance" was intended to be by way of loan or gratuity was a matter upon which opinions differed very materially in the evidence, given upon the point. Your Commissioners are of opinion that the public finances of New Zealand would be seriously prejudiced in the event of. this colony becoming a State of the Commonwealth of Australia, and that her State Government would be hampered and embarrassed in respect of finance, and in the prosecution of any policy for developing her resources. A statement showing the public indebtedness of the several States of the Australian Commonwealth and of the Colony of New Zealand, with the due dates of the several loans, is appended to this report. 111. Defence. Upon this matter your Commissioners have had the evidence of the Officers Commanding the Forces in the States of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, and Queensland, and of Major Madocks, staff officer to the Commander of the Forces in New Zealand. Having carefully considered the opinions of these officers, the Commissioners agree that, so long as Great Britain holds command of the sea, New Zealand is quite able to undertake her own land defence. In the event of Great Britain losing command of the sea, Australia and New Zealand could not rely upon being able to render material assistance to each other in defence against a foreign Power. Your Commissioners are further of opinion that as a separate colony New Zealand would render to Australia all possible assistance in war-time ; and similar assistance would be given by Australia to New Zealand. No doubt great advantages may accrue to the Commonwealth of Australia from being now able to unite the local forces of the several States in one Federal force, with a uniform system and under one command; but the distance of New Zealand from Australia would render it necessary, even were she a State of the Commonwealth, for some arrangement whereby independent power would be vested in the Officer Commanding in this colony ; besides which a small-arms ammunition factory and separate military stores and munitions of war would be essential in any case here. Some witnesses were of opinion that an Australian navy of considerable power would be created before
A.—4
XV
long, and prove a great source of protection to all the federated States; but your Commissioners feel sure that many years must elapse before the Commonwealth can afford to man and maintain a squadron in any degree adequate to the purposes for which it would be required. Your Commissioners believe that the best protection this colony can have against foreign aggression is the Imperial fleet, and that the Commonwealth and New Zealand should increase the annual subsidy paid to the Imperial Government in respect of the Australasian Squadron, upon condition that the number of warships composing the squadron be increased and ships of a higher class employed in Australasian waters. The enrolment and annual training of an Imperial Naval Reserve for service on board His Majesty's ships in these seas is worthy of serious consideration. Your Commissioners were informed of the probability of the early establishment of a military college in the Commonwealth. In such an event there should not be any difficulty in arranging for officers of the defence forces of New Zealand pursuing their military studies at such college, whether New Zealand federates with Australia or not. Your Commissioners are unable to see any advantage as regards mutual defence which would arise from federation. IV. Postal and Telegraphic. It is problematical whether the Federal Parliament will follow the example set by this colony in the establishment of universal penny-postage and cheap telegrams, or whether, in the event of New Zealand becoming a State of the Commonwealth, she would be permitted to continue those systems ; and it is doubtful if, in the matter of mail contracts and subsidies, the Commonwealth Government would be prepared to recognise and adequately provide for the requirements of New Zealand, especially as regards oversea services. Should New Zealand join the Federation serious disadvantages in the matter of postal and telegraphic administration would probably be experienced, owing to the distance of these islands from Australia, and it would be necessary to vest such large powers in officials in New Zealand that the department would have to a great extent to work independently of the central authority in Australia. It appears to your Commissioners that, so far as postal and telegraphic matters are concerned, the result of federation would be almost certain loss to New Zealand. V. Administration of Justice. It has been urged that one reason for federation is that thereby uniformity of the law upon certain matters would be obtained, to the great advantage of New Zealand. From the evidence before your Commissioners, it appears that no serious difficulty has hitherto been experienced owing to any want of such uniformity, either as regards commercial or any other branch of the law; nor has there been any difficulty, so far as procedure is concerned, in enforcing in New Zealand judgments obtained in Australia, or vice versa. Your Commissioners are of opinion that whatever differences there may be between the law of Australia and New Zealand can be satisfactorily adjusted even if the latter remain a separate colony. The criminal law would, in any event, remain under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State Legislatures, each of which would be able to pass such criminal laws as the Constitution of the State allowed, without interference by the Federal Parliament: that Parliament not having power to pass laws relating to crimes, beyond providing remedies and punishments for breaches of statutes passed by it. The Constitution Act creates the High Court of Australia, with jurisdiction, subject to regulation by Parliament, to hear and determine appeals from the Courts mentioned in section 73. The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal is not
A.—4
XVI
exclusive as regards cases decided by the Supreme Court of a State, and an unsuccessful litigant in a State forming part of the Commonwealth has the option of appealing to the King in Council or to the High Court. It was pointed out to your Commissioners in evidence at Sydney that if cross-appeals by both plaintiff and defendant were made from a decision of a State Supreme Court, and the plaintiff appealed to the King in Council, and the defendant to the High Court, the judgments of the two Courts of Appeal might be directly contrary to each other, whilst each would be a final and conclusive judgment. Probably no practical inconvenience would arise in such a case, as the prerogative right of the Crown to grant special leave of appeal to the Privy Council could be invoked by the parties concerned. Under section 74 no appeal is permitted to the King in Council from a decision of the High Court without the certificate of such High Court upon any question as to the limits inter se of the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and those of any State or States, or as to the limit inter se of the constitutional powers of any two or more States. Except as provided in this section, the right of the Crown to grant special leave of appeal is not impaired. Parliament may make laws limiting the matters in which such leave may be asked, but proposed laws containing any such limitation must be reserved for the King's pleasure. The Commissioners are of opinion that litigants in New Zealand may well be content with the right of appeal which exists from the Court of Appeal in New Zealand to the King in Council. A conference of eminent legal authorities will shortly be held in London, the result of which.will probably be a scheme enlarging the powers and usefulness of the Privy Council as a Colonial Court of Appeal. VI. Imperial Eelations. It has been alleged as a reason for joining the Australian Commonwealth that federation would consolidate British interests, and thus tend to promote the unity of the Empire. But it is possible that, in the future, Imperial unity may be better promoted by' the existence of two British Powers in these seas rather than one. All British colonies now recognise the necessity of adherence to the Mother-country and to each other, and have lately given splendid proofs of their loyalty to the Empire. But history teaches us how a community may be hurried by a gust of popular passion or prejudice into some irrevocable deed, where there is no check upon the action of its Government and Legislature. Neither Australia nor New Zealand would be likely in future years under any circumstances to break away from the Empire without inquiry as to the attitude of the other; time would be gained, and a catastrophe probably averted. VII. Fedebal Depaetmental Administration. Your Commissioners are of opinion that the stretch of some twelve hundred miles of sea between Australia and New Zealand is a weighty argument against New Zealand joining the Commonwealth, and they believe that, should New Zealand federate, great inconvenience must at all times be experienced in the administration of the several departments controlled by the Federal Government —an inconvenience which must operate most prejudicially against good administration. It has also to be seriously considered whether, owing to the distance between New Zealand and the Federal capital, the wants of New Zealand would not be in danger of being overlooked, and, indeed, disregarded, by the Federal Parliament and Executive Government, or, if not so overlooked and disregarded, of being imperfectly understood or improperly appreciated. VIII. Agricultubal, Commercial, and Industrial Interests. Those who are favourable to federation urge the great importance of interState free-trade, which, it is alleged, would benefit New Zealand. It is therefore necessary to consider carefully the statistics of the trade and commerce of New Zealand, the potentialities as regards production of the several States of
A.—4
the Commonwealth, and the effect which federation might have upon the trade between New Zealand and Australia : — Yeab 1899. £ The total exports from New Zealand in the year 1899 amounted to 11,938,335 The total imports to New Zealand in the year 1899, excluding specie, amounted to ... ... ... ... ... 8,613,656 The total exports from New Zealand to the Commonwealth in the year 1899 amounted to ... ... ... ... ... 1,708,036 The total imports from the Commonwealth to New Zealand in the year 1899 (excluding specie) amounted to ... ... ... 1,211,568 The exports from New Zealand to the Commonwealth during 1899, and which were the produce of the colony, amounted to ... 1,646,169 In this amount was included gold (of universal value) to the amount of ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 645,850 1,000,319 The imports* from the Commonwealth to New Zealand, and which represented the produce of the Commonwealth (excluding specie), amounted to ... ... ... ... ... ... 500,699 Net balance in favour of New Zealand ... 499,620 * The values given here are f.o.b. values in Australia, not o i.f. in New Zealand. Year 1900. In 1900 the total exports from New Zealand to the Commonwealth £ amounted to ... ... ... ... ... ... 1,858,582 Deduct gold ... ... ... ... ... ... 764,590 Total export (excluding gold) ... ... 1,093,992 In 1900 the total imports to New Zealand from the Commonwealth (excluding specie) amounted to ... ... ... ... 1,389,008 Note.—The full particulars for 1900 are not jet available. The above table shows that, excluding gold, the exports of New Zealand produce to the Commonwealth in 1899 amounted to only B*4 per cent, of the total exports, and that the imports of produce of the Commonwealth to New Zealand amounted to only 5 - 8 per cent, of the total imports. Details of the interchange of trade between New Zealand and the Commonwealth accompany this report. Agriculture. —It has been contended that if New Zealand joined the Commonwealth the effect of inter-State free-trade would be to increase the markets in Australia for the productions of this colony, and so induce an extension of agricultural industry in New Zealand. It is said that a large and profitable market for agricultural produce, especially oats, from New Zealand existed in Victoria prior to the imposition of protective duties, and that in consequence of those duties that market has been practically closed. Whether or not the imposition of protective duties was the inducement which led Victorian farmers to extend the area under crop, certain it is that for some years past Victoria has been, and is now, able to grow all the oats and other agricultural produce required for home consumption, and to have a large surplus available for export. All the expert witnesses examined by your Commission in Australia agreed that, even under free-trade, New Zealand could not look to the States of the Commonwealth for a large permanent market for agricultural and pastoral products. But in seasons of drought a valuable market will, no doubt, always be found there. New South Wales has during the last ten years brought under crop for wheat an additional area of over 1,000,000 acres of land, and last season had a surplus of upwards of 6,000,000 bushels for export. Barley fit for malting, and hops, are also successfully grown. In Victoria the production of wheat is carried on upon a large scale; and, as to oats, although it is admitted that for some purposes the New Zealand oats are of a superior quality, and that the average yield in New Zealand iii—A. 4.
xvii
A.-4
is larger and more certain, yet Victoria, except in time of drought, can supply all her own demands for oats, and have a large quantity available for export. The Victorian returns for 1900-1 show that the area under crop for oats was 362,427 acres, and the yield 9,575,472 bushels, an average of 26 - 42 bushels per acre. It is claimed that the oaten hay of Victoria is superior to that of New Zealand. South Australia grows wheat largely and cheaply, and in Queensland barley fit for malting, and hops, are successfully grown. The evidence also proves that there are still large areas of land in New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland suitable for extending agricultural operations, and that such operations can be conducted with remunerative results. Your Commissioners were informed that in New South Wales the whole cost per acre for producing wheat is on an average 155.; in Victoria about 16s. This includes all charges, from preparing the land to completely harvesting the grain, which is stripped from the standing straw 7 . The wages of agricultural labourers in Australia are much the same as in New Zealand, taking the average ; but it must be remembered that the system of cultivation in New Zealand, is much more elaborate than in Australia, and is necessarily more expensive : the yield per acre, however, is much larger. The evidence shows that maize can be profitably grown in the States of New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland. In Queensland maize is generally used for horse-feed in lieu of oats. Potatoes can be grown successfully in several of the States of the Commonwealth, notably in Tasmania, Victoria, and New South Wales. The potatoes produced in Tasmania and New Zealand are preferred, being of superior quality and keeping better than those grown in New South Wales and Victoria. Onions are grown in large quantities in most if not in all the States of the Commonwealth. The dairy industry is well developed and annually expanding in Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, and South Australia, each of these States having a considerable surplus of dairy produce for export. During 1899 the value of the butter export from Victoria reached the large total of £1,404,830; and a Queensland witness before your Commission mentioned that during the past year 50,000 cows were milked in one district close to the border of that State, where a few years ago there were only a few milking cows, and that a similar extension is taking place nearer Brisbane. Fruit of all the kinds grown in New Zealand can be profitably grown in the several States of the Commonwealth, as appears by the evidence attached to this report. The fruit grown in Australia is on the whole as good, and cheaper, than that grown in New Zealand. In considering the extent to which our trade with Australia may be affected by the imposition of a protective Federal tariff, it must be borne in mind that \£470,084 worth of our exports in 1900 went to heavily protected colonies, and of the ,£623,908 worth sent to New South Wales under free-trade conditions a considerable quantity represented goods for transhipment, while many of the items exported are not likely to be seriously affected by any probable change in the fiscal system. The tables appended to this report, showing the character of New Zealand exports to Australia, and summarising the agricultural statistics of the Commonwealth, furnish detailed information on this subject. In the course of your Commissioners' inquiries some evidence was elicited with regard to the opening-up of new outlets for the trade of this colony. It was shown that full advantage has not been taken of the South African markets, and attention was drawn to a significant fact in connection with the shipments of New Zealand oats to Victoria—namely, that of the total amount of oats exported in 1900 to that colony, only 320 centals were taken for consumption in Victoria, the balance being transhipped to other markets. There were also large transhipments of New Zealand potatoes to Manila via Sydney. Manufactures. —The question as to how far the manufacturers of this colony would- be affected by federation is subject to various considerations. Very much depends on the Customs tariff which the Federal Parliament of Australia may decide to impose. If New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, although such tariff would not affect her as regards inter-State trade —which would be free
xviii
A.—4
XIX
—yet she might be exposed to severe competition with countries outside the Commonwealth should the Federal tariff be less protective than the present Customs tariff' of New Zealand. It appears to your Commissioners, from the inquiries made by them in Australia, that the Federal tariff will probably be much less protective than any of the tariffs now in force in the States of Victoria, Tasmania, or Western Australia. In Australia there are iron-foundries and engineering-works larger and better equipped than any in New Zealand, but our workshops are increasingfast in extent and appliances, and in many cases employ as many hands as those in Australia. In some trades, however—notably in the boot-and-shoe, furniture, soap and candles, and ready-made-clothing factories, owing to the employment of special machinery and the specialisation of certain lines of work, and in the case of furniture owing to the employment of Chinese labour —Australia would be able to compete successfully with similar manufactures in New Zealand in the event of intercolonial free-trade existing. After fully considering the evidence your Commissioners have come to the conclusion that, apart from the labour conditions hereafter referred to, neither the manufacturers nor the working-classes of New Zealand (except in the boot-and-shoe, furniture, soap and candle, and ready-made-clothing trades) have anything to fear from free-trade being established between New Zealand and Australia. Your Commissioners desire it to be clearly understood that they are not expressing any opinion upon the fiscal question of Free-trade or Protection, but merely stating what they believe would be the result if free-trade existed between New Zealand and Australia. Should, however, free-trade be established, your Commissioners do not consider that New Zealand would find any considerable new markets for her manufactures in Australia, as that country could supply her own requirements. Should New Zealand favour a policy of free-trade with the rest of the world, probably she would be better able to initiate and carry out such a policy as a separate colony. IX. The Social Condition op the Wobking-classes, Your Commissioners made inquiries in Australia as to the rates of wages, hours of labour, holidays, conditions of working, and cost of living of artisans and labourers in Australia. It was proved that, so far as rates of wages (except for overtime), hours of labour, holidays, and conditions of working are concerned, there is generally little difference between skilled artisans in Victoria and New South Wales and those in New Zealand, but in the other States there seems to be little or no uniformity either as to wages or hours of labour; but the proportion of boys and girls employed to adult labour engaged in manufacturing industries in all the States is much larger than in New Zealand. In regard to unskilled labour, an attempt is being made in some of the States by the Government to establish a minimum wage of 7s. per day on public works, a rate which seems to be the rule with all contractors doing Government work, and also with large contractors on private work. In several industries not properly coming under the heading of " skilled," but still involving greater skill than that required of a labourer, the wages paid are lower than the minimum mentioned above, whilst the hours of labour are longer than those worked in New Zealand. The cost of living, food, and clothing is in the main lower in Australia than in New Zealand, whilst house-rent is higher. Tables showing the respective rates of wages and hours of labour in various trades, in Australia and in New Zealand, accompany this report. There is no compulsory Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act in force in any of the States of the Commonwealth. In Victoria and South Australia Wages Boards have been established under the Factories Act, which practically do the same work when set up; but no such Board can be set up in Victoria except by resolution of one or other of the Houses of Parliament, and in South Australia a resolution of both Houses is necessary. Under the Victorian Act Wages Boards for twenty-six trades have been set up; and in South Australia only four trades have been brought under the operation of the statute. No
A,— 4
XX
Workers' Compensation for Accidents statute has been passed in any of the States, the workman's remedy being under the old Employers' Liability Acts or at common law. Early Closing Acts, and Acts referring to the attachment of wages, are in force in certain of the States. The labour legislation is not so " advanced" as in New Zealand. The Factories Acts of the several States do not apply over the whole State, but only to cities and boroughs ; country districts may be brought under the Act by a Gazette notice, but so far in no instance has this been done. Neither are the Factories Acts so comprehensive as in New Zealand, as no factory is required to be registered unless four hands are employed, except in South Australia, where one employe constitutes a factory for the purposes of the Act. A large number of small factories are not subject to the law in States where the minimum of four is adopted, leaving the door open for what is commonly known as "sweating." In other words, notwithstanding the existence of the Wages Boards, any wages may be paid or any number of hours may be worked in such workrooms, as the law takes no cognisance of them. The Federal Parliament apparently has power only to make laws with respect to " conciliation and arbitration for the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes extending beyond the limits of any one. State," (section 51, subsection 35,) so that the Federal Parliament could not under the present Constitution legislate in respect of the prevention or settlement of industrial disputes in New Zealand alone if that colony were a State of the Commonwealth. As a State of the Commonwealth New Zealand would still have legislative power to maintain and amend her existing code of labour-laws. Nevertheless, it cannot be assumed that whatever benefits the employers and workers enjoy under those laws would remain assured to them. It is already recognised in Victoria, which is more advanced in its labour legislation than any other State of the Commonwealth, that there will be great difficulty in maintaining its laws, especially those regulating the rates of wages, unless similar statutes are passed by States whose manufactures enter into competition with the products of Victorian factories. This matter now forms the subject of a vigorous public discussion in Australia, and has been brought under the notice of the Federal Premier. Mr. Barton, while pointing out that the Federal Parliament cannot now assume exclusive jurisdiction over the labour-laws of the Commonwealth without an amendment to the Constitution, has suggested that, under the 37th subsection of the 51st section, a State may refer the question of framing a Factories Act to the Commonwealth Parliament; but such legislation would apply only to' the State which makes the reference, although any other State might subsequently adopt it. In the opinion of your Commissioners, however, there is not sufficient unanimity in the several States of the Commonwealth on this question to render it at all probable that uniform Federal labour-laws will be secured at any early date through the medium of such a voluntary surrender of legislative powers as the course suggested by Mr. Barton would involve. The inclusion of New Zealand in the Commonwealth would therefore entail free competition with States where no attempt is now made to regulate the rates of wages or the excessive employment of boy-labour. According to the almost unanimous opinion of the employers and artisans engaged in manufacturing industries in New Zealand examined by your Commissioners, such competition would render the maintenance of the New Zealand code of labour-laws extremely difficult, and might result in reduced wages, longer hours, and a considerable displacement of labour. X. Coloured Labour. The large powers of legislation possessed by the Federal Parliament in respect of immigration would, in the opinion of your Commissioners, enable that Parliament to pass laws authorising the employment of coloured labour within the boundaries of the Commonwealth, and such laws would prevail against any to the contrary passed by a State. The question of coloured la,bour in Australia is a large and important one, and your Commissioners gave much attention to the subject, and examined many witnesses.
A.—4
XXI
Coloured labour—including Chinese, Cingalese, Japanese, Javanese, and Kanaka—is employed in the State of Queensland in connection witht he sugar industry; and, indeed, after considering the evidence before them, your Commissioners are of opinion that in the tropical parts of Queensland, unless coloured labour be by law permitted, the sugar industry will suffer severely, if not die out altogether. The conditions of labour in the cultivation of sugarcane, and the climate in certain parts of Queensland, are such as to be quite unfit for the continuous employment of white men. It was urged before your Commissioners that any work a black man can do a white man can likewise do. That may be true for a time, but your Commissioners believe that in a tropical climate it would be impossible to continue to employ white people in the cane-fields, generation after generation, without serious deterioration taking place in their physical condition. None of the witnesses examined before your Commissioners upon this branch of their inquiry were able to give any instance of the cultivation of sugar in the tropics without the employment of coloured labour. They believe that in this matter the law of Nature will be stronger than that of man, and that coloured labour will have to be employed, if a large part of tropical Australia is not to be left either wholly or largely undeveloped. Nevertheless, your Commissioners recognise that there is such a strong feeling throughout Australia—a sentiment shared by all political parties—in favour of preserving the purity of the British race, and protecting white labour against the unrestricted competition of a coloured population, that no serious danger from that cause need be apprehended under federation. If the employment of coloured labour be ultimately found indispensable to the prosecution of any tropical industry, your Commissioners have no doubt that it will only be permitted under proper safeguards. An influx of Asiatics into the northern territories of Australia would be attended with grave evils to the whole of the States, and these can only be averted by laws practically prohibiting immigration of this character. The same danger does not attend the introduction of Kanakas under severe legal restrictions, limiting their employment to field-work on plantations, and providing for their return home at the expiration of their indentures. Inter-State Commission. The Constitution Act provides for an inter-State Commission, with such powers as Parliament deems necessary, "for the execution and maintenance, within the Commonwealth, of the provisions of this Constitution relating to trade and commerce, and all laws made thereunder." (Section 101.) The members of the Commission are appointed by the Governor - General in Council, and hold office for seven years. They are subject to removal within that term by the Governor-General in Council on an address from both Houses of Parliament in the same session on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Their remuneration is to be fixed by Parliament, and cannot be reduced during their continuance in office. The Commission will be a judicial body, and may have administrative functions, but the extent of the powers Parliament may see fit to confer is yet to be determined. Eeference to sections 102 and 104, however, indicate some of the duties which will devolve on the Commission. With the purely internal traffic of a State the Commission is not concerned; but as regards inter-State traffic in the coterminous States, it will interfere to prevent undue competition by means of discriminating rates on State railways for the traffic of particular localities. As regards inter-State maritime traffic, the Commission will probably perform duties analogous to those of the Board of Trade in England; and, if New Zealand became a State, its interference might prejudicially affect the shipping laws of this colony. Men of large legal and commercial experience will be required to exercise such comprehensive powers, and the aid of an efficient staff will be necessary. It may fairly be anticipated that the annual expense of such a Commission will be considerable, its powers being capable of great expansion under the provisions of the Constitution Act.
A.—4
Recipbocal Treaty. One of the matters of inquiry was as to the probability of a reciprocal treaty between the Commonwealth and "New Zealand in respect of certain natural productions. Whilst your Commissioners believe that there are articles of commerce which are produced in Australia, and which might be admitted free of duty or at lower duty in consideration of similar privileges beingafforded by Australia to certain of New Zealand's natural productions, and that such reciprocity would be of mutual benefit to Australia and New Zealand, your Commissioners are not hopeful at the present time of any such reciprocal treaty being arranged. They, however, trust that this matter will engage the attention of the Government of New Zealand, and that efforts will from time to time be made to bring about such a reciprocal treaty. GENERAL EEMAEKS. There are several important matters bearing upon the political interests of New Zealand which your Commissioners think should be seriously borne in mind in considering whether or not this colony should become a State of the Commonwealth. One of such matters is the provision of the Commonwealth Bill (section 127) that in reckoning the number of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives shall not be counted. The result would be that New Zealand, if a State of the Commonwealth, would have one member in the House of Kepresentatives less than she would be entitled to if the Maoris were counted in the number of the people of the State. Though your Commissioners believe that the framers of the Commonwealth Constitution had not at the time our Maori fellow-subjects in their mind, and that the provision in reference to aboriginal natives was not intended to refer to the Maoris, yet they are clearly included therein ; and as the voting-power of New Zealand in the House of Representatives would be correspondingly diminished, and as the exclusion of the Maoris would be a great injustice to them, your Commissioners consider that the people of New "Zealand should hesitate before federating with Australia —if otherwise prepared so to do—unless some amendment of the Commonwealth Constitution be made which would enable the Maoris to be counted in the population of New Zealand. It should be said here that every responsible statesman w 7 ho gave evidence admitted at once that such an amendment would be necessary, and would be willingly accepted in Australia. Your Commissioners are of opinion that the power contained in clause 128 of the Commonwealth Act, enabling the veto of the Senate upon proposed amendments to the Constitution to be over-ridden by a popular vote, weakens the safeguard provided for the integrity of the States under equal Senate representation. They apprehend that amendments of a centralising character may be made hereafter, which would be injurious to the States most distant from the Federal capital, and that New Zealand, under federation, would be especially liable to suffer from this cause owing to her isolation. Attention is called to sections 111 and 122 of the Commonwealth Act, the former providing that the Parliament of a State may surrender any part of the State to the Commonwealth, and that upon such surrender, and the acceptance thereof by the Commonwealth, such part of the State shall become subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commonwealth ; whilst section 122 provides that the Parliament may make laws for the government of any territory surrendered by any State to and accepted by the Commonwealth, or of any territory placed by the King under the authority of and accepted by the Commonwealth, or otherwise acquired by it, and may allow the representation of such territory in either House of Parliament to the extent and on the terms which it thinks fit. There can be no doubt that these sections are applicable to the Northern Territory of South Australia, which the Premier of that State has been recently urging the Federal Government to take over. It has been stated in the South Australian Press that section 122 " was inserted in the Commonwealth Act with distinct reference to the possible acquisition by the Commonwealth of the
xxii
A.—4
Northern Territory of South Australia," which was ceded in 1863 to South Aixstralia under Royal Letters Patent, and which are liable to revocation. The administration of the tropical territories of South Australia at present entails upon the Government of that State a loss of from .£70,000 to .£BO,OOO a year. It was recently indicated by Mr. Holder, late Premier of the State, that this price was really paid for the preservation of a " white Australia," by the exclusion of coloured labour. This argument has been urged by him as a reason why the Federal Government should take over the administration of the territory. It may be pointed out that more than one-third of the Australian Continent lies north of the Tropic of Capricorn, and all the southern colonies are directly interested in the profitable occupation and development of these territories. It appears probable therefore that such applications as the one which has already been officially made to the Federal Government by South Australia will receive favourable consideration. Your Commissioners look upon the acquisition of these territories by the Commonwealth as a certain cause of increased Federal expenditure. The evidence of the Right Hon. Sir John Forrest, a member of the Federal Government, given before your Commissioners, plainly shows that the construction of a railway connecting the railways of the States of Western Australia and South Australia, at a cost of ,£3,000,000, is contemplated by the Federal Government; and, indeed, the question of the construction of that railway was one of the matters referred to in the speech of His Excellency the GovernorGeneral upon the occasion of his declaring his reasons for summoning the Federal Parliament to the present session. Your Commissioners think it a matter for serious consideration whether the probability of the construction of such a costly work, and of other similar undertakings, will not hasten the time when the whole work of railway construction and management will be taken over by the Federal Government ; and, while such a policy might prove advantageous to the various continental States, it could only result in serious injury and loss to an isolated State like New Zealand. A majority of the leading Australian statesmen who gave evidence before your Commission admitted that New Zealand, owing to its distance and separation by sea, might reasonably claim special conditions before joining the Commonwealth. It is clear, however, that the terms of the Act would not allow a differential Customs tariff similar to that granted for a period of five years to Western Australia. Any condition exempting the Maoris from the operation of the clause disqualifying aboriginals would also require an Imperial declaratory Act, if not an amendment of the Commonwealth Constitution. Conditions exempting New Zealand from liability to contribute towards matters of a purely Australian character, such as the transcontinental railway and the administration of tropical Australia, and giving her a more complete autonomy with respect to the administration of Federal services, might be embodied in the statute establishing the union ; but it is difficult to see how such provision could be made permanently with respect to all the contingencies that may lie ahead under an indissoluble partnership between two communities having no definite natural bond uniting them together on the basis of common interests. It should be always borne in mind that federation in Australia was hastened by the constant friction and irritation which existed in several of the colonies through border duties of Customs, questions concerning the control of rivers which were the boundaries of States, by conflicting railway tariffs in different States, the need for a system of defence applicable to the entire continent, and other causes. The same reasons for federation do not exist in this colony. Thus far your Commissioners have indicated certain matters in which federation might be prejudicial to the best interests of New Zealand. They, however, in the course of their inquiries endeavoured to ascertain what advantages were claimed by those advocating New Zealand joining the Commonwealth. The principal arguments advanced in New Zealand were the benefits alleged to be derivable from intercolonial free-trade, and from the broader education of the inhabitants of this colony by association with the larger community of Australia, Your Commissioners have already dealt with the question
xxiii
A.—4
XXIV
of intercolonial free-trade, and they confess that they are unable to understand how the broader education of the inhabitants of this colony is to be brought about by such association. The Commissioners are not impressed by these alleged advantages, and do not believe that federation or non-federation will affect the rapidly increasing intercourse between the Commonwealth and New Zealand. In Australia another argument was used by some of the leading public men. It was urged that by the federation of New Zealand with Australia friction in reference to the trade with or control of the islands of the Pacific would be avoided. Eeference was made to the supposed intention of New Zealand to federate with or annex certain of these islands, and it was contended that sooner or later disputes and differences were bound to arise between the Commonwealth and New Zealand concerning trade with the islands. This argument was chiefly urged in the State of New South Wales. In some of the other States such an argument was either deprecated or it was admitted that many of the islands of the Pacific afforded natural opportunities for administration from New Zealand. CONCLUSION. "Your Commissioners, after giving the fullest consideration to the evidence before them, and with their knowledge of the soil, climate, and productiveness of New Zealand, of the adaptability of the lands of the colony for close settlement, of her vast natural resources, her immense wealth in forest, in mine, and natural scenery, of the energy of her people, of the abundant rainfall and vast water-power she possesses, of her insularity and geographical position ; remembering, too, that New Zealand as a colony can herself supply all that can be required to support and maintain within her boundaries a population which might at no distant date be worthily styled a nation, have unanimously arrived at the conclusion that merely for the doubtful prospect of further trade with the Commonwealth of Australia, or for any advantage which might reasonably be expected to be derived by this colony from becoming a State in such Commonwealth, New Zealand should not sacrifice her independence as a separate colony, but that she should maintain it under the political Constitution she at present enjoys. Your Commissioners therefore most respectfully beg to report to your Excellency that, in their unanimous opinion, it is not desirable that New Zealand should federate with and become a State of the Commonwealth of Australia. Your Commissioners desire to add that in Australia they found the most friendly feeling towards New Zealand, not only among members of the Federal and States Governments and public men, but among all classes with whom they came in contact ; and, whilst the opinion was expressed that whether or not New Zealand should enter the Federation was a question principally for her to decide, it is certain that, should this colony decide in the affirmative, she would be warmly welcomed into the Commonwealth on terms at least as advantageous as if she had been an original State. Your Commissioners desire to inform your Excellency that they received the utmost kindness, courtesy, information, and assistance from the members of the Federal and States Governments in prosecuting their inquiries in Australia. The Federal and States officials were enjoined to afford all requisite information; ready access was given to all statistics and public records, and, generally, everything was done to facilitate the work of the Commission. All which is, with great respect, submitted to your Excellency. As witness our hands and seals, at Wellington, this thirtieth day of May, 1901. Albeet Pitt, Chairman. J. A. Millar. Harold Beauchamp. W. S. Eeid. (1.5.) Chas. C. Bowen. John Eoberts. Thomson W. Leys. W. R. Kussell. Charles M. Luke. William Jukes Steward.
A.-4
XXV
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS.
WELLINGTON. Thursday, 17th January, 1901. The first meeting of the Commission took place at the Parliamentary Buildings, Wellington, on Thursday, 17th January, 1901, at 3 o'clock p.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (Chairman), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Beid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Captain Eussell, M.H.E. The Secretary (Mr. Morris Pox) and the Eeporter (Mr. W. H. Eussell) were also in attendance. The Secretary read the Commission. A telegram was read from Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E., saying that he would arrive in Wellington from Sydney the next day. After some discussion as to whether the Press should be admitted, Mr. Leys moved, That the Press be admitted to the ordinary meetings of the Commission. A division was called for, and the names were taken down as follows :—■ Ayes. —Mr. Bowen, Mr. Leys, Colonel Pitt. Noes. —Mr. Beauchamp, Mr. Luke, Mr. Millar, Mr. Eeid, Mr. Eoberts, Captain Eussell. The motion was therefore lost; and it was resolved, on the motion of Mr. Millar, that a summary of each day's proceedings should be prepared by the Secretary and handed to the Press. The Chairman addressed the Commission in reference to the methods of procedure to be adopted. After some discussion it was decided to meet for the purpose of taking evidence at Invercargill at 4 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday, sth February. Messrs. Millar and Eoberts were requested to supply the Chairman, before the next meeting of the Commission, with a list of the witnesses they considered should be called upon to give evidence at Invercargill. The Chairman stated that he would authorise the necessary advertisements to appear in the Invercargill papers in due course. A discussion took place as to what statistical and other information was desirable before proceeding to take evidence, after which it was Resolved, That the Chairman write to the Colonial Secretary asking to be supplied with the financial (Eailway, Postal, and Customs) statistics for the financial year as early as possible after the 31st March. Various members of the Commission handed in lists of desirable statistics, and it was decided that the Chairman should write to the Government for such statistics and other documentary evidence as he might consider advisable. The Commission then adjourned until Friday, 18th January, at 2 p.m.
Friday, 18th Januaby, 1901 The Commission met at 2 p.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Messrs. Millar and Eoberts supplied the Chairman with a list of Southland firms whose evidence it would be desirable to take, and the Chairman agreed to ask the chairman of the Invercargill Chamber of Commerce to forward names of persons representing those firms who would be able to appear before the Commission. It was decided to leave the selection of witnesses in other towns until the Commission met in Invercargill. The Secretary was instructed to proceed to Invercargill two days before the Commissioners in order to make any necessary arrangements. The Commission then adjourned at 3 p.m. until Tuesday, sth February, at Invercargill.
INVEECAEGILL. Tuesday, sth Febeuary, 1901. The Commission met at 4 p.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J r Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed, iv—A. 4.
A.—4
XXVI
A letter was received from the secretary of the Bootmakers' Union, expressing a desire for their representatives, Messrs. W. A. Morris and J. P. Joyce, to be allowed to give evidence. The Secretary was instructed to inform them, that the Commissioners would hear them to-morrow. The Chairman read a letter which he had received from Messrs. Henry Feldwick and Mark Cohen, respectfully asking that the Commissioners should reconsider their decision to exclude the Press from their proceedings. The Chairman spoke at length on the matter, and requested members to give their views. After a lengthy discussion, Mr. Luke moved, That, in view of the difficulties of giving a satisfactory precis of the evidence brought before the Commission, the previous resolution with reference to admitting the Press be rescinded, and that the Press be admitted to the proceedings of the Commission. A division was called for, and the names were taken down as follows :— Ayes. —Mr. Beauchamp, Mr. Bowen, Mr. Leys, Mr. Luke, Colonel Pitt, Major Steward. Noes. —Mr. Millar, Mr. Eeid, Mr. Eoberts, Captain Eussell. The motion was therefore carried. Resolved, on the motion of Mr. Beauchamp, That the Chairman should have a deliberative and a casting vote. Resolved, on the motion of Captain Eussell, That five members of the Commission form a quorum. It was decided that the hours of the Commission should be from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. and from 2.30 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. Mr. Millar suggested that the Commission should pay a visit to the Orepuki Shale-works before leaving Southland. Resolved, on the motion of Mr. Beauchamp, That the Commission visit Orepuki on Thursday, provided business will permit. The Chairman read the following telegram from the Hon. J. G. Ward : " I have received following telegram from H. B. Kirk, Timaru : ' Will Federation Commission sit in Timaru? If so, about when ?' I have replied that the telegram has been referred to you to answer." Resolved, on the motion of Mr. Millar, That a reply be sent that the Commission will only be able to sit in the large centres, but that it will be prepared to receive his evidence in Christchurch or Dunedin, whichever place will suit him best. The Commission adjourned at 6 p.m. until next day at 10 a.m.
Wednesday, 6th February, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. H. A. Massey, who had been asked to give evidence, wrote to say he was neither an exporter to, nor an importer from, Australia, and had no evidence to give which would justify taking up the time of the Commission. The Secretary was instructed to acknowledge the receipt of the letter, and to intimate that Mr. Massey's attendance would not be required. J. E. Watson (Tothill, Watson, and Co., grain merchants, and chairman of the Invercargill Chamber of Commerce) attended and gave evidence. J. E. Callender (New Zealand Loan and Mercantile) attended, and, after explaining that local officers were not free to give their opinions, and begging to refer the Commission to his manager in Wellington, was relieved from further attendance. W. D. Hunt (Wright, Stephenson, and Co., stock and station agents and grain-buyers) attended and gave evidence. W. A. Morris (bootmaker), who claimed to be the representative of unions of bootmakers, butchers, and railway servants, numbering upwards of four hundred, attended and gave evidence. P. L. Gilkison (Fleming, Gilkison, and Co., grain-millers), C. J. Broad (Broad, Small, and Co., ironmongers and timber merchants), E. A. Anderson (J. G. Ward and Co., grain merchants), J. Johnston (Johnston and Co., engineers and dredge-builders), and W. Boss (Eoss and Co., woollen-manufacturers) attended and gave evidence. It was decided to proceed to Dunedin on Friday next, sitting there for the purpose of taking evidence on Saturday, 9th February. A list of witnesses whose evidence it would be desirable to obtain in Dunedin was handed to the Chairman by Mr. Millar, and the Secretary was instructed to have subpoenas forwarded. The Commission adjourned at 4.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. to-morrow.
Thursday, 7th February, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed
A.—4
G. W. Niool (Nicol Brothers, grain merchants) attended and gave evidence. J. M. Jones (manager for W. Guthrie, agricultural-implement manufacturer and timber merchant) attended and gave evidence. Resolved, on the motion of Captain Russell, That a sub-committee be formed, composed of Mr. Beauchamp, Mr. Millar, Mr. Roberts, and the Chairman, to go into the matter of statistics. At 12.10 p.m. the Commission adjourned until 8 p.m. The Commission reassembled at 8 p.m. J. C. Mackley, settler and butcher, attended, made a statement, and gave evidence. I. W. Eaymond, stock and station agent, attended and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 9.50 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Saturday, 9th February, at Dunedin.
DUNEDIN. Satukday, 9th Febeuaey, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Letters were received from H. Rodda and S. C. Brown (representatives of the Dunedin Bootmakers' Union), W. Carr, and F. Mallard, requesting to be permitted to give evidence before the Commission. The Secretary was instructed to arrange for their attendance, the two former on Monday, as requested. A letter was received from P. Barr, secretary of the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce, stating that Mr. Theomin, the president, was absent from the colony, and consequently unable to obey the summons of the Commission. A. S. Paterson (grain agent) and W. A. W. Wathen (president of the Trades and Labour Council, Dunedin) attended and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 12.15 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Monday.
Monday, 11th Febeuaby, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. F. E. Chapman, barrister and solicitor, gave evidence, and handed to the Chairman a copy of an address on Australasian federation delivered by himself to the Otago Institute in November, 1899. S. C. Brown, representative of the Dunedin Bootmakers' Union, attended and gave evidence. He also handed in a statement of wages and conditions prevailing in the Otago boot trade. H. Eodda (another representative of the Bootmakers' Union), W. Hood (president of the Workers' Political Committee), Donald Eeid (of D. Eeid and Co., stock and station agents), Peter Barr (secretary of the Industrial Association), and E. Slater (presser, secretary of the Trades and Labour Council) attended and gave evidence. ■ The Commission adjourned at 4.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Tuesday, 12th Febeuahy, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. 0, M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : A. Burt (of A. and T. Burt, Limited, machinery and engineering works), R. Glendining (of Ross and Glendining, warehousemen and woollen-manufacturers), G. P. Farquhar (of Michaelis, Hallenstein, and Farquhar, leather merchants), A. H. Bridger (manager of Sargood, Son, and Ewen's boot-factory and boot department), J. H. Morrison (manager of the Mosgiel Woollen-factory), J. C Ross (manager and director of the Denton Hat-mills), P. R. Sargood (of Hargood, Son, and Ewen, warehousemen), A. L. Isaacs (manager of the New Zealand Clothing-factory), and R. McKinlay (boot-manufacturer). The Commission adjourned at 3.45 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Wednesday, 13th Febbuary, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C 0. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. 0. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R.
xxvii
A.—4.
XXVIII
The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : W. Carr (upholsterer), J. C. Thomson (president of the Industrial Association of Otago), J. W. Faulkner (wire-worker), J. B. Shacklock (ironfounder), J. Sparrow (ironfounder and general engineer), F. Mallard (insurance expert), Mark Cohen (journalist), and M. J. Scobie Mackenzie. The Commission adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Thursday, 14th February, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : Rev. W. Curzon-Siggers, M.A. (vicar of St. Matthew's, Dunedin), J. W. Milnes (manager of the Phoenix Company, Limited, jam- and biscuit-manufacturers), J. L. Passmore (managing director of Donaghy's Rope and Twine Company), T. W. Kempthorne (managing director of Kempthorne-Prosser's Drug Company), W. Stevenson (of Irvine and Stevenson, provision merchants and starch-manufacturers), F. Oakden (manager of the Millburn Lime and Cement Company), R. Hudson (of R. Hudson and Co., biscuit-manufac-turers), W. B. Reynolds (grain, seed, and produce merchant), J. R. Scott (manager of the National Dairying Association of New Zealand), J. Lethbridge (Dunedin manager for Dalgety and Co.), J. M. Ritchie (merchant, manager of the National Mortgage and Agency Company), and E. B. Cargill. The Commission adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Monday, 18th February, at Christchurch.
CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, 18th February, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence": G. G. Stead (grain merchant), W. Recce (Mayor of Christchurch), H. Friedlander (grain, wool, and produce merchant, Ashburton), D. Thomas (grain, wool, and produce merchant, Ashburton), E. W. Roper (merchant), and G. T. Booth (implement-manufacturer). The Commission adjourned at 6 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Tuesday, 19th February, 1901. • The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, U.L.G., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : R. Allan (of Skelton, Frostick, and Co., boot-manufacturers, and president of the Industrial Association), W. Chrystall (grain merchant), G. H. Blackwell (managing director of the Kaiapoi Woollen-factory), R. E. McDougall (vicepresident of the Industrial Association), W. Wood (tanner and produce exporter, and president of the Chamber of Commerce), H. Wood (flour-miller), H. F. Wigram (maltster), J. Gould (merchant), G. Humphries (merchant), and G. S. Jakins (produce exporter). The Commission adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. the next day.
Wednesday, 20th February, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. G. S. Jakins attended and gave further evidence. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : Hon. Sir J. Hall, K.C.M.G., A. W. Beaven (of Andrews and Beaven, implement-manufacturers), J. S. Myers (farmer), J. A. McCullough (tinsmith, and president of the Trades and Labour Council), J. Young (bootmaker), A. E. G. Rhodes (barrister and solicitor), W. Newton (upholsterer), and J. L. Scott (engineer). The Commission adjourned at 5.45 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
A.—4,
Thuesday, 21st Febeuaey, 1901. The Commission sat at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. *J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : G. H. Whitcombe (manufacturing stationer), J. A. Frostick (boot-manufacturer, and president of Bootmakers' Union), H. Overton (farmer), C. A. Lees (grain merchant), G. Bowron (tanner and leather merchant), W. Williams (Operative Bootmakers' Union), W. Darlow (clicker), A. Anderson (ironfounder), J. Fisher (bootmaker), F. Beverley (soap- and candle-manufacturer), and A. Kaye (grain merchant). The Commission adjourned at 3.45 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Monday, 25th February, at Wellington.
WELLINGTON. Monday, 25th Febeuaey, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. in the Legislative Council Chamber, Wellington. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A telegram was received from the Hon. W. Eolleston, offering a written statement of his views on federation in the event of his inability to appear before the Commission. p Resolved, That the Hon. Mr. Eolleston be informed that the Commission will be pleased to accept a written statement of his views, and will also be pleased for him to attend personally in Auckland if convenient. Mr. James Izett wrote, enclosing a statement of his views in writing, which he asked permission to hand in. The Secretary was instructed to arrange a convenient time for Mr. Izett to attend. Mr. E. E. Vaney (secretary of the Trades and Labour Council) wrote, stating that Messrs. A. H. Cooper (president), A. Collins, and T. Lynch had been appointed to give evidence before the Commission on behalf of the Trades and Labour Council. The Secretary was instructed to arrange for their attendance on Wednesday, 27th instant. Messrs. Cable and Co. wrote, submitting the names of Messrs. D. Eobertson, J. Luke, and W. Crabtree as delegates on behalf of the Engineers' Association. The Secretary was instructed to arrange for their attendance on Wednesday, 27th instant. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : N. Eeid (general merchant and chairman of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce), S. Brown (wood and coal merchant, president of the Industrial Association of Wellington), M. Kennedy (merchant), and T. G. Macarthy (brewer). The Commission adjourned at 1 p.m. until 10 a.m. the next day.
Tuesday, 26th Febeuaey, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received, from S. Brown, asking to be allowed to modify the reply given to the last question put to him. Besolved, That the letter be attached to his evidence. A telegram was read from A. H. Bisley, Nelson, asking for his evidence to be taken on Saturday, as it would be impossible for him to be in Wellington earlier. The Chairman intimated that he had replied, asking Mr. Bisley to state his views in writing. A telegram was read from A. Hatrick, Mayor of Wanganui, saying it would be inconvenient for him to attend, and suggesting that the Commission should sit in Wanganui, as a centre o.f various interests. Besolved, That Mr. Hatrick be informed that the Commission would probably take his evidence on returning from Australia. S. Kirkpatrick, Nelson, wrote, saying it was inconvenient for him to attend, but, if necessary, would like to give his evidence on Thursday. The Secretary was instructed to inform Mr. Kirkpatrick that the Commission would take his evidence on Thursday. A letter was read from J. W. Kays, Wellington, asking to be allowed to give evidence. The Chairman stated that he had asked Mr. Kays to attend on Tuesday afternoon. A letter was received from J. Eoss, Wellington, enclosing a written statement of his views on federation, and asking that this should be accepted instead of personal attendance before the Commission, which would be highly inconvenient. Besolved, That the Commission accept Mr. Boss's statement, which was then read by the Secretary.
xxix
A.—4
XXX
J. Mackay (Chief Clerk in the Labour Department and Inspector of Factories) attended, gave evidence, and handed in a statement and comparative return of wages paid in various trades in the Australasian Colonies. . J. L. Kelly (journalist), M. Chapman (barrister and solicitor), and D. J. Nathan (merchant) attended and gave evidence. J. H. Collier (New Zealand Cycle-works) wrote, asking permission to give evidence, and the Secretary was instructed to arrange a time. A letter was received from W. H. Millward, asking to be relieved from attendance on the ground of urgent business arrangements. It was decided to excuse Mr. Millward from attendance. A further letter was received from Gresley Lukin, again requesting that, on account of private and personal reasons, the Commission would not insist upon his attendance as a witness. Resolved, That the Secretary write to Mr. Lukin and say that he would be- absolved from attendance. A letter was received from J. R. Blair, stating that, as he did not consider the question of federation a live one, and had therefore given it only the most cursory attention, he begged to be excused from giving evidence. He was, however, absolutely opposed to federation. The Secretary was instructed to write excusing Mr. Blair from attendance. B. S. Baldwin (patent agent and consulting engineer) and M. Macpherson (general manager of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company) attended and gave evidence. J. Izett (journalist, now being temporarily employed by the Government) attended, and asked permission to hand in a written statement embodying his opinions upon federation. After considerable discussion as to the propriety of allowing persons in Government employment to give evidence embodying opinions, it was resolved to allow such evidence from persons who, being only temporarily employed, are not Civil servants. The Secretary then read Mr. Izett's paper. H. Hurrell (Bouse and Hurrell, coachbuilders), P. E. Eussell (saddler), and J. Kays (wholesale chemist) attended and gave evidence. J. Duthie (merchant) attended and gave evidence, and also handed in a return of exports from New Zealand to Australia. The Commission adjourned at 5.30 p.m. till 8 p.m. The Commission reassembled at 8 p.m. W. T. Glasgow (Secretary of Customs and Marine) attended and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 10 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Wednesday, 27th Febkuaby, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received from S. Brown (president of the Industrial Association), submitting the names of gentlemen whose evidence might be taken, of whom it was decided to ask Messrs. Prouse and Corrigan to attend. A telegram was read from N. Kettle, Hawke's Bay, asking to be excused on account of important business. ■The Secretary was instructed to intimate that Mr. Kettle would be excused from attendance. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : T. Lynch (wharf-labourer, representing the Trades and Labour Council), Major Madocks (staff officer to the Commandant), W. Cable (master of Engineers' Association, and ironfounder), J. P. Luke (ironfounder and engineer), W. Crabtree (ironfounder and engineer), D. Robertson (ironfounder and engineer), Eev. W. A. Evans (Congregational minister), W. Booth (of Carterton, timber merchant, and director of Wellington Meat Export Company), E. K. Simpson (of Eangitikei, farmer), A. E. Eussell (of Palmerston North, farmer), M. Caselberg (of Masterton, managing director of the Wairarapa Farmers' Co-operative Association), A. Collins (representing the Trades and Labour Council), and P. J. O'Regan (journalist). Letters were received from the Hon. W. Eolleston and Mr. E. Melland, covering statements of their views on federation, in accordance with the request of the Commission. The Commission adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Thuksday, 28th Februawy, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Letters were read from W. Ferguson and E. Hannah, desiring to be excused from attendance, and the Secretary was instructed to intimate that they would be excused accordingly. C. Pharazyn (of Longwood, Featherston) wrote, expressing his views on federation, and it was decided to accept the letter as evidence.
A.—4
XXXI
J. Izett wrote, requesting that an additional paragraph might be included in his evidence. It was decided to append the last sentence —namely, "It is in the character of an old Australian that I desire to appear before your Commission and give evidence now " — if that would be satisfactory to Mr. Izett. W. Gray (Secretary of the Post and Telegraph Department) attended and gave evidence. A letter was read from J. Duncan (of Wellington), embodying his views on federation, and it was decided to accept the same as evidence. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : P. G. Freeth (journalist), A. A. Corrigan (manager, D.1.C., Wellington), Hon. T. W. Hislop (barrister and solicitor), M. G. Heeles (manager, Wellington Woollen-factory), S. Kirkpatrick (of Nelson, jam-manufacturer), A. H. Cooper (bootmaker, and president of the Trades and Labour Council), J. T. Dalrymple (of Bangitikei, farmer), and H. Fielder (cabinetmaker). The Commission adjourned at 3.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Monday, 4th March, at Auckland.
AUCKLAND. Monday, 4th March, 1901. The Commission met at 10.30 a.m. in the Municipal Council Chamber, Auckland. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauehamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, and Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Letters were received from J. Harker, P. E. Cheal, and Eev. G. Mac Murray, expressing their desire to give evidence, and the Secretary was instructed to issue subpoenas accordingly. The Hon. W. Eolleston (of Bangitata) attended, formally handed in a statement embodying his views, and also gave evidence. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : Dr T E. Laishley (barrister and solicitor), P. Virtue (manager, Northern Boiler Milling Company), J. Park (Onehunga Woollen-mills), A. C. Whitney (manager, Colonial Ammunition Company), Eev. J. C. Andrew (of Te Nui, landowner), W. McLaughlin (farmer), T. Hadfield (bootmaker), S. Vaile (land agent), M. A. Clark (warehouseman), A. Sanford (farmer and fish merchant, representative Tailoresses' Union), and T. Peacock (optician). G. Fraser and G. Tarbutt were excused from attendance on account of illness, and W. Philson, L. Nathan, and G. C. Garlick on account of absence from Auckland. The Commission adjourned at 5.40 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Tuesday, sth March, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauehamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, and Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received from H. Jones, of Birkenhead, offering to give evidence in reference to the fruit trade if his expenses were allowed. It was resolved to inform Mr. Jones that if he attended his evidence would be heard, but that the Commission had already arranged for several representatives of the fruit trade to give evidence. A letter was received from S. Vaile, asking permission to add to his evidence in writing, as he had, through haste, omitted some matters of importance. It was resolved that Mr. Vaile be informed that the Commission would allow him to attend again and give further evidence, but that he could not be permitted to materially alter the evidence already given. A letter was received from J. Johnson on the subject of federation, which was read. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : A. B. Donald (ship-owner and island trader), T. T. Masefield (engineer and ironfounder), W. Spragg (general manager, Dairy Association), A. Sturges (fruit-grower), Eev. G. Macmurray (vicar of St. Mary's, Auckland), J. M. Mennie (biscuit- and jam-manufacturer), J. Wiseman (manufacturer and importer), G. Low (fruitgrower), H. Dearsley (president, Bootmakers' Association), and P. E. Cheal (mining engineer and surveyor). The Commission adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Wednesday, 6th March, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauehamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, and Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed,
A.—4.
A letter was read from the secretary of the Waikato Farmers' Club, announcing that Mr. W. F. Buckland had been appointed to represent the club; and it was arranged that Mr. Buckland should be asked to attend before the Commission on Thursday. Letters were received from G. B. Alderton and C. Phillips, stating their views on federation; and it was decided to accept them as evidence. Letters were received from J. Fisher and Hon. E. Mitchelson, asking to be excused from attendance; and they were excused accordingly. A letter was received from P. E. Cheal, drawing attention to some items which he had overlooked in giving evidence the day before. It was resolved to inform Mr. Cheal that the Commission would be pleased to hear further evidence if he would again attend before them. W. Booth, of Carterton, wrote, stating his willingness to give further information before the Commission on their return from Wellington; and the Secretary was instructed to thank Mr. Booth. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : J. H. Upton (stationer), J. H. Mackie (public accountant and auditor, and secretary of the Fruit-growers' Union), J. Aggers (secretary of the Bootmakers' Union), G. A. Coles (boot-manufacturer, and president of the Auckland Bootmakers' Association), T. Hodgson (manager of the Northern Boot-factory), M. Flurscheim (retired), W. J. Harker (retired merchant), A. Dewar (mining engineer), J. Chambers (importer of mining machinery), and J. King (commercial agent and accountant). The Commission adjourned at 5.20 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Thuesday, 7th Maech, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A memorandum from J. O'Brien, embodying his views, was received and admitted as evidence. Letters were received asking that the attendance of E. Sanson and L. J. Bagnall might be dispensed with on account of business arrangements, and both requests were acceded to. A letter was received from W. J. Harker, naming E. Turner, fruit-grower, as one able to give valuable evidence, and expressing dissatisfaction at his treatment by the Commission. The Secretary was instructed to acknowledge receipt of the letter. A letter was received from A. H. Bisley, of Nelson, submitting his views on federation, as requested ; and it was decided to accept the same as evidence. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : J. King (in continuation of evidence given on the previous day), E. Hall (farmer, of One-tree Hill), J. Brown (managing director of the Direct Supply Company), A. G. Purchas (medical practitioner and clerk in holy orders), G. H. Powley (clothing-manufacturer), W. E. Lippiatt (fruit-grower and nurseryman, representative of the Fruit-growers' Association), W. F. Buckland (solicitor, of Cambridge), and J. Fawcus (mechanical engineer, representative of the Trades and Labour Council). The Commission adjourned at 4.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Feiday, Bth Maech, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. D. Goldie (Mayor of Auckland), D. E. Caldwell (of Macky, Logan, Steen, and Co.), T. Bell (of Henderson), and H. Johnston (of the Kauri Timber Company) desired to be excused from attendance, the request in each case being acceded to. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence: J. Hume (manager, Bycroft Milling Company), J. C. Macky (merchant and warehouseman), E. Dick (of Otahuhu, chemical-works manager, president of the Auckland Agricultural and Pastoral Association), M. M. Kirkbride (farmer, of Mangere), E. Hall (of Onehunga, secretary to the Auckland Agricultural and Pastoral Association), and J. G. Eutherford (farmer, of Bombay, representing the Franklin Agricultural and Pastoral Society). The Commission adjourned at 12.50 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Satueday, 9th Maech, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed.
xxxii
XXXIII
A.—4.
The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence: J. M. Morran (clothing-manufacturer;, A. J. Entrican (merchant), W. Atkin (coachbuilder), P. M. King (manager, clothing-factory), T. M. Quinn (grain and produce agent), T. B. Dineen (electrical engineer), E. W. Burton (solicitor), and J. M. McLachlan (retired business-man). The Commission then adjourned at 12.55 p.m. to a date to be fixed in Sydney.
SYDNEY. Saturday, 16th March, 1901. The Commission met at 10.15 a.m. in a room in the Chief Secretary's department, Sydney. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was read from G. L. Peacocke, of Auckland, accompanying a short statement of his opinions on the subject of federation, which it was decided to admit as evidence. An interview was held with the Hon. J. See, M.L.A., Chief Secretary, and Acting-Premier of New South Wales in the absence of the Hon. Sir W. Lyne. Mr. See kindly placed a room in his department at the service of the Commission, and expressed his desire to render them every assistance in his power. An interview was then held with the Hon. E. E. O'Connor, Vice-President of the Federal Council, who, in the absence of the Eight Hon. E. Barton, Premier of the Commonwealth, offered the Commissioners a cordial welcome to Australia. An interview was arranged with Messrs. Barton and O'Connor for 3 p.m. on Tuesday. A letter was despatched to the Hon. J. See, asking him to arrange for the attendance before the Commission on Tuesday morning of Mr. T. A. Coghlan (Government Statist) and MajorGeneral French. The Commission adjourned at 12 o'clock until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, Monday being a public holiday. ,
Tuesday, 19th March, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following witnesses appeared and gave evidence : T. A. Coghlan (Government Statistician) and Major-General French. A letter was received from G. J. Bruce (of the Goold Bicycle Company), offering to give evidence, and the Secretary was instructed to arrange for his attendance. At 3.15 p.m. the Commission interviewed the Eight Hon. E. Barton, Prime Minister of the Commonwealth, the interview lasting two hours and a quarter. The Commission adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Wednesday, 20th March, 1901. The Commission met a 10.30 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting was read and confirmed. The following witnesses attended and gave evidence : G. J. Bruce (of the Goold Bicycle Company), T. B. Clegg (of the Labour Department), A. Davidson (grain merchant), and Sir W. McMillan, K.C.M.G. The Commission adjourned at 4.30 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Thursday, 21st March, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received from W. T. Lawry, manager of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company in Sydney, asking to be excused from attending before the Commission, as he had practically no evidence to give ; and he was excused accordingly. E. L. Nash (financial editor of the Sydney Daily Telegraph), W. F. Schey (Labour Commissioner), and Hon. Dr. H. N. Maclaurin (doctor of medicine, and member of the Legislative Council of New South Wales) attended and gave evidence. A letter was forwarded to the Premier of Tasmania, informing him that the Commission would arrive at Hobart on the 29th instant, leaving again on the 30th instant. The Commission adjourned 3.45 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. next day. v—A. 4.
A.—4
Fbiday, 22nd March, 1901. The Commission met at 10.30 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. 0. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The Hon. J. M. Creed, M.L.C, G. Butter (stonemason, and secretary of the Trades Hall, Sydney), and E. Little (grain merchant) attended and gave evidence. A letter was read from the Hon. J. M. Creed, enclosing an extract from the political column of Melbourne Punch, and was received. A letter was received from G. C. Craig, 70, Hunter Street, accompanying a copy of a work by himself on the subject of Federal defence, and offering to give evidence on the subject. The Secretary was instructed to thank Mr. Craig, and to inform him that, as the Commission had already obtained the necessary expert evidence on the subject, his attendance would not be required. A letter was received from the Hon. A. W. Meeks, saying that pressure of business would prevent his attendance before the Commission this week, but he would be pleased to appear next week. The Secretary was instructed to arrange a time for Monday next. The Secretary was also instructed to endeavour to arrange on Monday for the attendance of the Hon. G. H. Eeid, the Hon. Sir George Dibbs, and an officer from the Agricultural Department. The Commission adjourned at 3.45 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Monday.
Monday, 25th Maech, 1901. The Commission met at 10.30 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. B. Dowling, J. P. (secretary of the Australasian Federation League of New South Wales), and W. Preedy (clerk in the Agricultural Department of New South Wales) attended and gave evidence. A letter was received from E. J. Black, regretting his inability to give evidence, owing to his having to leave Sydney for several days. Letters were forwarded to the Hon. the Premier of Victoria, informing him that the Commission would be in Melbourne from about the Ist April to the Bth. A letter was received from E. L. Nash, enclosing the financial information promised by him to the Commission; and the Secretary was instructed to thank him for the same. A letter was received from W. F. Schey, Labour Commissioner, enclosing information regarding the classification and registration of the unemployed; and the Secretary was instructed to acknowledge the same with thanks. The Hon. A. W. Meeks, M.L.C. (of Gibbs, Bright, and Co.), attended and gave evidence. Sir George Dibbs, K.C.M.G. (managing trustee of the Government Savings-bank of New South Wales), attended and gave evidence. The Commission accepted an invitation from the Agricultural Department of New South Wales to visit the Agricultural College at Eiehmond, in the Hawkesbury district, to-morrow, Tuesday, 26th March. The Secretary reported that he had seen the Hon. G. H. Eeid, who was still extremely busy, but thought he would possibly be able to attend when the Commission returned to Sydney in about three weeks' time. Letters were forwarded to the Eight Hon. E. Barton, P.C. (Federal Premier), and the Hon. J. See, M.P. (Chief Secretary), thanking them for the consideration shown to the Commission during their stay in Sydney. The Commission accepted an invitation from Mr. Mort for the afternoon of Wednesday, 17th April, to inspect his works. The Commission adjourned at 4.45 p.m. until Friday, 29th March, at an hour to be fixed, at Hobart.
EICHMOND. On 26th March the Commission met at the Agricultural College, Eiehmond, at 11.15 a.m. G. Valder, Principal of the Agricultural College, attended and gave evidence. The Commission inspected the college and farm, and adjourned at 4.30 p.m.
HOBAET. Friday, 29th Maech, 1901. The Commission met at 2.30 p.m. in a room in the Chief Secretary's department, Hobart. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., nd Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E.
xxxiv
A.—4
XXXV
The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : A. I. Clark (puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of Tasmania, formerly Cabinet Minister and member of the Federal Council of Australasia), E. M. Johnston (Begistrar-General "and Government Statistician of Tasmania), the Hon. W. H. Burgess (merchant, formerly a member of the Tasmanian Government), the Hon. W. Crosby, M.L.C. (merchant), and the Hon. Sir E. Braddon, K.C.M.G. (formerly Premier of Tasmania). A letter was read from the Hon. J. Want, K.C., expressing his desire to give evidence before the Commission on Monday, 15th April. As the movements of the Commission were not yet quite settled, consideration of the letter was deferred until the sittings in Melbourne. The Commission adjourned at 6.35 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Saturday, 30th Maech, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. fl. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. 0. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. E. M. Johnston, Government Statistician, was recalled, and gave further evidence. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence: The Hon. N. B. Lewis, M.B.C. (Premier and Attorney-General of Tasmania), the Hon. B. S. Bird, M.E.C. (State Treasurer), and the Hon. H. Dobson (barrister, formerly Premier of Tasmania). A letter was forwarded to the Hon. the Premier of Tasmania, thanking the Government for the assistance afforded to the Commission during their brief stay in Tasmania. The Commission adjourned at 1.15 p.m. until Monday, Ist April, at an hour to be fixed, at Melbourne.
MELBOUENB. Tuesday, 2nd April, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. in a room at the Parliament House, Melbourne. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E.-, Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Captain Eussell, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was read from J. Burns (of Burns, Philp, and Co.), begging to be excused from giving evidence, not having studied the subject. A letter was read from H. Jaggers, offering to give evidence before the Commission, consideration of which was deferred. D. Martin (Secretary for Agriculture, Victoria) and H. Ord (Chief Inspector of Factories, Victoria) attended and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 12.45 p.m. until 10.15 a.m. next day.
Wednesday, 3rd Apeil, 1901. The Commission met at 10.15 a.m. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The Hon. A. J. Peacock, M.L.A. (Premier of Victoria, State Treasurer, and Minister of Labour), attended and gave evidence. Captain Collins, E.N. (captain of the naval forces and Secretary of Defence for Victoria), J. J. Fenton (Assistant Government Statist), Major-General Downes (Commander of the Victorian military forces), and T. Kennedy, M.L.A., attended and gave evidence. The Eight Hon. Sir G. Turner, K.C.M.G. (Federal Treasurer), attended and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 5 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. next day.
Thursday, 4th April, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence: Brigadier-General J. M. Gordon (Commandant of Forces, South Australia), J. E. Johnston (of Johnston and Co., engineers and ironfounders, South Melbourne), the Hon. A. McLean, M.H.E., J. Danks (merchant and brassfounder), the Hon. F. T. Derham (president of the Victorian Chamber of Manufactures), and C Van de Velde (civil engineer). The Commission adjourned at 4.50 p.m. until Tuesday, 9th April, at an hour to be fixed, in Adelaide.
A.—4
ADELAIDE. Tuesday, 9th Apeil, 1901. The Commission met at 3 p.m., at the Parliament House, Adelaide. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received from E. Caldwell, M.P., offering to give evidence, which it was decided to take on Thursday next. A letter was received from Dr. Van de Velde, of Melbourne, asking to be allowed to give his views on the establishment of the beetroot-sugar industry in New Zealand on the return of the Commission to Melbourne. The Secretary was instructed to ask Dr. Van de Velde to put his views in writing. The Hon. F. Holder, M.L.A. (Premier of South Australia), attended and gave evidence. The Commission, having arranged to visit the Gawler district next day, for the purpose of inspecting iron manufactories and vineyards, adjourned until Thursday morning at 10 a.m.
GAWLEE. On Wednesday, 10th April, the Commission met at Gawler at 10 a.m. The Commission inspected the Chateau Tanunda wineries, and those of Messrs. Seppelsfelt. The Commission also inspected the foundries of Messrs. J. Martin and Co. and Mr. A. May, and the latter gentleman gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 4 o'clock.
ADELAIDE. Thursday, 11th Apeil, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received stating that Mr. E. H. Lascelles, of Geelong, was unable to attend during the Melbourne sittings, but that he would be able to do so on the return of the Commission. It was decided that Mr. John Eoberts should write to Mr. Lascelles, stating what information was desired, and asking him to supply it in writing. A telegram was despatched to the Eight Hon. Sir John Forrest, Melbourne, asking if he would grant an interview at 11.30 a.m. next Saturday at Menzies's Hotel. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : F. S. Wallis (secretary to the Trades and Labour Council, Adelaide), J. Duncan (of Duncan and Frazer, carriage-builders), H. J. Holden (of Holden and Frost, saddlery-manufacturers), J. F. Martin (chairman of directors of J. Martin and Co., Gawler), W. Burford (president of the Chamber of Manufactures), W. Lowrie (professor of agriculture, and head of the Department of Agriculture for South Australia), H. Davis (manager of G. and E. Wills and Co., boot-manufacturers), E. Caldwell, M.P., A. A. Simpson (manager of Simpson and Son, hardware-manufacturers), and J. M. Eeid (of J. Eeid and Sons, tanners). The Commission adjourned at 4.45 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Feiday, 12th Apeil, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence: E. W. Skervington (manager of the Produce and Export Department of South Australia) and Eev. J. Berry (minister of the Methodist Church). The Commission adjourned at 11 a.m. until next day at 11.30 a.m. at Menzies's Hotel, Melbourne.
MELBOUENE. Saturday, 13th April, 1901. The Commission met at 11.30 a.m. at Menzies's Hotel, Melbourne. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The Commission, having met for the purpose of taking the evidence of the Eight Hon. Sir J. Forrest, G.C.M.G., and the right hon. gentleman being otherwise engaged, adjourned at 12 noon until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 16th April, at Sydney.
XXXVI
A.—4.
SYDNEY. Tuesday, 16th April, 1901. The Commission met at 2.30 p.m. in the Chief Secretary's office, Sydney. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beaucliamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.8., Mr. W. S. Eeid, and Captain Russell, M.H.E. The minutes of the meetings of the 12th and 13th instant were read and confirmed. The Chairman reported that, after the adjournment of the regular meeting on Saturday last, he had an opportunity of obtaining the evidence of the Eight Hon. Sir J. Forrest, and interviewed him, together with the following members of the Commission—Messrs. Beauehamp, Leys, and Roberts —as there was no opportunity for obtaining a quorum. Sir J. Forrest's evidence was taken down by the official reporter. Resolved, That the action of the Chairman be confirmed, and that Sir J. Forrest's evidence be accepted. Mr. R. Teece, F.1.A., general manager and actuary of the Australian Mutual Provident Society, attended and gave evidence. It was decided to leave Sydney for Brisbane by next Friday's express, and on the conclusion of the sittings at Brisbane to adjourn to Wellington, at the Parliament Buildings, on Wednesday, Bth May, at 2.30 p.m. The Commission adjourned at 4.15 p.m.
Wednesday, 17th Apbil, 1901. The Commission met at 10.30 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. W. S. Reid, and Captain Russell, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received from W. E. Mort, stating that he would be unable, owing to important business, to attend the sitting of the Commission as promised. A letter was received from M. G. Denham, guard, Petersburg, South Australia, offering certain information in reference to federation, and his services, should a practical railway-man be required The Secretary was instructed to acknowledge the receipt of the letter. The Commission adjourned at 11 a.m. till 12 noon. The Commission reassembled at 12 noon. The Hon. J. H. Want, K.C., attended and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 1 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. next day.
Thursday, 18th April, 1901. The Commission met at 2.30 p.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received from E. H. Lascelles, of Geelong, containing the information asked for in reference to the mallee country. It was decided to accept the letter as evidence, and to thank Mr. Lascelles for the information. The Commission adjourned at 3.30 p.m. until Monday, the 22nd instant, at Brisbane, the time and place to be fixed afterwards.
BRISBANE. Monday, 22nd Apbil, 1901. The Commission met at 11 a.m. in the Parliament House, Brisbane. Present : Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Reid, Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : J. Hughes (Government Statist), A. C. Grant (manager, Moreshead and Co.), W. J. Scott (Public Lands Department), and P. R. Gordon (Chief Inspector of Stock). The Commission adjourned at 4 p.m. until 10.15 a.m. next day.
Tuesday, 23rd April, 1901. The Commission met at 10.15 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Reid, Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R.
xxxvii
A.—4.
XXXVIII
The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : Captain A. W. Pearce (editor of the Pastoralists' Review), P. McLean (agricultural expert), the Hon. A. S. Cowley, the Hon. A. Rutledge (Acting-Premier), P. Kenna (editor of the Worker), and R. W. Scholefield (of Toowoomba). The Commission adjourned at 5.50 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Wednesday, 24th Apeil, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The following gentlemen attended and gave evidence : Eight Hon. Sir H. Nelson (President of the Legislative Council), A. W. White (grazier), T. Glassey (Senator), A. Dawson (Senator and ex-Premier), and Colonel Finn (Commandant of the Queensland forces). The Commission adjourned at 3.30 p.m. to the Metropole, Sydney, on Friday next, at 2.30 p.m., if the Et. Hon. G. H. Eeid be available; if not, until Wednesday, the Bth ultimo, at 2.30 p.m., at the Parliamentary Buildings, Wellington.
WELLINGTON. Wednesday, Bth May, 1901. The Commission met at 2.30 p.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., and Captain Eussell, M.H.E. A letter was received from W. T. Glasgow, forwarding returns of estimated loss of revenue in New Zealand, which it was decided to print with Mr. Glasgow's evidence. Mr. Glasgow also brought under the notice of the Commission the claims of certain officers of his department to bonuses for work done for the Commission. It was decided to give the matter consideration before the close of the Commission. A letter was received from J. Kays, Wellington, forwarding further information, and asking that it should be included in his evidence. It was decided to thank Mr. Kays, and to inform him that, as his evidence was already printed, the additional matter could not be inserted. Letters were received from J. McConchie and J. S. Myers, of Marshland, Christchurch, concerning a petition alleged to have been forwarded from that district to the Commission in favour of federation. The Secretary was instructed to inform the writers that no such petition had reached the Commission. A letter was received from the secretary of the Otago Trades and Labour Council, stating that at a recent meeting a motion was passed, with only one dissentient, asking the electors to vote against federation. The Secretary was instructed to send a reply thanking the writer for the information. A letter was received from the secretary of the Otago Knights of Labour, enclosing copy of resolutions against federation recently carried unanimously by their body. Decided to acknowledge and print with proceedings. The Chairman read to the meeting a draft report. It was decided to print the same, and resubmit to an early meeting of the Commission for further discussion. The Commission adjourned at 4.45 p.m. until next day at 2.30 p.m.
Thursday, 9th May, 1901. The Commission met at 2.30 p.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Eussell, M.H.E., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the two previous meetings were read and confirmed. A letter was received from the secretary of the Workers' Political Committee, Trades Hall, Dunedin, stating that a resolution against federation had been carried unanimously by that body. It was decided to print the letter. A request from Dr. Laishley, of Auckland, asking for witnesses' fees for giving evidence, was considered, and the Secretary was instructed to inform him that such fees were not paid to witnesses who resided in the town where they gave evidence. The Chairman informed the Commission that the draft report was in the hands of the printer, and it was expected that it would be ready for the Commission by Saturday. A lengthy discussion took place as to the statistics which should be published with the report, and the Secretary was instructed to arrange the matter selected for printing as quickly as possible. The Commission' adjourned at 3.45 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Saturday.
A.—4
XXXIX
Satubday, 11th May, 1901. The Commission met at 10.30 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. JT A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Eoberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. A letter was received from R. Matterson, G. Cox, J. Hannan, and others, of Marshland, Canterbury, stating objections to the evidence given before the Commission by J. S. Myers, of Marshland, complaining that various statements in his evidence were misleading. The letter was received, and the Secretary instructed to inform the writers that the matter would receive the attention of the Commission. A letter was received from J. J. Fenton, Assistant Statist of Victoria, forwarding the latest Victorian statistics referring to population and the growth of oats. It was decided to print the oats statistics at the end of Mr. Penton's evidence. The Chairman submitted to the members of the Commission printed copies of the draft report for their consideration. Resolved, That it is not desirable that New Zealand should federate with the Commonwealth and become a State under the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act. Resolved, That, so far as the Commission can ascertain, the prospects of establishing a reciprocal treaty with the Commonwealth are at present remote ; and that, until the fiscal policy of the Federal Government has been finally determined, the Commission is unable to indicate the lines upon which such a treaty should be based. Resolved, That a sub-committee, consisting of Messrs. Bowen, Roberts, Leys, Reid, Millar, and the Chairman, be appointed to revise the draft report submitted by the Chairman, and to report to the Commission at the next meeting. Resolved, That a sub-committee, consisting of Captain Russell, Major Steward, and Messrs. Beauchamp and Luke, be appointed to select and revise the statistics to be printed in the report of the Commission. The Commission adjourned at 12.45 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday next.
Tuesday, 14th May, 1901. The Commission met at 2.30 p.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, 0.M.G., and Captain Russell, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The letter from R. Matterson and others, of Marshland, was again considered, and the Secretary was instructed to inform the writers that, as they had not attended the duly advertised sittings of the Commission, no further action could be taken in the matter. A letter was received from W. T. Glasgow, Secretary of Customs, giving the amount of Customs revenue received during the year 1900-1, which the Secretary was instructed to include in the appendix. The Chairman informed the Commission that the revise of the draft report, as amended by the sub-committee appointed for that purpose, would be in the hands of the Commissioners to-night. The Commission adjourned at 3.15 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Wednesday, 15th May, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Reid, Mr. J. Roberts, C.M.G., Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.R. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The Chairman read a memorandum received from the Hon. Sir Robert Stout, K.C.M.G., Chief Justice of the Colony of New Zealand, containing observations on appeals from the Court of Appeal in New Zealand, forwarded in response to the request of the Chairman. It was decided to convey the thanks of the Commission to Sir Robert Stout, and to print the memorandum in the appendix. Mr. Leys moved, That the report be signed by the Commissioners before their dispersal, and that it be left in the hands of the Chairman to hand in at his discretion, on or before the 31st instant. Mr. Millar moved, as an amendment, That the report be not signed until such time as the tables and statistics are attached thereto. A division being called for, the names were taken down as follows: — For the amendment: Mr. Millar, Captain Russell. Against the amendment: Mr. Beauchamp, Mr. Leys, Mr. Luke, Colonel Pitt, Mr. Reid, Mr. Roberts, Major Steward. Amendment negatived. The Commission then divided on the question, " That the original resolution be agreed to." For the resohition : Mr. Beauchamp, Mr. Leys, Mr. Luke, Colonel Pitt, Mr. Reid, Mr. Roberts, Major Steward.
A.—4
XI
Against the resolution : Mr. Millar, Captain Bussell. Eesolution agreed to. The revise of the draft report was then considered. The Commission adjourned at 5 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Thursday, 16th May, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C., Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The revise of the draft report was further considered. The Commission adjourned at 4.45 p.m. until 10 a.m. next day.
Friday, 17th May, 1901. The Commission met at 10 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Eeid, Captain Russell, M.H.R., and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The letter of the 3rd instant from the Secretary of Customs, bringing under notice claims of officers for night-work, was again considered. Resolved, That the letter be forwarded to the Government, with a recommendation that the request be favourably considered, and that Mr. Glasgow be informed accordingly. A letter was received from the Government Printer, asking that the whole report, evidence, and exhibits should be in his hands at least three weeks before the meeting of the House; and also that the evidence should be sent in consecutive order, as received, and not kept back to send altogether. Resolved, That Mr. Mackay be informed that his representations should be attended to. The revise of the draft report was further considered. A letter was received from R. M. Johnston, Government Statistician of Tasmania, forwarding his evidence revised, and stating that the tables promised to the Commission would be forwarded by an early mail. It was decided that the tables, if received before the 31st instant, should be printed in the appendix. The Commission adjourned at 5 p.m. until 10.15 a.m. next day.
Saturday, 18th May, 1901. The Commission met at 10.15 a.m. Present: Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. (in the chair), Mr. H. Beauchamp, Hon. C. C. Bowen, M.L.C, Mr. T. W. Leys, Mr. C. M. Luke, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., Mr. W. S. Reid, and Hon. Major Steward, M.H.E. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The final revise of the draft report was considered and approved, subject to slight alterations. Mr. Bowen moved a vote of thanks to the Chairman for the able manner and courtesy with which he had conducted the proceedings of the Commission. Mr. Beauchamp seconded the motion, desiring to record his appreciation of the tact, ability, and uniform courtesy shown by the Chairman throughout. Mr. Luke indorsed the remarks of the previous speakers. Mr. Leys, in concurring with what had been said, stated that the work of the Commission had been very greatly facilitated by the experience and tact of the Chairman. The motion was put and agreed to. Resolved, on the motion of Mr. Millar, That a vote of thanks be accorded to the Secretary (Mr. Morris Fox) and the Official Eeporter (Mr. W. H. Russell) for the services they had rendered to the Commission, and that it be recorded on the minutes. At 11.30 a.m. the Commission adjourned sine die.
XII
A.—4
WITNESSES EXAMINED.
INVERCARGILL. Wednesday, 6th February, 1901. 1. J. E. Watson (Tothill, Watson, and Co., grain mercbante). 2. W. D. Hunt (Wright, Stephenson, and Co., grain-buyers, stock and station agents, and manure agent«). 3. W. A. Motrin, bootmaker (representing the Bootmakers' Unifn, Butchers' Union, and Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants). 4. P. Tj. Gi'kison (Fleming and Gilkison, flour-millers). 5. C. J. Broad (Broad, Small, and Co , ironmongers). 6. R. A. Anderson (J. G. Ward and Co., grain merchants). 7. J. Johnston (J. Johnston and Sons, mechanical engineers). 8. W. Ross (Ross and Co., woollen manufacturers). Thursday, 7th February. 9. G. W. Nicol (Nicol Brothers, grain merchants). 10. J. M. Jones (manager, W. Guthrie, engineers and sawmillers). 11. J. C. Mackley, settler and butcher. 12. I. W. Raymond, stock and station agent. DUNEDIN. Saturday, 9th February. 13. A. S. Paterson (A. S. Paterson and Co., grain-exporters). 14. W. A. W. Wathen (president, Trades and Labour Council). Monday, 11th February. 15. F. R. Chapman, barrister and solicitor. 16. S. C. Brown, bootmaker (representing the Bootmakers' Union). 17. H. Rodda, bootmaker (representing the Bootmakers' Union). 18. W. Hood, upholsterer (president, Workers' Political Committee). 19. D. Reid (D. Reid and Co., wool and grain merchants). 20. P. Barr, secretary Dunedin Chamber Commerce, and secretary Industrial Association (Barr, Leary, and Co., accountants). 21. R. Slater, presser (secretary, Otago Trades and Labour Council). Tuesday, 12th February. 22. A. Burt (managing director, A. andTT. Burt, metal merohants and machinery-manufacturers). 23. R. Glendining (Ross and Glendining, woollen-manu-facturers). 24. G. P. Farqtibar (Michaelis, Hallenstein, and Farquhar, leather merchants). 25. A. H. Bridger (manager, Sargood's Boot-factory and Department). 26. J. H. Morrison (manager, Mosgiel Woollen Factory). 27. J. C. Ross (managing director, Denton Hat-mills). 28. P. R. Sargood (Sargood, Son, and Ewen). 29. A. L Isaacs (manager, New Zealand Clothing Factory). 30. R. McKinlay, boot-manufacturer. Wednesday, 13th February. 81. W. Carr, upholsterer and furniture salesman. 32. J. 0. Thomson, hardware and timber merohant. 33. J. W. Faulkner, wire-worker and galvaniser. 84. J. B. Shacklock, ironfounder. 35. J. Sparrow, general engineer and ironfounder. 36. F. Mallard, insurance expert. 87. M. Cohen, journalist. 38. M. J. Scobie Mackenzie, runholder. Thursday, 14th February. 39. Rev. W. Curzon-Siggers, vioar of St. Matthew's, Dunedin. 40. J. W. Milnes (manager, Phcenix Manufacturing Company). 41. J. L. Passmore (managing director, Donaghy's Rope and Twine Company). 42. T. W. Kempthorne (managing direotor, Kempthorne and Prosser's Drug Cumpany). 43. W. Stevenson (Irvine and Stevenson, provision merchants and starch manufacturers). 44. F. Oakden (manager, Millburn Lime and Cement Company). 45. R. Hudson (R. Hudson and Co., biscuit-manufacturers). 46. W. E. Reynolds, grain, seed, and produce merchant. vi—A. 4.
47. J. R. Scott, produce merchant (representing the National Dairying Association of New Zealand). 48. J. Lethbridge (Dunedin manager, Dalgety and Co.). 49. J. M. Ritchie (manager, National Mortgage and Agency Company). 50. E. B. Cargill, gentleman. CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, 18th February. 51. G. G. Stead, merohant. 52. W. Recce, ironmonger (Mayor of Christohuroh). 53. H, Friedlander, grain and wool merohant. 54. D. Thomas, grain merchant and auctioneer. 55. E. W. Roper, merchant. 56. G. T. Booth, implement-manufacturer. Tuesday, 19th February. 57. R. Allan, president, Industrial Association (Skelton, Frostick, and Co., boot-manufacturers). 58. W. Chrystall, grain merchant. 59. G. H. Blackwell (managing director, Kaiapoi Woollen Company). 60. R. E. McDougall (vice-president, Industrial Association). 61. W. Wood, tanner and exporter of produce (president, Chamber of Commerce). 62. H. Wood, flour-miller. 63. H. F. Wigram, maltster. 64. J. Gould, merchant. 65. G. Humphreys, merchant. 66. G. S. Jakins (Jakins and Bower, produce-exporters). (Mr. Jakms's evidence continued on the 20th instant.) Wednesday, 20th February. 67. Hon. Sir J. Hall, K.C.M.G. 68. A. W. Beaven (Andrews and Beaven, implement-manu-facturers). 69. J. S. farmer. 70. J. A. McCullough, tinsmith (president, Trades and Labour Oouncil). 71. J. Young, bootmaker. 72. A. E. G. Rhodes, barrister and solicitor. 73. W. Newton, upholsterer. 74. 3. L. Scott, engineer. Thursday, 21st February. 75. G. H. Wbitcombe (managing director, Whitcombe and Tombs, manufaduring stationers). 76. J. A. Frostick, president, Bootmakers' Union (Skelton, Frostick, and Co., boot-manufacturers). 77. H. Overton, farmer. 78. C. A. Lees, grain merchant. 79. G. Bowron, tanner and leather merchant. 80. W. Williams (representing the Operative Bootmakers' Union). 81. W. Darlow, clicker. 82. A. Anderson (John Anderson, ironfounder). 83. J. Fisher, bootmaker. 84. F. Beverley, soap- and candle-manufacturer. 85. A. Kaye, grain merchant. WELLINGTON. Monday, 25th February. 86. N. Reid, merohant (chairman of Chamber of Commerce). 87. S. Brown, wood and coal merchant (president, Industrial Association). BS. M. Kennedy, merchant. 89. T. G. Maoarchy, brewer. Tuesday, 26th February. 90. J. Maokay, Inspector of Factories and Chief Cleric in Labour Department. 91. J. L. Kelly, journalist. 92. M. Chapman, barrister and solicitor. 93. D. J. Nathan, merchant. 94. E. S. Baldwin, patent agent and consisting engineer. 95. M. Macpberson (general manager, New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company). 96. J. Izett, journalist. 97. H. Hurrell (Rouse and Hurrell, coaobbullders). 98. P. R. Russell, saddler. 99. J. Duthie, merchant. 300. J. Kays, wholesale chemist. 101. {Vide 127 a.)
A.—4
XIII
Wednesday, 27th Fbbeuaet. 102. T. Lynch (representing Trades and Labour Council). 103. Major W. Madocks, Staff Officer to Commandant of Forces. 104. W. Cable, ironfounder (master of Engineers' Association). 105. J. P. Luke (S. P. Luke and Sons, ironfounders and engineers). 106. W. Crabtree, ironfounders and engineers. 107. D. Robertson, ironfounders and engineers. 108. Rev. VV. A. Evans, Congregational minister. 109. W. Booth, timber merohant (director of Wellington Meat Export Company). 110. R. K. Simpson, farmer. 111. A. E. Russell, farmer. 112. M. Caselberg (managing director, Wairarapa Farmers' Co-operative Association). 113. A. Collins (representing Trades and Labour Council). 114. P. J. O'Regan, journalist. Thubsdat, 28th February. 115. W. Gray, Secretary, Post and Telegraph Department. 116. P. C. Freetb, journalist. 117. A. A. Corrigan (manager, Direct Importing Company, Wellington). 118. Hon. T. W. Hislop, barrister and solioitor. 119. M. G. Heeles (manager, Wellington Woollen Company). 120. S. Kirkpatrick. jam-manufaoturer. 121. A. H. Cooper, bootmaker (president, Trades and Labour Council). 122. J. T. Dalrymple, farmer. 123. H. Fielder, cabinetmaker. 121. E. Melland, gentleman. 125. J. Ross (Sargood, Son, and Ewen, warehousemen). 126. C. Pharazjn, runholder. 127. J. Ddnc»n (Levin and Co., merchant-). 127 a. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary and Inspector of Customs, and Secretary for the Marine Department. AUCKLAND. Monday, 4th March. 128. Hon. W. Rolleston, settler. 129. Dr. R. Laisliley, barrister and solicitor. 130. P. Virtue (manager, Northern Roller Milling Company). 131. J. Pack (manager, Onehunga Woollen-mill*-). 132. A. C. Whituey (manager, Colonial Ammunition Com r pany). 133. Rev. J. C. Andrew, clergyman and landowner. 134. W. McLaughlin, farmer. 135. T. Hadlield, bootmaker. 136. S. Vaile, land agent. 137. M. A. Clark, warehouseman. 138. A. Sinford, farmer and fish merohant (representing Tftiloresses' Union). 139. T. Peacock, optician. Tuesday, sth Mabch. 140. A. B. Donald, shipowner and island trader. 141. T. T. Masefieid, engineer and ironfounder. 142. W. Spragg (general manager, Dairy Association). 143. A. Sturges, fruit-grower. 144. Rev. G. Macmuriay, vicar of St. Mary's Cathedral, Parnell. 145. J. M. Mennie, biscuit- and jam-manufacturer. 146. J. Wiseman, manufacturer and importer. 147. G. Low, fruit-grower (president of Birkenhead Fruitgrowers' Association). 148. H. Dearsley (president, Bootmakers' Association). 149. P. E. Cheal, mining engineer and surveyor. Wednesday, 6th March. 150. J. H. Upton, stationer. 151. J. H. Mackie, publio accountant and auditor (secretary, Fruit-growers' Union). 152. J. Aggers (secretary, Bootmakers' Union). 153. G. A. Coles, boot-manufacturer (president, Auckland Bootmakers' Association). 154. T. Hodgson (manager, Northern Boot-factory). 155. M. Flureoheim, retired. 156. W. J. Harker, retired merchant. 157. A. Dewar, mining engineer. 158. J. Chambers, importer of mining machinery. 159. J. King, commercial agent and accountant. (Mr. King's evidence continued on 7th inst.) Thursday, 7th March. 160. R. Hall, farmer. 161. J. Brown (director of Northern Roller Milling Company, and others). 162. Dr. A. G. Purohas, medical practitioner and clerk in holy orders.
163. G. H. Powley, olothing-manufacturer. 164. W.E.Lippiatt, nurseryman and fruit-grower (representing Fruit-growers' Association). 165. W. F. Buckland, solicitor. 166r J. Fawcus, mechanical engineer (representing Trades and Labour Council). Friday, Bth Mabch. 167. J. Hume (manager, Bycroft Milling Company). 168. J. C. Maeky, merchant and warehouseman. 169. R. Dick, manager, Chemical Works (representing Auokland Agricultural and Pastoral Association). 170. M. M. Kirkbride, farmer. 171. E. Hall (secretary, Agricultural and Pastoral Association). 172. J. G. Rutherford, farmer (representing Franklin Agricultural and Pastoral Sooiety). Saturday, 9th Mabch. 173. J. M. Morran, c'othing-manufacturer. 174. A. J. Enttican, merchant. 175. W. Atkin, coachbuilder. 176. F. M. King (manager, Clothing Factory). 177. T. M. Qninn, grain and produce agent. 178. T. B. Dineen, electrical engineer (member of Council of Australasian Federation League). 179. E. W. Burton, solicitor. 180. J. M. McLachlan, retired business-man. 181. C. Phillips, settler. 182. J. O'Brien, timber merchant. 183. A. H. Bisley, fruit-grower. 184. G. E. Alderton, editor Northern Advocate. 185. F. G. Ewington, land agent. 186. G. L. Peaoocke, editor. SYDNEY. Saturday, 16th March. 187. Hon. J. See, Chief Seoretiry, New South Wales. 188. Hon. R. E. O'Connor, Vioe-President of the Federal Council. Tuesday, 19th March. 189. T. A. Coghlan, New South Wales Government Statistician. 190. Major G. A. French, Commandant, New South Wales Eorces. 191. Right Hon. E. Barton, P.C., K.C., Prime Minister of the Commonwealth. Wednesday, 20th March. 192. G. J. Bruce (manager, Goold Bicycle Company). 193. T. B. Clegg (Labour Department). 194. A. David-on, grain merchant. 195. Sir W. McMillan, K.0.M.G., merchant. Thursday, 21st March. 196. R. L. Nash, financial editor Sydney Daily Telegraph. 197. W. F. Sohey, Labour Commissioner. 198. Hon. Dr. H. N. Maolaurin, M.D., and M.L.C. of New South Wales. Friday, 22nd March. 199. Hon. J. M. Creed, M.L.C. 200. G. Rutter, stonemason. 201. K. Little, grain merohant. Monday, 25th Mabch. 202. E. Dowling (honorary seoretary of Australasian Federation League, New South Wales). 203. W. Preedv (clerk in Agricultural Department, New South Wales). 204. Hon. A. W. Meeks, M.L.C. (Gibbs, Bright, ana Co., meroban's). 205. Sir G. R. Dibbs, K.C.M.G. (managing trustee, Savingsbank, New South Wales). RICHMOND, N.S.W. Tuesday, 26th Mabch. 206. G. Valder (Principal of Agricultural College, Riohmond, New South Wales). HOBART. Friday, 29th March. 207. A. I. Clark, Puisne Judge of Supreme Court. 208. R. M. Johnston, Registrar-General and Government Statistician. 209. Hon. W. H. Burgess, merohant. 210.' Hon. W. Crosby, M.L.C, merchant. 211. Hon. Sir E. Braddon, K.C.M.G., ex-Premier.
XIV
A.—4
Saturday, 30th March. 211 a. B. M. Johnston (recalled). 212. Hon. N. E. Lewis, M.E.C., Premier and AttorneyGeneral of Tasmania. 213. Hon. B. S. Bird, M.E.C., State Treasurer. 214. Hon. H. Dobson, barrister. MELBOUBNE. Tuesday, 2nd April. 215. D. Martin, Secretary for Agriculture, Victoria. 216. H. Ord, Chief Inspector of Factories, Viotoria. Wednesday, 3rd April. 217. Hon. A. J. Peacock, Premier of Viotoria, State Treasurer, and Minister of Labour. 218. Captain R. M. Collins, Captain of the Naval Forces and Secretary of Defence for Victoria. 219. J. J. Fenton, Assistant Government Statist. 220. Major-General F. Downes, Commanding Military Foroes in Victoria. 221. T. Kennedy, ML.A., farmer. 222. Rt. Hon. Sir G. Turner, K.C.M.G., Federal Treasurer. Thursday, 4th April. 223. Brigadier-General J. M. Gordon, Commandant of Force=, South Australia. 224. J. R. Johnston, engineer and ironfounder. 225. Hon. A. McLean, M.P., Federal Parliament. 226. J. Danks, merchant and brassfounder. 227. Hon. F. T. Derham, biscuit-manufacturer and flourmiller (president, Victorian Chamber Manufacture). 228. C. Van de Velde, civil engineer. ADELAIDE. Tuesday, 9th April. 229. Hon. F. W. Holder, M.L.A., Premier of South Australia. GAWLEB, S.A. Wednesday, 10th April. 230. A. May, engineer and ironfounder. ADELAIDE. Thursday, 11th April. 231. F. S. Wallis (secretary, Trades and Labour Council, Adelaide). 232. J. Duncan (Duncan and Frazer, carriage-builders). 233. H. J. Holden (Holden and Frost, saddlery-manufac-turers). 234. J. F. Martin (chairman of directors, J. Martin and Co., ironfnunders, Gawler). 235. W. Burford (president of Chamber of Manufacture.?).
236. W. Lowrie, professor of agrioulture and head of Department of Agrioulture, South Australia. 237. H. Davis (manager of G. and B. Wills and Co., bootmanufacturers). 238. B. Caldwell, M.P., settler. 239. A. A. Simpson (manager of Simpson and Son, hardwaremanufacturers). 240. J. M. Beid (J. Beid and Sons, tanners). Friday, 12th April. 241. R. W. Skervington (manager of the Produce and Export Department). 242. Rev. J. Berry, minister of the Methodist Church. MELBOUBNE. Saturday, 13th Apeil. 243. Rt. Hon. Sir J. Forrest, P. 0., G.0.M.Q., Federal Defenos Minister. SYDNEY. Tuesday, 16th April. 214. R. Teece, F.1.A., manager and actuary of the Australian Mutual Provident Society. Wednesday, 17te April. 245. Hon. J. H. Want, K.G., barrister. 246. E. H, Lasoelies, merohant. BRISBANE. Monday, 22nd April. 247. J. Hughes, Givernment Statist and Registrar-General. 248. A. G. Grant (manager, Moreshead and Co., cattle and station agents). 249. W. J. Scott, Under-Secretary Publio Lands Department. 250. P. R. Gordon, Chief Inspector of Stock. Tuesday, 23rd April. 251. A. W. Pearce, editor, Pastoralists , Review. 252. P. McLean, agricultural expert. 2.53. Hon. A. S. Cowley, M.L.A., Queensland. 254. Hon. A. Butledgo, Acting - Premier and AttorneyGeneral. 255. F. Kenna, eiitor, the Worker. 256. B. W. Scholefield, commission agent and grazier. Wednesday, 24th April. 257. Bt. Hon. Sir H. M. Nelson, K.C.M.G., President of the Legislative Council. 258. A. W. D. White, grazier. 259. T. Glassey, senator. 260. A. Dawsnn, senator and ex-Premier. 261. Colonel H. Finn, Commandant Queensland Foroes.
A.—.4
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.
INVEEOAEGILL. Wednesday, 6th Febbuaby, 1901. Jambs Eeskike Watson examined. (No. 1.) 1. Hon. the Chairman, .] What are you, Mr. Watson ?—A merchant in Invercargill, a member of the firm of Tothill, Watson, and Co., and Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce. 2. Have you given much thought to the question of the desirableness or otherwise of the federation of New Zealand with the Australian Commonwealth ? —Yes, I have given the matter some attention, and it has been brought before the Chamber of Commerce on more than one occasion, but we felt that it was bordering on the domain of politics, and that perhaps it hardly came within our scope to make a pronouncement. 3. Will you give the Commission the benefit of your views as to the advantages or disadvantages of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—The principal advantages are distinctly of a commercial nature as far as this district is concerned. There is a considerable trade done at present between this part of the colony and the Australian Colonies, which, I imagine, would probably be interfered with if New South Wales put a heavy tariff on our products. Going back a number of years, there used to be a considerable trade done between the Bluff and Victoria in oats, but Victoria put a duty of, first, I think, 10-J-d. a bushel, and subsequently they increased that by 50 per cent., and since then the trade has died out so far as actual trade with Victoria for home consumption is concerned. A considerable trade is done in oats with Victoria from here, but it is entirely by way of transhipments to Western Australia and South Africa. In the same way, a considerable trade was done in South Australia until they put on a heavy duty, and that trade has practically died out since that duty was put on. The principal item of export from Bluff to Australian Colonies is in oats. There is also a trade done in dairy produce and cheese with New South Wales —in cheese especially in the winter months. 4. You think if a protective tariff was in vogue in Australia it would act prejudicially on the export trade in this part of the colony ?—I do. 5. Has the export trade from Southland with Australia been very considerable?—lt has been considerable with New South Wales; but, as far as Victoria and South Australia is concerned, the export trade for home consumption has practically died out. In the case of oats and dairy produce there has been a considerable trade with Victoria, but that is because the Victorian merchants control the West Australian trade, and hitherto they have had a very large say in the South African trade. War-orders for oats have been placed in Victoria, and Victorian merchants have bought large quantities here to fulfil these orders. Quite recently our own Government secured some of these orders, which are being filled direct now. 6. Does that apply to the 25,000-tons order?—l think of that order 10,000 tons came to Invercargill, and the rest was placed in Canterbury, as far as I know. 7. Is the produce of New Zealand exported to any market besides Australia and London ? — Not to many. The South African market has developed recently, but, as far as Southland is concerned, if the Australian market is closed to our oats and dairy produce we should have to fall back on London. 8. Assuming that the Government of New Zealand could make satisfactory arrangements with the lines of steamers whose terminal port is in Australia to make their terminal port here, what effect would that have on the export trade of New Zealand ?—lt would undoubtedly facilitate trade with other ports besides Australia and London. 9. Are you aware of any reason why that should not be done ?—Not beyond the one of cost. 10. You have mentioned some disadvantages; can you mention any others that would arise through our not being federated?—l think the commercial disadvantages are the most serious. Of course, there might be other advantages in connection with postal matters. Supposing we federate with Australia, it would open to us a market with the entire Australian Commonwealth in regard to produce which I think this colony is much more fitted to grow than any of the other colonies. 11. With free-trade? —I take it for granted that if we federated there would be free-trade with Australia. I suppose there would also be considerable advantage through having the commercial laws of the various colonies assimilated, through having a uniform postal system, and probably there would be a considerable reduction in the cable rates. 12. Would there be any considerable loss of revenue to this colony if free-trade were established through New Zealand joining the Commonwealth ? —I have no doubt there would be a considerable loss of revenue by way of Custom revenues on the goods we at present import from Australia; but that would be more than counterbalanced by the advantages this colony would derive through having such an enormous market thrown open to it at its very doors, and a market which, although it is a large one now, is bound to increase at a fast pace. I—A. 4.
A.—4
2
13. That loss of revenue would have to be recouped by increasing the taxation on the people ? —Yes, I suppose it would ; if it did not come out of the people's pockets in one shape it would have to in another. 14. Are you prepared to give any evidence on the political aspect of the question ?—No, I am not sufficiently conversant with it to venture an opinion ; but, speaking for myself, while I recognise what I consider would be the very great advantages that would accrue to this colony by having free-trade with the other colonies, I share the feeling of reluctance shown by most people to sacrificing any of our present political independence. It is simply a question of whether the commercial advantages do not warrant us in making a sacrifice in the other respect. 15. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Do you know the relative price of oats in Australia ?—Yes; and, of course, it varies in different parts of Australia. In Victoria oats have been very cheap the last few years, and they have exported a large quantity of their own oats to South Africa. 16. Then, is it not possible, if the growth of oats in Victoria is increasing, that that has really been the cause of a diminution in our trade, rather than the tariff question?—l do not think the farmers in Victoria would have grown the oats if it had not been for the protection they got by the heavy duty against New Zealand. Before the heavy duty was put on there was a large trade done with that colony in oats, but after the duty the Victorian farmers grew oats in increasing quantities, and now I do not believe a bushel of New Zealand oats goes into Victoria for home consumption. The quality of their oats is not as good as ours. 17. Does Tasmania export oats to Victoria ? —I do not think they do much trade with Victoria, for the same reason, that the duty keeps them out, but they do a considerable trade with New South Wales. 18. Is the cultivation of oats of vital importance to Southland ? —lt is of very considerable importance to Southland, because a large area of our land is not well suited for growing wheat, neither is our climate well adapted to growing wheat, and, as farmers have to break their pastures up at regular intervals to renew them, oats is the favourite crop. 19. Have you any idea up to what period of time in the future the cultivation of oats will be a matter of importance to Southland ? —I think as long as they can grow them profitably they will continue to grow them in large quantities here. 20. Are oats a very profitable crop ?—Taking one year with another, it has been fairly profitable of late years to the farmer; but, as I said, they are bound to grow some crop in order to break up their pastures, and they find they can grow oats better than wheat or barley. 21. Is it essential to Southland farming that oats should be grown, and through not fattening the lambs and stock, or cultivating their ground, they take a crop off of it ? Is the cultivation of oats the only profitable way of farming ?—Not by any means, but it is an essential part of the system of rotation the farmers go in for here. At one time fattening stock was not as profitable as it is now, and if it is a bad year in oats they sometimes make it up in stock, or if it is a bad year for fattening stock they make it up in grain. 22. Mr. Boberts.] In reply to a question of Captain Russell's you said that to a large extent the export of oats from the Bluff to Victoria during the last few years had ceased, and that had been entirely owing to the additional production going on in Victoria ?—I said it had ceased altogether with Victoria. 23. And that cessation of trade had come about through the production of extra quantities of oats in Victoria during the past few years?— That is so. 24. Have you noticed the relative proportion of the shipments from this colony and the production in Australia—that is to say, in lean years in Australia the export from here is greater ?—I do not suppose it is so, because there is a large surplus of oats in the colony which has all to go away whether there is a fat year or a lean year. It is simply a question of price; if they have a fat year in Australia our farmers get less for their oats in consequence. All would have to go away from here. 25. I have a conviction that to a large extent the export of oats from this colony to Victoria is entirely regulated by the crop on the other side — that is to say, the deficiency that has arisen there through a shortage in the crop must be supplied from here, no matter what duty is put on. Do you think that is so?—So far as Victoria is concerned, I think lam safe in saying that for the last seven or eight years they have not used a bushel of our oats in Victoria. 26. Is that to a large extent owing to the better seasons they have had there and the larger quantities of oats grown ?—lt is entirely owing to the large quantities of oats grown in Victoria, though my contention is that if it had not been for the extremely heavy duty in Victoria the farmers there would not have attempted to compete with our farmers in the growing of oats. 27. What is the price of oats there ?—Something about Is. 9d. to Is. 10d., and the cost of shipping the oats from Bluff, excluding the duty, is, roughly speaking, 3d. a bushel, while the duty in Victoria is Is. 2-|d. per bushel. 28. So that any export of oats that could have been made from here could have no effect at all on the local market, because it was impossible for you to sell them here at anything like the price they sell them at there ? —Yes. 29. Mr. Millar.] Can you give us any idea as to the percentage of your trade from the Bluff to New South Wales ? What proportion of your total export of grain and oats goes to New South Wales ? —I could not say, but I am quite satisfied that New South Wales takes far more than all the other colonies put together of Southland produce. 30. If there were free - trade to-morrow the Victorian market would have no say with us in regard to butter? They have taken butter from us before?— That is so. They would not be large customers for butter. 31. But we see from the latest statistics that they have been exporting butter largely for some years. In 1898 the value of the oats exported from the colony was £87,924 ?—I think
3
A.—4
there must be some mistake. They have not been importing oats to Victoria for their own consumption. I think 1898 was the year of the severe drought in Canterbury, when Canterbury did not export any oats themselves, but took about 200,000 bags from Southland. It was quite an abnormal year in Canterbury, which had to draw "on Southland. They were out of the market themselves. 32. With regard to the increased taxation likely to be required, you admit that it would mean a loss of revenue to us from a Customs point of view if we federated, because we should lose the duty on Southland imports from Australia. Would not it have a much wider effect than that, because it is understood, if there is a uniform tariff in Australia, there will be a uniform tariff against the outside world ? As far as we understand, it is going to be what they term a moderate tariff, but on many items we should lose the whole of our revenue on the imports. Is that not so? —If the people have not to pay the Customs tariff they will have the money in their pockets to pay in another form. 33. So that in making up the deficiency by imposing direct taxation you cannot take as a guide the loss of revenue from the imports from Australia alone, but will have to spread it over a wider area ?—Certainly ; if the Federation tariff was lower than our tariff the deficiency would have to be made up somewhere. 34. But from a purely agricultural point of view you think federation would suit us ?—No doubt. The opening of that enormous market for our produce would have a most beneficial effect on this part of the colony ; but in considering that aspect of the question one should not only consider the existing trade, but what that trade would grow to under favourable conditions. One should consider the natural advantages we possess, and our proximity to the Australian Colonies. I feel that under the present unfavourable conditions our trade is prevented from expanding—it is practically a flea-bite to what it would be if we had these new markets thrown open to us. 35. But is it not possible that by means of close settlement over there the people there would increase their production to meet the increased demand ? —I think we have got such enormous advantages over them, even with the expense of carriage—because the expenses are not such a serious matter after all—that our trade would be a rapidly increasing one. 36. Mr. Beauchamp.] In respect to these shipments of oats and cheese which have been made to Victoria, have they assumed very large proportions from Southland ? —There has been a considerable quantity of oats sent there for transhipment to South Africa, but that was really because the Victorian merchants managed to secure the Government orders. Since then our own Government has secured fairly extensive orders, which have been executed direct from here. 37. Like Mr. Eoberts, I think our trade with Victoria was very largely due to the adverse climatic conditions which prevailed there. Did you say that year in and year out we had a very large trade there, and that it was merely a question of one year giving a high price and of another year a lower price to satisfy our merchants ? —The trade we used to enjoy with Victoria and South Australia in these particular lines has practically disappeared. 38. Therefore it is necessary to get rid of our large surpluses, and so we have been dumping them down in New South Wales ?—Yes; when they could not take the surplus we had to send it to London. 39. I suppose Invercargill does very little export trade with the East ?—Very little. I should imagine what is done is probably done through Australia. 40. Have you considered the effect upon local industries of federation ?—I do not consider myself qualified to venture a definite opinion on that point. There are people connected with those industries who are better able to speak on that point than I am. I have always considered that, as New Zealand is essentially a producing colony, the interests of the producers taken as a whole would bulk more largely than the interest of the manufacturers. I really cannot see why the New Zealand manufacturers should not be able to hold their own against Australian manufacturers, because I do not believe for a single moment that this is the only colony that cares for the industrial classes. No doubt the industrial classes in the other colonies will see that the scale of wages is kept up to approximately what prevails in other parts, and if the hours of labour in other colonies is approximately the same as ours I cannot see why our manufacturers cannot hold their own with outsiders. 41. Do you think, in the event of our not federating, Victoria could grow sufficient oats to supply New South Wales?—l think New South Wales would grow a good deal of oats, and that Victoria and Tasmania would supply all they want if a new tariff is put on. 42. In which case we should be shut out by the duties?— Yes; but in the case of a severe drought I imagine they would have to fall back on us. 43. Mr. Leys.] I notice you say that we have been shut out from South Australia by the duty. In the statistics for 1899 the total acreage of oats in South Australia is given as only 25,000 acres. That cannot supply anything like all the wants of South Australia if it consumed anything like the same amount that the other colonies do. In the same year the acreage of New Zealand was 417,000 —in fact, the acreage of oats under crop in New Zealand is larger than that of Australia taken together. Do you not think some other cause must have been working in South Australia to shut out our export ?—I do not know whether that is so or not. All I know is that the trade has been killed by the duty. 44. Do you think Victoria is supplying them ?—Possibly. 45. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do they use Indian corn ?—Possibly they do. ■ 46. Mr. Leys.] Have you considered the effect of throwing open the market to the Australian wheat-producers ? —I do not think there would be any danger of the Australians shipping wheat to New Zealand, because we always produce a surplus of wheat in this colony, and the value of the wheat is regulated by the value in London. 47. There is always a large export of wheat from Australia, is there not ?—Yes, excepting in a very bad year.
A.-4
4
48. In New Zealand the total production of wheat was, in 1898, 50,000 bushels less than the local consumption. Do you recollect that year?— But you must remember that 1898 was a year of severe drought in Canterbury. Last year there was a large surplus. 49. If the duty were repealed would not the northern districts of the colony, which are not wheat-producing, have to get their wheat from Australia? —That would be the case if they could buy it cheaper than from Canterbury or Otago. 50. Is not the Australian wheat a drier wheat ?—Yes ; I believe it is better for milling. 51. Would not the effect of repealing the duty on flour result in large imports from Australia?—lt would depend on the question of price. If they could import cheaper from Australia than from the South Island it would be bought for preference; but I should imagine that the producers here would simply have to meet the market, as they would not allow the Australians to corner the North Island trade to the exclusion of their own wheat. 52. Then, the effect would be to reduce the price, in all probability ? —No; because I think the price of wheat all round, taking one year with another, is regulated by the value in London. 53. Is not the freight from Sydney about the same as from Invercargill to Auckland ?—There is not much difference. 54. Then, the local grower would have no advantage in sending supplies to Auckland ?—Not much. 55. Is it not a fact that before the duty was imposed the greater part of the Auckland wheatsupply came from Sydney ?—I could not tell. I always thought the bulk of the Auckland supply was drawn from the South Island. 56. A short time ago there was a short importation of American wheat into Auckland: did not that result in a very great outcry from the Canterbury farmers? —I do not remember the circumstances. 57. It was imported for the Auckland Roller Mills, which were in the hands of the Assets Board? —I think such an act would probably lead to an outcry for protection ; but, taking one year with another, there would be very little risk of any trade of consequence being done with outsiders. 58. Is it not a fact that the wheat-production of New Zealand is reduced to the actual consumption of the colony, and that wheat does not pay to export ?—I believe there is a considerable exportable surplus this year. 59. Has it not been the experience of the past that losses have been incurred on wheat, and there has been a tendency to reduce the export ?— I cannot speak with any precise knowledge, because this is really not a wheat-producing district, but I believe that the Canterbury farmers, taking one year with another, have done pretty well with wheat. 60. You do not think they would object to the repeal of the duty ?—I do not know what they would do; but, personally, I do not think that intercolonial free-trade would seriously affect the wheat-growers of this colony, nor the flourmillers, as I think our own flourmillers can hold their own with those on the other side. 61. Perhaps you have given some attention to the financial aspect of federation ? —I have thought a good deal about the whole question. I said I had not considered the political aspect: I mean I had not been able to arrive at any definite conclusion, and naturally I would not like to say anything on the subject. 62. Perhaps, as a commercial man, you have considered the question of borrowing on the part of the States of the Commonwealth. If the Customs duties were taken over by the Commonwealth, could the States borrow any funds for the construction of railways and roads ?—I have always considered that federation would be a great assistance to the colonies in the matter of borrowing, for they would have the guaranteo of the Commonwealth, and could get their money at perhaps a lower rate of interest. 63. Do you think the Commonwealth would borrow money to devote to the purpose of purchasing land for settlement ?—I really could not answer that question. 64. Would the Commonwealth be likely to borrow money for the construction of roads in New Zealand?—l certainly think that unless the colony had some power to raise money to carry on public works it would be a very serious question as to whether they should join the Commonwealth at all. I imagine that provision is made for borrowing. 65. Do you think they could borrow profitably ?—I think their credit would not be adversely affected by being members of the Commonwealth, but otherwise. 66. If they have no control over Customs duties, which is the chief security ? —If you do not take the money out of the people in one form they have got it in their pockets, and it will be taken out in some other form. 67. Would we not be very much in the position of the old Provincial Governments in regard to borrowing? Would our credit abroad not be very much discounted by the fact that we have no control over Customs revenue, which is the chief source of our security ? —I have not considered that aspect of the matter. 68. Are we likely to get loans on good terms ?—My opinion is New Zealand would be able to borrow money then on just as favourable terms as now. As to the risks of the Federal Government putting on direct taxation, I take it that our representatives in the Commonwealth Parliament would have some say in moulding the policy, and would not agree to any injustice being imposed on us. 69. But Mr. Barton has already indicated the possibility of direct taxation being imposed ?—I recognise that there are considerable risks to be faced in joining the Commonwealth, but we have to sink our individuality to some extent. But that is an aspect of the case I have not formed a definite opinion on. While believing that there would be an immense advantage to this colony from a commercial point of view, I admit that there might be drawbacks from a political point of
5
A.—4
view and from a financial point of view. Personally, it would be with a feeling of regret that I would see our political independence sacrificed to any extent; it is purely a question of whether in the interests of the colony at large the commercial .advantage to be derived would not warrant us in making the sacrifice, in the same way as other colonies have had to sacrifice a portion of their independence. 70. You have mentioned oats and dairy produce as likely to show a great expansion if we join the Commonwealth. Are there any other items that would be likely to expand our trade with Australia ? —There will probably be other items, such as linseed, barley, and other things. 71. But does not the English market regulate the price of produce exported from the colonies?—lt does in some items, but not in others. 72. Is it not the case that in the dairy industry, for instance, the price is regulated now by the English market ? —Nearly all our dairy produce goes home to the Old Country in the winter time. Take cheese, of which a considerable quantity is produced in this district: The English buyer would only take cheese up to a certain month. They all want their shipments to leave the seaboard by the end of March, or April, because later on the Canadian and Home cheese is coming on the market, and they do not want our cheese then. In the past a very satisfactory trade with New South Wales has been.done in the winter months, and what I feel is, if all restrictions were removed that trade would expand very considerably. 73. Do you conclude that Australia will immediately set up hostile tariffs ? Our trade imports from Australia to New Zealand amount to over a million and a quarter, while our exports are only about a million and a half, including specie. Is it likely that Australia is going to throw away all that trade ?—I understand that they cannot differentiate, but will have to extend to us, if we federate, the same treatment as to the other colonies. There will be the same tariff against us as against the rest of the world if we do not federate. I think those figures do not represent the bond fide trade, but include the transhipment from United Kingdom, which are not really imports from Australia at all. 74. If we federated, would not the large Australian merchants dominate the New Zealand trade? —I do not see why they should. While we have direct steamers to come to this colony we should be able to import direct to New Zealand. The bulk of our imports are direct now. A merchant here might import from Calcutta a thousand bales of cornsacks. Perhaps he would require two hundred bales more. He has not time to order them direct from Calcutta, and the chances are he buys that quantity from Australia; but the bulk of the import trade would have been done direct with the producing country. 75. I will take your opinion, which I believe to be correct, that a large portion of these goods are reshipped foreign goods or Home goods. That reshipment has been made subject to a second duty in New Zealand, and yet these merchants have been able to compete for this large trade ?—I think the goods would have been put under bond in Australia, and would not pay the duty there. There would be only one duty to pay, and even in case they had paid duty in Australia they would get a drawback. 76. Still, their facilities would be greater in any case if there were no other duties payable on reshipment to New Zealand ?—Yes. 77. Would not that have the effect of increasing the amount of reshipments of Australian importations to New Zealand? Would not the Australian merchants make this a clearing market? —Yes. New Zealand is used for that purpose to some extent, and I do not think we shall ever get away from that. If the Australian merchant overimports any line of goods, and wants to clear it out, he will take advantage of the market in New Zealand as long as he can get his stuff in at a price that would pay him better than sacrificing in his own market. 78. In the first place, they have a very great advantage in freights ?—They have, and that is a thing I think our Government will have to take into consideration. They have done so, as a matter of fact, and are endeavouring to see that we are put on more level terms with the Australian Colonies in regard to freights. 79. They have an advantage in freights. Will not they increase this clearing trade, as well as take a more dominating part in New Zealand trade, by means of travellers and other facilities of that kind ?—I suppose it would facilitate their operations in that way ; but lam quite satisfied that the bulk of the New Zealand import trade will continue to be done practically by New Zealand merchants, who will buy their goods in the first market and import here what they think they will require. And it is not always a disadvantage to us to thus take any surplus from Australia. 80. Then, with regard to manufactures, do you not think the manufacturers of Australia, having a large local market, will be able to manufacture more cheaply than we can in this isolated market, and will ship their surplus in the same way to New Zealand ?—I do not see why they should be able to manufacture more cheaply if the cost of labour there is the same as it is here. I think the handicap of the cost of transport would be a very fair protection for the manufacturers here in respect to some lines; but look at our development in woollen industries, in regard to which we would do a very extensive trade. I am told that there are considerable quantities of woollen goods going to Australia because they are of much better quality than can be turned out on the other side. 81. It has been stated in Australian newspapers that British manufacturers are expected to establish branches of their manufactures in the vicinity of Newcastle, close to the coal, for the purpose of supplying the trade requirements of Australia generally. Do you not think that with such advantages our local manufacturers would be overwhelmed? —I think they probably might be; but I am a Free-trader, and I believe in things taking their course as far as manufactures are concerned. 82. Then, in that case our manufactures would be detrimentally affected?—l imagine some of them would, but I do not know to what extent, or if, on the whole, the damage would be very
A.—4.
6
serious. Of course, lam speaking now about a thing I do not consider lam qualified to give a pronounced opinion on :I am only speaking generally. I am not directly interested in any local industries, and I have not got the information by me to enable me to speak definitely; but, speaking generally, I think there would be a risk of some of the local industries suffering to some extent through the competition from the other side. 83. Hon. Major Steivard.] I think you said that amongst the advantages you thought would follow the inclusion of New Zealand in the Federation would be an improvement in the value of our securities—that is to say, we would be able to borrow on better terms than we can borrow now in London ?—Yes. 84. Are you aware that prior to federation the 4-per-cents of New South Wales stood at 117, and that to-day they stand at 113, and that New Zealand 4-per-cents stand to-day at 113 firm? If that is so, would it not appear that there has been no very great advantage as far as the moneymarket is concerned to New South Wales ? —That might not be the result of it joining the Federation. There might be other conditions—the continuation of the war in Africa. 85. That is quite so; but would not these contingencies equally affect our securities?—l believe consols have gone back very seriously, partly owing to the continuation of the war and partly to the death of the Queen, and I do not think New South Wales is suffering exceptionally in that respect. If New Zealand securities are exceptional in maintaining their price, it might be due to other circumstances than through her not being included in the Federation. 86. Can you tell us what proportion of your exports from Southland have been sent to London, direct ?—No; but, speaking generally, oats are not shipped to London unless you cannot get a market anywhere else. 87. What has been the result?— Not satisfactory, on the whole, in the case of shipments to London, but there have been occasions when they have paid better than selling them locally. 88. Supposing Victoria produced more oats than it required for its own consumption, is it at all likely that under these circumstances she would import oats from New Zealand?—l think, if there were no duty, our oats could be landed there at a price that would induce the consumers to take them in preference to Victorian oats, and that farmers there would then give up growing oats. 89. You seem to think that, provided there was absolute free-trade between Australia and New Zealand, the cultivation of oats, which is the principal item in this district, would largely cease in Victoria and New South Wales, and they would have to depend upon us for their supplies ? —I do not know that it would cease altogether, but I say it would diminish. 90. That is very strongly on the assumption of absolute free-trade ; but supposing the Commonwealth impose a duty for revenue purposes, would that duty still have the effect of shutting out Southland oats ?—Such a duty could not apply to New Zealand if we were in the Federation. 91. Mr. Luke.] To what extent do New Zealand oats find their way to South Africa through Australia? —Last year a very considerable quantity went. 92. And there is no great difficulty in supplying them excepting the want of bottoms for carrying them ? —We could have got the freight had we got the orders. 93. As a Free-trader, do you think the question of manufacturing in the colony is very much subordinate to that of producing from the soil ? Is it not an element deserving of some consideration as to the effect of federation on industries here?— Undoubtedly. These industries have been started under certain conditions, and it would be very wrong if they were not considered now. 94. Supposing, under the Federation, each State had the right of domestic legislation as regards labour-laws, and some of the labour-laws which we have here at present were not introduced in the States of Australia, do you not think that that would have a very detrimental effect upon our manufacturers in this colony ?—I do not know that the labour-laws of New Zealand have increased the cost of production seriously. I cannot compare them with the labour-laws of the other colonies, because 1 am not conversant with the conditions of other colonies. 95. We are led to believe that there is a material difference in the hours of labour, more particularly in the rate of wages prevailing in Australia as compared with those here. If that is so, do you not think it would prove a very serious bar to our industries, and would be in favour of some of the industries on the other side ?—lf the scale of wages here is materially different from the scale of wages on the other side it would prejudicially affect the industries perhaps, but the throwing-open of the markets would, I contend, more than counterbalance any such loss. 96. Hon. the Chairman.] You mentioned that a considerable quantity of oats is exported to Australia for transhipment to other places ; would not the latter markets be open to us for direct shipments?— The principal market for the transhipments from Victoria has been Western Australia, and the probability is that that market would still remain open to us, because I suppose the climatic conditions in that colony are entirely against the growth of oats. I do not know where the rest of the oats go. Some have gone to South Africa and, I think, to China, but, as far as Western Australia is concerned, I think that colony is the probable ultimate port that our oats go to when they go through Victoria. 97. Can you give us any information upon the question of barley or hops? —Hops are not grown here, but barley is to a considerable extent in the country north of Lumsden—that is, at Garston, Athol, and Lake Wakitupu. The climate of Southland is not very favourable to growing barley suitable for malting. The barley from the districts I have named finds its market in Dunedin and Invercargill, and I think there is a considerable trade done by the maltsters of New Zealand with the Australian Colonies. That trade would be prejudicially affected if the New South Wales markets were closed by heavy duty. 98. Mr. Roberts.] The answer Mr. Watson gave in reference to the question of freights might be misinterpreted if a further answer were not given. Mr. Watson made a remark generally that freights in New Zealand were higher than in Australia. I suppose you know, Mr. Watson, that
A.—4,
7
freights fluctuate very much in Australia—that sometimes you have seen wool charged Id. a pound in Sydney when the freight here is only Jd. ? —I believe that did occur on one occasion. 99. And I think you recognise that freights here have a right to be higher on account of the difficulty of loading, through the ports being so much scattered about, involving necessarily high freights ? —Undoubtedly. 100. So that you could not expect the same freights here as are enjoyed in Australia?—No ; but the reference I made was that the question was one the Government might consider, having regard to the difficulties steamship-owners have to contend with in this colony in loading at so many different ports, with port charges at each port, and with the time taken in travelling between one port and the other. For instance, the German and French steamship lines are doing a large trade with Australia, but that is only made possible by the large subsidies given by their Governments. I thought in the interests of the producers of this colony the Government should take into consideration the question of granting subsidies, so as to bring the freights to something of the same level prevailing in Australia. lam quite satisfied, for instance, that a direct trade with South Africa could not be opened up unless some assistance of that sort is given. 101. Hon. Major Steward.'] Supposing New Zealand remained outside the Federation, and the Commonwealth tariff on oats were reduced to one-half the present Victorian tariff, would that reduction be sufficient to open the market for us ?—That would mean about 7d. per bushel, and I think that would still be a sufficient handicap to keep New Zealand out. 102. So that you think the only thing that would enable us to have the benefit of a full market in Australia would be that oats should be admitted absolutely free of duty ?—Of course, a nominal duty of 2d. or 3d. only would help the difficulty to be overcome. 103. Mr. Leys.] Our yield per acre of oats as compared with the yield of South Australia is so very high that do you not think, notwithstanding a substantial duty against us, we could still maintain a very large trade there'? —I am simply going by the evidence of fact that the imposition of the duty in South Australia has killed the trade. 104. But they must be getting their oats from somewhere else than growing them, because the statistics show that there has been a decrease in the quantity of oats grown for last year as compared with the previous year. Does that not prove that South Australia is not an oat-growing colony ? —Precisely ; that is what I contend —that they cannot grow oats as compared with Southland, which is more suited for growing oats. We could grow oats here for the whole of the Australian Colonies. 105. Do you think if the farmers in Australia found they could not grow oats profitably they would turn to something else, or do you think they would rather adopt the policy of doing without oats altogether than of taking oats from New Zealand ?—Well, of course, they can grow them if they keep on these high duties, but it pays the farmers to keep us out. Mr. Leys : But they do not seem to have done so in South Australia. 106. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I asked whether Indian corn did not take the place, at a certain price, of oats in Australia ?—Yes. William Duffus Hunt examined. (No. 2.) 107. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ? —I am a member of the firm of Wright, Stephenson, and Co., stock and station agents, grain-buyers, and manure-merchants. We deal with the farmers, and sell them pretty well everything they require. 108. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating or not federating with the Australian Commonwealth ?—No, I have not given it any consideration, excepting in so far as will affect our own business. Ido not know anything about the political aspect of the question. 109. State what you think are the advantages and disadvantages ?—I presume, if we do not federate, there will be a tariff wall raised against us, and that would certainly do harm to our commercial trade. My idea is that we should get free-trade with Australia somehow or another. If we cannot get it without federation we ought to federate. Australia is practically our only market outside London that we can depend on, and if they put a protected tariff on it will kill our trade there, the principal item of which is oats. Australia is our best market for oats, and if that was locked against us it would be unprofitable to grow them. This year South Africa is taking a lot of the Bluff oats, but that is a market we cannot depend on. 110. Have you considered any advantages that will accrue to the Colony of New Zealand through not federating ?—lf we do not federate I suppose we shall have a bigger say in our own affairs; but I repeat it would seriously interfere with our trade. 111. Do you think you could find other markets outside Australia for your surplus produce ? Well, in getting markets we have first to get the people who want our stuff; and, secondly, we have to get them to take it in large enough quantities to enable us to get regular communication established. 112. Do I understand that the whole of the produce shipped to Australia is consumed there, or is a great deal of it re-exported? —A great deal is re-exported. 113. Why should not New Zealand export direct to those places ?—Before we could do that we should have to be able to export in sufficient quantities to make the trade pay and to warrant a direct line of communication. 114. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Then, I gather that the chief item you are alluding to is the export of oats ?—We trade generally with Australia. My idea is that we want to get free-trade with Australia. 115. But as far as your business is concerned it is a question of oats?— Yes; in Southland oats is the principal thing. 116. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Looking to the interests of the day, what effect do you think federation will have on the trade of Southland twenty years hence ?—I think if we had free-trade
A.—4
8
with Australia it would mean that we shall have a large trade between here and there. We have a different climate, and we can produce well here what they cannot produce there, and it means that they will want a lot of our products. 117. And you think the conditions will be practically the same twenty years hence as they are now ?—I do not see anything to change them. 118. Why do you lay such stress upon the Australian market ? Is there no other market that might naturally rise for your Southland produce ? —Before we can attack any market successfully we must have regular communication. Well, we have got a regular communication with Australia, and I do not know if we can send a sufficient quantity of stuff to any outside market to make it worth while to put on a regular line of steamers. 119. Then, in the way you regard the question of federation, it is simply a matter of a day or two, and not a matter for all time ?—Simply as a matter of trade, and that trade I consider will last for all time. 120. Yes; but 1 mean are you regarding the question of federation as one that will affect the trade of to-day or affect trade for a definite period ? — The trade for all time. I maintain that it would benefit us for all time. Then, we might go so far as to say that it is essential to federate with Australia on account of the production of Southland, and on account of the production of New Zealand. 121. But the greater part of the produce of New Zealand goes where?—To Great Britain ; but one-sixth goes to Australia, I suppose, at present, and the bulk of that goes to New South Wales, where there is free-trade. 122. What articles of produce go from Otago to Australia?— Grain is the principal thing, and there might be a certain amount of dairy produce. 123. Do you think the duty prevents us sending away into Australia?— Yes. 124. What becomes of your grain? —We have been sending most of our grain to New South Wales. Years ago a great deal went to Victoria, but when the duty was put on that trade died away. For the last two years a lot of our grain has gone to South Africa, and if it had not been for the South African trade it would not have paid to grow oats. 125. Could you not export to England?—No; it would not pay, because the price is not sufficient. 126. Is the price of our oats lower in England than in Australia? —At present we get freight for oats to England for about £1 17s. 6d. a ton, as against 10s. to Australia. 127. Is not the average price £1 17s. 6d. ?—We have often got it for very much less, but only because the boats were particularly anxious to fill up, and they would take a smaller quantity at a lower rate. They would not take a very large quantity for very much less. 128. If there should be the same tariff for the whole of Australia as there is in Victoria, would the growth of oats in Southland cease?— Unless we can get some outside market it would cease. I do not see any prospect of a permanent market outside Australia. 129. You now send oats to England?— Yes ; we sent them there when we could not do anything better ; but to ship there simply means a heavy loss. 130. Do you think, if there was the same tariff throughout Australia as prevails down in Victoria, that Australia would take our oats ?—No. 131. Do you think, if there were a complete failure owing to drought, that that would not have a good effect on the oats on the market here ? —lf there was a disastrous drought that affected the crops in Australia they might have to come here for oats, but that would only be in an odd season. 132. But there are conditions under which they would be obliged to take your oats ?—Yes, in a season of drought; but unless we had a steady market we would not grow them. 133. What, is the average crop in Australia bigger? —I cannot tell exactly. The year before last we grew more oats than they did in the whole of Australia. 134. Do you know what the average yield in Australia is for oats ?—I do not; but they would not grow as good a crop as we do in New Zealand. 135. Do you know what the average yield in New Zealand is?— Last year, 37 bushels per acre. 136. And if the average yield in Australia is about one-third or one-fourth of that, do you not think we could produce our oats and land them in Australia cheaper than they can grow them under their conditions ?—I think we can. 137. Then, to put it shortly, you think the duty they have in Victoria, if imposed throughout the Commonwealth, would ruin the oat trade ?—-Yes. 138. Mr. Roberts.] If there had been no duty on oats this year, could you have exported them to Victoria with profit ?—Oats were very cheap last year in Victoria, and I do not think we could have competed with them if there had been no duty ; but we could have got a trade in other parts of Australia. 139. You mentioned, in reference to the export of oats to England, that you were not aware of any but disastrous losses on such shipments : do you desire to qualify that statement ?—Occasionally one might do very well by shipping to London. 140. I suppose you know that people have done quite as well by shipping to London as to Victoria? —It has happened, but not in recent years. We want a steady general market. 141. The price per bushel in London is about what?—lt has run about £1 2s. to £1 4s. a quarter, or about 2s. 7d. or 2s. Bd. a bushel, and the expense of shipping to London, on an average, is about Is. 3d. 142. Mr. Millar.] What proportion of the total shipments to the Bluff go to Australia?— Last year the great bulk of them went to South Africa, but now most go to Australia. 143. Therefore South Africa was the better market, and the same thing will continue ? —lf we had this market, and it was steady, we would not ship to Australia at all.
9
A—4
144. Then, it is not a question of the permanent trade, but where the highest market is ?— Yes; but Australia is the only permanent market we have. 145. Looking at the future, is there a prospect of the South African markets being open to New Zealand?—l could not speak on what the prospect would be. Because they have a large country and a small population, I do not think it would be a permanent market. 146. Then, it is useless to subsidise steamers to open up trade there. Or are they likely to grow themselves oats to such an extent as to interfere with our shipments ?—I think they will; but I am only speaking from hearsay. 147. Mr. Beauchamp.] There is no duty on oats in New South Wales, and that is the chief reason why you used that colony as a dumping-ground for your surplus oats ?—They have taken them nearly all. If it had not been for the South African market it would not have paid to have grown oats the last two years, because New South Wales would not have taken enough. Australia has been able to supply a sufficient quantity for her domestic use. 148. Therefore it is not likely to be a permanent market ?—No. To make it pay to grow oats in Australia they would have to have a duty against us always. 149. Is it not due to the adverse climatic conditions existing in Australia?— Partly. 150. Mr. Leys.) Do I understand you to say that the export to Australia is one-sixth the production of this district ?—One-sixth of the total trade of New Zealand is done with Australia. 151. Is there not a very large market for oats in other parts of New Zealand?— Yes ; but it does not absorb the whole of our surplus. The North Island is every year growing a larger quantity of oats itself. If Australia were closed to us we would have to reduce the quantity we are growing. 152. I suppose other crops could be found equally profitable ? —No. Otago and Southland are better suited for growing oats than other grain-crops. We do no business in wheat and flour. 153. How would free-trade in New Zealand affect the wheat-growers and the flour-millers ?—I have not thought the matter over. 154. Hon. Major Steward.] Was not a considerable portion of the oats shipped last year to Sydney sent on to South Africa?—No; those oats went through Melbourne. 155. Then, practically the whole export through New South Wales was for her own consumption ?—Yes. 156. Mr. Luke.] Supposing Australia imposed a duty of 6d. per bushel on our oats, would it not pay to send them to London were we to obtain a permanent market ?—We cannot get a price in the London market that makes it pay for producing. 157. Hon. the Chairman.] You think it would not pay to export to other countries unless the trade could support a line of direct steamers ? —We would want direct communication to make a permanent trade. 158. Do you not think it would pay the Government to proceed in that direction—in the interests of farmers, to subsidise a line of steamers to come to New Zealand—rather than for New Zealand to join the Federation ?—Before it would pay to subsidise the steamers you would first want a permanent market that would take a sufficient quantity to fill the steamers, and I do not think South Africa would do that. 159. Why should not New Zealand export to the same markets as Australia does, if these lines of steamers were subsidised to come on to New Zealand ?—To make it pay the steamers would have to get a very large quantity, and would have to go to nearly every port of New Zealand to make up a cargo. Ido not think they would get sufficient inducement to warrant them coming here. 160. Mr. Beauchamp.] But supposing there are two or three lines of steamers trading from Australia to South Africa, and it is by these steamers that a large quantity of our produce has been re-exported to South Africa —in the same way, why should not a line of steamers run from here to South Africa, and land our produce there direct ?—lt might be made to pay. William Arthur Moeris examined. (No. 3.) 161. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—A bootmaker. I represent not only the bootmakers, but the Amalgamated Society of Eailway Servants and the butchers, nearly four hundred men. 162. Have you considered how federation might affect the local industries of New Zealand ? Yes. My objection to federation is twofold —from the political and industrial standpoints. We have here a Government that possesses the confidence of the people, and if there were occasions to consider any matter from a wide colonial standpoint the Government could do it just as well as if they were federated. If we were federated the questions would have to be looked at from the broad Commonwealth standpoint, and in such a case the individuality of this colony would be lost. From the political standpoint, I think we have everything to lose and nothing to gain by federation. I believe if we federated our local industries would be ruined, because the larger concerns on the other side will overwhelm our industries, and consequently our men will have to run after the factories where the work is, because the factories do not run after the men. I believe that the Australian manufacturers will be able to manufacture cheaper than we can here. I question very much whether the working-men would reap any benefit from the removal of the tariffs. We had. an object-lesson on that last session. £165,000 was knocked off the duties then with the idea that it would benefit the working-man, but I have never met one that had benefited to the extent of one halfpenny by that remission. I contend a protective duty is necessary against the Australians to assist our manufacturers, who had to build and equip their factories. 163. How do you think federation would affect the rate of wages in New Zealand ?—I believe it would be the same as in 1883 or 1885, when men had to go away to seek for work. 164. Then, both on industrial and political grounds you think it would be a bad thing for New Zealand to federate ?—I do. Some people seem to think that if we had federation there would be 2—A. 4.
A.—4
10
a greater outlet for our produce. I fail to see it. I have lived in Australia and know what its requirements are. It requires nothing from us excepting oats and soft woods. Now they are federated Victoria can supply all the oats and dairy produce they want. 165. Do you think they are likely to keep on the duty against oats and timber?— They have done so, but the people have to pay it themselves. I know the prevalent idea is that if we were federated the workers would reap the benefits of the increased production ; but some years ago, when Mr. Webb was Minister for Agriculture in Victoria, he had to go to America for the Government. Now, at that time reapers-and-binders were admitted to Victoria duty-free, and yet they were sold there at £56 each. It was felt there was something wrong in that respect, and when Mr. Webb went to Frisco he went into one of the large reaper-and-binder factories and asked them the price of the machines. They told him £28. He said he would take two hundred; but when he told the manufacturer he wanted them for Victoria, the latter replied, " We cannot do that, because we have our agents there, and you must get them through them." This showed that rings and monopolies did exactly as they do now, and that the people got no benefit from the low price of the goods or from the removal of the duties. The same remark applies to the manufacturer of gum-boots, which are manufactured by the North British Company. There is only one firm that has the agency, and when Gavin Gibson, of Melbourne, sent a cheque for £3,000 Home for boots the cheque was returned, and they were told to get them through Neil and Co. If a loaf is only 3d. and I have not got that 3d., it might as well be 3s. as far as lam concerned. Give the work-ing-man the opportunity of fair wages and he will never ask to be governed by any other people outside his own colony, he will never want to go anywhere else to work, and he will never grumble at the taxation you impose. 166. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Are wages better in New Zealand than they are in Victoria?— Taking them all round, they are. In my trade a man under certain circumstances might earn more there than here, but there are different surroundings. 167. You think the wages are better here than in Victoria, notwithstanding their protective duty ?—Taking it all round, I believe we are better off in many respects ; but you must not always reckon according to the wage standpoint. I might earn 3s. or 4s. more a week here, but perhaps I would have to pay 6s. or Bs. more for rent. 168. With our climate, would artisans be able to do better "work than they can in the hotter climate in Australia ?—I do not know. I have seen some pretty tough " rags "in Australia—men who would work with our men, and not shirk their work. They get accustomed to the climate. Physically, I believe our men are better men; but when it comes to the physical question it is wonderful what the Australians go through. 169. You fear that free-trade would mean that the larger concerns of Australia would swamp our concerns here ? —Yes ; and it might possibly mean that the German and Japanese manufacturers would come in also. Those people work under indifferent conditions, and I did not leave the Old Country to work under the same conditions here. I am not afraid to meet any man under fair conditions, but not under the conditions the German and Chinese work under. 170. What do you refer to when you speak of Chinese labour ?—I believe it would open the door to other classes of goods. Possibly it might not directly affect the bootmakers, but it might be possible that the German boats and Japanese lines would bring their goods through. 171. How does federation affect our trade with China and Japan?—l do not think it would increase it in any shape or form, excepting that some of the goods I mentioned would come in. 172. Are you afraid of Chinese and Japanese labour getting into Australia ?—-Yes, unless great care is taken to keep them out. 173. You think in Queensland there will be a question of coloured versus white labour?—lt must ultimately rise, and it will have to be settled. 174. Do you think the industries of Northern Queensland can be carried on in the tropics with white labour ?—My conviction is that they might be; I have met men who came from Bowen who weighed 15 st. 175. Did they do outdoor work?— Yes ;in the sugar-fields. I believe the Anglo-Saxon can do or go anywhere. 176. Can you show me a tropical country where the Anglo-Saxon does do hard outdoor work continuously ?—He is not employed, simply because the class of manufacture involved is not profitable enough to employ him. 177. Can you give an illustration where a white man can stand such work in the tropics for one or two generations ? —ln Queensland they do that now ; but I would qualify that statement by saying that there would need to be a constant accession of fresh blood. That is necessary, otherwise I think the race would die out. 178. Mr. Roberts.] I think your remarks as to the effect federation would have on the labourmarket pointed to the conclusion that you are distinctly of opinion that federation would have the effect of reducing the rate of wages in this colony ?—Yes ; and, although I am a workman at the present time, I have been an employer of labour, and I claim to speak both for the employer and employe. 179. I suppose you have noticed that other colonies in Australia are moving in the direction of obtaining Conciliation and Arbitration Courts ?—Yes. 180. If that comes about, I presume the only effect would be that one of two things must happen : either wages must increase in Australia or decrease here. Do you not think it is more likely that the result of conciliation and arbitration would be to bring the Australian wages up to the level of the New Zealand standard wages ?—That is a very difficult matter to decide offhand. I am perfectly satisfied to hold to what we have got. 181. In reference to the question of Kanaka labour and Chinese labour, have you any idea what these men are paid in the sugar-tields ?—No, I could not say myself; but I understand they get about 10s. a week.
11
A.—4
182. I might tell you that the cost of Kanaka labour in Queensland is 18s. per head per week, and of Chinese labour £1 per week ? —Yes. 183. That does not include the cost of bringing them from the islands and of taking them back. The skilled wages are very much higher than we think ?—I am surprised. 184. Mr. Millar.] You have been speaking purely from a worker's point of view on the question of federation. In Victoria are not the workers in your trade more highly paid than they are in New South Wales ? —I would, rather work in Victoria than in Sydney, because the Victorians manufacture a different article. 185. Can you give me any idea which is the largest factory in Victoria ?—Bedgegood is about the largest, employing six years ago about four hundred hands. With the other factories, there were quite four or five thousand hands employed. 186. In your opinion, if the Victorian bootmakers worked full time this year to their full capacity their output would be sufficient for the whole of Australia ?—Yes. 187. And the inevitable result would be, under free-trade here, the whole of these factories in Australia would have to find some other outlet for their surplus ? —After providing for their local requirements we would be the scapegoat for them. 188. In respect to the boot trade, wages are remarkably low for a skilled trade, are they not, which I understand is largely due to competition from America ?—A great deal of it. 189. Do you not think, if there is going to be a Federal tariff, the probability is that the tariff will be lower than the existing one ? Now, Victoria has a high protected tariff, and if that is to be reduced there will be great competition from other countries?— Yes, that would be the inevitable result. 190. Therefore our only chance of keeping our manufacturers going is to bring the hours of labour down to the same level as theirs, and to make the other conditions also equal ? —That is so. 191. Have you met anything in the shape of Chinese cabinetmaking ?—Any amount. In Little Bourke Street, Melbourne, there is hardly a European cabinetmaker. 192. Under federation our market is to be thrown open to these Chinese cabinetmakers: would our men be able to compete with them?—No; they could not do it and pay the same wages and work the same hours. 193. Mr. Beauchamp.] You have told us that New Zealand would be the dumping-ground for surplus manufactures of Australia, and if federation were accomplished there would be ring 3 formed amongst manufacturers in Australia by which prices would be maintained: is there not a conflict of opinion there?—l mean the rings that would be formed there would operate here. If I were in the Old Country I would be a Free-trader; but lam not there, and the circumstances are different here. Protection is a monopoly, I admit, but it is a monopoly that allows every manufacturer to go into it freely. 194. Mr. Leys.] The franchise under the Commonwealth is manhood suffrage: do you not think the federation of the States will result in federation of labour in the long-run, and therefore in a uniform wage ?—I do not dispute it; but it will be guided to a very great extent by the climatic conditions and natural productions of the country. 195. Do you not think the tendency in Australia amongst the working-classes will be to establish a similar system to our own, under which a uniform wage will be paid ?—Theoretically, but not in practice. Here we have the practical control; but, supposing New Zealand wishes to take a step further, and the people there are against us, we cannot carry out what we like. Here we can say to our legislators, " We want so-and-so, and if you do not do it in three years we will put some one else in your place." 196. That is to say, you feel more secure without federation? —I reckon this is the best country in the world, and that we ought to be able to carry out our own destiny in our own way. 197. What do the Victorian bootmakers do with their surplus? They do not send it here?— No ; but they could do so if there were no tariff against them. 198. Do the Victorians export largely to New South Wales, where there is no duty ?—ln manufactured articles. 199. And should we be in a worse position in regard to Victoria than New South Wales is at present with regard to manufactures?- -That is where a great many people make the big mistake, because New South Wales is the terminus of the great shipping countries, and that gives employment to the people in that colony. It is not the factories. If you remove that terminus to Melbourne, Sydney could shut up. 200. Is the manufacture of boots in New South Wales a considerable one ?—ln certain lines, yes, but nothing like it is in Victoria. 201. You state, with regard to agricultural produce, that you do not think New Zealand could benefit in any way by federation, because Victoria will be able to supply all the adjacent markets: if we federated, should we not be in as good a position as now ? Why does not the factory supply those markets now ? —Because New South Wales, for instance, could not depend upon the supply from Victoria. 202. And that non-reliance would always continue ?—Yes; there will be exactly the same market as now. 203. Excepting if New South Wales put on a duty against us, then would it not pay the Victorians to send their produce there, because they would be in a very much better position than us ?—lf they like to put on a duty the steamers would have to pay it. Supposing they supplied themselves in Southland from Victoria, then, of course, we could send our produce Home. They only give you in Sydney the same price as at Home. 204. I see that Sir Eobert Stout, in an article on federation, says that " factory-workers can do from 5 to 10 per cent, more work in New Zealand than during the summer months in Australia": is that a fact?—l have worked under both conditions, and I very much question that.
A.—4
12
I have seen bricklayers working on a building at 104 in the shade, and I have seen men working in the factories under the same conditions. I have worked at 104 in the shade behind a screen with the gas alight. 205. Would you do less work under those conditions than you do in Southland?— You have to do it or go to sleep. You have to work as hard as you can. 206. I was told by the manager of the Kauri Timber Manufactory in Sydney, who employs a large amount of labour, that he can get one-fourth more work out of New-Zealanders when they arrive in Sydney than he can get from New-Zealanders who have been there a few months or a year, because they come down to about the same same level after a time as the Australians—that their working-power was greater at the start than later on : is that so ?—lt would be just the same if you got an Australian workman over here. They naturally try to do as much as they possibly can when they start work. They come down to the same conditions as prevail in the country they work in, which is not the climate altogether. 207. Hon. the Chairman.] You said you represented four hundred men : can you say how far you represent the opinions of the majority of those men in the views you have expressed on this occasion ?—I take a great interest in this matter, and I believe the opinions I express to-day represent not only my own opinions, but those of 90 per cent, of organized labour here. Nearly every man I have met is opposed to federation. The question has been placed before them, and they appointed me to come here as their delegate and express their views. Pbtee Lindsay Gilkison examined. (No. 4.) 208. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—I am a flour-miller and grain-miller generally. . 209. If you have considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia, will you kindly give the Commission your views upon it ?—Well, I have not considered the matter very much, excepting from a business point of view. I think, if we do not federate, that our trade will be hurt. I think we ought to federate if we do not have to pay too much for it. It will certainly hurt our trade if we do not, and Australia goes against us. We export a large quantity of oatmeal, principally to Australia, the larger portion of which goes to Sydney. Our individual export this year has been from 1,500 to 2,000 tons of oatmeal, valued at £9 a ton. We are the only oatmeal exporters of any consequence in Southland, and we have sent more this year than formerly. We export principally to Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, and a little to Western Australia. The greater portion of it goes to Sydney. I think we have everything to gain and little to lose by federating, seeing that in this country we produce three times more than they produce on the other side. I have not considered the political aspect of the question. With regard to the flour question, some people think that if the present duty was taken off the flour it would bring about competition with the other side. I do not agree with that, because our wheat is quite as good as their wheat. We cannot turn quite so much flour out of a bushel of wheat as they can, but we can turn it out quite as good in regard to quality. - 210. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Supposing you were not in the oat trade, would your views be affected at all ?—They might. 211. As a matter of fact, you view the question—possibly, properly—from the point of view which would affect your firm in your town? —Decidedly. I have not considered it from the colonial standpoint, but I am quite satisfied that nine-tenths of our Southland farmers would vote in favour of federation. 212. Supposing you had to devote yourself to growing wheat, barley, mutton, or beef instead of oats in Southland, would that seriously affect Southland ?—lf we were not to get an outlet for oats in Australia at all it would never pay to send them to England. 213. What is the average price per bushel of oats, year in and year out, in Southland?— This year the farmer has been getting, on an average, about Is. sd. to Is. 6d., and last year scarcely so much. The average price would be about Is. 4d. 214. Do you know at what price it would pay to convert oats into mutton ?—lt depends upon the price of sheep. At the price sheep are now it would pay to make them into mutton. 215. Then, if the average price to the farmer is not over Is. 4d., is there not an outlet for oats in the freezing-chamber ? —I could not say. A great many people here growing oats will not do that. They simply grow oats because the crop suits the climate. 216. You say it is impossible to send to England ?—Unless the price there is high. 217. What is the average price there? —About £1 4s. to £1 ss. a quarter. In London, 2s. 9d. to 3s. a bushel. The freights are very high : you cannot get the boats under from £2 to £2 ss. a ton : £2 is a very fair average. 218. What is the freight to Australia?—Eoughly, 3d. a bushel, or 10s. a ton. 219. Then, with regard to wharfage and exchange to London ?—The exchange is much higher, and London is an extremely expensive port to send to. 220. Mr. Boberts.] You know that during the past year the price of oats in Victoria has been very much lower than for previous years?— Yes. 221. Has the lower price of oats decreased the price of oatmeal in Victoria?— Not very much. It has affected the quantity imported, but not the price, because the New Zealand oatmeal always commands a higher price than oatmeal made out of Victorian oats. 222. Is your export during this year about the average? —It has been higher than it has been formerly. 223. Mr. Millar.] You said just now that nine-tenths of the farmers would be in favour of federation ? —Yes; because from a commercial point of view the bulk of them look to Australia for a market. 224. Do you think it would be advisable for the colony to hand itself over absolutely to Australia by means of federation for the sake of saving to this colony an export trade of £3,000 ?—
A.—4
13
Ido not think we are going to hand ourselves over to Australia at all; we shall surely be represented there. Arguing on those lines, Tasmania would be wiped out of existence. 225. You said that nine-tenths of the farmers approved of it ?—I speak of Southland. 226. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is your trade in oatmeal steadily increasing ?—Yes. The largest quantity is sent to Sydney, where there is no duty. 227. Then, if there was a duty against oats, you think the higher quality of our oats would still enable you to keep a large portion of your trade ?—Yes; but you know very well that if produce is increased in price it restricts the consumption. With the duty the trade would be restricted. If Melbourne were as free as Sydney we would send 3,000 or 4,000 tons of oatmeal to Australia every year. 228. Mr. Leys.] Do you not think that if the duty on flour were repealed the northern mills would get the greater portion of their wheat from Australia for milling purposes ?—Auckland might. 229. And that would be a serious loss to the farmers ?—They could, at the price obtaining at the present time, compete with Australia. 230. Could not the Australian wheat be landed as cheaply in Auckland from Sydney as in Canterbury?— Not at the prices quoted in Australia for this season. Wheat there is quoted at 2s. 6d. to 2s. Bd., and in Oamaru you can buy wheat at the present time at 2s. 3d. to 2s. 4d. of equally as good quality. 231. With regard to flour, do you not think the North Island would import large quantities of Sydney flour if the duty were removed ?—I do not think so. 232. What would prevent it ?—They could get it cheaper down South. 233. Could they get it much cheaper?— Flour is quoted in Australia at £6 ss. to £6 10s. a ton, and you can buy it in Oamaru at £5 15s. to £6 in any quantity. 234. But, looking at the fact that wheat is exported from Australia, and the wheat is a rather better quality for milling than South Island wheat, is it not probable that the northern mills would supply themselves from Australia ?—lf you judge by this year, and assuming the English market rules the price, the price in Oamaru is about 2d. or 3d. a bushel less than in Australia, and I do not see how it would pay our people to get it from the other side. Our wheat makes quite as good a quality of flour as theirs, but we have not got sufficient sun to make it as thin in the skin. ■ 235. It would bring a very great element of competition into the New Zealand flour-market ?— It might. 236. And so tend to lower the price ?—Yes ; although I hardly think it would when we can produce 3 bushels of wheat to their 1. We should not have sufficient cause to fear them. 237. Hon. Major Steward.] In the event of the New South Wales market being wholly or partially closed through the imposition of a protective duty, is there any other market to which you could export your oatmeal?—No; we have tried the Old Country, but it did not pay. 238. Is there likely to be a market in South Africa, supposing there was a direct line of steamers ? —We have tried it by sending 10 tons, and there was a fair return. It would have to be tinned and sent under different conditions to the conditions we ship under to Australia. Under different conditions it might be possible to get a trade there. 239. Mr. Luke.] Is there not a certain portion of Adelaide wheat imported into New Zealand now for flour-making purposes ?—I do not think so. Some Manitoba wheat and flour has been imported into the colony, but I did not know of any Australian being so imported. 240. Do you not think, if the Commonwealth imposed a duty on our oats, and our yield is quite double that of Victoria, it would exclude our oats from going there? —It would not exclude them— it would restrict their consumption. 241. Do you not think we could export oats to Great Britain ?—That is out of my line. We do not send oats to London. Chaeles John Beoad examined. (No. 5.) 242. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you? —An ironmonger, and a member of the firm of Broad, Small, and Co. We have been in business eleven years. 243. Will you be good enough to give the Commission the benefit of your views .upon the question of New Zealand federating or not federating with the Commonwealth ? —I do not think it will make much difference from an ironmonger's point of view whether we federate or not. 244. What is your opinion as to the effect it would have on trade generally ?—I am not prepared to say. It might affect the boot trade. Victoria manufactures boots largely, and I could not say whether our local manufacturers would be able to compete with them. With regard to ironmongery, very little is manufactured in New Zealand, and not much more in Australia. 245. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the wholesale houses of Melbourne and Sydney would do a bigger trade than they do now by means of travellers if we were federated ? —Not to any great extent, because we can import as cheaply as Melbourne and Sydney, and we can " buy " as cheaply from the wholesale houses in New Zealand as we can in Sydney. 246. Is there much trade done with Victorian or Sydney houses ?—Not here. We can do almost as well in Wellington as in Sydney. 247. Mr. Luke.] Are you at all identified with the timber trade ?—Yes ; I have a considerable knowledge of it. 248. What effect do you think federation will have upon that trade ?—The only timber we import is blue-gum. 249. What about the kauri timber which is largely exported to Sydney and Melbourne ?—I do not think they will ever keep that out. 250. As an ironmonger, are there not some lines such as plates and bars which you can buy cheaper in Sydney than in Wellington ?—We have never tried Sydney. We import the bulk of our goods from the United Kingdom, a fair portion from America, but very little from Australia.
A.—4
14
Eobeet Albebt Andeeson examined. (No. 6.) 251. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?- —A member of the firm of J. G. Ward and Co., grain merchants, Invercargill. I have been connected with the grain trade for about twenty years. 252. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia in reference to the grain trade?— Simply as it concerns oats. If a duty is imposed against our oats it will have the effect, in my opinion, of curtailing shipments, and so of losing the trade. At present New South Wales is the only free port for oats, and to New South Wales the bulk of our shipments go, excepting last year, when Melbourne took a large quantity of oats for transhipment to the Cape. Victoria having a duty of Is. 3d. per bushel, our trade is limited to one in which the oats are transhipped again to other ports. They are wanted probaby for milling and exporting again under bond. 253. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you think it is possible that the reason why oats are shipped to Sydney is partially because the climate there is unsuitable for growing, or do you think that the climate has nothing to do with the cultivation of oats? —I think the climate is not altogether suited, and in the districts suitable for oat-growing I believe it pays them better to grow lucerne. I understand they can get up to seven or eight crops of lucerne a year, and that pays them very much better than any yield of oats would pay them. 254. Supposing the Australian Commonwealth were to impose a tax of one-half that which is now imposed on oats in Victoria, could you still ship oats there ? —lt would probably depend to a large extent on what the season was like over there, because with a good season Victoria could supply a very large quantity of oats. Last year they had an exceptional season and a very large quantity available for export. They are now our principal competitors in the South African market. 255. Has your firm ever shipped oats to England ?—Yes. 256. With fair success ?—The prices have been pretty low. 257. But there has been the market ? —A very small margin would be left to the grower, unless we got exceptionally cheap freights. It is all a matter of freights; but even with a fair freight we would have to accept a low price, unless there was a very much better price than has been ruling at Home for some years. 258. Mr. Roberts.] Irrespective of any duty which has been imposed in Victoria on oats, has not the export from here of that commodity been to a large extent guided by the question of good crops or bad crops in Victoria ? This last year your export has virtually ceased to Victoria ?—For home consumption I think it has, but there has been a large quantity shipped. 259. The export to Victoria has virtually ceased, owing to the exceptional production due to the fine season ?—Yes ; and owing to the high duty farmers have been induced to grow them. 260. And I think you will find that almost every year the same thing has happened—that is to say, the requirements of Victoria are almost entirely regulated by the quantity of their own production ? —lf their duty was 10d, a bushel, as it used to be, I believe, a very large quantity of oats would go in from the Bluff. 261. But was not that when the crops were somewhat defective there ?—No; they did not then produce the quantity required for their own consumption. 262. The volume of business is entirely dependent on the season there ?—lt is so now. 263. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is not the quality of New Zealand oats superior to the Victorian oats? —Yes. 264. But even with the duty we could still look to getting a fair share of trade in consequence of the superior quality of our oats ?—They have introduced during the last few years special machinery for milling these poorer qualities of oats, so that they do not take our oats. They used to take a tremendous lot of ours, even when the duty was on for milling and exporting under bond—for making oatmeal and for shipping round the Australian coasts. 265. Are our oats used over there for seed purposes ? —I do not think so. 266. Provided the prices were equal, and the market in Sydney was still open, which colony do you think would be the more favoured in shipping to Sydney — Victoria or New Zealand ?—All things being equal, New Zealand would get the preference on account of our better quality. 267. Mr. Leys.] Do you ship oats to South Australia? —Only in very small quantities. 268. Has there ever been a large trade with South Australia ? —Not for the last ten years. We have not done any ourselves. We used to ship five thousand and ten thousand bags there at a time, but the trade was only an occasional one—an odd one. Ido not think the duty there has affected the shipment of oats. One difficulty we have got in regard to Adelaide is the question of freight. We have got no direct freights from Bluff to Adelaide. It means transhipping at Melbourne. John Johnston examined. (No. 7.) 269. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ? —A mechanical engineer. I have been in Invercargill since 1873. 270. Will you be good enough to give the Commission the benefit of your views upon the question of New Zealand federating or not federating with the Australian Commonwealth ?—lt is a question I have not considered, our business being purely a local one, chiefly repairing. 271. Have you considered whether it would affect your particular line of business?— Not carefully. I cannot think that it would affect us, having regard to the distance we are from Australia, and to the rich natural resources of this country. 272. Do you mean that if New Zealand did not federate we should not be prejudicially affected ? —Yes; that is what I mean. 273. Mr. Millar.] You are a mechanical engineer ?—Yes.
15
A.—4
274. Have you been doing any dredge-building?—We have carried out several dredge contracts. 275. Is it not a fact that you are now meeting with very severe competition from Victoria?— That is so. 276. Despite the fact that you have the assistance of a small tariff?— Yes. 277. If that tariff is reduced or removed altogether, will your interest be prejudicially affected ? —The removal of the duty must affect us. 278. If we federate with Australia it means intercolonial free-trade, and the removal of the duty on outside manufactures : how would it affect your trade ?—lt would prejudicially affect both us and our employes, because, though on relatively the same terms as outside manufacturers, we should be under worse conditions as regards wages and hours of labour. 279. Mr. Leys.] Do you not think you could manufacture dredges here and send them to Australia if there were no duties there against you ?—I cannot think so. 280. Is that because they have superior appliances or skill ?—Wages are higher in this country than in Melbourne, and it would be difficult for us to compete against the Australians in that branch of industry. 281. If the wages there were on the same level as ours, could you hold your own against them ?—We could not in this part of New Zealand. 282. Not with the advantage of the handicap of freight?—We have a great deal to contend with in the shape of wanting more modern tools and a better system of putting the work through. They are ahead of us in that respect in Melbourne. 283. You think their manufacturing industry is very much better developed ?—That is so. 284. But this dredge-building is almost a specialty in Otago ?—Yes. 285. And still you think you could not compete ? —No. 286. Hon. Major Steward.] With regard to dredge-building, is it not a fact that our men are so fully employed that we have to send to Sydney for dredges ?—I believe so. 287. And the hours of labour is longer in Australia than here ?—I believe so. 288. So that you have the handicap of having to pay higher wages, and the men here work a less number of hours, and, under the circumstances, you cannot compete against the Australian manufacturers unless you have the duty ? —Yes. 289. Mr. Luke.] Is it not a fact that orders for a large number of dredges have been placed both in New South Wales and Victoria ?—A great number. 290. And are you aware that those orders were first placed there without ascertaining whether the New Zealand shops could take them up ?—-In many instances, I believe so. 291. Are you aware that a firm of consulting engineers in Dunedin have set up a sort of connection with a firm in Melbourne, to whom they post their orders direct without first ascertaining prices in, or getting tenders in, New Zealand ?—I was not aware of that. 292. Is it not your opinion that if we federated, and there were the same tariff over all Australia, with their superior tools, larger shops, and larger output, the Australians would handicap New Zealand in the manufacture of dredges ? —I think that would be the result. 293. Have you made any complete dredges ?—No. 294. What parts have you made ?—We have turned out the machinery, the shafting, carryingblocks, ladders, and buckets. We have practically turned out the lot, and what would make a complete dredge, only it has been in different contracts. William Eoss examined. (No. 8.) 295. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you? — A woollen-manufacturer. I have been in the business two years here, and employ about seventy hands. 296. Where are your goods disposed of?— All over New Zealand. We have no export trade. Bing, Harris, and Co. bought our output, and we have been trying to get a connection in Sydney. 297. Supposing New Zealand were to federate with Australia, would that affect the woollen trade in chis colony ? —I could not say, because I have not been very long in the business, and I think that any evidence I could give would be of little value on that account. 298. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Could you say how federation would affect any other manufactures?— Yes, in regard to the engineering and implement trade. I have been in that for the last sixteen years. As far as New South Wales is concerned, we could always send machines there and compete in that market very well, because they were admitted duty-free ; but we could not send them into Victoria because the duty was against us. 299. How do you think federation would affect the engineering trade ?—Under the present labour laws, even if our machinery were admitted duty-free into Australia, we could not compete, because we are paying higher wages and working shorter hours than their men. The trade with New South Wales is falling off even now. Sydney is not such a good field for us as it was seven or eight years ago. 300. But is it still a field for us for certain goods ?—For certain classes of machines which they do not make to any large extent in Sydney, but the trade is limited. 301. What are the implements?— Principally chaff-cutters, windmills, and ploughs. 302. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Have you viewed the question apart from the trade aspect—as to the political aspect ?—I am not able to pass an opinion on that point. 303. Do you know Australia?— Yes. 304. Do you think our artisans are as capable as the men in Australia?—l think they are more so. A man will do more work here than in Australia on account of the climate. 305. With shorter hours here, should not we be able to compete with Australia ?—We also pay higher wages than they do.
A.—4
16
306. Is the freight to Australia much of a handicap?— Not so much ; it is more a question of labour. 307. But, if there were federation, would not there be a vastly increased output, and would not that compensate for the shorter hours and higher wages ?—Well, the question of labour comes in, because labour now is fully employed in almost every trade, especially in the engineering trade. 308. Then, you could not produce much more even if you got larger orders?— Not in the present state of trade. 309. Has your trade been injured by the shortening of hours and the increasing of the wages ? —I think almost every trade has been handicapped in that way. 310. It has diminished the output ?—Yes. 311. But still you say all the men are employed?— Yes, fully employed. 312. Mr. Boberts.] Have you employed labour in Australia yourself ?—No. 313. You have no practical experience to guide you in coming to the conclusion that a workingman can do a better day's work here than in Australia ?—I have had a good many men from Australia working for me here at the same class of work, and they could turn out more work here than there. 314. Therefore your experience in that direction has been only acquired from information you have obtained from men who have gone from here to there?— Yes, and from the amount of work they did in my employ. 315. Mr. Millar.] You said just now that you considered our manufacturers were handicapped by the higher wages and lower hours: in what way are they handicapped ?—We are working snorter hours for one thing, and we are restricted 316. You work forty-eight hours?— Yes. In Australia they work nine hours a day. 317. They work eight and three-quarters here, do they not?— Yes; that is only forty-eight hours a week. We give the half-holiday, which comes to the same thing. 318. You are working the forty-eight hours a week? —Yes, against their fifty-four. 319. And yet every man you can employ is fully employed now ?—I am only speaking generally of the engineering trade. 320. You have had to send over to the other side for men ?—That has been entirely on account of the progress of the dredging industry during the last two years. 321. Coming down to the agricultural-implement makers, their wages are smaller than in any other branch of the engineering trade : is that not so ?—Blacksmiths are paid the same rate of wages in the implement trade as they are in the engineering trade. Of course, engineers in the implement trade are not required to be of the same class of skilled men that they are in the engineering trade; therefore there is generally about Is. a day difference between those men working in the implement-shops and those working in the engineering shops. 322. You have a number of lads in the agricultural trade ?—That has been so in the past. 323. Who has curtailed it ?—The present legislation. 324. What legislation?— The unions only allow one boy to three men, and whenever you bring the matter before the Arbitration Court, of course the union is upheld. 325. Your agricultural-implement makers are not bound by any agreement in force in the colony?—Eeid and Gray are one. 326. How ?—They were before the Court. 327. They were never attached; there was never an award given against Eeid and Gray?— I understood there was. 328. There has never been an award given against Eeid and Gray ; therefore, so far as the law is concerned, they have not been hampered in any way by legislation ? —Of course, it applies to every trade in the colony. 329. Well, trade has been very brisk in the colony. Our export of manufactured articles greatly increased last year ?—I am not prepared to refute that. 330. That looks as if all trade- is in a very healthy condition ?—But it is quite possible that the increased output on the other side has been materially increased also; but, at any rate, I think the present legislation is hampering manufactures of all kinds. 331. And yet, although they are hampered, they have never been so fully employed ?—That is on account of the dredging, and things are very busy all over the world. 332. Going away from the engineering trade, in every other trade the same conditions pretty well apply—the trouble is to get both men, boys, and girls, on account of their being fully employed?—l admit that. 333. Then, the hampering has not done them any injury ?—lt has simply stopped trade. There is not the same amount of export to New South Wales in connection with the manufacturing trade as there was eight years ago. 334. Well, the total value of manufactured goods exported from this colony last year was £80,000, as against £63,000 the year before, or an increase of £17,000 for the year?—l am only speaking of the implement trade. 335. Mr. Leys.] Mention was made by a previous witness of the importation of dredges into the colony. As I understand your evidence, that importation is not because you could not have made them here, but because your shops were so fully employed that there was not the labour to make them : it was not because you could not compete with Australia, but because you could not get through the work in time ?—Up to two years ago our labour was not so fully employed as it has been during the past two years, especially in the engineering trade, which I think has been entirely owing to the number of dredges wanted for the colony. 336. It has been stated by a previous witness that New Zealand could not compete with Victoria in the construction of dredges—that dredging appliances were being manufactured in Australia and sent here. I understand from your evidence that the reason for that is because you
17
A.—4
cannot here get through the work in the time the dredging companies wish ?—I think that is the reason. Dredges are being made in Victoria at the present time; but, of course, our engineering shops are so fully employed that they could not take more work. 337. Mr. Luke.] You stated just now that the shorter hours lately have affected the implement trade. As a matter of fact, we have always worked the same number of hours in New Zealand that we are now working —-viz., eight hours a day '!■ —-Yes. 338. And it must be the question of wage which has affected the implement trade?—Of course, the increase of wage has affected it, but in Australia they work nine hours a day. 339. Oh, well, we had always those conditions existing, so that the hours have not affected the trade, but the wages?— Certainly. 340. And do you not think that the dredging business has created a demand for the men who were engaged in the agricultural-implement trade, and that that fact might account for the fallingoff in the implement-manufacture ? —I think the falling-off took place before the dredging started.
Thursday, 7th February, 1901. George Willis Nichol examined. (No. 9.) 341. Ron. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Nichol? —I am a merchant connected principally with the grain trade. I have been in business in Southland for twenty-five years. The firm I am connected with has been established thirty-five years. 342. Have you considered the question of this colony federating or not with the Australian Commonwealth?—ln common with most people, I have thought the question out, and my opinion so far has been in favour of federation. I see nothing to indicate that we should be worse off than we are now if we federated, but I think there is a great deal to show that we would be better off in many ways. I consider that, having regard to the surrounding conditions of this colony and Australia, our interests are largely identified with theirs. We are bound to be brought into very close contact with the Commonwealth, and in the future we are bound to be always rubbing up against it. We belong to the same race, we are part of the same Empire, our aspirations socially and our interests commercially and politically afe the same, and I cannot help thinking that if we federated we would not be placed at any disadvantage. 343. Those are reasons apparently which tend more to an Imperial federatian. Will you give us your reasons why you think we should federate with the Australian Commonwealth ?—I think we are already sufficiently federated Imperially. If we federated with Australia we should naturally have free-trade, and thereby a market for our produce and a field for our manufactures. I hold that New Zealand will interchange largely with Australia in regard to manufactures and not only in regard to produce, and that our people are quite able to hold their own with any other part of the Empire in connection with certain manufactures. Take our woollen goods as an example : Not many years ago our woollen-mills protested strongly against the imposition of a further protective duty on woollen goods, because, they said, they could hold their own against anybody. 344. If they can hold their own with free-trade, what is the object of federating ?—I am not in a position to say what is the exact position of the woollen trade between Australia and New Zealand, but I have been given to understand that our woollen goods are largely used in Australia, and that with a protective duty against us. 345. Have you any other reasons in favour of federating?— There is the question of defence. Most decidedly we would be far better off united than disunited. 346. Have you studied the political aspect of the question? —I understand we shall have the management of our own affairs to a reasonable extent, and that only subjects of a general bearing are relegated to the Commonwealth. 347. Are jou aware that if the Commonwealth passed a law which is antagonistic to our State law the Federal law would prevail ? —lt would be a jolly good thing if it did, so far as some of our laws are concerned. 348. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Have you considered the question of the cost of government if we united with Australia ? —I have read a good deal on that point, but I have not studied the actual facts, nor do I know what the actual figures would be. The cost of any arrangement bringing about a united condition between the two countries strikes me as being merely a matter of " pin-money." Ido not think it would weigh very much in connection with the question. 349. That is, as to affecting the financial position ?—Yes. 350. Hon. Captain Bussell.] In regard to the question of defence, in what way do you think we should benefit by federating ?—ln the event of a danger of attack it would be most suicidal if we were to take independent action without any reference to what the other colonies were doing. In the disposition of a fleet round our coasts it would be well for the squadrons to have some concerted scheme in regard to watching and guarding certain portions of the coast-line. 351. But would that be effected by the federation of Australia ? —I think it would be largely promoted. 352. But surely the fleet is an Imperial fleet, not an Australian fleet?—l think that as time goes on the colonies will have to take a very much larger share in the outlay connected with Imperial defence ; we have hardly done anything so far, and the growth of this Commonwealth will necessitate that question being very much more seriously entertained in the future ; and if we contribute to the maintenance of the navy, I suppose we shall have something to say in its management locally. 353. I do not suppose you mean we should separate ourselves from the Imperial connection? —No; and I think that accentuates the necessity for our getting into closer contact with the Commonwealth. 3—A. 4.
A.—4
18
354. Have you considered the subject having regard to its more remote possibilities—the advantages to generations a hundred years hence ?—That is the position I have been looking at the question from all through. The whole history of everything connected with our national life for the last fifty years has been in the direction of aggregation as against isolation. We even see the United States going away from the Munro doctrine; and the growth of our own Empire shows that we do not want to stand still, and even the action of our own Government —which I highly approve of—within the last few months, in annexing these islands in the Pacific, is all in support of the contention I hold. 355. Mr. Millar.} You said the woollen-mills protested some years ago against the imposition of a further duty ?—They said they could stand alone. 356. Was not the primary reason the fact that there were so many woollen-mills being developed under the protective duty, and that the competition was becoming so keen that new mills were not desired ?—I did not hear that reason given. 357. But it is quite possible that was the reason ? —lt might have been. 358. Looking into the future in regard to this question of federation, can you conceive it possible in the course of years that the whole of the States would be abolished ?—No ; not any more than we have seen that the United States have been abolished. 359. Did we not abolish all the provinces in New Zealand ?—That is certainly true ; but I do not think that is a case which affects the main question. It may be the exception which proves the rule. There was a General Government in New Zealand then, and we were part of it. The provinces were a necessity in the very early history of the colony on account of the want of communication and sparse population ; but their time, of course, went by, and they were abolished. Ido not think the same condition applies now. I think the trend of opinion is in the direction of firming down local government. 360. following out your own line of argument—namely, that the tendency was to aggregation— is it not probable that these artificial boundaries will be absolutely wiped out, and there will be one General Government for the whole of Australia ?—lf in the future it is found that we can be better governed by one centre, no doubt that will be the result; but there is nothing in recent history to show that there is any likelihood of such a position arising. 361. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do I understand you are of opinion that, in the event of our federating, our industries would not be adversely affected, notwithstanding any difference there may be in the hours of labour and rates of pay ?—I think, if there is a Commonwealth Government for the whole of the colonies, the trades-unions will see it to their interests; in fact, the federation of labour is one of their main planks. In all probability there would be similar labour legislation throughout the colonies ; it would be very much better both for employers and employes. 362. Mr. Luke.] What industries do you think would be benefited under federation?—l am not in a position to say. I think we should have to leave that to the test of experience. 363. Are you not aware that the gigantic concerns of Australia would overshadow ours ?—I do not think it would be likely. We are more likely Co overshadow Australia, and in the race we would win. All our conditions are favourable. We are close to the sea, and have water-power to a large extent. Our facilities are of such a character that we cannot possibly be behind in any competition with Australia. John Maitland Jones examined. (No. 10.) 364. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Jones ?—-Manager for Mr. Walter Guthrie, proprietor of the Southland Implement and Engineering Company and Southland Sawmilling Company. 365. How long have you been here?— Five years in Invercargill; thirty-six years in New Zealand. 366. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating or not with the Australian Commonwealth ?—Yes. It is a very large question, and I cannot say I have come to any decision upon it; but if you wish to know what effect it might have upon the trade which is done here in ironwork I can tell you. The freight on the raw material—manufactured iron and pig-iron—is so much less from Home to Australia than it is to New Zealand, and labour is so much less in Australia than here, that if the Australian products were allowed to come in here free the effect would be that we could not compete. Dredges can be quoted cheaper in Australia and landed here cheaper than they can be manufactured in New Zealand. The Government invited tenders for some railway-trucks a short time ago, and I understand the price quoted in Australia for them to be landed in New Zealand was less than the New Zealand tenders. My opinion is that if Australia can increase her production so as to reduce the cost she could afford to undersell us here, provided she made little or no profit. She would be recouped on such sales by the enhanced value of the profits she might obtain in her own sphere through the lessened cost of production obtained by a greater output caused by selling her surplus to us at cost, or slightly over cost. Then, I think federation would affect other industries, such as the candle industry, and probably the confectionery and jam-making. You can make jam much cheaper where the fruit is easily and cheaply obtained, and where wages are low. Although I was always in favour of free-trade, this question of the results of federation puzzles me. We have to look as much to the industrial as to the agricultural aspect. Avenues of labour must be provided for the rising generation. One important industry in the colonies is gold-mining, and we are only beginning that in what you might call a proper spirit. New Zealand manufactures dredges for the former and agricultural implements for the latter. 367. How do you think federation would affect the timber trade in New Zealand?— Not much, one way or another. We export the white-pine to Australia, principally from the North Island, not very much from here. The timber trade is protected here.
19
A.—4
368. Have you considered the facilities for fruit-growing in Central Otago, Nelson, and Auckland?—l know the districts you allude to. They are good districts for fruit-growing, but I have never considered to what extent the cultivation of.fruit would be affected. I still think the jam and fruit industry would be prejudicially affected. Ido not think, taking into consideration all we can produce here, we should ever become exporters. We require all our fruit for home consumption. 369. Ron. Captain Russell.] Why do you think it is impossible to grow fruit profitably in New Zealand ? —I do not wish to be understood as saying that. I say we should not be able to export it, because we can consume all we can grow. 370. Is our climate not as good for fruit-growing as that of Australia ?—ln some districts only. Take the Waihemo district, where you can grow grapes in the open, but ten or twelve miles from there —at Pigroot —the land would not grow a potato. Speaking generally in New Zealand, I scarcely think we shall be able to grow more than we can consume ourselves within the next few years as population increases. 371. Are you certain that labour is higher in New Zealand than in Australia ?—Yes; by probably from 10 to 20 per cent. 372. Have you formed any conception as to why labour is higher than in Australia?—l think there is more competition in the larger countries, and the cost of living is not so great as it is here. 373. Is labour more efficient in New Zealand than in Australia ? —I would not like to say that. I believe we have got very efficient labour in New Zealand. 374. Do you think that, owing to our climate, a man can do more work here than in Australia ? —I know I can do more work here than in Auckland; but we have got so many climates in such a small area as compared with a big country 375. But we have to look at it from a New Zealand standpoint, and not from a local one?—l think you might say that one-half the colony, on account of climatic conditions, might work a little better than the other half. 376. But do you think that, taking New Zealand as a whole, labour is more vigorous here than in New South Wales ?—I should think so. 377. Then, is the actual cost of labour greater here than in Australia?—l believe so. 378. You think the relative power of a man to do the work does not compensate for the increased wage he gets here ? —I do not think so. The Australians seem to become acclimatised there. We should feel the work in their climate when they do not. 379. I gather that you are suffering competition from Australia in the matter of the construction of railway-trucks, which can be built cheaper there than here ?—That is so. 380. Have you considered the question in its broader aspect—of the probability of the importation of our ironwork from America ?—Yes ; and I think it is a very likely thing. 381. How would that affect us? Do you imagine that the manufacturers of Australia will be able to pour their goods into New Zealand ? Would it not be better for us to remain outside the Federation, manufacture for ourselves, or get cheaper goods from America ?—-The question is so large that I would not like to give an answer. As you go on further you will be able to get the experience of other witnesses. I have free-trade instincts, but when I look at this large question I thought the best thing for me to do would be to give you an idea of how I thought it would affect the particular industries I am connected with. 382. Have you heard, for instance, that America is laying down steel rails in England alongside steel-works in England ? —I believe so. 383. Do you know that America was able to build a bridge for England in Egypt more rapidly and cheaply than English manufacturers could ?—Possibly that would be the case. 384. Do you know that they are making electrical plant for England in America ?—Yes. 385. Assuming this to be correct, how would that affect our industries here in the event of federation ?—lt would most assuredly affect us if they were allowed to place their products on the market here without any protection. At any rate, they are doing us no good. I hoped a few years ago we might have been able to send some of our productions to America, such as woollens, but now we are so severely handicapped—even our very shipping is being handicapped—that we are shut completely out of the market, as far as I can see. 386. Supposing we federate with Australia, do you think we shall be able to exclude these manufactures from America and elsewhere ? —-Do you mean by virtue of the Commonwealth taking a united stand in regard to imposing protective tariffs ? 387. Yes—that is to say, that the United Commonwealth would then be able to impose such a duty as would enable its manufacturers to compete and manufacture as against the huge output of America ?—I think that might be so, but Ido not think they would be able to export for years to come—away from the colonies. 388. You said freights were dearer here than in Australia: do you think federation would affect that question ?—I do not think much. It might in some small degree. New South Wales and Victoria have two main ports, for instance, while New Zealand has many. It would not pay the shipowner to charge the same freight. 389. Mr. Millar.] How would you suggest that the agricultural interests are to be looked after as well as the manufacturing : by a reciprocal treaty such as would allow some of our products to go to Australia at a reduced rate in exchange for some of theirs ?—I would like to see that very much. 390. Do you think that would suit the colony better than federation ?—Reciprocity is very desirable, but the question of federation is so large that I do not feel that I can make up my mind with regard to it. With regard to the agricultural interests, I have felt for a long time that we should do what we are commencing to do in regard to South Africa—namely, open up fresh markets for our grain and meats.
A.-4,
20
391. You say the iron-manufacturers are handicapped by reason of the freights?— Very much so. 392. You are feeling that competition from Australia now ?—Yes ; and I illustrated the rail-way-trucks as an instance. The Australian tenders, I understand, were cheaper, and they had to pay the freight. Dredges are the same. We have received orders for dredges at a higher price than they can be built at in Australia, because supervision is easier and there is a certainty of there being no delay. If there were intercolonial free-trade the competition would be still keener, and we would get flooded unless we were under the same conditions as regards wages and hours of labour. The wages paid here for ironworkers have within the last few months risen from 9s. a day to probably 12s. and even 14s. a day. We are now paying for—Journeymen boilermakers, 145., 11s., and 10s. (according to ability); blacksmiths, 12s. down to 9s. (according to ability); fitters, 12s. and 11s. (according to ability) ; turners, 11s. and 10s. (according to ability). 393. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you import largely from Australia, England, and America ?—From England and America; not largely from Australia. 394. You said freights were much lower from England to Australia than from England to New Zealand. I judge from that that you would be able to buy at much better advantage many lines in Australia than to import them from England ?—lt would not pay, because of the extra freight from Australia to New Zealand. Freight is very much the same from Australia to New Zealand as it is from Home to New Zealand —on heavy goods. 395. Do you import large quantities from Australia?— During the mining boom large quantities of iron were imported from Australia, because the people could not wait nine or ten months for their orders to be executed. It is more advantageous to import direct from England or America than from Australia. 396. Mr. Leys.] Do you export agricultural implements to New South Wales?— No. We did at one time, but of late years it has gone off. 397. You think there is no chance of New Zealand manufacturers exporting to Australia if we were federated ?—The difference in freight is a great handicap to us. 398. Taking all things into consideration, you do not think that the larger market we should get under federation would be of any practical value to New Zealand manufacturers ?—I cannot see it, because the Australians are able to manufacture agricultural implements as well as we can. 399. Do you think English manufacturers will establish large factories in some central position in Australia, in order to supply all the Federal States ?—lt is very likely. They have done so in Wellington for match-manufacture, and saved the duty. Of course, the colonials will go ahead as far as they can, because they do not like to leave any ground unturned, especially if they have the capital to carry on the industry. As against that, the Home people would have capital, energy, and experience. 400. Are you quite sure that wages are higher here than in "Victoria ?—I do not know what they may be to-day, but I have always found it so in the past. 401. Is there not a minimum-wage Act in force in Victoria? —I am not aware of it. I have seen children working in biscuit-factories in Australia, and from their appearance I do not suppose they were getting sufficient to clothe themselves with. I never found such a thing here. 402. How do you suppose the candle industry would suffer through federation? —It might not press so heavily on that industry as on the other. Candles are protected now; I think the duty was reduced recently ; but you can get more evidence on that point in Dunedin. If there were no duty, and we were federated, we would have to reduce the price of candles in order to compete with the Australians. 403. Regarding fruit, do you know that fruit has been exported from Auckland ?—Yes, experimentally. 404. But there is a surplus for export now, if a profitable market could be found for it ?—Apples might be exported, I think"; but I spoke of jam principally, and I did not allude to any place in particular. 405. You have stated rather emphatically that New Zealand would not produce more fruit than it could consume itself ?—lf you remember, I said I was not very well able to give an answer to that question as to the fruit. I gave my opinion based on the question of the manufacture of fruit as it obtained in the South. 406. I judge from your evidence that you think, on the whole, it would be injurious to New Zealand to federate ?—That is as far as I have got; but at the same time I must say that lam a Free-trader to the backbone, though I feel there are exceptions to that principle, and we must proceed according to the conditions of the colony. I should like very much to see some way out of the difficulty, but these are the difficulties that must be faced. I would like very much to see federation and free-trade between the colonies, but the matters I have mentioned make it seem to me inadvisable in the meantime. 407. Hon. Major Steward.] Regarding the candle industry, are you aware that there was a reduction of duty made four years ago, and the Australian candle-manufacturers do not come into very keen competition with us ? —I believe that is so. 408. Although theoretically a Free-trader, you are of opinion that it is necessary under certain circumstances that protective duties should be imposed for a time ?—I do. 409. And you think, if New Zealand were to join the Federation, therefore all her manufactures would be admitted duty-free to every part of the Commonwealth, and that that would have a disastrous effect on our industries?—l do. 410. You are aware that there is an agricultural interest in this matter to be considered— there is a very considerable export of oats from Southland to Australia ? —Yes. 411. There is also the export of oatmeal. Supposing all those articles were admitted free to all parts of the Commonwealth, do you think they would reap an advantage sufficient to counter-
21
A.—4
vail the disadvantages urged as likely to occur under federation to the manufacturing industries ? —First of all, I think Western Australia would be responsible for a lot of oats, and no doubt there will be a market in South Africa. When war was impending there some years ago (in South Africa) there was a big spurt in both flour and oats, and we sent a lot away from Canterbury and Otago. The same has been repeated recently. 412. In your opinion, with general free-trade through our entering the Federation, we should not expand our export trade to the extent that some people suppose ?—ln oats I think we might. 413. Do you think there would be a large increase in the export from New Zealand of oatmeal?—l do not know. They used to grist oats in bond in Victoria, and export to free-trade colonies. 414. Do you think there would be any effect in regard to the export of fish ? —I think a lot of our fish in recent years, if not the bulk of it, has been exported to Western Australia. Freetrade might help us in that respect. 415. Mr. Luke.] Are you aware that Christchurch firms do export a large number of agricultural implements to Australia ?—No. If they do I do not know how it pays. 416. Do you think a reciprocal tariff would better suit the conditions of New Zealand than joining the Federation?—lt might suit better. 417. Are you sure that the reason why these orders for dredges have gone to Australia has been due to the shops in New Zealand being full of orders ?—Some orders may have gone there, but I am speaking rather the other way about. Orders have been placed in New Zealand that could have been done cheaper in Australia. 418. Do you say that the orders were placed in Australia because there was not time to make them here? —I said dredge orders could be executed more cheaply in Australia than here, and that a higher price had been paid in New Zealand than they could have been obtained for in Australia. 419. Is that not due largely to the fact that the contracts in New Zealand provided for the erection of dredges complete on the site, as against the delivery of them f.o.b. by the Australian firm ?—That might be the case ; but I know that contract prices were less in Australia than contract prices taken in New Zealand. 420. Have not all the contracts in New Zealand provided for erection on the site ?—No, none of our contracts have been for delivery on the site. 421. As to the difference in freight between Australia and New Zealand and London and New Zealand, is it not a fact that pig-iron and bar-iron have often been bought and shipped from Australia to New Zealand as low as it could be got from London ?—Sometimes the shipowner carries pig-iron for dead-weight for nothing. I have known pig-iron carried from Glasgow to London vid New York for much less than it could be carried direct from Glasgow to London. 422. Do you think they have superior machinery for the manufacture of dredges in Australia to what we have in New Zealand?—l do not think so. We have got the most up-to-date machinery here, and there is more coming to hand. Our works are probably only second to the works in Addington. 423. Do you know what number of firms in New Zealand tendered for the railway-trucks ?— Several. 424. Would it surprise you to find that there were only two ? —I know of three that tendered, and we tendered for the lot. 425. In view of the fact that we have very large deposits of iron in New Zealand at Parapara, containing over 80 per cent, of pure iron, do you think, if we federated, that as manufacturers in New Zealand we could then compete against the manufacturers in Australia ?—Thirty-five years ago I sent a bag'of ironsand Home to a firm I knew, but from that day to this, with the exception of what has been done by, and what we have heard from, Mr. E. M. Smith, nothing seems to have come out of it. 426. Do you think, in view of the fact that those deposits at Parapara contain 80 per cent, of pure iron, and that there is limestone and coal in abundance in the vicinity, that the ironmanufacturers here could compete against those in Australia ?—lt might be possible in years to come; but then comes in the question of competing against the cheap labour at Home, and if they can get iron out here at 15s. a ton by dead-weight our men would be seriously handicapped. The question is whether they could afford to pay the higher wages here, and make the manufacture profitable. 427. In view of the general elevation of wages, do you think we might develop an industry of that sort ? —There is something in it for the future. 428. Hon. the Chairman.] How do you think the timber trade from this colony to Australia would be affected by New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth ?—I do not think it would be affected much. 429. You say you would like to see free-trade with Australia : do you think that obtaining free-trade with Australia would be sufficient compensation to New Zealand for parting with its political independence in order to obtain it ?—As far as I have got now, I do not think it would. I have not digested it. I cannot see my way out of that difficulty. 430. Have you considered the question of the extension of the New Zealand trade with the South Sea Islands forming part of this colony ? —I have thought a great deal about it. 431. Which do you think would be more preferable—for New Zealand to retain her present independence and to federate with the South Sea Islands, thereby bringing about an expansion in trade, or to become federated with the Australian Commonwealth ? —I think the former would be the better course. John Charles Mackley examined. (No. 11.) 432.-How. the Chairman.] What are you? —A settler at Wallacetown Crossing. I am a butcher, and have been connected with the meat trade for the last thirty years.
A.—4
22
433. Have you given any consideration to the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia?—l made one of four others who debated the question in the theatre here from an anti-federation point of view last September twelve months. 434. What are your views upon the matter ?—Taking the commercial aspect of federation, I might say that in commercial circles it was represented that by New Zealand standing out of the Australian Commonwealth we shall be losing a large and profitable market, to substantiate which Victoria, with its protective tariff, was pointed to as an illustration. This, however, could not be supported by investigation, for upon looking up Victoria's Customs statistics for the year 1898 I find conclusive proof that, in place of Victoria requiring New Zealand's produce, she was a large exporter, and was competing with New Zealand for their neighbouring necessities. In that year Victoria imported from and exported to New Zealand produce to the following values, viz. :— Imports. Exports. £ £ Butter ... ... ... ... ... 10,517 733,674 Cheese ... ... ... ... ... 4,550 7,377 Oats ... ... ... ... ... 638 57,860 Oatmeal ... ... ... ... 34,000 Beans and peas ... ... ... ... 512 2,032 Potatoes (being exceptionally scarce and dear) ... 15,099 34,554 Wheat 324,000 Flour .. ... ... ... 138,000 Pollard ... ... ... ... 3,181 Bran ... ... ... ... 8,750 Maize ... ... ... ... 27,860 Totals ... ... ... £31,316 £1,368,280 In the face of these figures, can any person, however much they may be interested in the export of produce, conscientiously ask us to believe that by rejecting federation we will lose a great market in Victoria. Under the powers of the Commonwealth Parliament the Commonwealth takes control of all postal, telegraph, telephone, and like services. I consider it will be a great calamity to New Zealand's progression to hand these departments over to the Australian Commonwealth. It would necessitate much departmental red-tape before establishing telegraphic, telephonic, or postal connection with new and rising districts in this colony. One of the great privileges enjoyed by New-Zealanders is the convenience bestowed upon them by the possession of an excellent service in this respect; and, speaking from an experience of fifteen months' residence in New South Wales, I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that New Zealand is far ahead of that colony in this respect, as the wide area over which the population of the Commonwealth is scattered necessitates a very large expenditure both for the carriage of inland mails and the erection of telegraph-wires. Therefore, I should say, hesitate before deciding to hand these important departments of national life over to the Australians to manage. Egarding railways, subsections (32), (33), and (34) of section 51 of Part V. of the Commonwealth Constitution Act state that the Parliament shall have power to make laws with respect to " the control of railways with respect to transport for the naval and military purposes of the Commonwealth; (33) the acquisition, with the consent of the State, of any railways of the State on terms arranged between the Commonwealth and the State; (34) railway construction and extension with the consent of that State." This I take to mean that the Commonwealth Parliament have the same power over State legislation that our General Government had over our late provincial Ordinances, repealing them, directly or by inference, when and how it pleased. My impression is that under these powers New Zealand railways would be doomed to fall under the complete control of the Commonwealth Government, which by the Constitution are given such supreme powers as would eventually reduce the New Zealand Government to the level of the old Provincial Council, without giving them any corresponding benefits in return. As an illustration, I will give a comparison between the railways of Australia and those of New Zealand (the length of railways in Australia is 11,145 miles, and in New Zealand 2,168 miles) :— Australia. New Zealand. Cost of construction ... ... ... £109,482,927 £15,577,392 Cost of construction per mile ... ... £9,820 £7,185 Population per mile of line ... ... 260 316 Area per mile of line ... ... ... 552 square miles 48 square miles. To my mind, all these comparisons show strongly in favour of New Zealand. As to defence, at the present time, jointly with the Commonwealth, New Zealand contributes her share of an annual subsidy of £91,000 for the maintenance of an Australian auxiliary squadron, and I fail to see in what other way we can expect to receive defence assistance from Australia in times of national trouble. In such times it appears to me a moral impossibility for the Commonwealth of Australia to assist us with land forces. Then, of necessity, New Zealand must depend upon her own resources, her share of the auxiliary squadron, and the Imperial Government. Before leaving this subject I might mention that New South Wales spent on defence for ten years—lßßs to 1894 —no less a sum than £3,188,854, while for the same period New Zealand expended £1,132,565. If the other States of the Commonwealth's expenditure on defence in any way approach that of New South Wales, it appears to me that New Zealand should decide against joining the Commonwealth. As to the question of inter-State free-trade, by the Constitution the Commonwealth is pledged to adopt within two years inter-State free-trade. It seems to me, should New Zealand federate with the Australian Commonwealth, that our manufacturing industries would receive a very severe blow from the competition that would commence between the more firmly established
23
A.—4
industries of New South Wales and Victoria and those of New Zealand, which, of itself, would be a very serious matter both to our artisans and revenue; and there is every possibility of this aspect of the question becoming greatly intensified should the fight that has already started between Mr. Reid and the Federal Premier, Mr. Barton, eventuate in Mr. Keid gaining the victory, and an international free-trade policy become the result. It appears to me that it would be more disastrous still if New Zealand, by becoming a State of the Australian Commonwealth, be compelled to adopt a free-trade policy, which no doubt would result in our being forced to initiate a system of direct taxation in order to make up the loss we should suffer by our present revenue-producing import trade being diverted into Commonwealth free-trade channels. 435. Mr. Leys.] Do I understand that you believe the Commonwealth could take over the railways under the present Constitution without the consent of the State ?—I do not say that at present they could do so, but I think it will eventuate in the course of time. 436. But they have not that power under the existing Constitution?— But do you not think that that will eventuate as time progresses ? Mr. Leys : To do so they would have to amend the Constitution Act, as they have not the power over the State legislation that our General Assembly had over the Provincial Council. Under this Constitution the powers of the Commonwealth and the powers of the State are fixed, and the Commonwealth have not the power that the General Assembly had over the Provincial Councils, because by a simple Act of the General Assembly they abolished the Provincial Councils, but by a simple Act of the Federal Parliament they could not abolish the States. 437. Hon. the Chairman.] Apparently, Mr. Mackley, you are against federation ?—I am an anti-federationist. I fail to see any advantages in our federating with Australia. It seems to me that the inter-State interest of the Australian Colonies far outweigh any consideration they might have for the interests of New Zealand, and any matters of what might be of vital importance to New Zealand are quite likely to be ignored, because the voting-power of the Australian Colonies is greatly in excess of that of New Zealand. 438. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you think by any chance that the population of New Zealand will increase as rapidly as that of New South Wales and Victoria, or that their population will increase more rapidly than that of New Zealand ? —From my- experience as a resident there, I think our population will increase far more rapidly than that of Australia. 439. Under those circumstances, might not New Zealand gradually become a State having as much voting-power as either Victoria or New South Wales ? —lt is quite possible ; but we have got a lot of lee-way to make up, because at the present time our representation is only fourteen to New South Wales' twenty-five and Victoria's twenty-three. It seems to me that time is very far distant. 440. Are you apprehensive that the larger colonies will join together to oppress the smaller ones ? —Not ostensibly, but their close connection and identical interests are such that they could not fail to legislate for their own individual States. 441. What part of Australia were you in ? —ln Dubbo, New South Wales, in 1895. 442. Did you hear the question of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth spoken of at all? —Not while I was there. 443. Do you apprehend that there will be any difficulty about the question of coloured labour ?—I do not think there is anything to fear in that connection with respect to New South Wales or Victoria, but the introduction of coloured labour on the sugar-plantations in Queensland is a different matter, because coloured labour is preferred there. 444. What is your opinion of the relative efficiency of labour in Australia and New Zealand ? —New-Zealanders are looked upon with jealousy by the labourers of New South Wales because they are physically much stronger, and have a greater amount of endurance. 445. Are the people of Australia conscious of that difference? —I think they are. I believe the contrast arises from the enervating climate of Australia. 446. If the New-Zealander has more power than the Australian, ought we to be afraid of competition with Australia ?—The competition does not arise so much from manual labour as from the machinery point of view. 447. But, then, although we have not the machinery at the present time, there is no reason to suppose that we shall not have the same push and energy in New Zealand as they have in Australia ? —So far as push and energy goes, we have more of that, but they have a larger amount of capital invested in their industries, the output of which is so much larger than anything we have in New Zealand. That is where we may fear the competition arising from those industries. 448. Fifty years hence, when our population shall have increased, when our capital shall have increased, and our people have not deteriorated, should not we then be able to compete with Australia ?—Of course, we see what the Americans have done in the way of pushing their industries, and we might say it was quite possible for New Zealand to follow in their footsteps; but, even with all the energy that has been displayed by the Americans, it is still conceded that Great Britain holds the markets of the world in consequence of the superior workmanship and cheaper labour. 449. Did you read in to-day's paper that America is sending over, I think, 9,000 tons of steel rails to England ? —I saw a short time ago that America had secured a large number of contracts through the saving of time—that is to say, that she could execute the orders much more rapidly than the firms in Great Britain. 450. Then, do you not think that in any case America will dominate the markets of Australia and New Zealand whether we federate or not?— That would be regulated a great deal by the kind of tariff we have in force. If it is a free-trade tariff, certainly she will; if a protective tariff, competition will be put a stop to. 451. You think that any taxation which can be imposed upon the large manufacturing indusr tries of America will prohibit their exporting to countries where the output is small and the wages
A.— 4
24
high ?—No, Ido not think that, because it would all depend on the nature of the industry. There are some industries which are natural to the country, and those will not be affected; but if it is in the shape of ironwork I would certainly think America will win. 452. Hon. Major Steward.] Have you given any'consideration to the question of federation as it affects the trade of this colony with Australia in cereals ? —lf we went into the Federation I do not think it would affect that trade at all. New South Wales is not a colony suitable for the growing of oats, and therefore her requirements in that respect will always be regulated by climatic influences. There are markets in Australia for our produce if we could reach them, but we have not facilities. 453. It has been represented to us that it is desirable for us to go into the Federation because we should get a market in Victoria for oats, which we have not now: what is your opinion ?— That we should not. 454. Then, from the point of view of the farmers of Southland, do you say that it would be expedient that New Zealand should become an integral part of the Commonwealth of Australia ? —No. 455. Mr. Luke.] Having regard to the future value of our iron-deposits at Parapara, do you think there would be any advantage in our federating with Australia in view of future markets there?— Granted that New Zealand might possess these deposits, we must not forget that New South Wales also possesses the same, and at the present time is carrying on a large industry in corrugated iron alone. 456. That is out of scrap-iron :it is not made from the ore ?—I have been wrongly informed if this is so. 457. There is also coal and limestone at Parapara—natural fluxes that could be used in the manufacture of iron? —Under these conditions, I should not say federation was going to give us any lever, but certainly it is an element that should be considered. 458. Mr. Leys.] The Southland exporters say that Victoria would not have developed its oatproduction excepting by means of a heavy duty of Is. 3d. per bushel against our oats, and that under that duty they can produce oats not only to supply themselves, but also to export; and if a similar duty were imposed all over the Commonwealth—and we stayed out of the Commonwealth— that Victoria and Tasmania could grow enough oats to supply all the Commonwealth, and we could not compete : what is your opinion of that ? —I think there would have to be a very great development in the production of oats in Victoria from what there is at the present time if there were no outlet for our oats in some parts of Australia. 459. Then, if there were a tax of Is. a bushel now in New South Wales that we had to pay, and which Victoria had not to pay, would not New South Wales take their oats from Victoria ?—I do not think it will interfere with New Zealand, unless Victoria's capabilities are such as to overtake the demands of the Commonwealth. 460. Mr. Beauchamp.] To what places did you refer.when you said there were many markets in Australia in which we could find satisfactory outlets for our produce if we could get it carried on better terms?—To Western Australia and to Brisbane. 461. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there anything you wish to add ?—I think the social condition of the labourer in New Zealand is far superior to the labourer in the Commonwealth. levbn Willis Raymond examined. (No. 12.) 462. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Raymond?—A stock and station agent in Invercargill. I have resided in this district for thirty-nine years. 463. Have you paid much attention to the question of New Zealand federating with Australia? —Yes; I have taken a good deal of interest in the question from the time that the late Sir Henry Parkes brought it prominently before the colonies. I view the question of this colony federating with Australia not from the standpoint as to whether it means an increase to the producer in the price of oats, or whether it means an advantage to the consumer in other respects, but on the broad principle of the greatest benefit to the greatest number of our colonists. Most advocates of federation in this district seem to favour it because of the commercial aspect, or from the aspect of that of the producer. I think the question of commerce is entirely a transitory one— what is to our advantage to-day may be to our disadvantage to-morrow ; and therefore we want to go deeper down than that. Taking a case in point in regard to matters which have been brought before this Commission, a friend of mine has stated that 90 per cent, of the farmers are in favour of federation. I am convinced that there are fully 25 per cent, of the farmers in Southland who are perfectly indifferent as to whether they get Is. or 2s. 6d. a bushel for their oats, because they do not grow them. lam satisfied that not 25 per cent, of the farmers have studied the question of federation. They, as a class, are very slow to move, and before they do they would certainly want to know what were its advantages. I know the feelings of the farmers very well on this question, and I am satisfied that fully 75 per cent, of those interested in cereal-growing would not express an opinion for or against. In this district most of the gentlemen who have appeared before the Commission are men who have been speaking from the exporters' point of view—agents who are representing the farmers, and whose interests they assume are identical with that of the exporters. I question this very much; but I think the question should be looked at from a colonial rather than from a provincial point of view, and if those gentlemen would look at it from the colonial standpoint, instead of from the standpoint of the interests they consider they are serving, they would hold different views from those they have expressed ; but the average business-man is rather loth to give up his time to the study of public affairs and political problems, and is therefore prone to look at a question such as federation merely from a business standpoint, and I think that remark will apply generally to the witnesses who are produce exporters that this Commission will meet during its sittings through New Zealand. As to the question of the expense of government
25
A.—4
should we federate, we have now a good idea of what the cost of governing the colony from year to year will be; we are allowed a voice in the selection of our rulers and in the administration of our public affairs, and in the event of dissatisfaction the electors can say whether there should be an alteration or not. But if we were simply a State of the Commonwealth it would be entirely different; we would be governed from Australia, and our representation there would be a mere trifle compared to the voting-strength of the other States. On that ground alone I think we are justified in pausing before joining the Commonwealth. Many who advocate federation seem to forget that if we join we have to pay the initiatory cost pro ratd of the establishment of the Commonwealth. We have to pay for the setting-up of a capital somewhere a hundred miles from Sydney; we have to pay for the maintenance of the Federal Government; and we have no idea what that cost is going to be —the wisest men in Australia cannot yet estimate what that cost will be. And remember that for all time we part with our independence. As far as I can ascertain, the two States of New South Wales and Victoria combined can outvote the minor States, even if all the minor States were agreed upon an issue. That, in my opinion, is another very serious obstacle to our joining. Take the case of Tasmania, which has been a loyal colony in regard to the federation movement: She has just met with a slap in the face, having been denied a representative in the Federal Cabinet. Then, there is the question of our separation from Australia by twelve hundred miles of water. Had I been a resident of and an elector in Australia I would have been a federationist; but I think these twelve hundred miles of water is an effectual barrier to our federating. Most recognised thinkers and writers maintain that climate has a great influence in moulding the character of the individual; with this I thoroughly concur. I am convinced that many of the gentlemen comprising the Commission realise that the residents of Australia and New Zealand have their separate and distinct characteristics ; and that distinction has grown up within the last half-century. As time goes on these distinctions will become greater and correspondingly wider, and our opinions and aspirations are almost sure to widen. Therefore lam satisfied that, if we have some community of interest with Australia now, as time goes on we shall have less. As to defence, we are infinitely safer in our present position than if we federated. We contribute £20,000 a year to the Imperial fleet, and we can demand anything in reason in the way of protection. If we federated we should have to look to the Federal Council for a certain amount of protection, which would be obtained from the fleet assigned to Commonwealth waters. In the event of a scare, and we required their assistance, is it likely that a body of men sitting in New South Wales, designated the " Federal Council," composed to the extent of nine-tenths of Australians, are going to lend aid to New Zealand when there are the large towns of Melbourne, Adelaide, and Sydney to protect? There is another aspect: For some time it has been very evident—and I think the feeling is growing every day—that the time is approaching when there will be at Home an Executive controlling colonial affairs in conjunction with the Imperial authorities. When that time comes I hope to see New Zealand have a direct representation there; but if we joined the Commonwealth New Zealand would not be represented separately on such a Council; we should be absolutely blotted out so far as Imperial representation is concerned. To sum the matter up, I am a strong advocate of this colony preserving its entity. 464. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do I understand you to mean that it would be impossible for Australia to give any assistance to New Zealand in the event of war ?—I do not mean to convey the impression that it would be impossible; I said it was highly improbable that she would, because her own interests are paramount. 465. Of course, you understand that the defence of all the colonies is an Imperial matter, and whether we joined or not they would be bound to assist each other to the utmost: is that not so ? —The general impression is that we would be absolutely dependent upon the Commonwealth. If it is otherwise, why do Federal advocates use it as an argument that we should join the Commonwealth ? 466. Mr. Millar.] Did I understand you correctly when you stated that 75 per cent, of the farmers here did not care about this question at all ?—I said 25 per cent.; but I am thoroughly satisfied that if you took a hundred farmers and asked seventy-five of them what their views were they could not give them to you. I meet them often. I have tried to discuss it with them, but they do not seem to trouble their heads about the question. It is like bimetallism to the average business-man. 467. Mr. Beauchamp.] The exportation of oats seems to be a burning question here :as an exporter, are you of opinion that we would lose the Australian market entirely in the event of our not federating, or do you think we would still have an outlet for our oats on account of their superior quality ?—I am thoroughly convinced that when Australia requires our oats she will have them. Take Sydney and Melbourne : Sydney has been a free port practically, but Melbourne is otherwise, and I believe, on the whole, Sydney has been a better customer than Melbourne has ; but there have been oats shipped to both ports, and I think, under any circumstances, if Australia wanted our oats she would buy them, irrespective of whether we were members of or independent of the Commonwealth. 468. Do you regard New South Wales as a permanent market for our oats, or only a spasmodic one ? —-It is entirely spasmodic, and controlled by climatic conditions. Something like 20 per cent, of our oats have been shipped to Australia during recent years ; the balance has gone to other countries. 469. Have you considered what would be the result to our industries by federating ?—I am thoroughly satisfied that our industries would suffer. I sympathize with and am in favour of fostering industries by giving them judicious protection, and thus finding employment for our own colonists. Our manufactures would have to compete against the cheap labour and Chinese and coloured labour of Australia if we joined the Commonwealth, and under such circumstances they 4—A. 4.
A.—4
26
could not hope to stand. Population is wanted, and to assist this object we must keep our manufactures going. 470. Hon. Captain Russell.] Can you give us any idea of what proportion of the farmers of this district are dependent materially upon their farming and the growing of oats ?— Tf the farmers of Southland were dependent on the growing of oats they would soon be through the Bankruptcy Court. It is a recognised fact that it does not pay to grow oats year in and year out. The majority grow oats for feed, and under a certain system of rotation of crops, that is all; but it never pays to grow oats at prices that have been ruling of late years. 471. Could they substitute any other grain or crop for the oats?— Not very well. 472. Mr. Leys.] Then, it is a necessity to some extent ? —lt is the only grain that is satisfactorily grown in Southland. 473. Hon. Captain Russell.] Will rye-corn grow here?—No; but barley grows in the Lake district. 474. Take a farm of 200 acres : how much would they put in oats annually ?—Possibly not more than 20 to 25 acres. I have been surprised to hear so much made of oats before this Commission. 475. Hon. the Chairman.] Supposing the Australian market were closed for Southland oats, would there be any chance of other markets being available ?—Yes. 476. Where ? —I believe in the action of the Government in subsidising a line of steamers to South Africa, seeing that private enterprise has not come to the rescue. From a recent visit to that country I am satisfied there is an unlimited market there. 477. Do you think it would beneficially affect New Zealand if the steamers trading to Australia whose terminal ports are there were subsidised to make New Zealand a terminal port?— Yes. 478. Do you consider the present Constitution of the Commonwealth, that involves adding to the cost of the State Government the additional cost of two Houses of Parliament, is one which we ought to join ?—I am opposed to New Zealand joining under any circumstances. The question of expense of government, although a factor from my point of view, is infinitesimal compared with the sacrifice of our independence for all time. 479. You spoke of the climate affecting the character of the people : how would that question affect us if we federated, because the people with the stronger characteristics would still belong to the State of New Zealand?—As time goes on the interests between Australia and New Zealand will sure to widen; therefore I cannot see that from our point of view " good work" will be done by an Executive so constituted. 480. According to your argument, the representatives from New Zealand would be more vigorous than the representatives from Australia, and ought to exhibit a more national spirit ?—They might be more national, but numerically they would be too weak to make their presence felt against the extra numbers they would have to contend against. We are more progressive and energetic than the Australian Colonies are, and require the services of our best men to be devoted to the successful government of our own country.
DUNEDIN. • Saturday, 9th Fbbeuaey, 1901. Alexander Steonach Pateeson examined. (No. 13.) 1. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your occupation, Mr. Paterson ?—I am an importer and exporter merchant. 2. How long have you been in business in New Zealand ?—For thirteen years. 3. Have you given consideration to the question of New Zealand federating or not with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—Just the ordinary consideration which a business-man requires to give it. 4. But you have given pretty close attention to it, have you not ?—Fairy close attention. 5. Will you be good enough to favour the Commission with your views on the matter?— Well, I hardly know what you expect of me. 6. I mean, if you think there are any advantages to be gained from New Zealand federating you may tell us what they are; if, on the other hand, you think there are disadvantages, we should like to hear of them. First of all, as regards the commercial aspect of the question, you may tell us how far it would affect the commerce of New Zealand ? —Well, I presume that in doing so I shall state a good many truisms. I think the advantage of federation would be that it would give New Zealand another four millions of people to trade with upon the best possible basis—viz., that of a home market. 7. I want you not merely to confine yourself to the question, but to give your views ?—I think I have put my views into one sentence. 8. How do you think it would affect the commercial industries of New Zealand?— Not injuriously in the long-run, because I do not see that New Zealand has less advantages for the carrying-on of industrial occupations than the other colonies. 9. Do you think New Zealand would be able to compete successfully with the industries of the Commonwealth of Australia? —In the long-run, yes. 10. How would it affect the commerce of New Zealand as regards markets for New Zealand produce beyond the markets in Australia ?—lt would give a nearer market and freer market than other markets give for the purchase of New Zealand produce.
27
A.—.4
11. Are you assuming that the policy of Australia would be one of free-trade or protection?—I am assuming that New Zealand would be part of the Commonwealth, and therefore would have free access to the markets of the Commonwealth. 12. But how would it be affected by the fact of the tariff of the Commonwealth being a protective or a free-trade one ?—New Zealand would certainly be commercially just as well off if she had a free-trade tariff, or if she had a free-trade market in Australia, as she would be under federation. In what I said before I was making the common assumption that there will be more or less of a protective tariff in the Commonwealth. 13. Supposing the tariff of the Commonwealth were a free-trade one, how would the trade of New Zealand be affected as to being dominated by America, for instance ? —I think the nearness of New Zealand would give it a great advantage over America, and I do not think it is yet to be assumed that it costs more to produce in New Zealand than it does in America. 14. Supposing New Zealand did not join the Commonwealth of Australia, and there was a protective tariff there against New Zealand, could New Zealand look for markets outside the Commonwealth of Australia for her produce ? —Certainly. It would have the London markets and the world's markets for what they were worth. 15. What would there be in addition to the London market ?—I think there must necessarily be a large opening in the future in other countries that have not yet come into trade relations with New Zealand. She would have those markets—markets of the future, if I may use the expression—before her; but for the present she would be practically confined to London if a protective tariff were initiated against her in the Commonwealth. 16. In your opinion, what should be done to open those other markets you speak of?— I think it should be made a national question in New Zealand—that a Government department for the expansion of trade should be initiated, and should take in hand not only the diffusing of information in those countries, but also the active opening-up of markets. 17. Supposing it was ascertained that markets were available, what would be a practicable way of opening them up ?—The most practicable way that is in sight at present, in my opinion, is the assistance of steam freight—the establishment of steamship communication with other markets. 18. Have you considered how the public finances of New Zealand would be affected if New Zealand joined the Australian Commonwealth?—l cannot say I have seriously considered that question, beyond noticing the outstanding fact that New Zealand would have to part with her Customs revenue to the Commonwealth. 19. In your opinion, would there be any possible advantage in the conversion of the public debt of New Zealand ?—I cannot think that is a serious matter—that the Commonwealth will be able to finance the colony's public debt very much better than the colony herself. 20. Mr. Leys.] Speaking of this question of the public debt, do you think, Mr. Paterson, if the Commonwealth took over the Customs, as it will do, and left New Zealand to carry on its settlement operations—its railways, its land-settlement, and so on—New Zealand could borrow so favourably for those purposes without the Customs duty as security?—l have already said Ido not think the difference would be a serious one between the borrowing rates for New Zealand and the Commonwealth. 21. I understood your reply to that question meant that the Commonwealth could not borrow cheaper than New Zealand ?—Not seriously cheaper. 22. But if New Zealand were borrowing as a State, without having control of the Customs revenue, could it borrow as well as it does now ?—Again I would say I do not see that the difference ought to be a serious one. 23. Do you remember anything of provincial borrowing?—l cannot say I do. 24. Do you know anything of the borrowing of the American States ? —No, I do not. 25. You think, then, that the fact of the Customs revenue being taken over by the Commonwealth would not affect the power of the States to go into the London market for necessary loans ? —I think we have good security. We should still borrow reasonably. 26. Mr. Beid.] In your experience as a mercantile man, have you considered this question of federation with regard, say, to commercial legislation, either particularly or generally—-as to whether there would be advantages to New Zealand in obtaining a general law, supposing she joined the Federation ?—There would undoubtedly be advantages in having uniformity of law in the various colonies. 27. Would there be any advantages beyond uniformity? Would it facilitate the conflict of law that sometimes happens ? —I cannot say I can specify any advantages beyond uniformity. 28. Mr. Luke.] You said you thought the effect of federation would be to enlarge our market and give us four million more people to deal with, and you said the ultimate effect of federation on industries would be beneficial: in what way do you think it would be beneficial ?—I think I said I did not see that the ultimate effect on the industries would be injurious. lam not prepared to say it would actually be beneficial. What I meant is that I think our own market would still be practically intact to our own industries, and could not be seriously or permanently interfered with by manufactures from Australia. 29. You used the word " ultimately," I think?— Yes. 30. Within what range of time would that come, do you think, having regard to the enormous capabilities of Australia as compared with New Zealand ?—I am not sure that I could define what " ultimately " means. What I meant to say was that there was bound to be a dislocation more or less to begin with, but that ultimately the resources of New Zealand will not be less than the resources of Australia, and that it ought to be able to hold its own in the matter of manufactures. I stated that in a broad and general way, as an opinion. 81. Do you think that within the next fifty years we would not be at a disadvantage as compared with Australia in, say, manufacturing boots, or in anything associated with the metal or
A.—4
28
furniture trades ?—I do not see why we should be seriously at a disadvantage in connection with boots now. We have the raw material here as advantageously as in Australia, and I presume we have the same machinery and the same or better workmen for making them ; and therefore I say in a broad way we should not be at a disadvantage in-the making of boots at all. 32. How do you think it would affect the wage question in New Zealand ?—lt certainly would tend to the levelling of wages as between New Zealand and Australia. 33. Would that levelling be in the direction of levelling down or levelling up in New Zealand? —I do not see why eventually wages should be higher in Australia than in New Zealand, or vice versd. 34. Mr. Beauchamp.] In answer to Mr. Luke, you said you considered the effect of federation would probably be the levelling of wages : have you considered the effect on wages of the different climatic conditions? I take it that a man in Australia can live cheaper in many parts through the warmth of the climate than in New Zealand, and therefore in New Zealand he must earn higher wages?—l do. not think, as a matter of fact, that living is cheaper in the Australian towns than in the New Zealand towns, as far as my observation of them goes, and I have been in them all. 35. As regards competition with America, I understand you to say you think in course of time we would ourselves be able to compete against the manufactures of America ?—Yes ; I think we would be able to do so as much in connection with the Commonwealth as out of connection with it. 36. And you think that inter-free-trade would not prejudicially affect our industries here in the event of our federating ? —ln the broad view, I do not think it would. There might be dislocations to begin with; but, our natural conditions being as good, and our ability to manipulate the raw material into the manufactured material being quite as good, and our having the raw material to manipulate, it does not appear to me why, in the long-run, we should not produce manufactured goods equal to those of Australia. 37. I have a return showing the wool imports from Australia to Dunedin. In 1897 Dunedin imported from Australia wool to the value of £385 ; in 1898 the value was £1,429 ; and in 1899 it was £3,921. Do you know whether those wools are the product of Australian woollen-mills?— I should presume they are not. It altogether depends on where the figures have been got from. The ordinary statistical blue-books discriminate, I think, between exports which are the product of Victoria or which are the product of New South Wales, as the case may be, and exports which are re-exports. Your question, I think, depends altogether on the compilation. 38. Of your own knowledge, do you know whether in Dunedin there are considerable quantities of woollen goods used that are manufactured either in New South Wales or Victoria ?— I do not know from actual knowledge. 39. Then, I gather it is your opinion that the trade of this colony would be distinctly affected by our not federating?— Very largely affected, I think. I may amplify that answer by saying that at the present time I think we export rather more than a million and a half—l think it is about a million and three-quarters —to the Australian Colonies. 40. That included specie ?—Probably it does. If any one can tell me the amount of specie I would be obliged. 41. About £200,000? —Then, it comes down to a million and a half. [The Secretary intimated that last year the value of the specie exported from New Zealand was £53,000.] Yes; the exports from the colony to Australia stand at £1,700,000 —specie does not seriously affect that figure—and under federation I think the bulk of that trade will disappear. 42. Hon. Captain Bussell.] The bulk of which trade? —Our export of £1,700,000 per annum to Australia. 43. Hon. the Chairman.] You think it would disappear?— Yes. I do not mean it would immediately disappear, but I think it will be eventually worked out, and I will give my reasons for that opinion. 44. Mr. Leys.] Is that if New Zealand does not join ?—Yes. My reason is this: At the present time we do an exceedingly small trade with Australia, except New South Wales. New South Wales is answerable for the bulk of our present business with Australia. The reason for that is very largely that New South Wales is a free port, while at the present time all the other colonies have protective duties against us. These protective duties have worn down our trade with Victoria to an exceedingly small one, and have prevented us having anything of a trade with the other colonies, except always New South Wales. It is reasonable, therefore, to assume that if New South Wales sets up a tariff against us, or if the Commonwealth as a whole sets up a tariff against us, we will see the same thing happen in New South Wales as happened in the other colonies—viz., that they will be able to do without the imports from New Zealand. I would also like to put it this way: that these exports from New Zealand to Australia, which total £1,700,000, are exports of New Zealand produce consisting of certain items with which we are all familiar. All these articles can be produced in Victoria, and produced there approximately as well as and as cheaply as they are produced in New Zealand. Therefore, after the federation, Victoria will have her production stimulated, and she will have the advantage of being inside the tariff, while we will be outside of it. Therefore she will gradually attach to herself this trade which we have been doing with the other colonies, and it will leave us. At any rate, I feel certain that, of the £1,700,000, a million will be lost to New Zealand. 45. Hon. the Chairman.] At least a million of it ?—Yes, I think so. 46. Mr. Beauchamp.] Igo back to the one point of specie. From the Port of Dunedin during 1899 specie was exported to the value of £343,346, out of a total exports from Dunedin of £526,291, so if you deduct the specie from the total the exports from Dunedin appear to be rather small ?—The exports from Dunedin are rather small. I admit that. I should say it amounts to £300,000 to all Australia.
29
A.—4
47. What are the principal items exported from Dunedin to Australia—to New South Wales particularly ?—Oats, wheat, oatmeal, malt, seeds, .potatoes, cheese, and butter are the principal items. 48. All of which, in your opinion, could be produced in the various States in the Commonwealth ? —ln Victoria, under the impulse the production will have there from the enlargement of her free market, and the absence of the competition of New Zealand on an equal footing. 49. Mr. Millar.] Mr. Paterson says he is principally in favour of federation because it will give us a large market with an additional four millions of people, and that that market is a home market ?—Yes. 50. Is Dunedin a manufacturing centre ? Are the manufactures developed to any extent in New Zealand ?—Yes, to a fair extent. 51. Have you any idea of the value of the manufactures in Dunedin ?—No, I cannot say I have an idea of the value. It is large, certainly. 52. I think you will admit that, so far as the four centres of population are concerned, the bulk of the people in them are dependent on the manufactures, more or less ?—There are a very large number of them. 53. In view of the fact that from figures shown to us the Australian market is worth only between £200,000 and £300,000 of exports, do you consider, from a colonial point of view, or even from a provincial point of view, that it would be to the interests of the colony that we should federate if it would be detrimental to those manufactures?—l think that, in order to weigh the manufactures against the export trade, the total value of the manufactures as an industry to the colony must be ascertained, and must be set forth. I have mentioned that the knowledge I have of the export trade comes to me in the ordinary way of business. As I have not the same knowledge of the manufacturing trade and its value to the colony, I am not prepared to make an absolute comparison at the present moment, although I would be quite willing, after reflection and study, to give an opinion if it were wished for. 54. You admit that is a matter that ought to receive careful consideration?— Most serious consideration. 55. You said a home market is the best, which is always admitted, and therefore anything that would prejudice the home market—our own home market in New Zealand—must be detrimental, even to the producers, because it throws a larger amount of their produce over for export ? —Yes. It is a question, however, of what the gain is against that. 56. Exactly. I suppose you know that at the present time we have a fairly good tariff on some articles of manufacture in this colony ?—Yes. 57. They are protected to a large extent? —Yes. 58. Would you be surprised to learn that under those conditions the exports of manufactured articles from Australia to Dunedin amounted to £4,526 in one year?—lt does not seem to me to be an out-of-the-way figure. I should not be in the least surprised at it. 59. That is under the present tariff. Now, assuming we wiped out the tariff, would that increase or not ?—I think it would be bound to increase; but I would point out that it probably consists of articles that are non-competitive to a large extent. 60. It includes slop-made apparel and boots ? —What naturally takes place—and it affects all the import trade—is this : In New Zealand we have small towns and small populations, and in Australia they have one or two large depots, and all we want of special sizes of special articles which are not in our small places has to be got from Australia, and the imports from Australia are, to a considerable extent, things we are temporarily short of here, or things that our market is not large enough to keep in stock. That is what I mean by saying they are not actually competitive manufactures with our own to any extent. 61. Well, what about machinery?—l should think that remark applied exactly to machinery. 62. Printed books?—l think it is a non-competitive line to a large extent. 63. Agricultural implements and boots? I suppose you are aware, as far as boots are concerned, that our keenest competitor is America? —Yes, I am aware of that. 64. Now, suppose that the Commonwealth tariff will be a moderate tariff, that moderate tariff might possibly, and probably will on many lines, reduce the tariff we have existing at the present time against foreign markets. If that is the case, and if our competition is keen with America, Britain, and Germany now, and you further reduce the taiiff, it is bound to accentuate it?— Yes. 65. And therefore the larger the importation the less the manufacture within ourselves?—Yes. 66. That means a corresponding reduction of what you might call the purchasing-power of the people?—So far, yes. 67. If one views it from that standpoint, and admitting that one portion of the population are depending more or less on the manufactures of the colony—l believe the factories just now employ forty-seven thousand people directly, without those dependent on them —it is a matter that should receive great consideration. In fact, it must be shown, to my mind—and I think you will agree with me—that, unless commerce can show it is to be of great advantage to the colony as a whole, we should not go in for federation if it is to affect us in the manner you have yourself admitted ?—I am sorry I have not quite caught the question. 68. The question is simply this : Unless the commercial advantages to this colony are to be so great that the injury done to the manufacturing interests will not be felt, we should not federate ?— It is a question of balancing one against the other. There must be an advantage. 69. So far as Australia is concerned, you know that the rate of wages paid there is considerably lower in most industries than is paid here ?—I am not aware that that is so. At any rate, I do not see, as I said before, why it should be permanently so. The question of federation is one
A,—4
30
for the future, and, in the broad view, I do not see that we are going to have one community here and another twelve hundred miles across the water with a substantial difference of wages between the two. : 70. Mr. Roberts.] With reference to your remark about the four million people in Australia that we would have to trade with in the event of federation, you will admit, I suppose, we would also have the competition of four million people'? —Yes. 71. And do you think this younger colony could stand up against the older and more populous colonies ? —Yes, I think so. 72. You also said the cost of production in New Zealand was much the same as in America? i—l said I did not think ie was more. 73. How do you ascertain that : it is a big question ?—I have not professed to ascertain, it. I have said lam not aware the cost of production is more in New Zealand than in America. 74. You said the cost of production was the same in New Zealand as in America ?—No; I said I was not aware the cost of production in America was less. I was asked how we could compete with America in the Australian markets, and I said we were nearer, and I was not aware produce could be produced at less cost in America, and therefore we had the advantage of nearness intact. 75. You handle quantities of oats, do you not ?—Yes. 76. Do they go chiefly to Melbourne or Sydney ?—Chiefly to Sydney. 77. Do you ship to Melbourne at all ?—Only for transhipment. 78. We had it in evidence in Invercargill that for seven or eight years the export of oats to Melbourne had ceased ?—That is so. There is practically no New Zealand produce of any serious value goes into Victoria. 79. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Of course, if federation came about there would be comparatively freetrade* between the colonies : do you think the trade would largely increase if there was federation and no Customs duties ? Is there a large interchangeable commerce to be looked forward to between Australia and New Zealand ?—Yes, I think there is. 80. Much larger than under present conditions ?—Yes, I think so. .. .. 81. In what particularly? —Simply in a development of the present trade. 82. That is, in cereals ? —Chiefly in the lines I have already «amed. I think that under a free tariff New Zealand must become the producer for the Commonwealth of a very considerable number of those lines. 83. Such as oats, for instance?— Such as those I have named—oats, and other lines. 84. Would not foodstuff's, such as Indian corn, come into the north of New Zealand a good deal ?—At the present time the north of New Zealand exports Indian corn to Australia. 85. A small quantity ?—lt does not import from them, and if we had more Indian corn we would have more to send to Australia. 86. Supposing there was free-trade, would it make any difference in the export of oats to Australia ? —Yes; I think it would make a large difference in the future export of oats to have a free market there, instead of a market with perhaps 6d. or 9d. a bushel of duty against us. 87. You do not think Victoria would find the oats? —I think Victoria would find the oats with the tariff in her favour, but if we had an equal footing to Victoria within the Federation I think we could find the oats against Victoria. 88. Hon. Captain Russell.] Have you pictured to yourself the social conditions of a federated New Zealand and Australia a hundred years hence ?—I cannot say I have. 89. Do you not think that is an important question ? —A very important question. 90. You have not considered it at all?—I cannot say I have. 91. Have you viewed it from possible trade conditions a hundred years hence?—l have tried to view it from what I call the outlook of the future, and if you would not tie me to a hundred years I would say Yes. 92. Well, say at some fairly remote period ?—Yes. 93. And what do you imagine will be the prevailing conditions ? What shall we export to Australia fifty years hence ? —I think we must still retain our advantage as a producer for Australia. 94. Of what articles?—Of all the articles we export now, and possibly other minor products that have not yet reached the exporting-poiat with us. 95. Cannot Victoria and Tasmania grow practically the same articles as we export?— Yes; I have said they can behind a tariff wall, but on a level with New Zealand I do not think they can. 96. The freights and wharfages and handlings and commissions are not in themselves protective ? —I do not think those charges are serious ones as compared with the tariff wall to get over. 97. Have you noticed that about two-thirds of the Australian Continent is either tropical or semi-tropical ?—Yes. 98. Is that liable to affect the condition of their population in the course of two or three generations ?—Undoubtedly it must, but to what extent or in what particular way I am not •qualified to say. 99. Do you think it will affect the powers of production of the working-classes ?—Yes, I would say it will. 100. To the advantage or the disadvantage of New Zealand ?—To the disadvantage of Australia and to the advantage of New Zealand. 101. Therefore, so far as the climatic conditions go, New Zealand ought to be able within two or three generations to produce more cheaply than, or as cheaply as, Australia?— Yes. 102. That concerns European labour? —Yes.
31
A.—4
103. Do you imagine that tropical or semi-tropical Australia will be permanently cultivated by white people ?—I am inclined to think it will be. I think the tendency is strong in that direction at present. I have been frequently in tropical Australia—in Queensland —and know the surroundings of the sugar industry there, and I know that the leading men in connection with the industry look forward to its ultimate cultivation by white labour, not that they prefer it or choose it, but they see that it will be required by the social conditions in Australia, and they accept it, and do not despair of their industry on account of it. 104. Have they expressed themselves to you that the law of man will be stronger than the law of nature ?—I have heard the men whom I consider the leading men in connection with the sugar industry express the opinion that the industry will survive on the white-labour basis. They say that if they can only get kindly handling from the Commonwealth, and are allowed to temporise with the black labour so as not to have a crisis brought about, the industry will survive. 105. Do you know any tropical country in the world where white labour is employed ?—No, I do not. 106. Can you mention any source of information where we could learn that such has been the case ?—No; I understand it is quite admitted by these same men who hope it will be done in Australia that the thing has never been done before. 107. They believe the power of an active Commonwealth will override the laws of nature ?—- Well, I should hardly put it that way. 108. Assuming, as I shall choose to assume, that coloured labour will prevail in all tropical Australia, will that affect the social conditions of Australia?— Undoubtedly. 109. And do you think that might react prejudicially on New Zealand if she joined the Federation?—-Yes, that contingency certainly is present. 110. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think the differences that exist in the commercial law between New Zealand and the Commonwealth could not be adjusted without federation?— Yes, I should think they are capable of adjustment. . : 111. You have said that Victoria has ceased to import oats from New Zealand for a number of years ?—Yes. 112. On account of the tariff, or on account of Victoria being able to supply her own demands and also to export oats ?—We thought a few years ago it was on account of the tariff, but it has been made manifest within the last few years that it has not been on account of the tariff, because Victoria is now producing a surplus of oats and exporting them. 113. Speaking of manufactures, do you think, if New Zealand federated with Australia, that in the production of agricultural implements New Zealand would be able to hold her own ?—I see no reason why she should not. 114. Are not the manufacturing-works in Australia on a much larger scale than they are in New Zealand ?—Yes. We will always have the drawbacks of the small place alongside the big one. That will affect many things, and would, no doubt, affect agricultural implements in some degree. 115. We have been told of instances in which railway-trucks have been supplied to the New Zealand Government from Victoria as against New Zealand ? —I am not aware of that. 116. Do you think that in the manufacture of railway-trucks and dredges New Zealand could successfully compete against Victoria?—l certainly do. It would require a great many instances to the contrary to make me think otherwise. 117. Do you think the furniture trade in New Zealand could compete successfully against Victoria, especially with coloured labour, if we federate ?—I do not grasp the meaning of your words " with coloured labour." 118. I understand that in Victoria, for instance, there are a great many Chinese employed in manufacturing furniture ?—That is more an accident of the present time, I take it; Ido not"think it is permanent. Ido not mean to say that New Zealand could compete with Chinese labour, but I think New Zealand furniture could compete with Australian furniture, and that in the production of furniture New Zealand ought to be the better country of the two, and ought to be the furniture-supplier eventually, apart from any question of Chinese labour or black labour. 119. Mr. Leys.] Did I understand you to say that at the present time our exports are almost confined to New South Wales ?—No ; I said the great bulk of the produce we export to Australia goes to New South Wales, the figures being, I think, £1,200,000 out of £1,700,000, which leaves only half a million to be scattered over the other colonies. 120. The figures last year were £1,118,699 to New South Wales, and £591,697 to the other colonies? —That is precisely what I have said. 121. In view of those figures, do you adhere to your statement that the whole of our Australian export trade would be killed if we federate ?—I do. I said that to the extent of a million I thought it would go. That is two-thirds of it, and not the whole of it. I was dealing with a total of £1,700,000, and I said a million of it would go. 122. If we lost one-half of our exports to New South Wales we would still have an export to Australia of £1,150,000? —No, not if we lost half of the New South Wales trade. 123. Do you assume that we would export less to all these protective colonies—Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, and Western Australia —than we do now ? —Yes, I certainly do. 124. Why ?—Because Victoria will be able to supply them without paying any duty, and we will have duty to pay. -125. You assume we would export less to them?—A great deal less. 126. lion, the Chairman.] Do you not think that other markets would be found for that produce which would fail to reach the Australian Colonies ? —lt is an exceedingly difficult thing for .an isolated and small community like this to find markets —new markets. That has been made abundantly plain by the course of trade in New South Wales and Victoria recently. These two
A.—4
32
colonies, which are'inferior in producing-power to ours, have established during the last few years a very large export trade with the world at large, the reason being that they are near to the great highways of trade. They are big enough in area and population, and otherwise, to attract these lines of steamships, and so they get roads to different countries. New Zealand by its isolation is cut off from that, and it is exceedingly difficult, and indeed a serious problem, for New Zealand to find new markets. We have always London to fall back on. 127. Supposing those lines of steamships were induced to come to New Zealand?— That is exactly what we want; and, given them, we would be able to make up for something of what we would lose by the federation of the Australian Colonies. 128. Mr. Leys.] Looking back at these figures, I see that goods valued at £412,000 actually go into Victoria itself. Now, surely we cannot lose any of that trade under its high protective tariff?—lf the Victorian blue-book is in the room I think I would be able to explain that figure. I think the Victorian blue-book will show that our exports to Victoria are only about a quarter of a million. The explanation I take to be that a great many of the goods sent from New Zealand to Melbourne for transhipment to other countries —to South Africa for example, to Western Australia for example, particularly Western Australia—get entered up as exports to Victoria. Therefore we are never safe to take the statistics of trade between one colony and another from the books of the one colony. You have to get it checked by the books of another colony before you get the right figures, and if you follow that process I think you would reduce that £400,000 down to one-half. I think I am right in saying that. 129. In concluding that we should lose this trade, you assume the Federal tariff on such an item as oats, for instance, would be maintained at the exorbitant protective duty now charged by Victoria : do you assume that ? —No. 130. Have you considered that our average in oats is something like 40 bushels to the acre, while the Victorian average is only 20, and the New South Wales average 13 ? Now, unless the Commonwealth adopts a tariff as prohibitive as the Victorian tariff, should we not be able to put our oats into the greater part of Australia ?—I think not, because at present Victoria is able to supply oats to New South Wales. What she can do for New South Wales at present, in some degree I say she can do for the whole Commonwealth once she gets a free door to all the Commonwealth markets, and has no competitor on an equal footing. If Victoria is equal to do oat business with New South Wales and with Queensland and Western Australia at present in the face of their tariffs, what will she do when she has a free entry ? 131. But does she do that to any large extent ?—lt is only beginning. There is a surplus of oats in Victoria beyond their requirements, and certainly one cannot argue much from it; but there is no evidence at present that she cannot compete in the world's markets. 132. Looking at the actual average yields, would it not require a very prohibitive protective tariff to keep our oats out of New South Wales and the other colonies ?—Not such a very great protective tariff as one would think at first sight. I may say this: Suppose that in Victoria a man grows oats on land worth £1 an acre, and in New Zealand a man grows oats on land worth £10 an acre, the grower of the Victorian oats has only Is. an acre to pay for rent, and the grower of the New Zealand oats has 10s. an acre to pay. The difference between the two is 95., or, roughly, equal to 4 bushels. If you take the harvest expenses, which are greater in New Zealand than in Victoria, and other items, you will find you can reduce this disproportion of bushels to the acre very greatly, and it will be seen it is not just as it appears on the surface. Then, Victorian wheat is very much better than New Zealand wheat, which gives you, again, an equivalent of a good many bushels to the acre, and so the thing comes much nearer a level than you would suppose when you start off by saying we get 40 bushels to the acre and Victoria only 20. 133. We were told in Southland that our oats were very much inferior to Victorian oats ?—I am not mentioning Victorian oats, because that is a disputable point. 134. Mr. Beauchamp.] As to the rates of wages paid to agricultural labourers, you admit that they are higher here than in Australasia ? —Yes, I believe that is so. 135. Mr. Roberts.] In some places the cost per acre is lighter with a light crop than with a heavy crop. In cutting it has got to be gone over in the same way; the only thing is that the heavier crop costs more for binding-twine, for one thing ? —I think in some places they strip the crop when it is heavy, and the cost of stripping wheat is a good deal cheaper in Australia than it is here. 136. Hon. Major Steward.] What does it at present cost the exporter in New Zealand to deliver his oats in Sydney?— About 4d. per bushel. 137. Supposing that Victoria extends her oat-production, in view of the fact that she will have the other markets of Australia open to her, will not the handicap of that 4d. per bushel against New Zealand prevent our getting an extended trade ?•—I do not think so, because it must cost Victoria the greater part of 4d. to put the oats into Sydney. 138. So that, in point of fact, your calculation will not be interfered with when there is that 4d. to pay in any case ? —No, not seriously. 139. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there anything you wish to add to your evidence, Mr. Paterson ? —I do not think there is, except this, which occurred to my mind when answering a question. It is in the same line as I have pointed out in respect to figures—-it is necessary to take those on both sides of the water in order to get their correct significance. It has been remarked that New Zealand imports as much from Australia as she at present exports to Australia. That is true, but it is exceedingly misleading, because the great bulk—quite 75 per. cent.—of these imports from Australia are not of Australian production, but are goods that are re-exported from Australia, as being the largest depot, to New Zealand, as being the smaller depot, and that really the imports from Australia of Australian production are very small—l should say, not more than half a million, as against an export of £1,700,000. .. . . i
33
A.—4.
140. Mr. Leys.] Would not that weigh with Australians in fixing tariffs that specially affect New Zealand goods ? —This trade would not be affected by an Australian tariff; it would only be affected by a New Zealand tariff. 140 a. But in fixing tariffs would they not deske to keep up trade with New Zealand ?—Yes. W. A. W. Wathbn examined. (No. 14.) 141. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name ?—William Alexander Waddle Wathen. 142. What are you ?—I am a printer by profession, but have been a journalist here for over twenty years. lam now president of the Otago Trades and Labour Council. 143. How long have you been in the Colony of New Zealand ?—Since 1871, I think. 144. Have you resided in Australia at all ? —Yes. 145. For how long ?—I was living in Launceston for about twenty years, and I have been to Melbourne and Sydney on several occasions. 146. Have you directed your attention to the question of the federation of New Zealand with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—To a slight extent. I happened to be in Sydney during the sitting of the Federal Convention in 1891, I think. 147. If you have formed any opinion on the question of federation with Australia—as to whether it would be beneficial to New Zealand or not —we would be glad to hear it?—My own private opinion is that eventually it would not pay New Zealand to federate with the Australian Commonwealth. New Zealand is practically self-contained, and all the advantages of joining the Commonwealth would be counterbalanced by certain things which would, I think, affect trade in New Zealand to a very large extent. From a social point of view the working-classes here have great advantages now, and with the class of labour in various parts of Australia the probability is that the tendency, after joining the Australian Federation, would be to reduce the living-wage here—a thing we have been working for in New Zealand for a considerable time. The work of the Trades and Labour Council latterly has been to raise the standard to a fair living-wage. Under the legislation of New Zealand great advantages have come about to the people here, and these advantages would, I think, be very largely affected if New Zealand were to federate with Australia. When I was in Sydney in 1891, and heard the evidence given there, I thought that New Zealand ought to join the Australian Commonwealth, but, having regard to my recent studies, Ithink it would not eventually pay New Zealand to federate with the Australian Commonwealth. 148. That is, looking at it from the point of view of the rate of wages to the labouring-classes? —Yes. 149. Have you any opinion as to what the effect would be upon local manufactures of New Zealand if New Zealand federated?— Well, judging by the evidence I have had, I would be inclined to think that the lower rate of wages in Australia, and the aliens—Chinese and other coloured labour—in parts of Australia, would tend to reduce the wages here very much. If New Zealand were to have the same labour laws as Australia the rate of wages here would necessarily come down. The standard of living would be lowered to that of the alien races—like the Japanese, for instance. 150. Do you think that the manufactures in New Zealand could compete successfully with the larger manufactures of Australia ? —I think so. 151. Hon. Captain Russell.] Have you considered the question from the remoter period—not merely that of the effect of federation to-day, but its possible effect upon our national character a hundred years hence?— Yes ; my idea is this : that if we joined the Australian Commonwealth we should eventually be brought to a very low level. Allowing the coloured labour as they do in the northern parts of Australia, and allowing the Japanese and Chinese to come in in Victoria and other parts, the tendency must be downward; and if New Zealand is placed on the same level as the Australian Commonwealth the tendency here must be in the same direction—downward—so far as the social life is concerned, looking to the future." 152. Do you imagine Australia will allow coloured labour to come in ?— Yes ; they must necessarily do so, for the sugar-cultivations in Queensland. 153. You believe that sugar and such other tropical cultivations cannot be carried on by white labour?—So far as I have read, it is a fact that white labour cannot stand the heat of Queensland. 154. Then, do you think there is danger of the coloured labour, in the course of a century or two centuries, becoming a great political factor in the Commonwealth ?—I think so ; and the heat of Australia will tend to reduce the constitution of the. white people there. 155. Have you pictured to yourself what the social and political condition of the people of Australia may be if the coloured races come in in large numbers ?—I have said already that I think the tendency will be downwards; and unless the Commonwealth carries out the declaration that has been made —that white labour only shall be used—and a large part of the Continent lie waste in consequence, they must make that sacrifice in order to attain a good state of society among the population generally. 156. Have you read at all on the subject of coloured labour in the Southern States of America ? —Only to a small extent. 157. You could not tell us whether the black population is increasing there at a greater ratio than the white ?—I have evidence that the negro population of America is increasing to an extraordinary extent, and is a real menace to the government of the States —that the increase of the blacks is astonishingly rapid, and unless some steps are taken to prevent their increase they will overrun the country. 158. And you think that such may prevail in Australia?-—Yes. The northern part of Australia, if the present legislation is allowed, will practically be governed by blacks eventually. 5—A. 4.
34
A.—4,
159. Do you think that could be stopped by legislation? —Yes, I think so. 160. Hon. Mr, Bowen.} Do you not think the coloured labour will be confined to the tropics ? —That may be for a time. 161. It is not likely that coloured labour will be admitted in the colonies fit for European labour, but the alternative, you say, would be to leave the tropics unused if coloured labour was not admitted? —That could only be produced by wise legislation. But if they are allowed free progress from one part to another, then the blacks must go where they please, and they will go wherever the employment suits them best. 162. Hon. Captain Busscll.] Tell us what you mean by blacks?— All coloured labour that may come in. Japanese, for instance, may come in, and they increase at an extraordinary rate. 163. Mr. Roberts.] I understand your principal objection to federation is the fact that, wages being somewhat lower in Australia than here, it will necessarily tend to reduce wages here ?—Yes, I think that will be so. 164. Can you give us any statement of the wages there, so as to make a comparison ?—I have not any statement here. 165. Could you furnish us with one ? —I may be able to after consulting with Mr. Slater. He has a lot of details that I have not. 166. Mr. Millar.] You are aware that we have considerable competition from America and Germany now in different manufactures?— Yes. 167. If the Commonwealth tariff were lower than our existing tariff, that would mean still more competition ?—That is so. 168. It would open the door to more imports?— Yes. 169. That must necessarily tend to either reduce the wages of the workers here or reduce the amount of employment ?—lt must act both ways. 170. And would it not also have this tendency : that the large factories of Victoria and New South Wales would be able to send their surplus down here if there was an open market ?—Yes ; they do so now. 171. Take boots, for instance : If the duty was wiped off, do you think our boot-manufacturers would be able to compete with Victoria ?—They would not be able to live at all. 172. And pay anything like fair wages ?—They could not do it. 173. Their enormous output cheapens the cost of production?—-Yes. 174. Federation would affect us in many ways?— Yes ; from all points of view, I think. 175. I presume that you talk with a fair knowledge of the opinion of the majority of the workers in this particular district ?—Yes; I can fully voice the opinions of the bootmakers in that respect, at all events. 176. You say that the Trades and Labour Council have passed a resolution that they will not consent to federation until a Conciliation and Arbitration Act has been passed; but even with that Act do you not think that climatic conditions would regulate the question of wages ?—Yes, to a considerable extent. 177. Even with a uniform wage it would cost more to live in this colony than in some of the other colonies?— Yes ; living is far cheaper in Auckland than here. 178. From every point of view that you have looked at it from—socially and industrially—you do not approve of federation ?—No, lam entirely against it. lam very fond of quoting a remark of the late Hon. John Bathgate : " New Zealand should always be isolated, because she could produce nearly everything she wanted." 179. Mr. Beauchamp.] You have a large number of important industries down this way?— Yes. 180. Is the output of these industries generally increasing ?—I should say so, generally. 181. Generally speaking, are the workmen in a flourishing condition? —Generally, they are well paid about Dunedin. 182. Are there very few unemployed ? —Very few indeed. 183. Are the goods manufactured here for export to Australia, or are the goods manufactured chiefly for domestic use ?—Chiefly for domestic use, but woollens go largely to Australia now. 184. I see here in the imports for 1899 the item " Woollens, £3,921 " : do you know whether they were manufactured in Australia or out of it ? —I cannot say. 185. Mr. Luke.] Your principal objection, I understand, is that federation will affect the wages paid in this country?— That is one of the objections. 186. How do you harmonize that with your statement just now that you thought New Zealand manufactures could compete against the manufactures of Australia and maintain our high level of wages ?—The class of work here and the labour employed are said to be better than that in Australia. The workmen are said to be superior to those of Australia in the iron industry, for instance. 187. Do you mean that under equal conditions New Zealand could compete against Australian manufactures ? —Yes, I think so. That is the position. 188. That would be the position under federation ?—There are certain advantages in Otago, for instance, with regard to raw material which I do not think they have in New South Wales and other places. 189. What are those advantages ?—I understand that these materials are more readily got at in New Zealand than in New South Wales. 190. Coal is a great item, and coal is cheaper in New South Wales than it is in New Zealand? —That is so. 191. Is there not now a large quantity of dredging material imported into New Zealand? —-Orders have been given out to other parts because the ironmasters here have not been able to fulfil orders by reason of so many orders being put on the market at one time.
35
A.—4
192. Is it due to that, or that they are procurable at a lower rate in Australia than they are here?—l think the question of expediency came in. The dredging companies thought they ought to have the material to hand as soon as possible, so they sent the orders to Victoria and America. It was done merely because the foundries could not "turn out the work in time. 193. The cost of raw material is considerably cheaper in Australia than it is in New Zealand; freights are something like 10s. per ton— in some cases 15s.—less between England and Australia than between England and New Zealand ; so that with other advantages, such as cheap coal, and so on, do you not think that under federation our industries in this colony will be seriously menaced ? —I think that is a question for statesmen more than for myself. I have not had much opportunity of considering the question in that aspect. 194. You have mainly looked at this question from the wage standpoint ?—Yes, and from the social point of view. 195. Ultimately, you think that this coloured labour will find its way into industries other than the sugar industry and cabinetmaking—that it will find its way into the bootmaking and metalworking industries ? —Yes, undoubtedly ; and I think it will also come to New Zealand if we join the Commonwealth. 196. Mr. Leys.] Do you not think that the democracy in the Commonwealth will be able to keep this coloured labour in check ?—I am inclined to doubt it. 197. We had evidence from Mr. Paterson just now that the sugar-planters of Queensland had already accepted it as a doctrine that they will have to work their plantations with white labour?— That may be because of the intimation by Mr. Barton that they are going to have a white-labour Australia, but the evidence so far is that Queensland cannot do without black labour if she wants to keep her sugar industry. 198. The Pacific-islanders will not become permanent population. They are mostly under conditions, are they not, and returned to their homes ? —I understand so. 199. Do you think the Chinese will become a permanent population?— Yes, I think so; and the probability is that they and the Japanese will largely increase unless legislation is directed against them. 200. Do you think that if we federated a large number of these Chinese would come over to New Zealand? —I think a large number would come to New Zealand, and remain here permanently if allowed so to do. 201. With regard to the rates of labour in Australia and New Zealand, do you not think that a federation of labour would solve the difficulty that you apprehend ? There was a remarkable attempt here at the time of the maritime strike to attain an Australasian federation of labour, was there not ?■—Yes, I think there was an effort made in that direction in one line of industry. 202. But did it not affect all lines of industry ? Was it not a real federation of labour at the same time ?—lt seemed to me to be merely confined to one industry. 203. But did not all kinds of industries go out on strike—bootmakers, carters, and others not connected with the maritime industry at all ?—Oh, yes, a large number. 204. That was an effort to produce a federation of labour, was it not ?—I think it was more with a view that the men engaging in the maritime strike should be successful. 205. By inaugurating a general strike ? —Yes. 206. Is that not a federation of labour ?—I suppose we may regard it from that point of view. It was a federation for the time being to work on certain lines for the good of the whole community. 207. Do you not think, if New Zealand federated with the Commonwealth, that such labour laws would be established as would secure an equal rate of wages, and that Australia would not be working at a lower rate than New Zealand for the same work ?—That might be brought about in time, if the Commonwealth Government were sufficiently favourable to the carrying-out of the idea. 208. With manhood suffrage, would not that view be forced upon the Government ?—Yes, manhood suffrage ought to be able to force that view upon them. 209. You said that Australians would probably not be able to do as much work as NewZealanders, but that they could live cheaper : is that what I understood you to say ? —They can live cheaper in a warmer climate than here, for instance. I believe the Australian workmen have not the same stamina as the New Zealand workmen. They show that already; and in the course of time, according to some thinkers, they will not have the same strength as the young men of New Zealand. 210. Would not the cheapness of living counterbalance the fact that they were able to do less work ?—That is a problem that will have to be determined by the future; I could not give an answer to it just now. 211. If New-Zealanders got a higher rate of pay than the Australians, would not the extra work they did for the money counterbalance the lower rate of pay the Australians received?—lt might do so, but I could no say so positively. 212. You have not formed any opinion on that ?—Not a conclusive opinion. 213. With regard to the swamping of the New Zealand industries under federation, is that because you think the industries of Australia are better developed ?—Yes ; they have a cheaper way of producing things over there, and they have a large surplus stock to get rid of. They send large surplus stocks to New Zealand. 214. Do you know anything of the Victorian labour legislation ?—Very little. - 215. You do not know whether they have a Minimum Bate of Wages Act ? —I do not know. They may have. 216. Hon. Major Steward.] In your position as president of the Trades and Labour Council, I suppose you are aware that the manufacture of furniture is a very considerable industry in this district? —Id is pretty large.
A.—4
36
217. Is it or is it not a fact that the greater part of the furniture used in ordinary houses is manufactured in the colony itself?—l believe that is so. 218. Are you or are you not aware that in Melbourne and Sydney in that particular branch of industry Chinese are very largely employed ? —That is so. 219. Is it not a fact that the Chinese work for a very much lower rate of wages than white people do?— Yes. 220. If New Zealand became part of the Federation it would of course follow that anything manufactured in Melbourne or Sydney would come into New Zealand free ?—Yes, that is so. 221. Whereas now there is a considerable protective duty on furniture? —Yes. 222. Supposing we joined the Federation and that protective duty were released, do you think our manufactures would hold their own against the low price of Chinese labour in Victoria ?—No, I think not. 223. Cannot our white labour compete against their Chinese labour?— Not unless we got the extra value in our native woods, which they have not in Australia. 224. Do you think the difference in the quality of our woods would turn the scale as regards the price in the market generally ? If a cheaper article were put in the market with Chinese labour, would that not displace the article here—that is, supposing they were brought into competition with our locally made articles ?—Yes, to a large extent. 225. The same would apply to boots, &c, too? —Yes. 226. Then, if we were to go into the Federation, by which act we would have to admit manufactured articles from all parts of the Commonwealth free, you think that would have a prejudicial effect in regard to certain of our industries ?—Yes, it would seriously affect them. 227. Hon. the Chairman.] Could you tell us the greatest number of hands employed in any industry in Dunedin ?—The iron industry is the one that gives employment to the largest number just now. 228. What is the largest number in any particular establishment ?—I heard the other day that there were five hundred men employed at A. and T. Burt's. 229. That is one of the largest iron firms in Dunedin?—Yes. Sparrow's and Eeid and Gray's are other large ones.
Monday, 11th Febeuaey, 1901. Febdeeick Eevans Chapman examined. (No. 15.) 230. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand ? —Yes. I am also a member of the English Bar. 231. You have been resident in New Zealand—how long ?—I have resided in Dunedin for twenty-eight years. I was born in New Zealand. 232. Have you resided for any length of time in Australia ? —Yes ; all my school-days were in Australia. I have not resided there since, though I have Visited it several times. 233. You are familiar with the political Constitution of Australia and the various colonies?— So far as familiarity with it can be acquired from a close study of the present Act and of the proceedings which led up to it, I am familiar with the Constitution. I have made a comparison between that Constitution and the Constitution of the Dominion of Canada. 234. Have you given consideration to the question of the advantages or disadvantages of the Colony of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia?—l have given consideration to that question. I may mention that in 1899 —the period ending November, 1899—1 was president of the Qtago Institute, and in my presidential address, with which it is customary for the president to wind up his year of office, I delivered in November a somewhat elaborate address on that subject. I propose to hand in a copy of that address if it is likely to be of any value to this Commission. 235. The Commission will be much obliged ?—ln that address I analyse the Constitution and compare it to some extent with that of Canada and that of the United States, and endeavour to point out to what extent the legislative functions of the colony are affected or reduced by ceding legislative authority to the Commonwealth. 236. Perhaps you would favour the Commission shortly with the views you hold ? —Well, it is a little difficult to express the opinions, but shortly they may be put in this way : that, speaking generally, and as an ideal to be attained, I am in favour of federating with Australia, but I can see practical difficulties under the present Australian Constitution which seem to me to debar New Zealand from entering the Commonwealth. I have always had the impression that if New Zealand had stood in at the time, strongly advocating federation and putting herself forward as one of the colonies of the group strongly in favour of federation, that that would have tended to retard rather than to bring about the result that has been attained in Australia. Ido not know whether that is well founded, but from the history of the movement;, as I make it out, I should think that if New Zealand had shown extreme anxiety to come in with the rest of the colonies it would not have advanced the scheme. 237. Why not? —My impression is that, although federation between the Australian Colonies was due at some date, and would certainly have come about, it was immediately brought about by the activity of Victorian politicians and Victorian interests in seeking to broaden their market— what I might call their protected area. They had found their system required a larger area than they had at their disposal. Victoria has in a considerable measure excluded New Zealand produce —I am speaking now not of manufactures, but of actual produce —while New South Wales has admitted it. If New Zealand had been very much in evidence at the time as an advocate of federation, it is quite possible that the strong protective instincts that prevail in Victoria would have seen in New Zealand an undesirable competitor. The matter has, however, proceeded without New Zealand being a party to the discussion, except, I think, in the earlier stages, and there
37
a;— 4
are difficulties which I can see which seem to prevent New Zealand from joining at present, at any rate. One of those difficulties is a large question of public finance. Western Australia was admitted on special terms. It would be difficult, I think, for New Zealand to enter at present except on special terms, giving her time to readjust her finance. There are other questions to which I refer in the paper I have mentioned. They are remediable. For instance, there is one which is a matter of sentiment—and, I think, very proper sentiment—we cannot overlook, and that is that, according to the existing Act, in the computation of the population of the colony Natives are not included. There is nothing to prevent them being represented, or even to prevent the sending of Native members to the Federal Parliament, but they are not computed in the population. That would put New Zealand at a certain amount of disadvantage in representation, and it seems to me something more than that: it would cast a slur upon the Native race here, which would feel it. We have treated them here on an exact equality with the colonial population, and I do not think this colony could very well accept a scheme of that kind. That is remediable. The Commonwealth Parliament has power under certain conditions to amend the Constitution, and, if New Zealand were negotiating a union with Australia, that is a matter that could be remedied. 238. You have spoken of several objections : are there any others ? —I cannot recall them at present. ■•■■;..' ■' 239. I should like you to finish any voluntary remarks you may have to make ?—I do not know that I can say anything more. I should prefer that the expressions which I, as it were;, matured in the address I referred to should be taken as my views on the subject. It is some time since I wrote that. It is in print, and a copy can be furnished to the Commission. 240. You are aware that under the Act establishing the Commonwealth the representation of original States in the Senate was equal—that is, six members for each State ?—Yes. 241. Of course, New Zealand would not now be an original State, supposing she joined?—No, she would not. : , 242. You are aware that under the 7th section of the statute the Parliament may make laws increasing or diminishing the number of Senators for each State ?—Yes, that is so. 243. So that it would be within the power of the Federal Parliament to increase or decrease the number of representatives of the Senate for New Zealand, not being an original State ?—That might be so; but I should hardly think that New Zealand would in any circumstances come in unless it were understood she came in on the same footing as the other States. 244. But after she same in the Parliament might still exercise that power and increase or dimmish the number of representatives in the Senate, she not being an original State'?— That appears so. I have not given particular attention to that, but that appears to be a defect. That is a matter that would have to be remedied if it came to be a question of negotiation upon what terms New Zealand came in. If the Constitution could be amended, that is one of the matters lii respect to which it might be amended. There is power to amend the Constitution. , 245. Yes; but what I want to know is this : Could there be any assurance there would be any finality of legislation in that respect ?—lt is hardly likely a body of people of British origin would deliberately legislate to the disadvantage of one member as compared with the others. It is improbable. 246. Are you aware that the representatives of the States of Victoria and New South Wales outnumber the whole of the representatives of the other States of the Commonwealth and New Zealand if she joined ? —That is so in the Assembly, but not in the Senate. The counterpoise to that is supposed to be derived from the fact that if the small States grouped together they could outbalance the great States. It is the same as in the United States. The Senate is supposed to supply the balance for any inequality. One State with less than forty thousand inhabitants has the same representation as the great State of New York, with at least six million inhabitants. 247. Have you considered the provisions of the Act in reference to the alteration of the Constitution? —Yes; I see there is a power to alter the Constitution. I cannot at this moment recall the exact terms. There are checks upon it as in the United States. 248. Yes, there are checks on it; but the ultimate authority apparently is a referendum to the electors ?—Yes. 249. Do you consider the provisions there are satisfactory, or such as New Zealand should consider it advisable to come under ?—They seem to me as fair for one colony as for another. The same question has always been in evidence in the Constitution of the United States. In point of fact, it has been found so difficult to amend the Constitution of the United States that it has seldom been done. There the States are far more numerous, and the referendum a much more cumbrous matter than it would be under this Constitution. 250. As a lawyer, are you aware that there are differences in the commercial law of the Australian Colonies and New Zealand ?—That is so. 251. Can you give the Commission any instances in which any inconvenience has arisen from those differences ? —I cannot give examples. Occasionally inconvenience may arise, but I may say in a general way how singularly small are the inconveniences that arise from marked differences in the laws of different colonies or provinces. In New Zealand, where we had diversity of laws throughout the provinces, there was seldom any conflict or difficulty arising out of them, and that question, such as it is, will not be much altered under federation. Differences exist now. They lead occasionally to a little friction; but, on the whole, I think the matter is unimportant compared with the vast volumes of transactions that take place between the several colonies. That would not be much affected by federation, because those differences would go on. Very serious questions may crop up from differences in marriage laws. There are differences, and apparently growing difficulties, in the laws relating to marriage and divorce. Very serious questions occasionally crop up, but, though they are serious when they arise—serious to the parties—compared with
A.—4
38
the total number of cases in all the colonies the bulk is a very minute proportion. That is a question generally of the conflict of laws. That kind of difficulty arises just as much in the fortyfive or forty-eight States in the Union in the United States as it does, or ever will, in these colonies. They have to put up with difficulties of that sort. _As a matter of fact, there are even greater differences in relation to marriage and divorce between the three kingdoms forming the Kingdom of Great Britain now. 252. Are you aware whether in Australia there is any Legitimation Act in force similar to ours ?—I am not aware. It is a matter that would be within the legislative dominion of each provincial Parliament. It is so now, and would be so under the Constitution. 253. Hon. Captain Russell.] Under the Commonwealth ?—I think that is so. 254. Hon. the Chairman.] Have you considered the question of the establishment of a Federal Court of Appeal ? —Yes. I should have referred to that when you first asked me to state what I considered to be the difficulties. Personally, I altogether disagree with the course adopted by Australia. I think it is a most unfortunate course. It has had the effect of practically abolishing the appeal to the Privy Council. It may be that that is satisfactory to the Australian Colonies. They may know their own affairs, and that may be satisfactory ; but when that comes to touch New Zealand it must be looked at from our point of view. In Australia the appeal would be from the Supreme Court to a Court locally situated on the Continent somewhere—in the capital. From New Zealand it would be an appeal "from New Zealand to Australia, and there is no particular advantage, if an appeal has to go out of the colony, in going to Australia as compared with England. On the contrary, I think the advantage is all in favour of retaining the appeal to England. 255. Have you considered the question of the appointment of colonial Judges in the event of New Zealand federating with Australia?—l do not think that would be affected. The Judges of the Courts of the other colonies would be appointed as they are now. Ido not think the Supreme Court of each colony would be affected at all by the change. 256. Do you consider the powers of legislation of the Federal Parliament conferred by section 51 of the Act to be limited and restricted to the several matters therein mentioned, or is there anything in the Act to prevent them legislating on any matters affecting the States?— There are other matters scattered through the Act, but practically they are limited to those subjects and others specially mentioned in the Act. They have not general legislative authority. 257. You think not?—l think not. The wording is: "The Parliament shall, subject to the Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to " —and then are enumerated the different matters. If I remember aright, the Canadian Constitution goes further, and gives more general power to legislate concerning the peace, order, and good government of the Dominion. 258. Hon. Captain Russell.] You told us when you commenced that from an ideal standpoint you were rather in favour of federation ?—Yes, most decidedly. If I could see that we entered upon terms compatible with the dignity and interests of the colony I should style myself a Federalist. The question of defence alone is one which renders that desirable. It is impossible to look aside from that now. The whole aspect of the Pacific, and of the States in the Pacific generally, has altered in the last few years. We now have neighbours in the Pacific. We had not a few years ago. There are naval Powers in the Pacific now. Up till recently there was only one besides the British, and that was the French. Now there are several. The whole aspect of affairs has changed, and I am quite satisfied these colonies must put themselves in a position to satisfy the outside world they are thoroughly defensible. No doubt, this colony can, in a great measure, look after itself if it sets to work thoroughly; but federation gives great advantages when the Constitution imposes on the Commonwealth the duty of defending each State. It may be to the advantage of New Zealand or to the advantage of another colony—whichever may require the aid. 259. Is it not the case that for the next hundred years, at any rate, the defence of Australasia must be Imperial rather than colonial ? —So far as naval defence is concerned, that is so. That is necessarily so; but as to land forces these colonies will have to rely on themselves. 260. Can you conceive of any attack on Australasia which has not first to reckon with the Imperial defence ?—No, certainly not. It must first of all reckon with the Imperial navy, excepting a casual and isolated attack upon a point. I agree with you, it must first of all reckon with the Imperial navy. We do not know, however, what would happen if the British Empire were pitted against two or three naval Powers. They might be put under pressure, and have to defend some portions of the Empire to the neglect of others. In that case all these colonies might be thrown back on land defences. 261. Then, on the assumption that the Imperial naval power is destroyed or injured, would it be possible for Australia to help New Zealand, or for New Zealand to send troops to Australia ?—I think it would remain possible, unless you assume some dominant Power in full possession of the seas. 262. Even if it was possible to send troops, do you think it would be expedient that either Australia or New Zealand should, in the face of the loss of sea-power by England, denude herself of her own troops ? —I think there might be circumstances—it is difficult to imagine any particular condition —in which that could easily be done. It is a question of which portion of the Empire is most easily defended. For instance, Australia is a very difficult country to attack, even if there were no navy there, and it might have men to spare for New Zealand. No doubt the duty "would arise to protect New Zealand, even without federation, as a part of the British Empire, but the exercise of the duty in that senee would be rather optional, whereas in this sense it would be obligatory. 253. What other point, do you think, would be specially advantageous, looking at it from the more or less sordid point of how New Zealand is to gain by joining?— There is a question
A.—4
39
beginning to loom up now which seems to me to begin to acquire growing importance, and that is this question of the interests of the several colonies in the Pacific islands. Very little has been said or done about that up to this point, but there has been some discussion with reference to some kind of union with Fiji. I do not know exactly what the proposal is, but it is in the direction of acquiring some form of sovereignty over Fiji and other islands. It is to be noticed that the moment that was mentioned, Australia, through Mr. Lyne, made a kind of protest against New Zealand acquiring any special interests in the Pacific. I do not know whether Mr. Lyne noticed that the very protest he made against New Zealand acquiring any special interests in the Pacific islands in effect debarred Australia from acquiring any of those islands as Federal territories. I thought it would have been a natural aspiration on the part of the Australian Colonies to have sought to acquire Federal territories in the tropical portions of the Pacific—such islands as New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, and so on. But if the Federal Executive is entitled to claim that the Imperial Government shall deny to New Zealand the right to federate with the islands without consulting Australia, its denial involves the debarring of Australia from similarly acquiring territories on her side of the Pacific. That brings about this position: that when this question becomes more acute of federating with the islands, or of acquiring the islands, or of acquiring special interests, it will become necessary either to partition the British portion of the Pacific between New Zealand and Australia, or to have soma common understanding between Australia and New Zealand as to community of interests throughout. That community of interest would come about at once under federation. Apart from federation, it will undoubtedly be necessary at some future date to arrive at a common understanding on the subject through the medium of the British Government. 264. Is there any power in the Commonwealth Act to deal with the question of the islands of the Pacific ?—There is power to acquire Federal territories, but the power to acquire Federal territories must mean, of course, with the consent of the British Government. 265. Would that be adverse to New Zealand's claims and interests?—We should not like to see those islands absorbed into Australia. When it becomes a question of trade—at present New Zealand has large commercial relations with the Pacific islands —we should not like to see them put under a protective tariff in favour of Australia and adversely to the interests of New Zealand. 266. The meaning of my question was, Does that give the Commonwealth any legal advantage in annexation over New Zealand ? —Not that I can see. That is intended, I think, to give the Commonwealth the power to expand by taking in new territories; but, in so far as those are British territories, they must be taken in with the consent of the British Government. 267. But it would not debar our federation with Fiji or any other of the islands?—No; but it must mean that at present the British Government must hold an even hand between the two if they are competitors. They would cease to be competitors if they formed one State. 268. What do you imagine will be the social conditions of the Continent of Australia and the Islands of New Zealand in the next century ? Whether we federate or not, shall we be similar or dissimilar, and will there be a tendency to increasing social and racial differences, or is that only a dream ?—lt is purely speculative; but one cannot help saying this: that northern Australia will necessarily follow the tendency to import the class of labour that is suitable for tropical lands, and that may not be white labour. 269. Do you think there is likely to be any physical, mental, or moral degeneration of the European people who live north of the 30th parallel of latitude ?—I do not know why we should expect to find any greater difference than we find between Massachusetts and Louisiana. 270. I have heard it said of Scotsmen that they have an advantage over the rest of the United Kingdom on account of the severity of their climate and the circumstances of their lives ?—We all have to admit that in Otago. 271. Is it not possible that a similar condition of things may be boasted here, in the colder climate, against the people who live in the hotter climate ?—Well, we may take the examples we have. The States of North and South Carolina have been in existence nearly as long as the States of New England. When they came to a rupture from 1861 to 1865, involving calling on both people for the severest exercise of energy and the greatest sacrifice which a people could be called upon to make, it is difficult to say which of those two was the more ready. They both fought out to the bitter end—absolutely fought out to a finish. If that is a test—and, I take it, it is a test— of human energy, it was pretty well answered there. 272. Taking the map of Australia, we find that, roughly, two-thirds is north of the 30th parallel of latitude ?—Yes. 273. Do you imagine that in tropical and semi-tropical Australia it will be possible to carry on the ordinary cultivation and manufactures with white labour?— That is a question on which I cannot speak with any actual knowledge or experience. I have never been into that part of Australia, and any ideas I have on the subject are necessarily second-hand. 274. Probably your reading has been wide, and you will know of countries under similar circumstances : can you illustrate the position by telling us of any country in the tropics where white labour has been able to work from generation to generation either in manufactures or agriculture, or in any way, even as administrators?—No; I cannot refer to any extensive area of actual tropical country. Southern Europe does not extend into the tropics. I cannot refer to any country in which white labour is extensively employed either in manufactures or agriculture. 275. We may assume, then, that from 10 degrees north of Sydney it will not be possible in the hereafter—one or two hundred years hence—for the European to live and labour : I do not mean the imported European with centuries of cold blood in him, but the descendant of resident Europeans?—l do not know that you are necessarily driven to that conclusion, because a considerable portion of it is high land—more than 2,000 ft. above the sea—and I understand that in the high land of Queensland white men retain their activity.
A.-T-4
40
276. Is it not the case that the tea-planters in the higher portions of India and Geylon are obliged to send their families Home ?—Yes ; that is so all over India. The reason for it Ido not -know. 277. Is it not a fact that the negro population of the Southern States of America is increasing at a far greater ratio than the white population ? —I think, Captain Russell, that the latest data on that subject looks rather the other way. Recently I was reading some singular articles by men who are evidently well informed on the subject, and the general result is that in the towns the negroes are thriving and doing well, while in the country they are steadily going to the wall, and are being replaced not by white labour, but by white settlers buying the subdivided estates of the former planters. That is observable in several of the States, and it is quite a marked feature that the negroes are actually being starved out by white settlers taking up and working the land as their own. 278. Well, the last book I read on the subject, called " Black America," gave a very different ■view of the question ? —The articles I have read are articles that have appeared within the last two years. 279. Then, the wakefulness of Japan, and the probable awakening of China, are they likely to affect settlement in northern Australia ?—That is a great question. One knows perfectly well that if the Chinese show the same tendency towards civilisation as has been shown by the Japanese the possibilities of the future in their case are enormous. It is quite possible that they might undertake the enterprise of in some way colonising the extreme north of Australia, but those are problems on which we have practically no data at present. 280. But are they not questions that ought to be considered before a temperate State allies itself indissolubly with a State that is not temperate, or is it a matter that is out of the region of consideration ? —Questions of that sort cannot be left out of consideration ; but if the considerations are likely to apply in the future it is quite possible they apply now. New Zealand is not a country that is likely, from its geographical position, to be swamped by aliens. The white people ■here will hold their own, at any rate. 281. But, if they should pour in in large numbers into northern Australia, will they not filter to southern Australia, and perhaps come over to us if we were a State of the Commonwealth?—l do not know that they have any more chance of coming over to New Zealand as a State of the Commonwealth than they have under present conditions. 282. We could not exclude them if we were citizens of the Commonwealth ?—No, I suppose not; but I do not know that there would be any great difficulty in excluding them if, from force of circumstances, they were gradually passing south, either as citizens of the Commonwealth or otherwise. 283. Would not our power of exclusion be far greater as a separate State than as a State of the Commonwealth?— Yes. 284. And will not the law of nature be stronger than the law of the Commonwealth in insisting possibly that the tropical countries shall be occupied by coloured people ?—I should term that a distant problem. 285. But we have to consider all time, have we not, and not only next year?—My idea is that the advance of races is hardly stopped by legislation in the end. It comes to a stop from natural .causes, just as in America. There you have the negro population with liberty to penetrate into any State they like. They pass to a certain length, and draw the line there. Beyond that line only a comparatively small number are scattered. 286. Climate principally accounts for that ?—No doubt it is the natural conditions that have drawn the line/ 287. And the natural conditions of northern Australia would be more favourable to the settlement of coloured races than New Zealand?— Yes, unquestionably. In the United States the mixture between races has practically stopped now. Intermarriage between them has practically stopped. 288. There are laws against it, are there not ?—I am not aware of it. There may be. Ido not know that people give much attention to these laws. If they cannot make legal marriages they make unlawful ones, but even that is not going on in the Dnited States. 289. We have the illustration, have we not, in South America in the infusion of the Latin races with the indigenous races ?—Yes; the Spanish section of the Latin races, and in other regions of the Portuguese section of the Latin race. 290. You think we need not concern ourselves on such a subject in considering the question of federation ?— Ido not think it is a matter which need have very great weight. I think the tendency will be for New Zealand to protect itself under all circumstances. 291. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Have you considered the question of distance ? For all practical purposes, the distance, I suppose, will be as great as between England and Canada? —It comes to this: that there is no instance in the world of two countries federating. I see that. Even in the case of Canada the slight distance that divides Newfoundland from Canada has in some way proved a bar to federation, but the distance between Ireland and Great Britain did not prove an obstacle to a union. 292. England and Ireland are within three hours of each other ?—Yes. Canada and Newfoundland are more than that, but not a great distance. 293. I presume New Zealand will be far more populated than Australia in proportion to acreage in the future ? — Yes; taking Australia as a whole, I think there is every probability of that. 294. Then, with regard to defence, Captain Eussell asked you one or two questions as to your views upon the naval and land defence. As long as any colony is a member of the British Empire, would it not be the duty of every colony in self-defence to defend another colony that is hard pressed,
41
A.—4
as far as its ability goes ?—No doubt the colonies have fully recognised that duty recently, but still there is a little difference between that duty which a colony imposes on itself and one which it enters into as a constitutional obligation. 295. With regard to coloured labour in Australia, is it not probable that in the future, in order to make use of the northern part of Australia, it will be necessary to create tropical States to be governed in a different way from constitutional colonies ? — I should assume that before long the Northern Territory, which is now part of South Australia, will be created a Federal territory. Ido not see very well how large tropical areas are to be governed quite as constitutional colonies. Under former conditions, if that territory had become separated from South Australia it would have become a Crown colony. In the future I have no doubt it will be created a Federal territory, and a portion of Queensland will also become a Federal territory. 296. All that government, which would be under the Commonwealth, would be very alien to New Zealand: New Zealand would not be very much interested or have very much knowledge of the matter ?—No ; that is so. Of course, it would be governed by the Commonwealth as a whole. It is always necessary in a tropical country, especially where there is a large native population or a large alien population, to give exceptional powers either to the Governor or to some other functionary. 297. Looking at the question as an Imperial one, do you not think it would be to the advantage of the Empire that there should be two Powers in these seas instead of one ? Democracies are historically subject to a certain excitement —a tendency to quarrel with the Mother-country— and in such a case would not the one be checked by the presence of the other, and be less inclined to do -anything rash while there was another Power in the same seas ?—I cannot see it would have any such tendency. I should have thought it was rather the other way : that if there was any tendency to quarrel with the central Power it would be better to have the province which is disposed to quarrel surrounded with provinces of a different disposition, which would be in a position to influence it. 298. To influence, but not to control?—l do not know about that. If the whole body had a cause of quarrel, and a disposition to quarrel with the Empire, nothing could stop it. 299. Do you not think the effect of there being two Powers there—the one inclined to be aggressive, and the other not so inclined—would be that, under those circumstances, the one would be a check on the other?—lt had no effect in North America in the eighteenth century. The older States separated from the Empire, and the newly acquired States remained loyal to the Empire. At any rate, Ido not think the contingency of a quarrel with the Empire ought to be considered at all. I think it ought to be assumed there will be no such quarrel, because if you start speculating on a matter of that kind you find yourself purely in the region of speculation. 300. I think, myself, it is more than a speculation. I understand, then, Mr. Chapman, you think that the balance of advantages would be in favour of federation ? —I think so; but Ido not think we could federate under the existing Constitution. 301. You have, I suppose, considered the tariff question and the apportionment of funds as between the States and the Commonwealth ?—I have not had the means of going into that in detail. I have not seen sufficiently well marshalled figures to see the effect of it. I have assumed there were considerable financial difficulties. Major Atkinson found considerable financial difficulties when he considered the question twelve years ago. There has been no tendency to reduce those difficulties since. It has been rather the other way. 302. What do you think of the provision by which the two Governments —the Commonwealth Government and the State Government—both dip into the same purse ? —I am afraid I have not adequately considered that. 303. Do you think the creation of the Commonwealth would tend to weaken or to increase our attachment to the Empire as a whole ?—I can see no reason for supposing it would have anyweakening tendency. I see that the French have been pluming themselves on the fact that Australia has made itself into a nation. They seem to think that is a step towards moving off. Ido not see that myself at all. I think it is rather the reverse. There is certainly no ground for suggesting that it has made any difference in the case of Canada. 304. You think, then, Mr. Chapman, that there is nothing in the idea that two British Powers in these seas might be a safer system than the whole of the Pacific being under one Power ? —I do not think there is any reason to suppose it is a safer system. The British Parliament has evidently failed to see any danger in that. They have taken the risk of federation, and I was unable to discover any expression of opinion in England in the way of dreading or mistrusting the result of federation in its effect on the Empire. 305. Mr. Roberts.'] Do you think the manufacturing interests of this colony would suffer through federation ?—As a whole, Ido not think they will. Going beyond the manufacturing into the agricultural—grouping them as a whole—l think the advantages will be very greatly in favour of federation. I think it quite possible that some manufactures would be adversely affected—l cannot say which; but you cannot bring about great changes of the kind without detrimentally affecting some manufactures. Take any case : There is Mr. Cobden's commercial treaty with France. It led to enormous advantages to English manufacturers, but it put some of them out completely. One I can recall is the silk-manufacturers of Coventry. I think they disappeared under it. They could not compete with Lyons. I have no doubt there would be some disturbance detrimental to some classes of manufacture in New Zealand, but it is better to consider that while the manufactures are in their infancy than at a later date, when the disturbance would be greater. It is a difficulty that tends to increase with time. 306. We have had it in evidence by witnesses that, so far as they can see, the lower rate of wages in Australia and the larger scale on which the industries are carried on there would have the effect of seriously disturbing the industries here ? —That might be so. 6—A. 4.
A.—4
42
307. But you think that ultimately it would have no detrimental effect ?—I think, taking the interests of this country as a whole—agricultural and manufacturing—they would be advanced rather than detrimentally affected. For instance, we have had the advantage of an open port with Sydney. We have been in a large measure excluded from Melbourne. The whole area would be opened to New Zealand products, and I see no reason to doubt that that would be advantageous to the agricultural interests. It might even in some few instances detrimentally affect them, though I cannot see in what. I must admit the probability that some manufactures would be adversely affected. Ido not see how it is possible to bring about a great measure without it. 308. Mr. Millar.] Under the Constitution it is arranged that there shall be several States : do you think it probable that in the course of a few years' time those States will be abolished ?—I do not think so. I do not think there has been any tendency in that direction in the case of Canada, and I feel perfectly satisfied there would be no such tendency in Australia : the area is too great. 309. Provided it so happened, do you think this country would be as well developed or looked after from a Central Government as it would be by a Government of its own ?—I do not think it would be practicable to absorb New Zealand to that extent. Igo further, and say Ido not think it is possible. Taking the measure of legislative and executive interference stated in that Constitution, I do not think you can carry it further in the case of New Zealand. 310. That Constitution can be altered ?—Yes; but I do not think it would be practicable to alter it so as to make any great difference to New Zealand. 311. You do not think the community of interest on the other side might do exactly as we did in this colony in the abolition of the provinces?—l do not think so. Ido not think that community of interest is so marked as all that. Each province will have an interest in maintaining its own stability. 312. Although year by year they may be shorn of their powers?— They may to some extent. Originally the United States were grouped together as a group of sovereign States, and a small power was given to the central authority. There was a tendency to give further powers, but it went so far and no further. It is possible the railways of Australia might become Federal, but that would not affect New Zealand. 313. Under the Constitution it would be done with the sanction of the State ?—Yes. 314. Now, as a financial matter, taking the English market from the point of view of our securities, do you think we will derive any benefit from federation in regard to future State loans ? —I do not think it would make much difference. 315. I suppose you have noticed that the New South Wales 4-per-cents have gone back since federation? —I had not noticed that. I have noticed that all stocks have gone back, but uothing has gone back so far as British Consols. 316. Four months ago New South Wales Consols were quoted at from £116 to £117, and New Zealand Consols at from £111 to £112. New Zealand Consols are now £113, and New South Wales Consols have gone back to £113. Do you not think it is likely that by federation there will be a tendency to equalise the whole of the colonial securities ? —I cannot see any reason for it. There might be with colonial securities—that is to say, State securities—-that are not dependent on the credit of the Federal bodies. Morally speaking, there may be a reliance on the credit of the Federal body, but legally they are not dependent. A State might get into difficulties without involving the Federal body. 317. The Commonwealth will in time take over all the debts of the Federal bodies, will it not: I understand that is the principal argument in taking over the whole of the Customs duties ?— That may ultimately be of advantage; but it would almost prevent a State from borrowing for the future. 318. Assuming they did take over the whole of the duties and negotiated all future loans, would the Commonwealth be able to negotiate loans on better terms than New Zealand if she were a separate State ? —Yes, I think so. A larger State usually negotiates loans on better terms than a small one. 319. We could not assume that we could borrow money under the Commonwealth at lower than 2-J per cent., could we? —You would have to look forward a long time to expect it. 320. From a financial point of view in regard to future loans, you do not see any great advantage to be gained by joining the Federation?—l do not think there is very much in it, one way or the other. I have often seen that opinion expressed, but I have not seen much in it myself. I think this: If the State were relying on the credit of the Commonwealth it would borrow rather cheaper. Ido not think the difference is a great thing. 321. You are aware that the conditions of labour in this colony are superior to those of the other colonies so far as hours of labour and wages are concerned ? —Yes ; I have every reason to suppose that is so. 322. Do you not think there would be a likelihood of a levelling-down process if we were a portion of the Federation—that is to say, those colonies being larger than we are and their industries much better developed than ours, the tendency would be that they would increase their trade here, and our people would have to come down to worse conditions than they now have to compete with them?—So far as I can see, I think the tendency at present is to endeavour to follow New Zealand. 323. They have been ten years trying to follow it, and they have not got far yet ?—They are trying to follow that legislation yet. The whole tendency is to follow that legislation; and, I take it, they are trying to follow with the other conditions too. You must remember that in this country, so far as the matter is controlled by the labour organizations, the whole system is ahead of that of Australia. I take it that is so. It is not entirely controlled by such considera-
43
A.—4
tions. There are other things affecting it, but it seems to me Australia has been trying to follow New Zealand. 324. As a matter of fact, labour organizations on the other side are better; they are larger than in this colony, but they have not the same influence, owing to the amount of territory ?—I take your statement for it. I have no doubt you know about it; but it is certain they have not had the same way—l do not know whether they have claimed the same way—as in this country. 325. If we lost the trade the people would have to follow the trade, would they not; and we would lose our population as well ?—Some of the people might resort to other occupations, but not all of them. The people attached to any manufactory would, of course, follow it. 326. Taking the question broadly, do you think the advantages to be gained would equalise the loss that might arise through that ?—The disadvantages rather affect the present generation. The advantages are not necessarily a question for the present generation. You cannot do these things without a wrench : I admit that. 327. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the address to which you refer, did you go into the financial aspect of the question at all ?—To some extent. I was obliged to get my figures where I could get them —from computations made by other speakers. 328. I suppose you have carefully considered the effect on New Zealand finances of our surrendering to the Federal Parliament such departments as those mentioned in the Bill entitled " Customs and Excise " ?—I gave it some consideration. I had not the data from which I could deal with it exhaustively. 329. What conclusion did you come to on that point ?—That a very large sum had to be made up in some way. I did not see how New Zealand was to enter the Australian Commonwealth for that reason unless under some such conditions as were granted to Western Australia. Time was given for Western Australia to adjust its finances. Take, for instance, the general effect of that. We give up a large amount of revenue. We have to make it up. We give up a large amount of revenue, of course, by making our tariff conform to that of Australia, but that is giving up to our own people. We have to make it up by some other form of taxation. 330. Eoughly speaking, I understand we would lose £200,000 a year?—l should have thought it would have been very much more than that. Even twelve years ago, when Sir Harry Atkinson made a calculation, he brought it up to something like £400,000 if New Zealand were to adopt what was then suggested—the Victorian tariff. We have always heard a great deal about the enormous protective duties of Victoria, but the whole run of duties in Victoria was lower than in New Zealand. 331. You recognise that under the present Constitution it would not be desirable for New Zealand to federate ?—I do not think it could be done under the present Constitution. If New Zealand is to federate with Australia, a basis of negotiation would have to be suggested, and special legislation would be required to admit New Zealand. 332. The chief advantage you expect would be that of defence ?—Yes, and of a large market for agricultural produce, timber, and such things. 333. In speaking of a possible invasion of New Zealand, you seriously considered the great difficulties of transporting a large force to this colony by any foreign Power ?—Yes; I assume that, so far as landing an army is concerned, it is impossible until the question of naval supremaoy is entirely altered. 334. In the light of the experience we have gained in South Africa, it would be difficult, would it not, to conquer a country like this, which is in a better position probably than South Africa ?— I assume that neither New Zealand nor Australia could be in any sense conquered by any force sent against them. To suppose such a thing as the conquest of one of these Australian Colonies would not only involve a disposal of the British fleet, but it would involve a leisurely concentration of military forces in these colonies to a degree that cannot be even thought of. 335. Therefore the question of federation, in so far as defence is concerned, is not of importance •> —There is something more to be taken into consideration. Conquest is an ultimate result. That is not to be thought of. But a serious invasion, a serious embarrassment, might ensue upon great naval reverses. 336. As to industries, you do not think they would suffer materially by New Zealand being what might be called the dumping-ground for the surplus manufactures of Australia?—l cannot say in what particular direction, but I admit there would be a probability of a certain amount of dislocation. 337. In the case of a protected country like America we find that, after supplying their domestic requirements, there is a tendency to export to different parts of the world and sell their surplus ? —Yes. I have been told of an instance in which an American piano can be bought in Dunedin at the same rate at which it could be bought in the town in which it is manufactured. That is due to some great combination. 338. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think that the preponderance of influence in the Federal Parliament would place New Zealand at a great disadvantage in the expenditure of funds at the disposal of the Federal Parliament ?—I cannot say that I have gone into that. 339. Generally, you think that trade, commerce, and industries would ultimately benefit by federation ?—I think so. 340. That greater development would take place in what is known as products from the soil as against manufactures ? —Yes ; I think the great advantage would be having a constant market for the products. That to some extent is manufacture —such things as cheese, and so on, even frozen meat.
341. That is why I drew the line between products of the soil and products otherwise?— Yes; at present we send to Australia something more than products of the soil. There is an export to New South Wales and Queensland of ready-made clothing from New Zealand.
A.—4
44
342. We also get a good deal of slops and clothing of that description in from Australia ?—I do not know how it is, but we are actually exporting the same things to the Australian Colonies. 343. In the matter of defence you do not think we will be materially affected by federation ? —I think that, on the whole, it would be an advantage in the matter of defence. 344. Mr. Reid.] Having regard to the legislative powers as set out in clause 51, you will notice that some are concurrent and some exclusive. Of those that are exclusive, are there any that strike you as being particularly dangerous to New Zealand in the case of her joining the Commonwealth—take, for instance, subsections (20) and (24) ?—Well, they can be described as clauses which illustrate the conditions generally of federation. Ido not regard them as very large matters. 345. You do not ?—No. 346. As regards section 24, referring to legislation for the enforcement of judgments of the Supreme Court, are you aware whether the law now in force is largely taken advantage of ?—The process of enforcing Supreme Court judgments between one colony and another now is simple and works fairly well. It is remarkable to how small degree it is used, or has to be used, in this country. We occasionally have to enforce an Australian judgment, but it is a comparatively rare thing. 347. Is there any present difficulty in enforcing judgments ? —The present law is satisfactory. 348. In bankruptcy and insolvency, does any conflict occur in the administration of these laws? —It is very seldom that any question arises. There is power under the English Bankruptcy Act for the Courts of one colony to aid those of another, and it is very seldom that any question arises. There are not many bankruptcies going on; but formerly, when bankruptcies were more frequent than they are to-day, we had more to do with England than Australia over them. 349. Would you say, with regard to commercial legislation generally—weights and measures, bills of exchange, copyrights—that any special condition was required with regard to federation ? — Ido not see that there is need for any. Take, for instance, bills of exchange : Practically speaking, there is identically the same law in all the colonies and in England ; and a law that has been arrived at by centuries of mercantile experience is not likely to be altered materially for centuries to come. 350. Practically they have all adopted the Imperial legislation ?—I think they all have. We have adopted it line for line. 351. There is provision in subsection (20) for trading financial corporations formed within the limits of the Commonwealth: in the winding-up of companies do any difficulties occur?— difficulties ; no more than in the case of bankruptcies. 352. With regard to the administration of real estate, what is the law in the colonies generally ?—I think it is very much the same as our law. I think, for instance, all real estate now is divisible amongst the family, and does not pass to the heir-at-law as in former times. 353. We might say that the law in the present States is practically uniform now ? —Yes, I think so. The law of wills is uniform now, or practically so. The marked difference is in the law of divorce, and that is tending to uniformity; but we have in this country some special laws, such as the adoption of children and legitimation. However, very few instances arise between colony and colony on subjects of that sort. 354. With regard to the powers of the Appeal Court which is created under this statute, I suppose you are aware it does not take away the right of appeal to the Privy Council even from the State Court ?—Not wholly. 355. In what degree does it take away at all?—My impression is that it leaves the power to abolish it practically. I was under the impression that there was some legislative authority with power to give an. exclusive appeal to the colonial Court of Appeal. 356. There is section 84, but that is only with regard to certain matters ?—There is exclusive appeal in constitutional matters. Appeal to the Privy Council, however, does not seem to be affected. I understood it was affected. 357. Hon. the Chairman.] Was it not pointed out by somebody that clause 74 only interfered as set out here, with the exception that it affected the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth ? —They only limit in section 74. 358. Mr. Leys.] You expressed the opinion that the chief influence in bringing about federation was the necessity Victoria felt for additional markets for her manufactures ? —I thought that was the ultimate impulse that brought it about. 359. Does not that imply that Victoria has a very large surplus of manufactured goods that would come into New Zealand and other colonies to the detriment of our own manufactures ?—lt implies that Victoria has appliances for manufacturing to a greater extent than her markets could consume. 360. Is the export of that surplus not likely to interfere with our own manufactures ?— I admit that. It is extremely likely that there will be some dislocation. 361. Do you not think that the border difficulties, the differentiation of railway rates, the overlapping of one colony with another, and such difficulties as that, had a great deal to do with bringing about federation ? —No doubt that had something to do with it. They were desirous of getting rid of those obstacles. 362. These conditions do not apply in New Zealand to the same extent? —No. 363. There were conditions in Australia that worked for federation that do not work for it in New Zealand? —No doubt. They felt embarrassments every day and every hour, whereas we may not feel them keenly here. 364. That implies a community of interest in Australia that there is not in Australia with New Zealand?— The community of interest is much closer there than between Australia and New Zealand. 365. And does it not also follow that there will be community of opinion in Australia?— That
45
A.—4
may be so; but I would think that on many subjects there would be as great divergence of opinion as between Queensland and Victoria as between New Zealand and Australia. 366. But on certain main questions. For example, take railways : It is not improbable that there will be a feeling in Australia in favour of taking over the railways : do you not think that very likely ?—Yes, for securing a uniform gauge and taking over the railways. I think that is very likely. 367. Well, do you not think in other directions the tendency would be to enlarge the borders of the Commonwealth and reduce the borders of the States ?—To some extent. There is a general tendency to some extent to absorption with Federal bodies, but in time a limit is reached, and it goes no further. In every Federal body there is a contest on some topics between the Federal States and the Federal body, with a tendency to absorption ; but I think it reaches a limit, as it has done in the United States and Canada. It finds its level at last, and then the tendency stops. At the beginning, the Federal Government will be a comparatively feeble body. Even the functions it is to take over it can only take over in part at first. 368. But is it possible that a Government of that large character will be content with limited powers? Will not the tendency continually be to abrogate more and more the functions of the States ?—No, I think not. The States will not willingly part with their powers. 369. The power of the Federal Government to absorb the State powers really depends upon the power of the Federal Government to amend the Constitution, very largely? —Yes; but it cannot amend the Constitution without the concurrence of the States; and, after all, the Federal Government represents the States, and their individual aspirations have pretty free-play. 370. Is it not because it is very much easier under the Commonwealth Act —the power to amend the Constitution is very much easier than it is to amend the Constitution of the United States of America?— Yes, I take it, it is easier, for the referendum in the case of Australia is not so cumbrous. 371. But under the American Constitution does it not require a two-thirds majority of both branches of the Legislature ?—lt requires a majority of the States. 372. Does it not require a two-thirds majority of both Houses of the Legislature?—l do not remember at this moment what it requires, but my impression is that it requires a big majority of the States. 373. More than a bare majority ?—Yes. 374. You say that the Senate would see to the protection of the individuality of the States ?— Yes, that was always so regarded in the United States. 375. But under the Commonwealth Constitution is it not possible to amend the Constitution without the consent of the States at all, with a referendum ? —An amendment of the Constitution requires the consent of the States, and it is hardly likely that the States outside of the two large ones—New South Wales and Victoria—will give up the advantage that they have in the shape of equal representation in the Senate. It is extremely unlikely. Of course, one may imagine all kinds of amendments. 376. When you say "consent of the States" you do not mean State Parliaments?—No, I mean the States themselves. 377. By popular vote ?—Yes. 378. That being so, do you not think the communion of interest of Australia may result in a popular vote in favour of amendments that may be damaging to New Zealand ?—I do not see it myself. lam unable to see that there is any fear of that. The Chairman pointed out to me the possibility of legislating against New Zealand, but if we have to go in under negotiations we should stipulate that we go in as an original State. That would be a cardinal point insisted upon by any Commission appointed to study that matter. 379. Then, with regard to the Pacific islands : Do you not think we are more likely to retain our present advantages in the Pacific islands by standing alone and insisting upon our own policy than by allowing the policy with reference to the Pacific islands to be governed from Australia ?— Yes; Ido not assume that the Pacific islands can be governed from Australia adversely to New Zealand. Ido not think the British Government would consent to that. At present, apparently, New Zealand desires some form of federation with Fiji and some other of the Pacific islands. I do not know that the colony is in favour of it, but I assume that it is, as the Government has expressed a desire of that kind, and personally I have been in favour of that; but there is a difficulty in the way of bringing it about owing to the protest of Australia. The whole question would be settled if it was desirable to bring in the Pacific islands under the general Federation. The whole question then between this colony and Australia would disappear if we federated. 380. But would it disappear to our advantage ? —I take it, it would disappear on such terms as would enable us to compete equally in those islands. That is what we do now. 381. From our geographical position we hold a unique position to the islands on this side of the Pacific ?—Yes, we do. 382. As far as the islands are concerned, do you not think we are more likely to benefit by retaining our independence than by allowing the question to disappear, as you suggest, in the Commonwealth interests? —I do not know that there is any such tendency. 383. Hon. Major Steward.] I think you were unable to give us an instance in which two countries so widely separated as New Zealand and Australia have been successfully administered under a federal form of government?—ln which they have voluntarily federated. I spoke, of course, of distance separated by sea. The United States and Canada are both instances of Federal bodies the borders of which are very widely separated from one another. 384. The difficulty seems to arise in countries separated by sea? —Apparently that is so. 385. One reason for that may be that you cannot travel so quickly by sea as by land, and that there would not be such rapid communication between the centres and the outlying population ?— Yes.
A.—4
46
386. Does it not appear to you that, if New Zealand joined the federation, it would be at a disadvantage compared with the other States by reason of the difficulty of communication between New Zealand and the centre of administration ?—I do not see that New Zealand should be at a disadvantage. 387. Let me put it to you in this way : Supposing the Federal capital is at Orange, Bomballa, or Yass, would not the population of Melbourne, Adelaide, and Sydney be within a few hours of the centre ?—Undoubtedly. 388. Well, in the event of a difficulty arising, would it not be an advantage to be able to proceed to the centre and argue out the point instead of having to do it by letter?— Well, up to the last thirty years California was in that position. Up to 1869, when the railway was made across the Continent, it was a sea-voyage to reach California, for the road was dangerous. California existed as a flourishing State of the Union for several decades under those conditions. 389. Do you not think the fact of our distance, and the greater time involved in communication, would be disadvantageous to New Zealand ?—lt would result in this State remaining largely self-governed. We would not get into the habit of running to the capital for everything. There would be some means of resorting locally to the Federal authorities. 390. It makes all the stronger reason for New Zealand having some special terms, if she goes into the Federation, to provide against that ?—lf New Zealand goes into the Federation these details will have to be carefully thought and worked out. In many ways New Zealand would have to enter on special terms. 391. Supposing there was a grievance, the people of the three principal States could go and argue out that grievance in forty-eight hours at the outside, or much less, whereas not a single soul in New Zealand could go to the centre and back again under nine days. That circumstance has to be taken into account in any arrangement that will be made ? —No doubt that will have to be taken into account. That depends a good deal on what the Federal functions are—what kind of questions are likely to arise, and in what degree questions are likely to arise between distant States and the Central Government or authority. 392. The fact that grievances could not be redressed or inquired into without the lapse of a considerable amount of time would tend to develop friction ?—Yes. We know that in Queensland there was a Separatist movement some years ago. They found that Brisbane was too distant from northern and even central Queensland, but we have not heard much about it for some time. They even sent delegates to England. 393. No other State occupies a position of so great disadvantage as regards communication as New Zealand ? —No doubt. The Constitution is not in all its particulars suited to New Zealand, and if we federate with Australia it will have to be a matter of negotiation and of special terms. 394. To meet our special circumstances ?—Yes ; and I am quite sure the people of this country will not unduly hurry for that reason. We should lose our independence in a measure by simply taking in globo the present Constitution, and we cannot afford to lose our independence. We may concede our powers of legislative administration to the central body, but New Zealand must see that its independence and freedom of action are adequately guaranteed. 395. Hon. the Chairman.'] Do you not think if New Zealand entered the Australian Commonwealth her legislative independence would be impaired ? —On this Constitution, to some extent it would be. 396. I understood you to say, in answer to Mr. Leys, that you thought the legislative powers of the Federal Parliament would not be increased, and that the legislative powers of the State would not be curtailed? —I think, of course, that the legislative powers of the Commonwealth would be increased with reference to such subjects as railways, but beyond that I do not see there is much fear of their encroaching on the States. 397. You gave as a reason in support of that that the States were represented in the Federal Parliament ?—And the States will always retain a tendency to stand up for themselves. 398. But we had an instance in New Zealand, where the provinces were represented in the General Assembly, and yet within twenty-five years of the granting of the Constitution the provinces were actually abolished ?—The provinces, as such, were not represented in the General Assembly. 399. They sent representatives according to the number of the population ?—The people of the provinces, quite independently to the residents of the provinces. There was no federation. It was not a federal union at all. The provincial system was an absolute necessity in the early days of the colony, when you had to send communication by sailing-ships to Auckland. It was supposed we grew out of it, but I am not quite sure there has not been a considerable amount of repentance over abolition. 400. What I was trying to put was that the General Assembly had practically dominated ?— The General Assembly at that time had full power to supersede any provincial Act or Ordinance. The provincial Parliaments had certain powers, but the General Assembly had power to override any of them. That is not the system that exists in any Federal Constitution. 401. That depends on whether the opinion you have expressed as to the powers of the Federal Parliament being limited to what is set out in clause 51 ?—I am quite satisfied as to my interpretation of clause 51. To my mind, the Canadian Dominion Government has much greater power. It has the power of absorbing the powers from the provinces, except certain powers given exclusively to provincial Legislatures. It has not encroached upon them very much, but it has to some extent. 402. Do you think that if any foreign Power made an organized attack on New Zealand it would have a chance of success under the present circumstances ?—I do not think so. A Power might make a successful attack on an isolated town, but I doubt if it would be worth the while of any foreign Power to send warships down here and empty them into our towns without getting any further.
47
A.--4.
403. You spoke of the federation of New Zealand with the Pacific islands ; but, supposing the boundaries of the colony were extended under the Colonial Boundaries Act of 1895, would that affect your opinion with regard to the federation of New Zealand ?—I do not think so. 404. Which do you think would be New Zealand to federate, or for a reciprocal treaty in regard to trade and commerce to be established with Australia ?—lf we could establish a reciprocal treaty with Australia, and make it a fixture, it would do away with a portion of my argument in favour of federation; but Ido not think that Australia would enter into such a treaty. 405. Hon. Captain Russell.] You said just now that you were inclined to believe that people had reconsidered their decision with regard to the abolition of the provinces ?—I am quite sure that some of those who favoured the abolition of the provinces have repented of it since. Of course, it is a long time ago, and the new generation are beginning to forget about the provinces; but inconveniences arising out of the abolition of the provinces are felt. I can say that, certainly. 406. Do you not think it possible, were we to federate now, we would regret it hereafter if we abolished this province ?—The whole point is that we do not abolish this province. If it is to result in the abolition of this State, then it would be better not to federate. That is why I say special conditions will have to be established, and carefully guarded, and guaranteed by the Imperial Legislature. 407. Can you give us an illustration of any federation where there is not great friction ? Take the case of Sweden and Norway, Austria and Hungary, the States of Germany, or the States of America : Is there not great friction in all of these cases ? —There is friction ; but take the case of the United States, or the German Empire, the people never admit that the friction is sufficient ground for rescinding the Federal Constitution. I lived in Germany at the time the question of union between the States was a burning question. I lived in Germany in the period intermediate between the two great wars, and I had a pretty good idea of the popular opinion in that country, and I have no reason to suppose it has changed since. I know they dislike the dominance of one Power, of one military State, but, with all their dislike for certain of the conditions appertaining to the Federal Empire, they are practically unanimously in favour of it. 408. Do you imagine that the Federations of Germany and of Austria and Hungary would survive for a quarter of a century were it not for the strong military force on their boundary ?— In Germany it would. I do not know whether it would in Austria, where there are different races. 409. At any rate, your answer will be that in every federated State in the civilised world there is considerable friction?— There is, and they survive that friction. The friction in the United States reached its climax in 1861. I can say that, despite the existence of the friction, arising in some istances from unfair treatment of individual States, the people appear to remain unanimous in favour of retaining the Qnion with all its disadvantages. 410. Mr. LukeJ] Did I understand you to say that under federation we would be better able to enforce judgments in Courts of law ?—I do not think it would make much difference. Take, for instance, the enforcement here of a judgment obtained in Victoria, it is a simple process now. 411. And that process will exist under federation?—lt will be quite as simple. It may be made more simple. 412. But if we do not federate ?—lt will be as simple. 413. Mr. Beauchamp.] With regard to the Native population, I take it that any member of the Native population is eligible for election to the Senate or the House ?—I have assumed that to be so. 414. Mr. Roberts.] You say that friction is general in Federations, but it is not so in the Federation of Switzerland ?—They had religious friction in the Swiss Federation in the past, but it has died out. There, however, it is almost parochial federation. Switzerland is an instance not of the encroachment of Federal power upon the States power, but of the voluntary cession of the power of individual States in order to increase the power of the Federal body. That cession was made in modern times. Sydney Charles Bbown examined. (No. 16.) 415. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name ?—Sydney Charles Brown. 416. What are you ?—Bootmaker. 417. Do you hold any representative position here ?—I appear here as the representative of the Bootmakers' Union. 418. Do you hold an official position in that union ?—No. 419. Have you considered the question of the federation of New Zealand with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—From a trade standpoint I have. 420. Will you be good enough to give the Commission the benefit of your opinion ?—The first question is that of wages, and the next is the condition under which the factories are worked. The majority of the trade in New Zealand is worked under the piecework system, and that system also prevails to a large extent throughout the whole of the Australian Colonies. Through the Arbitration Act, and with the assistance of the Arbitration Court, piecework prices are pretty well uniform in New Zealand. 421. In your opinion, would it be advantageous for New Zealand to federate ?—I am of opinion it would be against the boot-trade interest to federate. 422. What are you afraid of in the event of federation ?—I am afraid that, owing to the larger centres, manufacturers would be able to concentrate their manufacturing and to more largely utilise machinery, and specialise the class of work they turn out, and this would be to the detriment of New Zealand. Each factory can reduce the number of classes of work to three or four. In New Zealand we cannot do that, because each centre, to a great extent, is dependent for trade on the provincial district in which it is situated. The Sydney and Melbourne manufacturers manufacture for the whole of those colonies, and that gives them a great advantage.
A.—4
48
423. Wβ are told that America sends a considerable quantity of boots into this colony ?—Yes, that is so. 424. If New Zealand federated with Australia, and the tariff of Australia were free-trade, would New Zealand be able to compete with America in the boot trade ?—No, we could not possibly do it on any large scale. At the present time we are very hard pushed through American competition. 425. Have you regarded the question from any other standpoint than that of the boot trade ?— Generally speaking, I do not think it would be wise for us to federate. 426. What are your other reasons ?—I think the disadvantage of being so far away from Australia would be against our interest. 427. Are the opinions you are expressing those of the majority of the Bootmakers' Union of which you are a delegate ?—Yes, that is so. A motion was carried at one of our meetings that, in the opinion of our union, it was not desirable that New Zealand should federate with the Australian Commonwealth. 428. Mr. Leys.] You think the existence of small towns in New Zealand is against the creation of very large industries ? —Yes. 429. And that the centralisation in Australia, because of the big towns, gives them an enormous advantage over us ?—Yes. 430. That, of course, would be a permanent advantage to all time ?—lt would. 431. And you think that, under those circumstances, we could never hope to create such large establishments as they have in Australia ?—No, I do not think we could, on account of the much larger population they would naturally have. 432. You conclude that the effect of federation would be to destroy New Zealand as a manufacturing country ultimately, and to concentrate the manufactures in those large establishments which specialise, and that all the colonies will be supplied from these large centres ? —Yes ; and that is the effect in America. America can compete with the colonies because their trade is more specialised than in any other part of the world. 433. Even by the adoption of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act by the Commonwealth, and something like uniformity of wages established, that would not overcome the difficulty you speak of ?—Not altogether. 434. Equality of wages is not so much the factor as the concentrating of the manufacturers in the large establishments and specialising?— That is the principal objection. Even with the Arbitration Act we had difficulties in New Zealand. Dunedin, Wellington, Christchurch, and Invercargill had an award governing them, but Auckland was not federated, and we could not get Auckland to come in under the same conditions and prices. But two years ago, through an alteration in the rules of the union, we got Auckland federated, and got an award governing the whole of the colony. Previous to that, Auckland had been paying lower rates than the other towns. If there was an Arbitration Court in Australia the conditions in Australia would prevail, and the tendency would be to pay less wages than in New" Zealand. 435. And to force them on New Zealand by reason of that Arbitration Court?— Yes. 436. You think, then, that the Australian workman would not look for such high wages as we have here, and that a low average rate of wages would be established here ?—Yes. 437. Mr. Luke.] You think that even if the Arbitration Court raise the wages of the Australians you would still be at a disadvantage in competing with them here in your line of business ?—lf they took the Australian standard, and then raised it slightly on that, I think we would. 438. It has.been stated that New Zealand workmen can do a larger amount of work in a given time than they do in Australia?—l do not believe that. lam a native of Australia myself, and worked some eight or nine years in the trade, and it is not so. 439. What are the hours in the trade ?—Fifty hours. In Victoria forty-eight at the present time. 440. What are they here ? —Forty-eight hours. 441. Has the importation of American goods very much depressed your trade ? —There are not a great many out of work, but we have lost a great many members. They have left the trade and gone into other avenues of industry. 442. Does New Zealand produce better leather than Australia through climatic conditions?— No, I do not think so. 443. You generally fear that, as a result of federation, through the large factories and the large amount of machinery, New Zealand will be placed at a disadvantage in competing with the Commonwealth ? —Yes. 444. That is the principal objection ? —That and the wage question. 445. Assuming that the wages were brought up to the same level as New Zealand?— Australians would still have the advantage. 446. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you know how many men are employed in this colony in the manufacture of boots ? —No. It is a hard thing to get at the total, because of the shops that have one man and a boy. 447. It is one of the most important industries in the colony?—lt stands third. 448. Assuming the rates are uniform throughout Australia and New Zealand, do you think we could hold our own against Australia in the manufacture of boots ?—No. 449. You think that through the larger factories and the concentration of trade in Australia they could still best us ? —Yes, especially on light work. In heavy work New Zealand could hold her own. 450. Mr. Millar.] As far as your trade have looked into this matter, they are very much afraid that New Zealand is not going to be a manufacturing centre at all ?—Yes.
49
A.—4
451. You have had some discussions, I presume?— Yes. 452. Have you ever looked at it from this point of view : You have competition from America; there is a duty of 22£ per cent.; assuming that the Commonwealth tariff were reduced to 15 per cent., there would be a large influx of" German and American manufacturers? — I presume there would. 453. That would still further be against the industry here ?—Yes. 454. It would be practically impossible to specialise in New Zealand?— Yes. 455. There is not sufficient demand for special work ?—No. 456. Mr. Roberts.] You emphasized the competition which the New Zealand trade was receiving from Australia, and I think you also mentioned America : do you not find the competition much more serious on the part of English manufacturers ?—ln regard to quantity, certainly. 457. Have you any idea of the proportion that Victorian and New South Wales imports bear to the whole ? —ln 1897, Victoria imported 7,940 pairs of boots; in 1899, 12,940 pairs were imported. 458. Roughly speaking, Victoria and New South Wales in 1899 exported to this colony ten thousand pounds' worth of goods, as against a total import into the colony of £144,000, so that New South Wales and Victoria only sent into this colony 14 per cent, of the entire importation?— Yes. 459. America, on the other hand, sent £18,200 of the total, so that New Zealand gets from the United Kingdom £113,000 out of a total of £144,000; so that the competition from England is of a much more serious nature than from all the other colonies ?—That is so. 460. Do you not think the duty which the exporter from Victoria and New South Wales pays on shipments to this colony more than counterbalances the advantages which he has in the way of cheaper labour ?—Well, to a certain extent it does; but still he is able to compete under those conditions. 461. Do you not think the comparatively small amount of business that is done, and their having to pay 22J per cent, duty, points to the fact that this must be a dumping-ground for getting rid of lines of which an excessive quantity has been made ?—Yes, to some extent. But that would be made worse if there was free-trade with this colony. 462. Unless you had an assimilation of the price of labour?— Yes. 463. Hon. the Chairman.'] These boots imported from Victoria and New South Wales may be boots manufactured in the United Kingdom and transhipped to New Zealand?— They may be. 464. Is there anything else you wish to say ?—When the Commission is in Australia they will find that the only colony that has any conditions imposed on trade is Victoria. 465. Do you fear the conditions prevailing in New Zealand may be taken from you under federation ? —Yes. Wages are only part of the question ; it is the conditions under which we work that have greater influences. In Victoria they have a Factories Act which allows one boy to three men, and also one improver to three men. The excessive number of boys reduces the average cost of the article over and above what it would show in the statement of wages. Hbney Rodda examined. (No. 17.) 466. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name ?—-Henry Rodda. 467. What are you ?—-A bootmaker. 468. Are you a delegate here from any union?—l am authorised by the Bootmakers' Union of Dunedin to appear here with Mr. Brown. 469. Will you be good enough to state your views in reference to New Zealand federating?— Mr. Brown was-to deal with the trade part of the question, and I was to deal with it in its general aspect. 470. You agree with the views Mr. Brown has expressed ?—Yes. 471. Well, then, what are your views on the other grounds?— Our union carried a motion against federation, and, in keeping with that, we, as delegates, have come here to support that resolution. First of all, we believe that the sacrificing of our independence for the imaginary gains would not warrant us in joining the Federation, believing that our wants and wishes and aspirations would be best met by full, immediate, and effective -local control. Secondly, that, owing to the small representation that we should obtain, our interests would be overshadowed by the larger and more cohesive interests of Australia. Supposing, for instance, that any Government were to hand over the railways and post and telegraphs to the Commonwealth, and that we should be sorely in need of a railway—say, an Otago Central or Midland Railway—and we only had a handful of members in the House of Representatives, and only one Minister in the Cabinet, he would have to be a champion intriguer to get any modicum of justice at all. Another reason is that this colony is self-contained, and has the elements and resources which go to make a country great, and is well able, with its superiority in every way, to hew out its own destiny. As regards defence, we think that is the great point. We think we must, for at least a century, be protected by naval defence, for which we must look to the Mother-country. Considering the large interests the people of the Mother-country have at stake here, we know by history and observation that she will do that. As regards inland defence, we are quite capable of looking after that ourselves. In conclusion, we think that on this question of federation there are larger principles at stake than oats and potatoes. Whoever heard of a country being great because of these ? Let us copy England and America, who are great because of their manufacturing industries. 472. Your opinion, then, is decidedly adverse to federation?— Very adverse. 473. Hon. Captain Russell.] Mr. Brown thought the Australians were fully equal to the NewZealander in capacity for work : what are your views ?—I believe that is so. 474. Do you think that labouring in a hot climate for a number of centuries is likely to affect the producing-capacity of the workers in Australia ?—That just depends upon the number of hours that are worked. 7—A. 4.
A.—4
50
475. You think climate will not affect the matter?—No; I have worked in Victoria and enjoyed good health, and worked hard. 476. There seems to be an opinion that work must centre in Australia. A hundred years hence, shall we not have a sufficiently large population to hold our own? —That may be so; but in the meanwhile our trade might have to go to the dogs. 477. Yes; but try and look at it from the standpoint of a nation, and not of an individual trade: would we not be able to hold our own as a people against the Australians a hundred years hence?—l think we might be able to hold our own even now were there equal conditions. 478. What is likely to be the great motive-power for driving machinery a hundred years hence ?—I do not know about that. 479. You think electricity need not be considered? —I do not think that would alter the cost of production much so far as our trade is concerned. 480. Do you think we have unrivalled facilities for creating electric power ? —Yes; our water. 481. And is that not to be the great power of the future?—l think so; but Ido not think that would tend to alter the cost of production of boots very much. 482. Mr. Roberts.] Have you any idea what the proportion of the imported article is to the manufactured article ? —No; Mr. Brown has dealt with that part of the question. 483. Is there no reason why you cannot produce cheaper here ? Is your machinery antiquated, or the factories too small? Surely per cent, is sufficient protection?—We have to import some of the fine leathers. The machinery we have here is not so far advanced as that of other countries; it is now coming in, but is not here yet. The higher rate of wages is one thing against us. 484. Do you think the higher rate of wages is sufficient to prevent you producing profitably with a 22-J-per-cent. duty ? —Manufacturers can produce profitably. There is no doubt about that; they never had a period of prosperity like that for twenty years past. 485. How do you account for the large importation in 1899?— Various causes led up to importation. Sometimes it is done for ulterior purposes. 486. Mr. Millar.] In the importation of boots, o's to 3's come in free of duty?— Yes, I think. 487. Gum-boots are included in that line? —Yes, I think. 488. You are not aware whether New Zealand has exported a large quantity of boots ?—I believe they have exported a small quantity. 489. You quite agree with what Mr. Brown said with regard to the trade ? —Yes. 490. This matter has been pretty well discussed throughout your trade ?—Yes. 491. There is a unanimous opinion that intercolonial free-trade would be ruinous to the New Zealand boot trade?— Yes ; that it would jeopardize our trade to a great extent. 492. From a social point of view, can you see any advantage to be gained by federation?— None at all. I think our social standing is far better than in Australia. 493. From any point of view you can only see disadvantages in federation ?—Yes. 494. Mr. Beauohamp.] I have been informed by bootmakers in the North Island that through competition from America they have ceased the manufacture of certain boots : have you a similar experience in Dunedin? —I do not know of any. Ido not think it could be to any great extent with the protective tariff of 22£ per cent. 495. Mr. Luke.] Do you think it possible to produce these higher grades of leather in time ?— I do not know. 496. Supposing they raise the scale of wage in Australia under federation, with our superior advantages which we are told we have in this colony for manufacturing, do you then think we could compete against the Australian manufacturers in boots and shoes ?—I do not think we could with the large centres. 497. Supposing we could build up a big business?— Then I think we could compete if on equal terms. 498. Do you think the advance in popularity of American boots is due to prejudice against the locally made article ?—No; I believe it is due in some measure to the superior finish that is given to them. They are light in texture, but Ido not think they are nearly as serviceable. 499. What do you think would be the effect of federation generally on manufacturing trades ? —I believe the same thing would apply. 500. Have you looked into the question from the political standpoint ? Would we be at any disadvantage ?—I think we would be. We would not have our wishes met in the manner that we have now. 501. Hon. Major Steward.] If your contention is correct —that under federation we should be at a disadvantage to compete with Victoria, which would result in your business going to the Victorians no matter what conditions were subsequently imposed on Australian trade—there would be great difficulty in bringing it back to New Zealand again ? —Yes, that is so. William Hood examined. (No. 18.) 502. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the president of the Workers' Political Committee in Dunedin?—Yes. 503. How long have you resided in New Zealand?—l came to New Zealand twenty-six years ago. I left again in 1884, and went to Melbourne, where I stayed eight years. I then come back here, where I have been ever since. 504. What is your occupation ?—I am an upholsterer. 505. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating or not with the Australian Commonwealth? —Yes ; principally as far as it relates to trades and industries. I also considered the matter when it was under consideration there. 506. Kindly state the conclusions you have arrived at, and your reasons therefor?— From the national point of view, I believe almost everything is in favour of New Zealand federating with
51
A.—4
Australia; from an industrial point of view, I believe that is also the case to a very large extent, but I would modify my remark on that point by saying that an immediate federation with Australia would, to a certain extent, unhinge our present industrial arrangements, inasmuch as any shock to the tariff always does so ; and should we enter into the Federation, and our present tariff were removed, our industrial arrangements would certainly be unhinged. I would be in favour of federating with Australia provided we could have some such provision made as was made with Western Australia—viz., leave the present tariff in existence for five years, or whatever time might be deemed necessary, to enable the industries here to recover themselves and to get a little more firmly established. Then I think we could maintain our own against any manufacturing industries in Australia. I also think New Zealand should be admitted to the Federation as an original State. Certainly the gain would be considerable to New Zealand from a political standpoint; but, taking it all round, perhaps that gain would cost too much unless we were admitted as an original State. Federation would give us free-trade between the colonies, and would open up a large market for our produce. As to the political aspect, I believe a large confederation such as the Commonwealth would necessarily overshadow a smaller country like New Zealand, which might prove detrimental to New Zealand, and I think on that ground it would be better for New Zealand to become a part of the Federation than to remain outside as an independent State. 507. Where would the larger market for our produce be?—ln Western Australia; and I believe there would be a demand for it in New South Wales, where there always has been a demand for it, and to a certain extent Queensland. Then, if there were free-trade, we should have Victoria open to us. 508. Are there any other advantages you think would accrue if we federated ?—There are advantages in the matter of defence which would arise if we were federated with the Commonwealth, because New Zealand, from its geographical situation and island trade, would require more marine defence than a land defence, and by federating with Australia we would in all probability be strong enough to provide a navy able to cope with anything a foreign Power might send here to make a sudden attack on us; 509. Do you not think that New Zealand of itself would be sufficiently strong to resist any such attack ?—Not by means of a navy, on account of the tremendous expense, which we cannot afford. 510. I mean with our present defences ?—No. 511. Have you considered as to how the colonial finance of New Zealand would be affected by federation ?—I would not like to give an opinion as an expert. I wish to state that lam not expressing the opinions of the Workers' Political Committee, because this question has not been considered by them up to now, owing to the holidays. I am merely expressing my own views on this matter. 512. Hon. Captain Bussell.] When you say you think that the Commonwealth will overshadow us, and so be detrimental to New Zealand, what do you especially refer to ?—I am considering the prestige of the colony with regard to its relationship with foreign Powers, and its trade. The whole tendency of great countries would be, if they wished to open up a connection with the South Pacific, to turn their attention immediately to the Commonwealth as the dominating Power, and therefore we, if we were an independent State, would be overshadowed. 513. I do not quite understand you when you said that from a national, and also from an industrial, standpoint we had everything to gain : what have we to gain nationally ?—I think nationally we would gain the stability that a great Power like the Commonwealth must ultimately become would give us in excess of what we can possibly achieve of ourselves. 514. And you imagine that. New Zealand will not in the course of years have a large population in itself ?—lt will be a great many years before she will if we take the natural increase, unless we can by promoting immigration increase our population. 515. That, no doubt, is true ; but, looking at the future of the colony, what is your opinion on the subject of our having a population strong enough for all purposes of production and defence ?— For the production requirements of the colony, and probably for land defence too ? 516. I am speaking of two hundred years hence ? —Two hundred years hence, in all probability, this will be another England. 517. If this is likely to be another England in the course of a couple of hundred years, is it wise, from a national standpoint, that we should associate ourselves with the Commonwealth?— Yes. I think we should be greatly benefited if we associated with it. 518. You think there would not be a danger in the very remote future of our being in the position of a subordinate Power perpetually struggling against a stronger one ?—I think it would be more likely to occur without federation. 519. You think there would be more likely to be a conflict of interest if we were separate than if we were joined together ?—I think so. 520. What would you imagine would be the social conditions of the two peoples a hundred years hence ? Do you think they will materially differ ? —I do not think so. They are so closely allied and related that their instincts and tendencies will be to move in the same direction, and even now they take what is progressive in our legislation, and I think we are trying to ape what is progressive in theirs. I think we should all progress in the same lines, as we have a common origin. 521. Do you think, in the course of one or two centuries, that the difference of climate will not alter the race characteristics?—l believe it will. It is noticeable now. 522. Will not the descendants of the present Australians differentiate to a greater extent from the descendants of New-Zealanders than the parents of the two countries do now ?—I believe they will largely differentiate in that respect, but whether it will affect them particularly I would not like to say.
A.—4
52
523. Is there not likely to be a diversity of instincts and tastes ?— Yes, to a large extent. I believe that even now the moral tone in Australia is lower than among the New-Zealanders. 524. To what do you attribute that?—lt is due largely to the origin of the people, and to the climatic influences. 525. If it is in any degree traceable to climatic influences, will not that operate in a constantly increasing power as the children are more removed from the original parents' stock ?—I think it will go on until until they develop a distinct race of people from the New-Zealanders. 526. Then, under these circumstances, shall we not be, according to your argument, a more .potent race physically and morally, but allied to a race stronger than ours numerically ?—ln all probability, yes. 527. Why do you lay stress on the necessity of our being admitted as an original State?— Because otherwise we should be at a great disadvantage. 528. In what way?—l believe that we shall be asked to pay a proportion of the expense of establishing the Commonwealth. If we go in later on we shall be asked to bear our share of the burden, which will be a considerable amount. If we were to enter as a State now, the revenue that would be controlled by the Commonwealth would be gradually taxed to accomplish that. Therefore we shall not go in on easy terms. 529. In other words, you think Australia would drive a hard bargain with us?—l am inclined to think so if we do not go in as an original State. 530. Is that not sufficient cause for us to hesitate before embarking on the Federation ?—To some extent it is true, but the same argument would hold good for every State. You cannot expect to have a dominating influence in the Commonwealth as an individual State worked on a democratic basis. 531. You think the fact that all Australia is homogeneous would not make it dangerous for us outsiders to join the Commonwealth? —No; though on the whole they would like to get New Zealand in. I believe their object is to endeavour to get a complete federation of the Pacific. 532. Would not New Zealand then be somewhat in the same position that the second cousin is to a united family?—As an original State, New Zealand should be able to maintain her position in the Confederation. 533. You think the fact of Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria being coterminous would not give them united interest which cannot exist for ourselves and for Tasmania ? —They have not snowed that tendency hitherto, but have rather been antagonistic to each other all through. Ido not see why it should develop now as against New Zealand. 534. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you know of any other case in the world of a federation of States separated by such an expanse of ocean ?—No. 535. Do you not think that is a factor to be considered?—-It is certainly a drawback. 536. Do you think it would be advisable at this moment to enter into a federation, supposing we could do so, without special conditions or some alteration in the Act?—-That is a very serious question to answer, and I would not like to go as far as that, because I believe that federation would to some extent upset our existing affairs from an industrial point of view. 537. You think Australia would be willing to amend their Constitution Act in order to admit us ? —Yes ; I think they would in some sense do what they did for Western Australia. 538. Mr. Roberts.'] You said that federation would bring about a large increase to the trade in New Zealand ?—I think so. 539. Then, I suppose you know that, generally speaking, the wages of Australian workers are lower than they are here? —I dare say they are, though not as much as it is made out. 540. If yoU expect, under federation, a large increase of business you must be looking forward to the time when wages in Australia must rise materially, or decrease materially here : is that so ? —The whole tendency of wages in Australia has been to rise. During the tremendous depression that country underwent for five or six years wages went down. They were originally as high as they were in New Zealand; then they went down during the depression, and now they are on the increase again. 541. If you expect a largely increased trade as the result of federation, would not New Zealand then be in a better position to cope with the Australian Colonies than she is now ? —I am never afraid of New Zealand not being able to compete with Australia under any circumstances. 542. You think that ultimately New Zealand will be able to produce as cheaply as Australia? —I would go as far as to say that it would be able to produce equally as cheap. 543. Because you expect a large accession of business, which naturally means that you can produce cheaper ?—I think there are a great many things we can produce cheaper than Australia. 544. Mr. Millar.] What lines do you think we should increase our production in if we had the right of free entry into the Australian markets ? —The bulk of our manufactured agricultural products, and manufactured products generally. 545. I suppose you are aware that Victoria has a very large export in butter and cheese ? —Yes. 546. And that it was fostered by bonuses to bring about that result ? And Adelaide is a very large exporter of wheat ?—lt grows excellent wheat, but I do not think it ranks very high as an exporter. 547. Victoria has been able to produce sufficient oats for her own consumption, and do you not think that, if that is so now, the gradual cutting-up of the land for closer settlement will enable her to so increase her output that she will be independent of New Zealand ?—I do not consider that Australia is an agricultural country. It is only a strip of country on the seaboard that is suitable. 548. Is not the Eiverina supposed to be some of the finest country in the world ? —That is a mere patch.
A.—4
53
549. What about the Darling Downs —there is a very large extent of agricultural country there, is there not ?—Pastoral principally. 550. In your opinion, that cannot be cut up?— Not in the sense that New Zealand land can be. 551. What manufactures do you think we should be able to export largely to Sydney?— Leather, sawn timber, kauri timber from Auckland, woollen goods, manufactured goods, and also paper. 552. Do you not think it likely that the whole of the industries would be concentrated in the large centres of Australia, to which population would naturally be attracted ?—No ; because I think they would tend to concentrate in districts that were more suitable for the carrying-on of those industries. That is the case in England, and it would become so in Australia. 553. Following out your argument, our leather trade would not benefit much by federation, because it is an industry more natural to Australia than to New Zealand ? —Yes, it is ; but we have just as good a leather industry here. We breed cattle here, and we export sealskins to make leather. 554. What about flax?—l think we export binder-twine and rope, and the flax-tow, to New South Wales now. 555. Do you not think it would be a very serious matter for the workers of this country if che manufactures were diverted from here to Australia ?—Undoubtedly it would be. 556. And do you not think there is a possibility of that under the conditions which I have mentioned—viz., that there are factories so thoroughly developed in Melbourne and Sydney that they can supply all the requirements of Australia without even now working to their utmost capacity ?— Ido not think so. New South Wales admits the raw materials for manufacture duty-free, and in Victoria they have methods of getting the materials for manufacture into port free of duty, and they now send their goods to this colony. The goods that come here are manufactured practically under no tariff conditions, and yet they do not supplant our industries to any extent. We here v who are manufacturing against them, have to pay the tariff on our imported raw materials ; so that Ido not think our industries would be taken away. 557. Taking the cabinetmaking trade, are you aware that there is a large number of Chinese cabinetmakers in Melbourne ? —Yes ; it is a great evil there, and they would ultimately destroy any industry they were allowed to come into in any country. 558. That would be the inevitable result if our market were open to them, would it not?— Yes. 559. You have looked at the question from every point of view : do you think that, as far as the social and industrial development of the people are concerned, we would be likely, under the Commonwealth Government, to make equal progress to that which we have made during the last twenty years in New Zealand?— That is very doubtful. The machinery of government will be necessarily more cumbersome under the Federation than it would be under a State Government. Our progress would be slower owing to that fact. 560. Will it not take some time to educate the Australian nation up to viewing large questions from the economic standpoint we view them from ?—I am not so sure that they require educating on these questions so much as facilities for carrying out their ideas. They are hampered with barriers to progress in the shape of an Upper House—in Victoria particularly. 561. That would still remain the same—you do not alter the. State franchise under the Commonwealth. A State has the power to legislate still ? —Their progress economically does not seem to me to be from any lack of education on the part of the people themselves, but from lack of opportunity to carry out their ideas. 562. In view of all these facts, do you still think it would be to the advantage of this colony to federate ? —'Yes ; and it would be better for New Zealand to do so now, because when the Commonwealth is completely established we shall feel the pressure somewhat severely; and I should think it would be better to federate, provided we can get in on terms that would be at least reasonable to us as a'State, and not cause too great a shock to the colony. 563. Mr. Beauch'imp.] Your chief reasons for advocating federation are that it would open up a better market for our products in manufactured goods ?—Yes. 564. You do not anticipate that our markets here would be likely to be swamped by the surplus manufactures from the inferior factories on the other side ? —I do not dread that. 565. Notwithstanding the fact that the labour conditions are more liberal to the manufacturers there than here ? —Wages are not so very much different, and the hours of labour are no more. 566. Supposing that there was the same provision for New Zealand being included in the Commonwealth as has been made with regard to Western Australia, would you consider that a sufficiently liberal provision to warrant our federating?—l would. 567. But, supposing the Commonwealth would not agree to extend that same provision to us, would you still advocate our federating?—No; I would stand off for a little while, unless you could get some special advantage by going in now. 568. I think you will admit that we have made some progress with regard to labour laws during the last few years ?—Yes. 569. I understand the Australians have been attempting to get similar laws passed for something like ten years, without result?— Yes ; I fought for them in Australia when I was there at the Trades Hall Council in Melbourne. • 570. In view of what we have accomplished here, is it not likely that there will be a considerable amount of friction if we could not carry on the same progressive legislation under the Federal Parliament to what we are carrying on in our own Parliament here ?—Yes, undoubtedly. I believe I am justified in saying that the workers of New Zealand would not support federation of any kind unless the Commonwealth would uphold our social legislation, such as the Old-age Pensions, the Workers' Compensation, and the Conciliation Act.
A.—4
54
571. On the basis of representation, which I understand to be about six in the Senate and fifteen in the Lower House, do you think we would be able to pass these liberal measures to the same good purpose we have for New Zealand ? —I do, because the sympathies of the people, with perhaps the exception of Queensland and Western Australia, are almost entirely with our legislation ; and it has been their aim to pass similar legislation, and but for the obstructiveness of other interests they would get it. I think New Zealand's influence would go a long way towards accomplishing their desire in the Federal Assembly. 572. From your knowledge of Australia and New Zealand, do you think there is really no community of interest between the two ?—There is very great sympathy between the two. 573. Mr. Luke.] Do you think our aspirations and objects and aims are not of rather a different character from that of Australia in the main ?—There are very large sections of their people that hold very little in common with the masses of the people here, but the masses of the people there are certainly developing along the same lines politically and socially as we are. We advocated similar reforms there ten years ago that we here have accomplished since. 574. That brings us to a very important point. It has taken us ten years to reach the point of advantage we have already gained. Legislation goes more rapidly here than there. Would not that be an element rather against federation than in favour of it ?—Yes, it is, from our point of view. 575. You do not think that the preponderating influence of Australia in the Federal Parliament, as compared with that of New Zealand, would have a prejudical effect ?—No, I do not fear that, because I think it would react on themselves in time. 576. Supposing we joined with all the advantages of an original State, but with a special clause delaying the removal of the tariff for, say, five years, so as to avoid a great shock to our manufactures, and the labour organizations of Australia made an endeavour to better their condition, do you think they would anything like accomplish in five years what we have taken ten years to do ?—Yes. They are getting legislation on the same lines as ours; there has been a great deal accomplished within the last ten years, both there and here. 577. You have some knowledge of the furniture trade?— Yes. 578. Well, I saw a suite of furniture in one of the Wellington auction-rooms which the auctioneer told me was landed here for less than £6—in the auction-rooms. I was simply astonished ; and I ask you, as a practical man, is it possible that our furniture trade can compete with a condition of things that could produce such an article ?—We do not produce that class of goods in New Zealand. It comes in from Sydney. I made that class of goods in Sydney, but we have no market for it here. If we made it and sold it to a customer we should have to sell it in our own name ; but if it is consigned from Australia, and put in the auction-room here, it is, as a consignment, sold in nobody's name. New Zealand could do the same thing if our conditions were the same as they are in Australia with regard to the importation of parts duty-free. 579. But not at that price ? —Yes, we could do it at that price, under the same conditions, and we could do it now in regard to certain things. 580. Then, you think federation would not act detrimentally in the long-run as against labour ?—No ; I believe it would do no harm to New Zealand to federate. 581. You do not think it would affect the manufactures themselves?— No. 582. Not in view of the large factories in Australia, and the larger output and capital involved in comparison with ours ? —There is always the barrier of freight against them ; but, of course, that is against us also for exporting. 583. Mr. Beid.] Have you reason to believe that the views you have expressed before the Commission are held by the majority of the workers you represent ?—These views do not represent those of the majority of the workers here. 584. Is there reason to believe that the majority hold contrary views ? —Yes, I believe the majority does. 585. Mr. Leys.] I gather from your evidence that you think we have nothing to gain from a governmental point of view by federating with Australia—that our present political system and administration are rather in advance of theirs, and of what the Commonwealth Government is likely to be for some time ?—I believe that the machinery of government here is more rapidly put in motion than there. 586. And that our legislation under those conditions has put us in advance of Australia?—l believe so. I think we should gain, in that we should be part of a great community, instead of being a little one in ourselves, and outside. We might be overshadowed by the big one. 587. But I mean as far as administration goes?—As far as that goes, I think we are as well off as we should be under the Commonwealth. 588. May we not lose something in the shape of administration in having our postal arrangements, telegraphs, and probably railways in the future administered from somewhere in New South Wales ? —Nc, I really do not think we would. I believe it would be managed similarly to what it is now. 589. With regard to our being overshadowed, should we not lose our identity and individuality as a State as compared with a self-governing nation ?—No more than any other State would in the Commonwealth. 590. Eegarding our exports in produce, are you aware that even vow Victoria exports butter to Queensland and South Australia, and New South Wales is also a large exporter ?—Yes; all the Australian Colonies do excepting Western Australia. 591. Are you aware that Victoria and South Australia export wheat, and that New South Wales is practically self-supporting in that respect ?—I think, taking it on the whole, if we joined the Federation, there would be a tendency on the part of the Australian States to deal more liberally with New Zealand than there is now, considering that their interests are in common with ours, and I think in that way it would tend to extend our trade.
55
A.—4
592. Is not the price of these great staple exports fixed by the rates ruling in England, and those rates rule in these local markets ?—That is so. 593. Is not the English market practically inexhaustible so far as our exports go ?—So far as we can produce, I believe it is. 594. Are we likely to suffer so seriously as you seem to anticipate, even if the Australian market were closed against us ?—Australia is nearer to the Home market than we are, for one thing, and the tendency would be to trade with the Commonwealth in preference to outsiders for home consumption. 595. Although they produce very much the same class of goods that we produce, and export them to England and other places ?—But I believe New Zealand can produce better goods than any of those countries in the class referred to. 596. In regard to manufactures, do you not think that the sea barrier would prevent our manufactures being profitably sent into Australia ? —Yes, to a very large extent; but I think that, on account of the increased output bringing about cheaper production, the tendency will be to send these goods into the other States of the Commonwealth, instead of to New Zealand only. If federated we would all have the same chances to carry on the trade. 597. Do I understand you to say that it would be beneficial to our manufacturers as well as producers to federate ?—Yes. 598. Do you think it possible to supply Australia with manufactured goods?— Yes, with the surplus we manufacture. 599. Have you considered the re-export trade of Australia at all ?—I have seen the figures. 600. The re-export trade between the colonies is £18,600,000, while the New Zealand reexports only amounted to £138,595, of which £134,000 went to the South Sea Islands ; so that practically we have no re-export trade excepting the South Sea Islands : is that not because the contiguity of the Australian Colonies enables them to exchange between themselves ?—The agents are liable to concentrate themselves in the large centres of population, and that may account for it. 601. Would not that continue, apart from federation?—To some extent it would, as the tendency would be to draw towards the Federal centre. 601 a. Then, the Australian merchants reshipped a large amount of these re-exports—£l,3oo,ooo —to New Zealand: would they not be likely to reship larger amounts under the Federation ?— I expect that the whole of the trade of the South Pacific will expand through the establishment of the Commonwealth, and the impetus would extend here. 602. But I mean the trade between Australia and New Zealand : do you think the merchants of Australia will dominate our trade to a large extent ? —I do not think it will be to their interests to do it more than now. 602 a. Are they not deterred by the tariff to some extent ? —Of course, if you remove the tariff we will have the same advantages here as there. 603. But still they export largely here in spite of the tariff ?—Probably because they have representatives here. 603 a. Have not they advantages in freight?—l do not know that they have, because intercolonial freights have always been pretty high ; and they might be doing a larger trade—l believe they are—with the people there than we can do because having lower freights from Home. 604. Have they not advantages in their branches ? —Yes. 605. Would that not give their merchants the advantage over us ?—They have that advantage now, and have always had it; it would not be altered by the Commonwealth. 606. And making the ports free would not make any difference, do you think ?—They get drawbacks there now on the Customs duties. 607. Do you think Melbourne would not supply such places as the West Coast?—No, there would still be the same State rivalry, and they are not likely to take the trade away from New Zealand; and the tendency would be to develop trade more largely if we were a part of the Commonwealth than if we were not. 608. Hon. Major Steward.} Eegarding your views on defence, do you mean that you think the Commonwealth could establish a navy sufficiently strong not only to protect its own immense seaboard, but also to spare vessels to assist in the defence of New Zealand?— That is putting the question in a very different way. My idea was that they could provide a small colonial navy able to concentrate itself at any given point to repel any attack of vessels sent by a foreign Power. In that way there would be more protection than could be afforded by any land defence. 609. The assumption is that New Zealand becomes a part of the Commonwealth ; if so, and a quarrel arises with another European Power which results in that Power attacking the Commonwealth, does it not follow that the latter would have to look out for the protection of its own shores as well as New Zealand ?—Undoubtedly. 610. Then, is it not probable that the Commonwealth would look first to the protection of such ports as Sydney and Melbourne rather than to the protection of Dunedin and Lyttelton ?— But I think all the States would have some permanent protection. 611. If it were going to defend, it would only defend the points nearest itself, and only those which there was the most necessity to defend ? —Yes. 612. Then, it would be only the surplus naval strength it had available that it would be able to send to New Zealand ? —That is so. 613. Then, do you think it probable, if we entered the Federation, that the Commonwealth would be able to establish a navy sufficiently strong to protect the ports on the mainland and spare anything for the protection of our ports ?—No; there is such an extensive seaboard to protect that it would be practically impossible; but I thought four or five cruisers could be maintained in addition to whatever gunboats were necessary for port defence, to be concentrated wherever it was deemed necessary.
A.—4
56
614. Hon. the Chairman.'] Do you mean first-class, second-class, or third-class cruisers ?—I think we would require two or three first-class cruisers. 615. Have you any idea what three first-class cruisers would cost ?—I suppose, nine or ten millions. 616. What do you think their annual upkeep would be ?—I suppose, £500,000 a year. Donald Reid examined. (No. 19.) 617. Hon. the Chairman.} How long have you resided in New Zealand, Mr. Eeid?—A little over fifty-one years. 618. You have been a member of the Colonial Legislature, and also a Minister of the Crown in New Zealand ?—Yes. 619. Will you be good enough to favour the Commission with your views as to the advisability of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth of Australia or otherwise ?—ln the first place, I really am doubtful whether the views I hold on the subject are sufficiently matured to be of any use to your Commission. The impression I have formed in respect to New Zealand joining the Commonwealth is decidedly against such a course. My opinion is based mainly on the political aspect of the question. I have not gone very largely into the commercial view of it. In respect to the political aspect of the question, I look at it in this way: We have here a country peopled by a grand race of settlers for developing a young country—a people having a common history, identity of interest, and united by national sympathies, occupying a great country, with the freest institutions and the most liberal Constitution that I know of; in fact, we have the power to mould the future of this country as we think fit. It is not a puny, small country, and does not require to be joined to any other. The extent of this country—larger than Great Britain—should besufficient to engross the attention and satisfy the ambition of any rulers we may have, and whose desire should be to see it properly governed and keep our political privileges intact. In my opinion, the ultimate result of such a union as now proposed would be to dwarf the minds of our people in respect to political matters, because the power they would be able to wield in the affairs of the Commonwealth would be so trifling, and the centre of political action would be so remote, that they would not take the same active interest they now do in political affairs. It is only very few men who will give their minds to much study over political questions with the knowledge that they will have little or no power in the ultimate decision, or that the power they can exercise is so infinitesimal as not likely to materially affect the result. People thus deprived of the power to act for their country so as to give potential effect to their views soon cease to care for the privilege, and this, I think, would be one of the evil effects of making New Zealand a State of the Commonwealth. These remarks may not apply to the same extent to our present people; but gradually the position I have indicated would be brought about, and the belief I have formed is that already our political activity is not so active as I would like to see it. Again, in respect to representation, assuming that we were to become a State of the Commonwealth, I would like to know who are the men whom we could get to go from their business here to attend the meetings of Parliament. The difficulty even at present is to get many of those who are engaged in business, and who I think ought to be largely representing us in Parliament, to spare the time to attend to the duties. Even in the colony we have great difficulty in getting suitable men to attend our local Parliament to deal with the comparatively limited amount of business which it has to undertake, but if we had to look for members to represent us in the Commonwealth Parliament in Sydney, with the enormous amount of work and time occupied, they would have to be either men of large capital—who I am not quite sure make the best or most desirable representatives—or it would have to be men who are devoting their attention to nothing else but representation. And, again, they are not the class of representatives whom we would like to see, because, unfortunately, there is a tendency with many of them to manufacture opinions to suit the crowd, instead of being free representatives studying what is best in the public interest, and putting well-matured sensible opinions before the people, and inducing them to adopt them and go with the representative. These are some reasons that would weigh with me in expressing an opinion against New Zealand casting away the glorious inheritance she has in her free Constitution—the right to manage our own affairs, control our own revenues, and make our laws to suit ourselves. If we wish to develop any industry we have the power to do it at any time without anybody overriding us. If we wish to raise more revenue to carry out any great undertaking we have the power within ourselves, having also the control of the whole of our revenues, which we would not have as a State of the Commonwealth. If we wish for immediate protection from any common danger or attack we have the power within ourselves to obtain it, and it seems to me that federation with the Empire is all the federation that would be necessary for New Zealand. On the other hand, what advantages are we to gain by giving up all these great privileges ? I have been told in some quarters that we shall get a market for our oats. Well, really, gentlemen, that is a transitory and fleeting argument. These matters of trade and commerce will regulate themselves; but, in regard to the political matters, if once we part with the power we now have we can never restore it, as far as my belief goes ; but, as for regulating commercial matters, they regulate themselves pretty well. I cannot believe that the people in the Commonwealth will be so blind as to refuse to receive our oats, because we have not joined, when it suits them to take them, and it is only when it suits them that they take them now. 620. You hold the opinion, Mr. Eeid, that the legislative independence of New Zealand would be prejudicially affected by federation ?—Yes, I do, decidedly. 621. And how do you think local administration would be affected?—Oh, well, that certainly would not be affected materially, as far as I can see. There would be this difference, however: The local administration —boroughs and counties —when they require any assistance from the Colo-
57
A.—4
nial Parliament can get it; they can get measures passed to facilitate operations without much trouble or delay ; but if they had to obtain such authority from the Commonwealth Parliament there would be great delay and difficulty in getting rfc.. 622. Have you formed any opinion as to whether the industries or the commerce of the country would be affected prejudicially by federation, or benefited ?—I cannot see how they would be seriously prejudicially affected; and, as to benefit, the only case that has been brought up has been in respect to agricultural produce. 623. Assuming that it would be prejudicially affected in that respect, do you think that would be a sufficient ground to set against the disadvantages which you have enumerated?—No, certainly not; but lam doubtful if it would be prejudicially affected. 624. And you think the main effect upon the colony would be an unwise political step ?—Yes, I am sure it would. 625. Are you aware that the referendum is the ultimate tribunal in regard to altering the Constitution ?—Yes. 626. Do you think it would be advisable for New Zealand to throw its lot into such a Confederation?— Certainly not. 627. Hon. Major Steivard.] Do you not think, Mr. Beid, that our separation from Australia by several hundred miles of sea, involving a journey of three or four days, would be a serious handicap to our representatives, seeing that in the case of the Australian representatives it would only be a matter of a few hours for them to communicate with the seat of government ?—Certainly, it would be a great disadvantage. 628. Mr. Leys.] With regard to what you have said about the difficulty of getting representatives, have you noticed that seven out of nine members of the Federal Executive are lawyers ?—I did not notice that. 629. Is not that very much the same as in the United States, where the government falls mainly iuto the hands of lawyers ?—That might not be the disadvantage it appears, because there are lawyers and lawyers. 630. You think that on the whole it would be an advantage ?—No; I certainly would rather have a mixture of the different interests and classes of the community as representatives. 631. Mr. Luke.] We have been told that federation would open up to us a trade very much larger than anything we have in this country, not only with regard to agricultural produce, but we might develop our manufactures and find a market in Australia : what do you think ?—lt might be possible in some lines; but we need not, I think, consider it, as we have more outlet for our manufactures now than we have people to produce them. We have to import largely because we cannot produce all we require, and I am not sure that the course we are pursuing in respect to labour legislation will tend to have a fostering effect on our manufactures. 632. Mr. Beauchamp .] Have you considered the financial effect of federation on this country : I dare say you are aware that the Federation would take over our revenues from Customs and excise ? —I have no doubt they will ultimately take over everything worth legislating about. I presume it would disarrange our finance for a time, and our local governing bodies would have to revert to further direct taxation. 633. Do you think the same friction and trouble would arise as arose in this colony with regard to the provinces under the Provincial Governments? —I think very probably it would be so, only the referendum would have to settle it. By-and-by the Commonwealth Parliament would wish to take over further revenues and duties from us, assuming that they were matters which could be dealt with by the Federal Government so as to get popularity, but anything in the way of throwing burdens on the people they would leave to the State Parliaments. That is the general way Governments work. 634. And, as the basis of New Zealand's representation —both the Senate and Lower House— would be lower than that of Australia, do you think we would be likely to be outvoted on questions affecting this country ?—I think we would be simply ignored. 635. As to a market for our produce in Australia, are you of opinion that that market is created chiefly by climatic conditions ?—Yes. In times of drought they would be very glad to get our produce, and I cannot conceive that a manufacturing and town population would ever submit to a tariff that would in times of scarcity exclude our produce or make it ruinously dear to them. All the world over the agriculturist has to provide the food, because people must be fed, and he has to grow the food and get the best living he can out of it; but protection does not last long for the agriculturist, as far as I can see, the world over. The consumer would not submit to very heavy taxation being levied on his food. 636. Mr. Millar.] Do you think this colony would develop as rapidly under a Central Government in Australia as it has done under our present system ?—I think it would not. 637. There would not be the same community of interests as there is in being governed by our own people ?—No. I am quite sure there would not be the same disposition on the part of the people to accept what was passed there as heartily as when it was passed by their own representatives. 638. Mr. Roberts.] I presume, while not favouring federation, you would be in favour of establishing a reciprocal treaty with the Commonwealth ?—Certainly. On as free and full lines as possible. 639. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I would like to have your opinion on the provision in the Commonwealth Act which provides for both the Commonwealth Government and the States Government dipping out of one purse—that is to say, instead of having different means of taxation, the Customs revenue will provide for both payments to the Commonwealth and the States ?—That would soon mean the beginning of a battle royal, and I am sure the Commonwealth will gain at the finish in that battle. B—A. 4.
A.—4
58
640. Of course, they get one-fourth, or not more than one-fourth, of what they want for the present ?—We have had those promises in New Zealand put in the shape of enactments; when passed they were to last for many years, and the next session they would be altered again, but always to the gain of the Central Government. 641. Do you not think that provision is a danger in the Act?— Yes, certainly. 642. Under the Canadian Act they have separate financial arrangements, have they not ?— Yes, I believe so. Petbe Baee examined. (No. 20.) 643. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Barr? —A member of the firm of Barr, Leary, and Co., public accountants, Dunedin. I have been thirty-seven years in New Zealand. 644. Have you lived in Australia?—l have visited Australia several times, but have not lived there for any length of time. 645. Will you kindly favour the Commission with your views on the question of New Zealand federating or not federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ? —I understand I have been summoned as secretary to the Industrial Association of Otago, and this morning I also received a letter asking me to attend as secretary to the Chamber of Commerce. Any opinion I might express in reply to your question would only be a personal one, as I think I might say that the question has not been considered by either of those bodies. 646. Have you any individual opinion upon the matter ?—I have not come to any very definite opinion on it. lam an accountant, and have consequently no practical necessity to go into it, not being either an exporter or an importer. So far as I have been able to form an opinion, it is, on the whole, favourable to federation with Australia, as it would open up a larger market to us. Of course, that would depend upon the attitude of the Commonwealth towards New Zealand, and probably it would be better for us to wait until we see more clearly what that attitude will be, and also until we see what the effect of the working of federation will be in Australia. 647. Mr. Millar.'] Do you think that federation will not affect the industries of this colony?— It might to some extent; but I am inclined to think that any injury that may be done to those industries would be counterbalanced by the benefit accruing to our increased markets, always assuming we were not shut out by the Federation. 648. I suppose you will admit that, as far as the centres of population are concerned, they are practically dependent upon the manufacturers ?—To a great extent we are. 649. These four centres of population represent nearly one-third of the population of the colony, so that if the manufacturers are injured there must be one-third of the population of this colony going to be considerably injured by federating ?—Yes ; but if the whole colony is benefited through having our export trade increased it might be counterbalanced. 650. But is not the best market for a producer the home market ?—Yes. 651. And if you reduce the population of the colony jou are reducing the home market?— But I do not see that it follows that you would reduce the population of the colony. 652. Population must follow the trade, and if industries are injured in this way, and are 'gradually withdrawn to Sydney and Melbourne, the men must follow the work: is that not so ?— Yes. 653. The value of the Australian trade to us is £1,700,000, and, unless it can be shown that that can be materially increased to such an extent as to benefit the whole colony, federation would not be for the benefit of the colony ? —I am inclined to think that that would be so. 654. Despite the fact that the bulk of the colonies are exporting now the same things that we produce ?—Yes, because we are in a particularly favourable situation for producing on account of our agricultural capabilities. 655. But we could not touch Victoria in the production of butter, could we ? —Probably not. 656. We cannot touch South Australia in regard to the production of wheat ?—That I could not say. 657. So that, when it is narrowed down, the only market that we really have for agricultural produce is the market for oatmeal and oats ?—They are very considerable items. 658. We want to keep our commerce as much before us as we can, but the question is what price are we going to pay for it. I understand your opinion is that, unless it can be shown that federation is going to benefit the whole colony, you do not think we should federate ? —Certainly. 659. Mr. Beauchamp.] Has not this question been discussed by either association to which you refer—the Industrial Association or the Chamber of Commerce ?—No ; the annual meeting of the former will be held immediately, when a new committee is to be appointed, and it was thought better to leave the matter over for the new committee, and also to wait for the result of this Commission. Had the Commission commenced its sittings in Auckland instead of Invercargill, it is possible that the matter might have been considered before the Commission arrived here. Eobert Slatbe examined. (No. 21.) 660. Hon. the Chairman.) What are you, Mr. Slater?—By occupation I am a presser, but I am the secretary of the Dunedin Trades and Labour Council. 661. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ?— Personally, I have not given a great deal of attention to the question, but I have been appointed, along with our president, to come here and give evidence with regard to the effect of federation on our labour laws, especially with regard to the Arbitration Act. The view of the Trades and Labour Council is that, under present circumstances, if New Zealand were in the Commonwealth, and Mr. Barton's promise given lately were carried out—viz., that there would be an Arbitration Act for the Commonwealth —of course it would be naturally carried out on the lines laid down., in the New South Wales Bill at the present time, and that would be detrimental to our workers by taking us backward instead of forward.
59
A.—4
662. You think the labour laws would be retrogressive instead of progressive ?—Yes. 663. Is the association you represent —or, rather, the majority of the association—in favour of or against federation with Australia?—As far as I am aware, the majority are against it, although a little while'ago ajmember of our council appeared before you and spoke in favour of it —I refer to Mr. Hood. 664. Hon. Captain Russell.] Has the question of federation in its general aspect been discussed by your council?—No ; it is set down for discussion at an early date, but we did not expect the Commission so soon. 665. Then, it is only as federation may affect New Zealand for the next ten years that you give evidence ?—I give evidence on behalf of our council, but lam quite willing to answer any other questions that may be put to me. It is the effect of federation on the labour laws that we have considered. Personally, my opinion is that it would put New Zealand back ten years. 666. How ?—Because, if the labour laws were to be administered as Commonwealth labour laws, then it would take that time for the other colonies to get the distance that New Zealand has got in regard to social and economic legislation. 667. Do I understand you to mean that you are afraid the Commonwealth would repeal our labour legislation ?—I do not know that they would repeal it; but, supposing an Industrial Arbitration Act was passed by the Commonwealth, I do not think it would provide as good machinery as we have at present in New Zealand for settling disputes, and that would be practically repealing our Act. 668. You are afraid they would practically repeal our legislation, and enact something that would not be as good ?—Yes. 669. What is your impression as to the relative efficiency of the New Zealand and the Australian worker ? —I have not had much experience of Australian labour, having only been in Australia three weeks when attending the Commonwealth celebrations, so I could not form a sound opinion as to the efficiency of labour there. 670. You have formed no opinion from what you have read or heard ?—From what I have read the efficiency of New Zealand workers is higher than that of the Australians. 671. If the relative efficiency of the New-Zealander is higher than that of the Australian have we cause to be afraid of their competition ?—Yes ; because, although we hear it said that the Australian Colonies are working the same hours as us, we find, after inquiring closely, that they work very much longer hours, and that their wages are lower. 672. You do not think that in the course of a few years the labour laws and the hours of labour would be assimilated in all the States of the Commonwealth? —Very possibly they would be; but Ido not think New Zealand would gain any advantage. It will take them a good many years to get as far ahead as we are in New Zealand at the present time as regards hours of labour and rates of wages. 673. Do you think we could compete, all things being equal, in the labour-market with Australia ?—Certainly. 674. Need we be apprehensive of their labour at all ?—Only as regards the interchange of products as between this colony and the Australian Colonies. 675. Mr. Millar.] Did you have an opportunity in Sydney of ascertaining the conditions under which the different trades work ?—I inquired into the conditions of labour, but the factories were not in full operation owing to the holidays, and that fact was against me. 676. You have had a big experience of the industries of this colony ?—Yes. 677. So far as you were able to ascertain, how does the condition of the workers in New South Wales compare with the condition of the workers here as regards wages and hours of labour ?— They are very much worse in New South Wales than here—very much to the detriment of the worker there. 678. Then, with federation and free-trade between the two countries, our workers would either have to come down to the same level or the work would have to go over there ?—That is the only way we could compete with them. 679. I understand from you that what would be looked upon as progressive legislation in New South Wales now would leave us worse off than we are at the present time if it were enacted here ? —That is the point I wish to make. 680. How did labour in Victoria compare with ours ? —Similar to New South Wales. 681. To go away from the purely pounds shillings and pence point of view, how do you think the workers of this colony would care about giving up the political power they have now in regard to legislation ? —I do not think they would care for it at all. 682. Are you aware of any opinion having been expressed with regard to it so far as Dunedin is concerned? —Not by any united association; but, of course, I mix considerably with the workers, and I think the majority of them are against it. 683. You have heard privately what would probably be the final decision when it is given ?— Yes; and my opinion is strengthened from certain facts I gathered on the other side. I took an opportunity of discussing the question of our federating with some members of Parliament, both in Victoria, New South Wales, and South Australia, and, of course, every one said they would like to see New Zealand come in, but I put the question, " Supposing you were New-Zealanders, and I was an Australian, what would be your view then —supposing you were living in New Zealand ? " They said they would do all they could against it. 684. They want New Zealand in to try to get a little leaven for the lot ?—That is the impression I formed from the discussion I had with several members over there. 685. So far as you know, the workers affiliated with your own organization do not view with favour the idea of our federating ? —Not as far as I know, though some of them do. 686. Mr. Beauchamp.] With regard to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, if it were passed in Australia, and we federated, do you not think that you would be sufficiently protected here ?—lt all depends whether they passed their present Bill or our present Act.
A.—4
60
687. That is to say, that they would have to adhere to our Act as a whole to effectually protect the workers here?— Certainly. 688. With respect to what you have designated as progressive legislation, do you consider that in Australia they are at least ten years behind us ? —Y-es. 689. As to the Factories Act, do you think it is not operative, or, in other words, like a man-of-war without guns ?—I expect it is, for they cannot enforce it. 690. With inter-free-trade, with no barriers in the shape of tariffs, is it not likely that the Australian manufacturers could successfully compete against our manufacturers ?—Yes, I dare say they could, on account of their larger output. 691. Even with the handicap of freight ?—I have not considered it from that standpoint, but merely from the labour standpoint. 692. Mr. Luke.] Do you think there are any advantages to be gained by federation ?—I have not seen any. 693. Do you think it would be possible to develop our public conveniences under federation, such as railways and posts and telegraphs, as well as we can under the State now ?—I do not think they would receive as much attention. 694. You think generally that federation would prove detrimental to the interests of trade ?— Yes, especially to the manufacturing classes. 695. Mr. Lei/s.] Are not the Victorian labour laws pretty efficient ? —No, they are very cumbersome. 696. Is not our factory law framed on the basis of the Victorian statute? —No ; quite different. Under the Victorian Factory Act they have a Wages Board which can be set up, with so many men from each side. 697. Is not there a classification of the hours of labour under the Factory Act?—l have not read the Victorian Act, but I have looked at the New South Wales Act, which, I understand, is something similar to the Victorian one ; and certainly the New South Wales law is very inferior to ours. 698. I understand that the Wages Board in Victoria fixes a minimum wage: is that so ? — Yes, sometimes. 699. It has that power ? —Yes; and I think they got exceptional powers during the last session of Parliament. 700. Is not the Act working pretty well?—lt did not work very well before—that is, taking the experience of the workers. I went to the Trades Hall, and inquired from the officials there as to the working of the Act. 701. Assuming the Commonwealth Parliament passes a Conciliation and Industrial Act on exactly the same lines as ours, do you think the decisions under that Act will bring the wages up to as high a level as they are now in New Zealand ?—No, I do not think so. 702. You think they would take a lower level ?—Yes. 703. And thiat that lower level would affect us here ?—Yes. 704. Hon. Major Steward.] I understand you to say that the conditions of labour are more satisfactory in New Zealand than in Australia, and that our legislation in that respect is ahead of Victoria and New South Wales ?—Yes. 705. If that is so, and New Zealand became a part of the Commonwealth, and the Commonwealth Legislature passed an Arbitration Act such as we have here, is it your opinion that the Courts set up under that Act would bring about an equality of wages by bringing down the New Zealand rate, or would it fix a rate which would be lower than that of the New Zealand rate ? —I do not think they would care to start by lowering our rate to that of the other side; it is more likely that New Zealand would have to stand still until the others climbed up to her. 706. Do you think it would be a levelling-up or a levelling-down ?—I should be afraid that it would be a levelling-down. 707. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there anything you wish to add?— Simply that in New South Wales there are only 431 Europeans—men, women, and boys -engaged in the furniture trade, as against 457 Chinese.
Tuesday, 12th February, 1901. Alexander Burt examined. (No. 22.) 708. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your position, Mr. Burt ? —I am managing director of Messrs. A. and T. Burt (Limited), merchants and manufacturers, of Dunedin. 709. How long have you been resident in Dunedin ?—Since 1861, continuously. 710. Have you resided in Australia at all ?—I was for two years in Australia previous to that. 711. What is the line of manufactures in which your company are engaged ?—Metals and machinery. 712. What number of hands do you employ?— Somewhere about five hundred in the different departments —all in Dunedin. 713. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia?— Just so far as our manufactures are concerned. 713 a. How do you view the matter so far as it affects the manufactures and industries of New Zealand ?—ln the metal industry it would affect us greatly. I do not think we could compete in any sense with an equal tariff. 714. If the terms were equal you could not compete—you could not come into competition with them at all ?—Not as New Zealand stands at the present time. 715. If the terms were equal it would make a difference ?—Yes. I mean that we could not compete with them equally. There would need to be a slight tariff on some things—more on some things than on others.
A.—4
61
716. You could not compete on equal terms ?—No. My reason for stating so is this : First of all, in Australia they have a larger population to work on as manufacturers. Then, a most important point in our trade is the raw material. They have copper and tin locally, which, of course, we have to import from New South Wales or Victoria. That is a matter that handicaps us. Then, there is fuel. They get fuel for about half of what we have to pay for it. They get bituminous coal for about 15s. :we have to pay £1 10s. here. We have to work with lignite a good deal. Coke, which is largely used by foundries, is also half the price in Australia that we have to pay for it. These are big items in the manufacture of iron goods—machinery, and so on. Then, freights to Melbourne and Sydney are from 25 to 50 per cent, less than to New Zealand, which, of course, puts the raw material into the shops in Australia much cheaper than we get it. Taking all these together, it would be impossible for engineers, ironfounders, brass-workers, or copper-workers to compete successively against the Australian manufactures. There is another point you will all agree with : the larger the manufactures the cheaper the output. Now, in Melbourne, where they are far in advance of New Zealand with their machinery, and so on, they could afford to make in excess of their own consumption, and the surplus they could send anywhere, even at a loss. It would still pay them, of course, because they would make their profit out of the enlarged output. Even if they only sold 25 per cent, of the surplus at cost or under in brass and copper goods they would really lose nothing. That was proved in America years ago. You could not buy the same class of goods in the market at the price at which they were exporting them, because it was a surplus they were exporting. If federation took place, I am sure that, under existing arrangements, a good many of the manufactories now going on in Dunedin would be stopped. Then, there is the labour trouble over here. I do not know if we can call it a trouble, but the unions have taken action through the Conciliation Board and the Arbitration Court, the result of which is that their wages have been advanced considerably. That Court does not exist on the other side. Wages are now 25 per cent, higher in New Zealand than they are in Australia. Of course, these are matters that might be remedied if federation took place. I have not studied the effects of federation years hence, but I can say that the effect in the immediate future would be that a great many of the rising industries of the colony would be annihilated. Then, there is another point— one the Government should take advantage of whether we federate or not. For a number of years past, in both Melbourne and Sydney, a large amount of money has been spent on technical education, much to the advantage of the different manufactories. No doubt it has enabled them to succeed in many things they would not otherwise have succeeded in. But any assistance we have got from the Government for our school in Dunedin we have almost had to drag out of them. I have had a good deal to do with the institution, and I know what it has been. You would be astonished to learn all the difficulties we have had in carrying it on; and now, after giving us many promises of help, they have practically refused to give further help, so that I do not think we will be able to carry on the school in the coming session. What we require is building accommodation for plant we have already got and paid for; plant that has been shut up for two years will be a third year if we do not get the necessary buildings. 717. Will not the Manual and Technical Instruction Act of last year help you?—To some extent, but not in regard to buildings. If the Fjducation Board take the whole matter up they will provide the buildings, but if private associations take the work in hand—and it is a private association in Dunedin—the Government give only £lfor£l. We have canvassed the publicjior the last ten or eleven years for subscriptions, and have met with great success. If it had not been for help from that source we could not have carried on at all, but I distinctly refuse to go to the public any further for help for the building or anything else. It would be a Government building. Of course, we hold it now, but we have agreed that if they extend the building we will hand it all over to them. That, then, is an advantage they have in Victoria and New South Wales over New Zealand. Up to the present we have done a little good with our school, but we would do a great deal more good if they would only give us the building accommodation. The cost to the Government, so far as the local school is concerned, has been only a few hundred pounds. 718. That is a matter you think should be urged on the consideration of the New Zealand Government ?—lf the Government in the end desire to go in for federation that is one point they would have to go into at once. If New Zealand is to cope with the larger-populated colonies our Government would have to meet that question. It is a fact all over the world that without proper instruction manufactories cannot progress —at least, you cannot compete with those who are better instructed. 719. Is there anything further you wish to say, Mr. Burt ?—I may say I have read s6me of the evidence about the borrowing-powers of the colony. My own opinion is that as we stand at present we can borrow money as cheaply as we could if we were federated. We can borrow as cheaply as an independent colony as if we were a federated colony. The time may come when we shall federate with Australia, but I feel that it will be throwing away our independence. 720. Our political independence ? —Yes. Another thing is this : A certain amount of the Customs duties would require to go from the colony—l think it is a third—and you would have to fight to get it back again. I may say I have studied the technicalities of my own industry, which would be affected with other industries in Dunedin. With certain industries we are further advanced in Dunedin than they are anywhere else in New Zealand ; we have had more experience in them. 721. I understand your remarks apply to other industries as well as your own ?—Yes. 722. Supposing New Zealand federated, do you think that protection for any limited time, if it were possible, would remedy the risks or minimise the risks to which you refer ?—To a certain extent it would, because it would allow us to pull up some industries which are now behind. I regard New Zealand as a self-contained colony. If we were a colony that could not produce everything we require, then I should say it would be a good thing for New Zealand to federate; but, as
A.—4
62
a matter of fact, there is nothing I know of under the sun that we cannot produce. I could quite understand the federation of New Zealand and some of the other islands of the Pacific, but I cannot see what advantage it will be for New Zealand to federate with Australia. 723. Where are the principal deposits of copper in Australia?— There are three or four. Burra Burra is the principal one. There are also the tin-mines at Broken Hill, and we get tin from Tasmania as well. 724. Do you despair of copper being worked profitably in New Zealand ? —No. I hope to see it worked in New Zealand. It is only a matter of development. 725. What about coal ?—There is plenty of it here; but the Westport coal that comes to Dunedin costs more than the Newcastle coal. Ido not know the reason, but I suppose it is the transit that causes it. We have plenty of bituminous coal in New Zealand. We are well supplied with lignite for steam purposes, but for furnace purposes you must have hard coal and coke. A large quantity of coke is used in foundries. 726. I take it, then, you are of the opinion it would be better for New Zealand not to federate at the present time ?—Certainly, that is my opinion. 727. Mr. Luke.'] Is the coal you use in your manufactures imported from Australia, or is it New Zealand coal?—We use both. We get the one that is cheapest. We use Westport, Grey, or Newcastle, so long as it is a hard bituminous coal. 728. You fear that under federation the large companies in Australia will manufacture more cheaply by increasing their volume, and ship their surplus to this colony ? —Yes. 729. That has been demonstrated, has it not, in America and elsewhere ?—Yes, repeatedly. 730. You have said the wages paid in New Zealand are higher than the wages in Australia ?— Taking the thing all round, I should say there is from 20 to 25 per cent, difference. 731. Do you think the freights from Great Britain to Australia will be lowered to any extent in the future ?—Not unless our imports increase. What causes the cheap freight for heavy goods to Melbourne and Sydney is the large amount of light goods imported there. The vessels are glad to get pig-iron at 7s. 6d. a ton, whereas we have to pay £1 2s. or £1 ss. a ton. We have not got these light goods coming here. 732. I presume the gathering of our return freights from the different ports increases the cost of shipping to New Zealand ?—Yes, manufacturers are handicapped in that way. They have to ship their manufactures to the different centres. Victoria has one large centre. If we start a factory to supply New Zealand we have to calculate in our cost the freight to take these manufactures to each of the large centres. That is a matter we add to our cost. Of course, we do distribute our manufactures all over New Zealand. 733. We were told in Invercargill that if we federated the dredging industry would be more or less destroyed ?—Under the present • tariff it would be entirely destroyed if the Victorian people could turn out the quantity. There has been a large demand lately, and companies have not been looking so much to price as to time. If the trade got consolidated, and time was not necessary, I should say that with the present 5-per-cent. tariff we would be thrown out of the market. Five per cent, is all we have on mining machinery, and up to the present we have got as much work as we require; but if keen competition was taking place, and the manufacturers in Australia wanted work, they could take it. At least, I could if I was there. 734. You think the dredge-building will be a diminishing quantity ?—Yes, I think so. I look forward to only a few years of it. As for the dredging industry itself, I see a large future before it, but there will not always be such a rush for new plant as there is now. There will no doubt be some work in the way of repairing and renewing. 734 a. You think the distance we are from Australia is one reason why we should not federate ? —Yes. 735. Would not that also be an element in favour of federation—that is to say, the Australians would not be able to so readily compete for the trade here because of their distance any more than we would compete with them?— Once you get the things on board, a few thousand miles make little difference in the freight. In fact, you pay as much to bring goods from Australia to New Zealand as you do from Home to New Zealand. 736. For heavy lines ?—Yes. 737. Looking into the future, it has been thought by some that, being a self-contained colony, and a colony that has all the materials for manufacturing, we may in time be able, under federation, not only to supply our own needs, but to compete with them for their local market ? —Yes, there is a possibility of that in the future. I feel there is a large field for development in New Zealand. There is no end to it. It is a matter of money and the proper men, and, as I said before, education. You cannot develop these new resources without having properly trained men to do it. Unless we encourage our technical schools so that artisans may attend them —let them be a means of education for practical mechanics —we will not succeed. If these men get the chance they can grasp the subject better than the professional man, unless the latter takes up the practical part. It is the practical men who attend these classes in Melbourne and Sydney, and also the Tradesmen's College in Glasgow, where an immense good has been done by the tradesmen attending these institutions. 738. Have you seen the Technical Association's buildings in Melbourne and Sydney ?—No; I have not been there for twenty years. 739. You think this technical training is a big feature in the future of New Zealand?— Yes. It must be gone on with in a thorough manner. Up to the present it has only been played with : I do not hesitate to say that. 740. You think we ought to retain our political independence, do you not ?—Yes; I am inclined to think we are better as we are, and, for myself, I would be sorry to give up the independence I have in New Zealand for any benefits that might be derived from federation.
A.—4
63
741. Mr. Beauchamp.] Assuming the rates of wages and the hours of labour were uniform throughout Australia and New Zealand, are you of opinion that the industries of New Zealand could not exist, although the Australian people would be handicapped to the extent of the freight from Australia to New Zealand?—lt would lessen the"difficulty a little, but not put us on a good footing. 742. You say that, owing to the raw material being cheaper, and the fact that they have a larger home population to tap, they can throw off their surplus here at such a price as would render it impossible for you to compete against them ? —Certainly. We could not compete against the surplus of such large firms as there are in Melbourne. You would have to compete against their cost price. 743. That is the chief difficulty that many people here have in respect to American goods— that the Americans, after supplying their domestic trade, export the surplus?— Yes. I have bought American manufactures at less than I know they cost them, just because it was a surplus. 744. What is the rate of freight you would pay on ordinary manufactures from, say, Sydney to Dunedin ?—Case goods are from 12s. 6d. to 15s. Sometimes we get pig-iron or plates for 7s. 6d. a ton, but it is generally 10s. When it has suited them we have had freight as low as 7s. 6d. 745. That was probably when the competition existed between the Union Steamship Company and Huddart, Parker, and Co. ? —No. It is a matter of convenience for the Union Company to take a few hundred tons of heavy goods at a small rate. 746. Have you any market in Australia for your goods ? —Only for specialities. There are some specialities in brewers' plant that we send to some parts of Australia. 747. With a moderately protected tariff, do you suffer any competition from Australia? —Not now. Of course, specialities may come over, but the general run of brass and metal goods we do not hear of coming to the colony. When the Australian manufactures do come it is not a matter of price, but a matter of getting the article. 748. In respect to the technical schools in New South Wales and Victoria, do you find that the higher wages and the shorter hours in New Zealand attract any of these men to this colony who have been educated there?— Yes. We have several men employed who were trained over there. I have observed the better knowledge of theory they have than the New Zealand men, though they are not such good workers. They seem to have grasped the theory, which, of course, our technical schools would teach if thoroughly equipped. 749. At what rates does the New Zealand coal sell?— Nuts for steam purposes cost, I think, £1 Bs.; but we do not use that class. Lump coal, which we use for our furnaces, is £1 12s. We never pay under £1 9s. • 750. Mr. Millar.] You are aware this question of federation is bringing about a conflict of opinion between the interests of manufacturers and the interests of agricultural producers: could you give us any idea of the manufactures of the colony ? —I think the Government have the statistics. I did not look them up, because I thought you would be able to get the information from the Government. At any rate, the value of the manufactures must be considerable. It has increased very much during the last few years. 751. You could not give any idea of the value of the manufactures in Dunedin alone? —No. We fill up printed forms for the Government giving all that information. Of course, it is supposed to be private. No one giving evidence would state the extent of his own output. I would not do it; but I say it must have increased considerably during the last four or five years. 752. We have evidence that the total value of the export of produce to Australia is worth to this colony about £1,7.50,000 ?—Yes. 753. Dunedin pays in Customs duties about £400,000 per annum ?—Yes. 754. The bulk of that, I suppose, is paid by the workers ?—Yes. 755. Well, I suppose I am correct in saying that the four centres of the colony are more or less dependent on the manufactures ? —For actual manufacturing wages they are. 756. Shopkeepers, again, are dependent on the workers ? —Yes; and no doubt the workingman in Dunedin forms the multitude. 757. So that the four centres of the colony are really dependent on the manufactures ? —Well, even if federation did not take place they would be bound to take some of these goods. The total of £1,750,000 might be reduced, but not wiped out. 758. If £400,000 is the amount paid as duty per annum in Dunedin, that, at 20 per cent., represents a total value of two millions ?—Yes. 759. And, of course, the bulk of the expenditure of the colony does not pay duty ?—No, of course not. 760. There is house-rent, fuel, flour, oatmeal, and so on ?—Yes, and many of the goods that are imported do not pay duty either. 761. A large part of their expenditure is not dutiable ?—That is so. 762. If it is shown that the workers consume a large portion of the two millions' worth of goods upon which duty is paid, and if you take, in addition, all the amount paid for rent and other items upon which no duty is paid, would it be fair to assume that the total value of the manufactures to Dunedin is worth three millions per annum ? —You could assume it, but I would not like to give it without working it up. It is not a matter I have studied. It is a matter that could easily be brought out mathematically. 763. If it can be shown that the manufactures of the colony are worth to the colony at the present time between eight and ten millions, as against £1,750,000 which the Australian market is worth in export, there can be no quibble as to which is of the greater value to the colony ?—I quite agree that the manufactures have the best of it. That is quite evident without calculation I think you might lose a portion of the £1,750,000, but not all of it. Of course, we would have the London market to fall back upon.
A.—4
64
764. I think you have stated that under intercolonial free-trade some of our industries would be almost annihilated ?—Yes. 765. The result would be that the workers at present employed, and who pay their share of the taxation of the colony, would have to leave the colony ?—Yes. 766. So that from a population point of view the colony would be handicapped ?—Yes. 766 a. Do you think that under a Federal Government the natural resources of this colony would be developed as rapidly as under a Government of our own?—No, decidedly not. 767. That is another objection to federation'?— Yes. lam sure some of our own provinces would have progressed better under provincial government than they have under the central form of government. 768. Have you given sufficient study to the question of federation to form an opinion as to whether it is probable that in the course of a few years the States will be abolished and there will be one Central Government in Australia?—l have concluded that, and that is one reason why I answered as I did. 769. You think the same disabilities that applied in the abolition of the provinces would apply likewise to the States ?—That is my opinion. 770. Altogether, from your personal study of the question, you favour New Zealand keeping out of the Federation ?—Yes, at the present time. 771. Mr. Roberts.] Will you kindly tell the Commission what position you occupy in the Technical Classes Association ?—I have been the president since the inception, eleven years ago. 772. So that in what you have been saying you have been speaking from practical experience? —Yes; and I feel very grieved at the way the Government have treated us. Mr. G. M. Thomson and myself have pretty well managed the association all along, with the assistance of an able committee. We have a meeting on Friday afternoon to go into the whole question, and the chances are that we will have to throw the whole thing up for want of help. 773. Hon. Captain Russell.'] Do you attach importance to the subject of technical education for public-school children, or is it a subject for young people after they have left school ?—After they go to work they should get it. In the public school they should find out what the children have a desire for, and what they would be inclined to go to. In the school it gives them, at any rate, an idea of working with tools, whether they follow it up or not. 774. I suppose technical schools for children could only be of avail in the large centres?— Yes, that is so. In the public school it is more recreation than anything else, because they have not the sense to know what they are driving at; but, when it is a case of a man or a young woman at the technical classes, they wish to learn the theory of the practical trade they are working at. Nowadays a practical trade without theory is not worth much. 775. You say that coal from Westport costs you about the same laid down in Dunedin as coal from Australia? —Yes. 776. How do you account for that ?—I do not know. All I know is the price charged here. 777. You seem to take rather a despondent view of the possibilities of manufactures in New Zealand for the future : would a protective tariff affect the matter at all ?—I would not agree to a protective tariff further than we have at present. I think that to increase the protective tariff would help to ruin industry, because it would increase competition to such an extent. 778. You think a further protection of manufactures would tend to injure the industries ?— Yes. 779. We may assume then that, for practical purposes, it would be impossible to improve the position of the trade by any alteration of the tariff ?—Yes. I think it would not improve it. 780. What is the average freight of iron, such as you use, from England ?—We can get it cheaper from England than from Australia. Sometimes we have to get small lots from Australia to keep us supplied when consignments due do not arrive to time. At the present time the cost from England or Scotland of pig-iron is £1 2s. 6d., and sometimes £1 ss. At times we have had lots at 15s. I know for a fact chat both in Melbourne and Sydney they are charged 7s. 6d. regularlv - -781. Why is that ? —The only way I can explain it is this : Many vessels come out pretty well loaded with light goods, and they must have ballast. In some cases they take pig-iron, and take it out for nothing. As a matter of fact, I have known cases where the ships have had to buy pigiron, and run the risk of selling it in Australia. 782. Ships come here with light freights, do they not?—We never get that chance here. We have to get the bulk of our pig-iron from Home, mostly from the Clyde. 783. Does the question of freight on the raw material materially affect the iron-manufacture ?— Yes, a few shillings a ton in cost affects you in heavy work. 784. Would it be possible to manufacture pig-iron, say, at Parapara and bring it to Dunedin at as cheap a price as you can get it from London ?—lf the Parapara was developed it would be a likely material, and there would, no doubt, be ways and means of getting the material down. You could get sailing-crafts to compete against the steamers. At any rate, if the pig-iron was smelted at Parapara, I think means would be got to take it to any part of New Zealand for not more than ss. a ton. 785. Could it be handled and put out cheaper than you import from England ?—Yes, but you would require to have the quantity to work with. 786. As to the difference of profits between large establishments and small establishments, what would you say it is? —Well, che larger the output the cheaper the cost. As an illustration, I may say that in certain articles you may make a dozen which might be sufficient for some requirements, but if you make a gross of the same article you could reduce the cost by 25 per cent. 787. Then, on that basis, is it possible without an enormous protective tariff to keep the steel rails and the steel manufactures of America out of this country ?—No ; it would require to be pro-
65
A.—4
tected, because these steel rails they are sending out are being sent out, I think, at cost. No doubt the large contracts the Americans have been taking are undertaken because of a surplus. 788. Taking the thing practically, will it affect our market ? —Not in steel rails. In other things it will affect our market. I have actually bought American brass manufactures cheaper than the American cost. 789. Does not that materially affect the question of federation : have we not to look to a wider market than Australia whether we federate or not ? —Yes, that would be right enough if things were equal, but I do not see why we should throw away our independence if things are not equal. If everything were equal, and we had copper, and tin, and other things, I should say open every port in the colony. 790. Should we not fear American production rather than Australian, whether we federate or not ?—No, because we have a 20-per-cent. tariff against the American. 791. On iron goods?—On all the iron and brass manufactures, with the exception of those confounded exemptions. The tariff is burdened with exemptions, of which mining machinery is one. If I wanted a new boiler, or a new engine, and did not feel inclined to make it, I would have to pay 20 per cent, duty, while if I sent it up to a mine I would have to pay only 5 per cent. Our tariff is killed with exemptions. Ido not know how they are put in, but they are there. 792. You spoke, too, of the cost of production being affected because of the price of coal : is it not possible that very soon New Zealand may be at an advantage as compared with Australia in motive-power through electricity ?—Yes ; I have a feeling myself that we will progress, and that in time we may be in a position to federate anywhere, but at present I do not think it, because we have not got the facilities. 793. Your objection to federation applies to to-day and not to fifty years hence?—To a certain extent. 794. Have you considered it from the position of a vigorous country in a cool climate competing with a country no doubt vigorous, but where the climate is hot ?—That is a point in New Zealand's favour, but it is only a small point. I will tell you why : Working in buildiags in a hot climate, such as Melbourne or Sydney, the workmen are cooler inside than outside. I know that in building factories over there they build them with brick and ventilate them thoroughly, so that men are more comfortable in the shop than outside of it. I admit, however, that our workmen are more robust and more able to stand fatigue. 795. Is it a calculable item?—lt should be taken into account, no doubt. 796. Do you consider our labour legislation here has been materially beneficial to the industries or not ?■ —Up to the present it has hurt us to some extent; but we will get over that." In some places where the price of labour has gone up we have had to study it, and have machines to make up for it in some way or other. But so far in our industry—the metal industry—it has not injured us much. In any cases we have had the decisions have not made the men better off. We had a decision the other day by the Conciliation Board for the boilermakers. It is no disadvantage to us. The men were as well off before as they are now. There were some alterations made, but technically there are but little differences. 797. There is a tendency to avoid strikes, is there not ?—Yes; and that is one thing I admire in the Act. There is no necessity for strikes now. We all know that strikes mean a loss not only to the men, but to the community at large. 798. Do you think, on the whole, the position of the trades, both for the employer and the men, has been improved, or has it been the reverse ?—I think the Conciliation Board and the Arbitration Court have been an advantage to the trade, and that their decisions will do good, so long as they are carried out properly. Sometimes they make mistakes, of course ; and sometimes, too, the men make mistakes in going to the Conciliation Board without reason ; but that rectifies itself. The ironmoulders who went to the Board the other day were well enough off before, and the Board proved it, because the men are not better off now. There were some trivial differences, but it was not worth while troubling the Board with them. 799. Why will Australia be able to defeat us in the manufacture of dredges in a year or two— an industry that was created in this country ?—At the present time they have larger appliances, they get iron cheaper, their coal is cheaper, and their labour is cheaper ; and all we have against those points is 5 per cent, duty and the freight, which is not enough. In some cases our tenders have been lower than theirs when we have come into competition, and now we are pretty well on a level. Sometimes they come in and sometimes they are out, just as we are among ourselves. 800. All these objections seem to me to deal with the question of to-day only ?—Yes. 801. What do you imagine the manufacturing industry will be worth fifty years hence?— Well, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. We see the paradise coming ; but, for myself, Ido not ■want to hand away our birthright until I see something better. 802. Mr. Luke.] In looking at the question of federation, is it not advisable to consider the two interests—viz.,- the produce of the soil as well as the manufactures of our factories?— Yes, I think so. 803. Are you aware that we export over a million a year in cereals to Australia?—l do not know exactly what is exported. 804. In considering this question, then, you put as a set-off the great interests of the manufacturing classes ? —Yes. 805. Do you know the extent of these interests ?—No. I have not seen the figures for some time. I know they have been on the increase, but to what extent I cannot say. 806. Then, you would not be surprised to find from Government returns that in 1895 we employed in our factories about twenty-eight thousand persons ; that the wages paid were about £1,907,592; that the value of the work turned out was £9,549,360; and that the value of the machinery and property involved in manufacturing was £5,796,017. Now, allowing for the great 9—A. 4.
A.—4
66
expansion that we all know has taken place in the last five years, we get an output of about twelve or thirteen millions, and we find, in addition, that last year forty-nine thousand persons were employed in our factories. In considering the question of federation you admit that we should consider these great interests as against a little over a million we export from New Zealand to Australia? —Yes, that is so. As far as increase of population is concerned, we cannot expect it without industries. 807. Mr. Leys.] Do you say that Australia does not compete with the New Zealand engineering shops now ?—Yes, they compete. 808. Is it not a fact that when the Government called for tenders for railway-wagons the lowest tender came from Australia? —I do not know. I understand that in that matter some firms did not tender at all, as it was understood the Government were going to make them themselves. We had a feeling in our company that they were only calling for approximate prices. Besides, we were busy at the time. I think they settled it at last by allowing any one to take somany trucks at a price. 809. There were several tenders sent in ? —-Yes, I believe so. 810. We have evidence that the lowest tender was an Australian tender: could you explain why that should be so ?—With the facilities they have as against ours, I could quite imagine it would be the lowest if they went into it properly. 811. You think that is an evidence of what you have already said about the superior capacity of the Melbourne shops?— Yes. 812. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you happen to know whether the large increase in the number of hands employed in factories and in the number of factories subsequent to 1895 was not more apparent than real, being consequent on the alteration of the definition of the word "factory " ?—I could not answer the question. 813. Hon. the Chairman.] Is it not correct that the information respecting manufactures and works is only collected every five years when the census is taken?—l think it is collected every year. At any rate, certain forms are filled up every year. We filled up some the other day. Eobeet Glbndining examined. (No. 23.) 814. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the firm of Eoss and Glendining?—Yes. 815. What are they?— Warehousemen and woollen-manufacturers. 816. How long have you been resident in New Zealand? —Forty years. 817. Have you resided in Australia?— No. 818. Has your house any branch in Australia ?—No. 819. You have only a New Zealand house? —New Zealand and London. 820. Are the operations of your firm extensive ?—Fairly extensive. 821. Will you favour the Commission with your views on the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I have- given it very little study. lam a busy man, and have not had time to study it much. 822. Just state, please, what your views are? —As warehousemen, I think it would not suit us at all to federate. There are larger houses there, and they have better facilities and cheaper freights, and we could not compete with them. That is from a warehouseman's point of view. As for woollen-manufactures, we could not compete with them in that line either. They have cheaper labour and a larger market than we have. 823. Would those remarks apply to a house in the same line as yours that had an establishment in Australia as well as New Zealand ? —Yes. 824. Why do you think it would not suit those in your line of trade to federate with Australia ? —In the woollen-manufacture we pay higher wages than they do in Australia, and we have shorter hours. 825. Have you any opinion as to how it would affect the manufactures of New Zealand ?— No, I have formed no definite opinion on the matter; but in the meantime I think it would be disastrous to the lot of us. 826. It has been represented to us that'from the producer's point of view it would be advantageous to New Zealand to federate ?—Not in the way of manufactures. 827. But as to agricultural products ?—lt might be a benefit to them ; but if the Australian people want our oats they will take them whether there is a tariff or not. 828. Which do you consider the more important—the manufacturing industry or the agricultural interest ?—The manufacturing is more important than the agricultural. 829. At the present time?— Yes. 830. Is it likely to continue to be so ?—Yes, under our present regime it is likely to be so. 831. Your opinion is against federation ?—Yes. 832. Hon. Captain Russell.] How do you arrive at the opinion that the manufacturing industry is more important than the agricultural ?—There is a larger number of people employed in it, to begin with. 833. How many people are employed in it?—l could not say how many. 834. How many in the agricultural?—l could not say the number, but it is much less. 835. How is it the New Zealand woollen industry is unable to compete with the Australian ? —The New Zealand woollen industry at present makes better goods than in Australia. Our New Zealand woollens are superior to any of Australia. 836. Supposing that to be the case, if the Australians want an inferior article, is there any reason why you should not manufacture it in New Zealand?— Our labour is against us. We pay higher wages than they do in Australia. 837. But you get better work?— Yes, certainly. «
67
A.—4
838. But does not the better work compensate for the increased wage ? —lt does in the market here. 839. Do the New Zealand mills supply an appreciable part of the soft goods used in New Zealand ?—Yes, a very appreciable part. 840. Can you give us any idea of the proportion ?—No. 841. Is it 10 per cent. ?—I could not say exactly. 842. You think the woollen industry of New Zealand is a material item in rejecting or accepting federation ? —Yes, I think it is. 843. I am surprised to hear all the manufacturers tell the same story—that we cannot compete with any other place : do you think we cannot send our produce anywhere ?—We cannot send our woollen goods into Australia on account of the tariffs, except into New South Wales. 844. Is our tariff higher or lower than their tariff? —Their tariff is higher than ours. 845. Speaking generally of Australia?—Of woollen goods it is. 846. New South Wales, for instance ? —New South Wales is lower. 847. And Queensland ?—Queensland is about the same as New Zealand. 848. And the other States ?—They are almost the same. Victoria is the only colony in which the tariff is higher than in New Zealand. 849. Yet you think we cannot compete with them in the industry? —No, not at present. 850. Would you suggest a higher tariff to prevent the importation of goods ?—No; I think our tariff is high enough. 851. A higher tariff would induce more competition in New Zealand ? —Yes. 852. Would that lead to larger production ?—Yes. 853. And a large production of manufactures would be injurious to the industries of the country'—Yes. We would not have a market for it. 854. Mr. Roberts.] Did not the woollen industry exist for many years under a 5-per-cent. tariff?—l think it was 15 per cent.; Ido not think it was ever 5 per cent. 855. What is it now? —25 per cent, ad valorem on all woollen goods. 856. Can you say what the difference of hours is in Australia as compared with New Zealand? —I am told they work ten hours in Australia. 857. You are not certain?— No. 858. You are satisfied the wages are lower than in New Zealand ?—Yes, very much. 859. Mr. Millar.] Your trade for the last few years has been expanding ? —Yes. 860. And you now employ about four hundred hands ?—Nearly a thousand, all told, in one way and anothor. 861. How many in the mill ?—Over four hundred. 862. Under present conditions your manufactures are gradually extending ?—Yes. 863. They are becoming more important to the colony all the time ?—Yes. 864. I suppose you anticipate that under normal conditions it will continue to do so ?—Yes, 865. You cannot see there will be any advantage to New Zealand from the opening of the Australian markets to New Zealand manufactures ? —No, I cannot see it at all. I think it would be a disadvantage. 866. You think it would be better to keep our own population and to keep our home market ? —Yes. 867. I find that altogether there are in the factories, coal-mines, and gold-mines 64,000 hands employed ?—Yes, I suppose so. 868. And, of course, there are numbers of casual labourers employed ; they are engaged off and on, and no statistics are kept respecting them ?—That is so. 869. So that we may say there are 100,000 persons employed in connection with the various industries?— Yes; more. 870. Altogether, from a colonial point of view, you think it is more to the advantage of New Zealand to keep as she is?— Yes, that is my view. Hon. Captain Bussell: The census returns of 1896 give these figures: Persons engaged in commercial pursuits, 50,380; persons engaged in industrial pursuits, 81,814 ; and persons engaged in agricultural, pastoral, mineral, and other primary productions, 106,130. 872. Mr. Beauchamp.] I judge from the number of hands you employ you must be one of the largest producers of soft goods in New Zealand ?—Yes. 873. Do you find you have considerable competition with the Australian towns carrying on similar lines of business ?—Yes. 874. Is it increasing or diminishing?—l do not think it is increasing much. 875. To what do you attribute their ability to compete against you satisfactorily ? —They come here selling their surplus stuff. 876. And under federation that trade would increase ?—Yes ; we would simply be flooded with surplus stock from Australia. 877. In former days the Melbourne people held the trade of the west coast of the South Island, did they not ?—Yes ; but it is almost gone. 878. As regards woollens, do you find the English goods competing keenly against you ?—Yes, they compete very keenly against us, owing to the cheap class of goods they send out. 879. By a return I have I see that in 1899 Dunedin imported woollens to the value of £3,921 from Australia : would those be re-exports or the product of Australia?—Ee-exports. 880. Are the woollens manufactured here exported to any extent ? —No. 881. You have no market in Australia?—No ; the tariff shuts us out. 882. That applies equally to New South Wales? —We get certain lines into New South Walea, but we are shut out of Victoria. 883. Is it owing to the superior quality of the goods that we find a market in New South Wales ?—Yes.
A.—4
68
884. Is it not a fact that in New Zealand at the present time there are more woollen-mills than we require?— Yes. 885. Is the industry therefore profitable or unprofitable?— There is great competition, and it depends on the quality of the goods made. 886. If, therefore, you are subjected to further competition through federation, it will annihilate the woollen industry in New Zealand ?—lt would at the present rate of wages. 887. That is to say, if they had longer hours of labour and lower wages?— Yes. 888. You do not advocate any increase in the present tariff? —No. 889. You are content ? —Yes. 890. Have you considered the financial aspect of federation to the colony ?—No. 891. You have not thought of the effect it would have on the raising of loans?—l believe New Zealand could borrow money without federation as cheaply as under federation. 892. Mr. Luke.] Did you say the hours of labour in Australia are ten? —I have been told it is ten hours. 893. That must be peculiar to the woollen industry ?—And to other industries. 894. I have been told the hours are nine?—My information is that they are ten. 895. You have also been engaged in pastoral pursuits ?—Yes. 896. And you can speak with a fair degree of knowledge of both the manufacturing and the pastoral industries?— Yes. 897. Taking the two interests into consideration, you think we are better without federation?— Most decidedly. 898. You are of opinion that with the higher wages we pay and the shorter hours we could not expect, under federation, to export into Australia any of our woollen goods?— That is so. 899. Have you thought of the matter at all from a political standpoint?— No. 900. Mr. Leys.] I presume that in saying the manufacturing industry was of more importance than the agricultural you took into account the fact that only a very small portion of our agricultural industry could be affected by federation—that is to say, that the greater part of our agricultural products go to England ?—Yes. 901. In 1899 the total exports to England were £9,400,000, while, if we deduct the gold, our exports to Australia were only one million?— Yes. 902. So that in view of those figures the agricultural industry scarcely compares with the manufacturing industry ? —That is so. 903. As far as this particular question is concerned ? —Yes, so far as this question of federation goes. 904. Then, with regard to the effect of federation on warehouses, already we have no chance of competing with Australia in our exports?—No, not the slightest. 905. Under federation our markets would be open to the Australian importers to a greater extent than they are now ?—Under federation, if we have to compete with Australia, we would have to go to Sydney and fight them on their own ground. 906. While the Australian Colonies re-export goods to the extent of 18,000,000 tons, New Zealand only re-exports goods to the extent of 138,000 tons, of which 134,000 tons go to the South Pacific, so that practically we have no re-exports? —That is so. 907. This 18,000,000 tons of re-exports from the Australian Colonies would be aggravated under federation?— Yes. 908. Hon. Major Steward.] Did you say that a certain quantity of our woollen manufactured goods found their way to New South Wales ?—A small portion. 909. And the reason that New South Wales imports that small quantity is that it is in special lines? —Yes, and on account of the low tariff. 910. Supposing we joined the Federation, and there was no duty between the States, should we be able to find a market, say, in Victoria for our woollen goods ? —Not unless we reduced the price of labour. 911. You think the difference in the price of labour and the hours would handicap us so much that we could not compete ?—Most decidedly. 912. We are not able to make a better article and command a market ?—We make a better article, but the demand is not in proportion.to the demand for cheap goods. Geant Pbeston Fabquhae examined. (No. 24.) 913. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a leather merchant, Mr. Farquhar?—Yes; and we have also a tannery. I belong to the firm of Michaelis, Hallenstein, and Farquhar. 914. How long have you been resident in New Zealand ? —Forty years. 915. Have you resided in Australia?—l was for ten years in Victoria prior to coming to New Zealand. 916. Have you visited Australia much since that time ? —I have made a visit every three or four years. 917. You are tolerably familiar with the conditions obtaining in Australia ? —I would hardly like to say that. 918. Will you give the Commission your views as to the probable result of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia?—As far as those branches I am particularly acquainted with are concerned, I believe the result would be extremely injurious to the trade—not directly, but indirectly. I believe the boot trade would be simply swept away. 919. Will you state why ?—That is a question more for boot-manufacturers to answer ; but, generally speaking, it is this: If a boot-factory is run to the best advantage it keeps its machines running constantly on special lines of goods, as in America. One firm takes up one particular line. For instance, if you go to a large boot-manufacturer in America and ask him about his line
A.—4.
69
he will show you four or five samples; and if you were to talk to him about altering them he would say, " These are the lines we manufacture ; if they do not suit you we are sorry " ; and there is an end of it. It is the same largely in Australia, and must be in the large centres to a greater extent than is possible in New Zealand. In one city in the colony there is now enough machinery to make all the work required for New Zealand, but it is running only half its time. The work is cut up into many branches, and it is necessary, when working on trade lines, to have all these lines working together. 920. How do you think the tanneries would be affected ?—I am speaking of that industry. 921. I thought you spoke more of the boot trade ?—I do not know that it would affect us very materially. In some lines the leather is as cheap here as in Victoria. 922. Have you considered the question in connection with other industries besides your own ? —Only generally. I suppose where large quantities of goods can be manufactured they can be made very much cheaper than they can in a small way, particularly with protection, which, I suppose, will be continued on the other side. It is well known that Victoria, when she had a heavy protective duty, was selling goods in New South Wales at 20 or 25 per cent, cheaper that in Victoria. It is a common thing in America to buy American goods 40 per cent, cheaper if they are for outside of America. 923. Supposing there were free-trade in the Australian Commonwealth, and New Zealand is one of the federated States, would the Americans be able to influence your market here in boots? —I think so. 924. In what way ?—The American goods, as far as I can hear, are sold so cheaply they would be able to do it. The price is very low. 925. Would the boot industry here be able to stand against America?—l do not think it is standing against it now. 926. And they would be even more prejudicially affected with free-trade ?—Yes. 927. Mr. Millar.] Your trade has been steadily increasing during the last few years?— Not very largely. 928. Still, it has been increasing?— Slightly. 929. From local consumption or export ?—We have had a large export to the Old Country. 930. I see there was leather to the value of £13,000 exported, from New Zealand to Australia in 1899 ?—I do not know about that. It is news to me, unless it refers to a certain quality of sheepskins. 931. Under federation would you fear any competition from the tanneries in Australia?— Yes. I believe the tendency would be for one of the lines we deal in to go to the wall. 932. It would be a serious question for New Zealand if she was to lose not only her manufactures, but her population ?—Yes. 933. And on those grounds you are opposed to New Zealand joining the Federation ?—Yes, partly on those grounds, and on others a3 well. 934. Do you think the social conditions of the people would be improved by federation?—l cannot see where it would come in. 935. Do you anticipate that there would be any probability of the States being abolished?— Arguing from what took place at the abolition of the provinces in this colony, I think that time might come. 936. In that case we would be governed by a body sitting in Australia? —Yes. 937. And simply have Government officials in New Zealand to carry out what laws there were ?—Yes. 938. You do not think that would be beneficial to New Zealand ?—No. 939. Mr. Boberts.] Did you say the machinery in the tanneries here was underworked?— I was speaking of the boot trade. 940. It does not apply to the tanneries ?—No. 941. During 1899 there was an export of 41,000 hides from New Zealand ?—That may be so. I think there has been an exceptionally large number of cattle killed during the last few years for freezing. 942. Seventeen thousand were exported to New South Wales and seven thousand to Victoria ? —Yes, there was keen competition in hides. 943. There must have been a shortage in hides on the other side ?—Yes, the tick affected the trade. 944. Are the New Zealand hides better than the Australian hides for certain purposes ?— Some of them are better, but there are some fine hides in Australia; they are generally lighter there. 945. They may be taken over to supply a want in an extra heavy leather ?—Yes. 946. Mr. Beaiichamp.] Do you know if there is any duty on leather in Victoria?— Yes, there is. 947. In 1899 we exported to Victoria leather to the value of £4,484, and hides to the value of £7,680 ?—There is no duty on hides. 948. The hides would be free, but on the leather there would be a duty : would that be a special kind of leather ? —Yes. It would be largely composed of skivers and basils, and there is a factory here that turns out perhaps the best chrome sheep-leather in the whole of the colonies. 949. It is owing, perhaps, to the fact that it is a specialty ?—Yes. 950. As regards social legislation, you know the Federal Parliament will deal with several matters of a social character, such as the old-age pensions, marriage and divorce, immigration, arbitration and conciliation, and so on ? —My feeling with regard to that is that it is a leap in the dark. If we once go into it there is no returning; however desirous we might be of returning to the former state of things, it could not be. 951. You prefer to maintain our present independence?— Yes.
A.—4
70
Alfred Henry Bridger examined. (No. 25.) 952. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Bridger ? —Manager of Sargood, Son, and Bwen's boot-factory and department. 953. How long have you been in New Zealand ?—About thirty-eight years. 954. Were you in Australia before that ?—No ; but I have been there on visits. 955. Eecently? —Yes, within the last few years. 956. Do Sargood, Son, and Ewen carry on business in Australia as well as in New Zealand?— Yes, in a large way, but not from a boot-manufacturing point; they are more in the soft-goods line—in fact, all soft goods. They have a boot department, but do not do anything in manufacturing. 957. Are their boots obtained from New Zealand ?—No; they are all obtained on the other side. We do not send anything to them. 958. Will you state to the Commission your views on the question of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth of Australia or standing out ?—I should be against it from a trade point of view, certainly, because there the wages are lower and the hours longer than in New Zealand. Besides, our conditions here are so varied and our population is smaller, and we have to treat with the thing from a very different standpoint. I may put it that as Australia is to America so are we to Australia; and, of course, the larger the cities and the larger the manufactures, the more they can, as it were, get on to special lines in large quantities, and by that' means reduce the cost considerably. 959. Any other reason ?—I do not know any other particular reason beyond this : that our trade at the present time is in a languishing state. 960. Hon. Captain Russell.] Which branch?— The boot-manufacturing. I do not think it could possibly stand against any further addition to the competition. 961. Hon. the Chairman.] Is your business affected from America in any way ?—Very largely indeed. 962. What is that owing to?— Owing to the principle on which they work their factories. They run them on such lines and in such quantities that they reduce the cost considerably, and in that way handicap us very heavily. One of their large manufactories will run ten thousand pairs a day on four or five samples; but we have to run such a large variety that we are really not able to compete against their prices. 963. If your trade is a languishing one now, and free-trade was established in the Commonwealth of Australia, and New Zealand were a State, the condition of the boot trade would be worse? —It would simply annihilate it. 964. Have you considered the question of federation as affecting other industries in New Zealand besides the boot trade ?—I have only heard from other witnesses the large interests of the workers here as against the agricultural interests. One would imagine that the manufacturing interest was of considerably more importance, as the amount involved is, I am told, thirteen millions as against exports of a million. Beyond that I have not studied the question deeply, but I would not like to give an opinion as against the opinions of those who have gone into the matter more thoroughly. 965. Do you think there is any chance in the future of the workers in New Zealand competing successfully against the workers in Australia with free-trade?— Our population will have to increase to the size of theirs before it can be done. 966. Hon. Captain Russell.] You say that America is a dangerous competitor in the boot trade ?—Yes. 967. Increasingly so ?—Yes, certainly. 968. Supposing we had federation with Australia, would the free-trade between Australia and New Zealand wipe the American boots out of the market ?—lt would all depend on the duty. 969. Assuming the duty stands as it is? —No; at present America can beat the world. 970. Therefore the question of federation on account of the boot industry need not be considered? —Only so far as a certain class of work is concerned. They make a certain class of work now, and America will make another class that they do not compete with; so that on the one hand we have to meet them, and we would have to meet the Australian markets on a still further ground. 971. You think the huge output from America and the good machinery there is such a counterpoise to the free-trade of Australia that in certain lines they could compete notwithstanding the duty?— Certainly. 972. If Australia were to develop a particular line, would not America imitate it and produce it more cheaply? —It would depend on whether America took that class of work up. 973. Would it be possible ?—Yes; but there are certain classes of work that do not come into the machinery so much as other lines ; so that, while America cansupersede us in certain classes, Australia, with its large population, and making to a very large extent, as it does, the classes of work we do, paying lower wages, could compete with us in lines in which America does not compete with us. 974. Where do you get the best boots from—America, England, or Australia?—As far as Australia is concerned, there are no imports at present. In America you can get all classes, from the best to the worst. 975. Does New Zealand or Australia produce leather of equal quality to the leather in the American goods ?—There are certain classes they supply that the colony can compete in, but taking it in the aggregate I say No. They supply a class of leather from Germany and France and America of a much superior quality to what is produced in the colony. 976. Do we turn out good leathers in the colony ? —That is largely a question of price. It is a matter of treatment.
71
A.—4
977. Are there facilities for tanning in New Zealand ?—Yes. 978. What bark do they use ?—All kinds. They import bark from Adelaide, and they get extracts from England and America; in fact, they have all the facilities;;for tanning in New Zealand that they have in the older countries. 979. Have we any special barks that enable us to tan without difficulty ? —Yes ; there is the acacia (the wattle-bark), which is the best, that comes from Adelaide. 980. Hon. the Chairman.] And birch-bark? —It is not largely used. It is hardly strong enough. 981. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Do we supply ourselves with tanning material?— The colonies do. 982. Does New Zealand?—As far as New Zealand is concerned, she has no tanning material of her own to any large extent. 983. And therefore the industry is not likely to be a big one?— No. 984. Have you considered the question from any further standpoint ?—I have looked at it only from the trade standpoint. If federation came about, and the trade further languished, we could not keep it up, and then, of course, our population would have to leave us for the places where the trade was being carried on. 985. Then, you think that, under the existing condition of things, New Zealand is in the unfortunate position of being unable to compete with any one ?—lt is the miscellaneous population on the other side that is the trouble. It is not that they are not willing to compete, but it is the amalgamation of so many branches, instead of subdividing, that causes the trouble. 986. And you think that federation would make us still less able to compete with any part of the world ?—Decidedly so. While other trades for some time past have gone ahead, ours has practically gone back. The number of workers in other trades has increased considerably, but ours has been at a standstill. 987. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Is it not the case that American boots are introduced a great deal owing to the Americans consulting the tastes of all classes more than other manufacturers ?— There may be something in that; but at the same time it is more because the general public have taken an idea that America is turning out a better-class article. The word " America " is quite sufficient, whether it is a good article or not, and it will not be until later on that they will find the distinction. 988. I dare say they are consulting the tastes of the masses of the people. For instance, one thing I heard was that the fact of their making what they call half-sizes in boots has led to a great deal of extra trade :is that so ? —Not the half-sizes. They exercise a very great deal of taste, but the price has much more to do with it than the quality of the material they give to you. 989. Mr. Roberts.] Do you not find that the competition from England in boots is much more severe than it is from America ?—Decidedly not. 990. Would you be surprised to know that the imports in 1899 show that there were only 4,600 dozen pairs imported from America, while there were 63,000 dozen pairs imported from England ?—I cannot understand that. As far as that goes, it is just a question of our imports from England and the Continent hitherto; but America has come into our market very rapidly within the last year or two, most rapidly within the last twelve months. Of course, I might say that Germany and England and other parts of the world have felt the pressure of the American competition before we have, and now the wave has reached us. 991. In 1899 the imports of boots were equal to one pair for every man, woman, and child in the colony: is that so? —Yes; there were 86,177 pairs imported in excess of the increase of the population, or equal to sufficient to give employment for a period of three years to 170 men. 992. Are not the wages much lower in Victoria, and the hours of labour much longer?— The hours are not so much longer as that the wages are very much less. 993. Can you give us any information as to what the proportion would be?—l have not studied it, but I understand the hours of labour are about nine hours a day. 994. And here you have only got eight hours ?—Yes. 995. Mr. Millar.] With reference to the imports from England, there are a considerable quantity of boots that come out that are not included in the imports at all : is not that so ?—You are speaking of the smaller sizes ? 996. Yes. Gum-boots are not included in these imports ?—Yes; but the proportion of gumboots was only 620 dozen in 1897, and 523 dozen in 1900, as against 72,000 dozen new boots; so that in 1897 the imports from England of ordinary boots were 62,000 dozen, as against, in 1900, 72,000, an advance of 10,000 dozen within three years. The smaller sizes imported were only 2,472 dozen, as against 62,173 dozen. 997. Eegarding America, I understand that it is hardly what you call a legitimate competition —that is to say, New Zealand is being made the dumping-ground for their surplus ?—Not in the boot trade. In resrject to gum-boots it may be so, but not in the case of ordinary boots, because they have to be made cheap to sell. I hardly think that that idea can possibly apply; they can hardly stock up the quantity in the lines they have. 998. With an increased population in New Zealand, will it not be possible for the factories in this colony to come to some arrangement about specialising their work so as to meet this competition ?—lt depends on the size of the population. 999. And if the market were thrown open, and there were free-trade, you could not do it then ? —We could not look at it at all. 1000. I want to know whether it is a question of wages alone which debars the boot trade from progressing ? —No; as I said before, it is because we are not able to subdivide our work. 1001. It costs you more to produce ?—Yes, because of the variety. 1002. But, still, what the men here earn is not an excessive wage ?—Not under the present conditions.
A.—4
72
1003. And you cannot see that benefit coujd accrue to us by federating?—l cannot see any at the present time. 1004. From a national point of view, getting away from the purely trade point of view, can you see any benefit ?—I cannot say that I can. 1005. Do you believe it would have an injurious effect upon the industries of this colony if we federated ?—I certainly think that. 1006. Mr. Beauchamp.] Comparing the importation of English and American boots, is there not a very much larger proportion of children's sizes in the English boots imported as compared with the American ? —The Americans do not produce the children's boots at all, you might say ; in fact, ihere is hardly a pair of children's boots imported from America. 1007. Is not the popularity of American boots very largely due to the craze for what you might call the peg-top boots, instead of the round and square toes ?—lt is more a question for us of price. We use the American lasts, and everything American, just as much as they do. We follow the American fashion closely, but it is purely a question of price. 1008. How many hands do you employ ? —Something like 230 to 240. 1009. Is that a larger number or a smaller number than hitherto ?—A smaller number. 1010. Is your industry decreasing owing to the competition from' America?— Yes. 1011. In order to assist your industry, would you suggest a higher tariff on boots?— Not altogether, because I think it would cause what you might call internal competition, which would be very keen ; but at the same time there is no doubt that, if the American boots are going to come in at the present time as they are doing, our manufacturers will certainly want all the start they can get, and a little more start would certainly steady the trade very much. 1012. But with a higher tariff you fear there would be a danger of increased competition from local manufacturers ?—That would right itself. 1013. With regard to the leather produced here, is the inferior quality due to the fact that we tan the hides from beasts killed too young ? —That might apply just to one class of leather only; but, as far as other hides go, it is really a question of maturity—of the hides being cured or held in stock long enough. It is kept too long, I think, in the pits. In one hide you might get several qualities, and it all depends on what quality you get—for instance, if you get a piece of what you may call the butt you get a really first-class wearing leather, but if you get it off the offal it is of poor quality. 1014. With regard to bark, do you depend mainly or wholly on South Australia ?—We very largely use extracts brought out in barrels from Home, where they use the same material. 1015. Is the absence of speciality in the boot trade owing to there being so many more centres here ?—Very largely so. If we were all concentrated in one place the manufacturers would be able to subdivide better. 1016. Mr. Luke.] I understand you to say, in reply to Captain Eussell, that they produce a better leather in America than here ?—No, a certain class of leather that is not produced in the colonies- —not a better leather. 1017. Is there not a certain amount imported from Prance which cannot be produced French calf only. 1018. As regards the imports of boots from England and America showing a large proportion to the advantage of British trade, is not that due to the American goods filtering through the London market to the colonies ?—Not at all, but it is bond fide English manufacture. As I said before, the American wave has only reached this colony within the last twelve months. 1019. You think our importations come direct from America ?—Yes ; they would send all of them that way. There are considerable quantities that filter through London, but not to the same extent as come direct. 1020. Would not that materially affect the returns of Great Britain ?— It might affect the figures you have before you now, but not those arriving later on, because there are now direct steamers coming here from America, and the goods do not have to go through London. 1021. I have heard manufacturers state that one reason why our leather wears so badly is due to the fact that it is not left sufficiently long in the tanning-pits ?—I do not think it has very much to do with it. There are different classes of leather. There are certain classes that come here to me that are harder because of the special treatment they undergo; but the leathers of this colony are, I think, quite as good as Home leathers of the same class —that is, if treated in the same way—but it is merely a question of quality and the part of the hide it is taken from. 1022. What is the largest number of hands you have employed ? —Up to about three hundred. 1023. Mr. Leys.] Do you not think that the first effect of federation would be to lower wages here ?—lt would have one effect or another : either it would lower wages here or increase them on the other side, because, as I heard it said, conciliation and arbitration was one question the Commonwealth would deal with as a matter affecting the whole. Then, of course, things would be put on the same level, but at the present time we are decidedly at a disadvantage. 1024. I said "the first effect" —supposing New Zealand went into the Federation, would not the effect be to immediately lower wages in New Zealand ? —Not immediately, because, of course, it would take time to extend the trade or take it away, and it is not until after the trade has gone that the workers would find that they would have to take lower wages. Competition would not come in all at once. 1025. Do you think the immediate effect would be to lower wages? —No; I fancy it would very shortly mean increasing the wages on the other side. 1026. In what way?—By means of conciliation and arbitration. 1027. You mean if they got that Act passed?—-Yes; if they did not it might lead to a considerable reduction on this side. 1028. If we federated with them, would not that have the effect of bringing our conditions down to their level ?—Yes ; gradually.
73
A.—4
1029. Which would mean lower wages and increased working-hours ? —Yes. 1030. Then, as you have already stated to Mr. Miliar, the present wages not being excessive as compared to the cost of living in New Zealand, would not that alter the conditions of life to the workers of New Zealand ?—Yes. 1031. So that the social effect would be detrimental to the workers?— Certainly. 1032. Hon. Major Steivard.] Then, following up the remarks of Mr. Leys, it would necessarily follow, if the social condition of the workers was lowered, that they could not purchase or use as much agricultural pioduce as they are probably using now, and they would very likely have to leave the colony also? —That need not follow, bat their purchasing-power would be less. 1033. Therefore the local market for agricultural productions would be a poorer market than it is now, so that agriculture in its turn would suffer with the worker in the factory ? —Of course, that is simply a matter of supply and demand. It is a broad question, and I have not really looked into it. John Haedib Mokeison examined. (No. 26.) 1034. Hon. the Chairman.] I believe you are the managing director of the Mosgiel Woollenfactory ?—Not the managing director, but I am the manager here for the company. 1035. How long have you resided in New Zealand ? —Thirty-eight years. 1036. Have you resided in Australia at all ?—No, only as a visitor, the last time being four years ago. 1037. Will you state to the Commission your opinion as to what would be the probable effect upon this colony if it federated with the Australian Commonwealth?—lean only speak of the effect so far as our own business is specially concerned. I have not studied the question very widely. As woollen-manufacturers, I think, seeing we are able to send in a little of our goods now, we might increase that business by being amalgamated with the Commonwealth. For the last fifteen years our company has been sending into Australia a certain amount of woollen goods, and I think if we had free-trade we might increase it. We have been doing a little every year, mostly with Sydney, on account of its being a free port. Our business with Melbourne lessened after the increase of duty, but I think we would be able to increase our trade with Melbourne if we were put on a free-trade basis there —always as against the worlds We could increase our trade with Sydney if we had protection against the world. At present we are competing with the world in Sydney. 1038. Have you considered the question of wages in New Zealand as compared with those in Australia ?—Well, I do not think the difference in our business is very great, but I have not studied the question very much. Of course, there is considerable difference in the clothing industry, where it comes to making up the woollen goods. 1039. Have you any opinion as to how our other industries apart from the woollen trade would be affected by federation ? —No; I do not wish to express any opinion excepting in regard to our own industries. 1040. Have you considered the political aspect of the question ?—Not very much. I consider that by federating with Australia New Zealand would lose «a certain amount of nationality. I think New Zealand would be able to work out its own destiny perhaps better than by being associated with Australia, which is too far away. I think it would be better to have a reciprocal arrangement of some kind, they taking our products and we taking what they can give us beneficially. 1041. Mr. Leys.] I see by the exports from Dunedin that the value of the woollen goods sent from here to there is not very large ? —No. 1042. Have you any duty to pay in New South Wales ?—None whatever. 1043. Then, you could not benefit very largely in New South Wales ? —Yes, we could, because we would not have the world to fight on a free-trade basis. 1044. So far as sending into New South Wales is concerned, you think the Commonwealth duty would be a protection to you?— Undoubtedly it would. 1045. Assuming that the duty imposed is not of a highly protective character, but only a medium duty, would not you suffer from outside competition ?—We would be on just the same footing as other people, and whatever duty was put on would be to our advantage. 1046. But, if the duty was lowered in New Zealand by one-half, would you not suffer from English competition ?—Yes, to some extent. 1047. And could you carry on your industry as at present? —I dare say we would be able to live, but perhaps not able to do so much as at present. 1048. Do you not think it is rather a leap in the dark, as far as your industry is concerned ?— It all depends. I presume there will always be a certain amount of tariff over there for revenue purposes, and whatever it might be as against the world would benefit us to that extent. 1049. What is the present tariff in New Zealand?— 22£ per cent., and 25 per cent, on some things. 1050. Is it not possible that the Commonwealth tariff might only be 10 per cent. ?—1 could not say. 1051. In that case, would not you suffer?—No; I do not think we should suffer anymore than any other person. Ten per cent, would be a protection. At present we are sending a certain amount of stuff into Sydney on a free-trade basis, and competing against Great Britain and Germany. It would mean a 10-per-cent. protection against them. 1052. But the total amount sent to Australia from Dunedin is only £3,952 : is that correct ? —We export from Ashburton also. We did more than that in 1899 with New South Wales alone. That would be only the Dunedin portion. 1053. 1 presume, therefore, that the great bulk of your manufactures are taken in New Zealand ?—Yes. 10—A. 4.
A.—4
74
1054. Now, if the tariff in New Zealand as a part of the Commonwealth was reduced to 10 per cent., could you hold your own here against outside competition?—l think so. We would have a larger market—a larger population—in Australia, and now we can hold our own against English manufacturers. 1055. Mr. Roberts.] When was the last increase of duty on woollen goods in this colony?—I think it was under the Atkinson Ministry, in 1889. 1056. Was the last increase of duty put on at the request of the manufacturers or against their protests ?—Against their protests. 1057. Can you say to what extent the hours are longer in Australia than here?— They work nine hours in the mills in Australia, and some of them even longer. 1058. Is that fifty-four hours a week or less? —It is fifty-four hours a week. 1059. You think that under federation the export of the woollen-mills would probably increase ? —I think it would with a tariff against the outside world. 1060. What goods do you send to New South Wales ?—Tweeds, rugs, blankets, and hosiery. 1061. And your exports to Victoria are almost nil?—-It has gone down—rugs chiefly, and tweeds. We do not send flannels or blankets to Victoria. 1062. Boughly speaking, there is something like £300,000 of woollen goods imported into the colony : do you know whether this amount is largely composed of articles that are not made in the colony ?—Largely so. 1063. So that the production of the colony supplies the immediate wants of the colony in this respect ?—Yes ; the ordinary run of woollen cloths are all supplied by the colonial mills. 1064. I see that during the year 1898-99 the importation of hosiery increased by £15,000 : do I understand that the woollen-mills here have also increased their output of hosiery ?—Yes. 1065. Then, the increased consumption, both of the imported and the local article, points to an increased demand?—No doubt; and there has also been a better price in these goods. The people have been more comfortably off, and are spending more freely. 1066. Mr. Millar.] Your business has been steadily expanding, Mr. Morrison, during the last four or five years ?—Not expanding, but it has been steady. 1067. Not despite the fact that the purchasing-power of the people has been greater?—lt has not been better for us. 1068. How do you account for that ? Importations ? —No ; I think it is due to the competition amongst ourselves, which means others cutting lower than we are doing. 1069. Would not federation reduce your market to a certain extent ?—I do not think it would make any reduction. 1070. You anticipate the Australian market would make up the amount you would lose on the home consumption? —Yes. 1071. Have you not found competition somewhat keen for the last three or four years through the inferior class of tweeds imported ? —lt has always been that, from a lower class of tweed. 1073. You do not make a second-class tweed?— No. We have been making what we call lower grades than we did at the very first, but not what you call second class. 1074. Would not it be possible that under federation, with a lower tariff than we have at present, the competition from that source would become still keener?—l do not think so. 1075. Is it not a fact that when labour is scarce all classes of the community are compelled to go in for the cheapest class of articles they can get ?—Yes. 1076. You could not make an article and sell it at as low a price as the imported slop article? —The imported article would not give the same result, as it would not last as long as the good article. 1077. Even from your own point of view, it is problematical whether federation would prove an unmixed blessing ? —I am only speaking for my own industry. The whole thing is a big problem. 1078. You have stated your opinion that we would do better to keep aloof, and try and arrange a reciprocal treaty?— That is my private opinion. 1079. Mr. Beauchamp.] According to the returns, the export of woollen goods from Dunedin to Australia has been steadily declining for the last three years : has your export to Melbourne and Sydney been declining in sympathy at the same time?—-No; it has been very steady. It declined from twelve years ago, but since 1896 it has been fairly steady. 1080. Twelve years ago had you any tariff in Australia ?—There was a tariff of 30 per cent, in Melbourne, as against almost a free-trade tariff in Sydney. 1081. With the benefit of free-trade in New South Wales for the last few years your business there has not expanded, so how can you look for greater expansion under federation? —Because there would be a duty against outside goods —against the German and British goods. 1082. Supposing the present tariff was reduced from 20 to 10 per cent., which would be simply a revenue-producing one, do you not think we would suffer more than we should benefit— there would be inter-free-trade between all the States ? —I do not think so, because a larger population would be available to us, and, whatever the duty was, it would be a certain amount of protection against the outside world. 1083. In Australia there are several woollen-mills : would not we meet with competition from those mills ? —We would ; and the competition would probably increase if there were a good market for them. 1084. How does the quality of their manufactured goods compare with ours?— Some good; others are very much lower. 1085. I gather you are not in favour of protection under the present tariff?— Not exactly ; but, as far as our industries are concerned, I think we would benefit by having reciprocity with Australia.
A.—4
75
Jamms Colin Boss examined. (No. 27.) 1086. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you, Mr. Eoss ?—Managing director of the Denton Hatmills in Dunedin. I have resided in New Zealand -all my life—thirty-six years. 1087. Are the operations of your establishment extensive ?—No, sir. 1088. Will you kindly give the Commission the benefit of your opinion as to the advantages or otherwise of this colony federating with Australia—in regard to the effect federation would have upon the manufacturing industries of New Zealand ?—I am in the position of most other witnesses —I have not given the subject the least serious consideration. I have been absent eight months in England, and have not given it that consideration other business-men may have; but, speaking for my own industry, it will not be affected at all. We work under similar circumstances to what they do in Australia. We pay the minimum wage of £3 a week to a journeyman hatter, we work the same hours as they do in Australia, and if we federated with them the whole point would be, What would the outside tariff be? Would it be lower than the present tariff? We have now a tariff of 25 per cent, on hats, ad valorem, and would they keep the existing tariff, or lower or raise it ? 1089. You would have free-trade with Australia?—l would not fear free-trade for one moment with Australia; but if we had only 10 per cent, against the world it would close us up, and also the very large hat-factories in Australia. 1090. Is your establishment connected with the Melbourne one ?—lt has nothing whatever to do with it. 1091. Can you express any opinion as to the effect of federation upon other industries?— No. 1092. Mr. Leys.] Are there any hat industries in New South Wales? —That industry has seen two companies through, and there is something struggling with it now. They cannot do any good with free-trade against the Continent and England. 1093. Do you think it probable the Federation will put on a duty as high as 25 per cent., seeing New South Wales now is free?—l think you will have a very high tariff of about£l a dozen. 1094. Why do you think so ?—Because the members forming the first Cabinet have been returned by the Protectionist paper of Melbourne, where there-is already a specific duty on hats of £1 10s. per dozen. When I was there a few weeks ago I understood the duty would be a little lower than £1 10s. specific, and I think it will come down to £1 specific, irrespective of value. That duty would shut out the world. 1095. Has not Mr. Barton already announced that the Federal tariff will be a medium tariff ? —I believe so ; but, of course, the thing is what he will consider a medium tariff. 1096. How would 15s. a dozen affect you ? —That would be better than what we have got now. The majority of the hats invoiced into the Old Country are not very high. I saw a sample invoiced from Italy —felt hats at 6s. 9d. a dozen; and I saw Russian samples invoiced Bs. 9d. a dozen. You can get hard-hitters manufactured in England at 12s. a dozen. 1097. Assuming you would not be injured in your business by federation, can you benefit by federation—can you export elsewhere ? —lt means that if the Australians were to come here to sell their surplus stock I should retaliate and do the same thing. 1098. Do you not think the twelve thousand miles of sea is a great handicap to us in competing with outsiders ?—I look upon it as a very serious obstacle. 1099. You think you have a chance of competing? —I do not say I would have a chance, as I hardly know under what circumstances we should be working. I would not be frightened of facing anything if the outside tariff against the world was no less than at present. If they lowered the present tariff it would close us up. 1100. Mr. Beauchamp.] Are there many hands employed in New Zealand and Australia in the hat industry ?—We have thirty. 1101. Do you import the raw'material ?—Yes. On that there is no duty. 1102. Mr. Millar.] Has not your trade been increasing of late ?—I have been doing my best to develop it. 1103. But you are only enabled to do that with the 25-per-cent. duty now existing?— Quite right. 1104. Do you think, supposing the 25-per-cent. duty were maintained all round, it would enable you to get a market in Australia? —I do not. 1105. Therefore the only thing you have just now is your home market?— Exactly. 1106. Would it not be risky for the colony to federate without knowing what the tariff is to be ?—That is what I said in my opening statement. 1107. Can you give me any reason for federating with Australia? —If we federate I am perfectly satisfied the States are bound to become a very big nation, and it would be very nice if New Zealand took a part in bringing that about. We have some very clever politicians here, who, I think, would help to form what is going to be a very big nation. If we do not federate we shall be left out —we shall be a small nation, a small people, away from the world altogether. 1108. Do you not think there is plenty of scope in this colony itself ?—With three-quarters of a million of people this colony would not be prominent. 1109. Do you think the colony would be as well developed if it were governed from Australia as it would be if governed internally ? —I heard that question argued this morning ;itis a very big question, and I would not care about answering it. 1110. Mr. Boberts.] Is there very much labour put into hats here? —Yes. 1111. You do not make felt hats ?—No. 1112. You import the hats in the shape of pull-overs? —Yes, after that style. 1113. So that really all you have to make is the shaping and trimming ? —Yes; but it is different work in New Zealand right through.
A.—4
76
1114. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Can you tell me in what other respects you would benefit ? I gather, on the whole, that you are in favour of federation ?—So far, I have not seen where it is going to kill New Zealand, as so many people think. lam speaking from my own standpoint. 1115. I think it is very important that we should quote reasons why we should federate : can you give us some specific reason or opinion why we should federate? —Personally, I think that if New Zealand federated with Australia it would strengthen the colony in respect to finance. We could borrow under better conditions than at the present time, and more cheaply. 1116. Do you think we should gain in borrowing—our last loans were supposed to be raised at 3 per cent. ?—Apart from what we may borrow in the future, we might get our own loans consolidated under the security of the Commonwealth better than we can at present. Therefore we could save money. 1117. I suppose you know we cannot consolidate for twenty-nine years? —I was not aware of it. 1118. I think we may take it in the abstract that you think you would like to belong to a great nation, and you are afraid we shall not become so if we do not federate ?—That is my feeling. 1119. Do you imagine that if we were allied with Australia there might be friction, or do you think we would agree with the Commonwealth ? —I am afraid there would be a good deal of friction respecting finance. 1120." Have you thought about other federations ? —No. 1121. Have you thought about the coloured-race question, and the influence climate has on the characteristics of a community ?—No. 1122. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Prom what you said just now, I presume you do not anticipate the breaking-off of Australia from England? —Not for a moment. 1123. When you speak of belonging to a great nation, do you not think you belong to a great nation as part of the British Empire ? —I do, and I feel very proud of it, no less than of being a colonist. 1124. Hon. fhe Chairman.] You said just now that you did not fear the Australians in competition with your own trade if you were working on equal terms : by that do you mean that you do not fear Australian interference with your trade in New Zealand ?—No ; I am not afraid if we manufacture on equal terms. With a 25-per-cent. tariff against the world, Ido not think there would be very much trade between Australia and New Zealand. Matters would remain very much as they are unless the Australians had a surplus, then they might make this a dumping-ground for the time being. Peecy Eolfb Saegood examined. (No. 28.) 1125. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Sargood?—A warehouseman, and a member of the firm of Sargood, Son, and Ewen, established in New Zealand. 1126. And in Australia?—No; it is not the same firm, but a connection. 1127. How long has your business been established in New Zealand?— Since 1861. 1128. Will you be good enough to favour the Commission with your views upon the question of New Zealand federating or otherwise with the Commonwealth of Australia?— That is rather a big order. Ido not know that I have any defined opinion on it. I have been seeking information to try and form an opinion, but I have not arrived at one yet. 1129. How would federation affect our industries ? —As affecting them, I am not quite sure that we are ripe for federation yet. We have built up our industries on what I might term a false basis—that is, on the basis of too many individual lines. We are not making the best of our ability or machinery by specialising. We have got the world to compete against in specialities where we are trying to do everything. If we federate I fear that the industries here are bound to suffer for the time being. Whether eventually we federate is a bigger matter, and lam inclined to think it will not come about in our day. Our conditions are very different from what they are on the other side. They have had the advantage of a bigger field for their industries, and therefore they have been able to work in specialities where we have not; consequently we are working at a disadvantage at the present time as compared with them. 1129 a. Take the warehousemen of this colony : if there were intercolonial free-trade under federation, would they be able to hold their own against the warehousemen of Australia ?—I do not see why not. Ido not see what advantage one has over the other. 1130. Are there not larger stores on the other side?—l should say that, proportionately to the population, New Zealand is a larger consumer than Australia. 1131. Have you considered the political aspect of the question?—l really have not formed any opinion on it. 1132. Mr. Millar.] From a financial point of view, do you think New Zealand would be injured on the London market in the matter of her loans if she remained aloof from the Federation ? — That is a question I would hardly like to answer. I am not acquainted with the borrowing facilities of New Zealand on the London market. It is surely a matter of security. 1133. Do you think the security would be lessened by New Zealand remaining aloof ?—I am not able to answer that question. 1134. You do not think there would be any great advantage gained financially if we became part of the Federation ?—1 do not think it would matter one way or another; if you reduce the values of your securities you will be affected, if you keep them up you will not. 1135. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you considered the effect federation is likely to have on manufacturers ?—1 am inclined to think that if we federated immediately there would be a considerable disruption of our manufactures owing to the conditions under which we work. 1136. Do you think it would "wipe out" some of our present industries? —I do not say " wipe them out," but it would necessitate our reorganizing them. Our labour laws are so
77
A.—4
different. We have Acts like the Arbitration Act, which, to my mind, is not advantageous to the industries of the colony. It is forcing up prices of production to such an extent that the outside markets of the world are coming in strongly against us. Australia has not got that Act, and whether they get it or not is a question immediately" affecting us. 1137. I suppose you are aware that the Federal Parliament has power to make laws in respect to conciliation and arbitration ?—No; I have not studied the Act. 1138. Mr. Leys.] I suppose you know that manufactured goods —re-exported goods—of the value of about £1,300,000 come in here from Australia now ? —I have not studied the figures, but no doubt they are correct. Re-exported goods come here transhipped from Sydney and Melbourne, probably American and Eastern goods and a considerable quantity of German goods. 1139. Do you not think the Australian business in re-export goods would be largely increased under federation? —No; because I am inclined to think that federation would tend to reduce the New Zealand freights to the level of Australian freights, and increase our shipping facilities. 1140. We had it stated in evidence here to-day that warehousemen would have to remove to Australia under federation, because the larger centres, the larger local markets, and better facilities for clearing surpluses would give them a dominating power under free-trade?— That raises the question, Are our commercial classes going to take a two- or three-weeks trip to buy their goods, or would the cost of sending travellers with samples here be greater or less than the cost of keeping stocks here ? 1141. What is your opinion on that subject ?—I have not any very definite opinion. I suppose at the present time there might be a disruption. We might have to alter our system of trading to meet such a competition. 1142. We had evidence in Invercargill from one of the tradesmen there in the iron trade that at present he could buy as cheaply from Wellington as from Australia; but do you not think that if there were free-trade with Australia he could supply himself better from Melbourne?—l do not know about the iron trade ; I should not think there would be any very great difference. There is the freight and general shipping charges to pay between the two places, which would always be something to be taken into consideration. 1143. Is there any advantage in buying for a large population ? —Naturally. 1144. Are not English prices lower ?—But then comes in the question whether the goods bought for the Australian market would suit the New Zealand market. If they would, there is nothing in that argument. My conclusion about the whole matter is that I do not see that New Zealand is ripe for federation with the Australian Colonies, and, though my conviction is that sooner or later it will come, for the next fifty years I do not think we shall be ripe for it. 1145. Hon. Major Steward.] If New Zealand joined the Federation, and the tariff on readymade imported clothing, which is now subject to a duty of 25 per cent., were reduced to 12J per cent., how would that affect our workers here ?—I cannot speak with great authority, not being a manufacturer of clothing; but I am inclined to say that in that case, under the present conditions of labour, we might be materially and detrimentally affected. 1146. Hon. the Chairman.] Can you tell us what is the relative price for making a pair of trousers, apart from material, in Melbourne and New Zealand ?—I cannot say, but I am inclined to think it is greater here than in Australia. 1147. Mr. Beanchamp.] Would you be surprised to know that in Australia, either in Sydney or Melbourne, a slop pair of trousers can be made for as against Is. 9d. here?—l do not know that it would surprise me, because I regard the conditions of labour here as against the low cost of production. I do know that the aggregate wages are very much higher here, and that the conditions of labour generally tend to a greater cost of production. 1148. Hon. the Chairman.] If it is true that a labourer gets 9fd., can that be considered a fair living-wage ?—That entirely depends upon a man's ability to earn a wage. I should want to know if the article at 9-J-d. had been produced by machinery as against hand-labour in the case of the other before giving an intelligent reply. 1149. I want to ascertain whether there would be a chance of the workers in New Zealand competing with the workers in Australia in such a branch of manufacture?— There, again, comes in the question of the conditions of labour. If a man is going to work forty-eight hours a week here, and you have there men working fifty-four hours a week, the question answers itself. The whole matter depends on the ability of the man who works with the machinery to get the best out of that machinery—no limitation of output, equal hours of labour, and the working of the machinery for all its worth. Alfred Leon Isaacs examined. (No. 29.) 1150. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Isaacs ? —Manager of the New Zealand Cloth-ing-factory in Dunedin. I have been twenty-four years in New Zealand, and have not resided in Australia. 1151. Are the operations of your establishment pretty considerable ? —Yes. 1152. What do you think would be the effect upon the manufacturing industries of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth ?—As regards our own industry — namely, clothing-manufacture, shirt- and cap-making—under the present conditions and hours of labour, and the fact of there being a log so much higher than the wages paid on the other side, I should imagine federation would prove detrimental to our industry. Until the hours of labour and rates of pay were adjusted we would certainly be at a considerable disadvantage. 1153. Would that remark apply fairly to any other industries besides clothing?— From what I heard here this morning, it seems to apply pretty generally to the manufacturing industries. 1154. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that wages must either come down here or go up in Australia, or you might have to shut up your factory under federation ? —I would very much rather prefer to
A.-4
78
see wages go up in Australia, because I would prefer to see what I consider a fair living-wage; but, on the other hand, I see a great difficulty in regard to the operations of a Conciliation and Arbitration Act—when they have such a large population to select from—in raising the wages over there. 1155. You think that wages would have to come "down, or our industries would have to close ? —That is as it strikes me at present. In Victoria, I understand, they work in the factories fiftyfour hours a week, while we work only forty-five. They also work for lower wages, and they are making garments at prices quite 50 per cent, less than what we make them for here. We could not do it here at the price under existing log. 1156. Knowing the conditions of life in New Zealand, and coming in contact with the workers themselves, do you think wages are too high here ?—I should not like to say that, but I think there is more time wasted in the factories here, by having to cater for smaller lines that you have no need for in a population like that of Sydney and Melbourne. Here there is a small community, and we do not keep large quantities in the one line; consequently, in that case the cost of production is very largely increased. 1157. And these conditions you think will be permanent?—l certainly think so, and would probably increase as our population increases. The manufactories of New Zealand are very much more scattered than they are in Victoria or New South Wales. 1158. And the want of centralisation in New Zealand tends to accentuate that ?—No doubt it makes production more costly. 1159. Mr. Beauchamp.] How many hands do you employ ?—Between two and three hundred. 1160. Are you able to express an opinion as to relative merits of the workmen here and Australia ? —Not having been there, I cannot. I might say, in reference to the question Mr. Sargood was asked about the price of the labour for making a pair of trousers, that no one man makes those trousers. The parts are carried on. One man cuts them, another girl machines them, and another girl does the finishing. No man does that for 9d. They are sold retail in Melbourne and Sydney at 4s. lid., made of colonial tweeds. 1161. If we had inter-free-trade between the States you quite recognise that under present conditions we could not compete against that sort of thing? —I do not see how we could. 1162. Do you find the labour laws harassing or unjust to your trade?-—I should not call them harassing, but the tailoresses have been several times before the Conciliation Board. We are now working under a log which is fairly satisfactory. 1163. Mr. Millar.] Assuming that you were under the same conditions as regards hours of labour and log as the Australians, do you think you could find a market for your goods on the other side ?—I see no reason, working under the same conditions, why New Zealand should not do as well as Australia does. Climatic influence here is perhaps in our favour. 1164. You think that under similar conditions it might be possible for an export trade to be worked up from New Zealand ?—That would depend upon the state of the market on the other side.- If the local market was fully catered for we should.not be able to export from here. 1165. I suppose they have ample plant on the other side to meet a very greatly increased demand ? —I could not say. 1166. How do you think New Zealand compares with them so far as plant goes ? Have they got more plant at the present time than would enable them to meet the demands of the people of New Zealand ?—We may have more plant, but have not the labour. Unfortunately labour is scarce at present. 1167. So far as the clothing-factories are concerned, does it not take them all their time now to meet the local requirements ? —That is so. I suppose it is largely due to the increased prosperity in New Zealand; There was a time when we had more hands than we had work for, but now the reverse is the case. 1168. Do you suffer much from the importation from Great Britain of slop-made goods ?— Only in the very low lines that we cannot compete in or make here. lam not at all anxious to see them made here. They are too low in price. 1169. What is the tariff on them ?—25 per cent, ad valorem. 1170.. If that tariff were reduced, would the importation of that class of goods be likely to be increased? —I think not. The people of the colony prefer the colonial-made stuff. 1171. Do you know of any reason why New Zealand should federate, or any advantage she would derive from doing so?— She could not possibly federate under the existing labour laws without doing a terrible amount of harm to existing industries. 1172. Mr. Boberts.] Did I understand you to say that suits are made up for ss. 9d. ?—Yes, in Melbourne —that is, to the warehousemen ; the factories provide everything But the tweed, which is supplied by warehousemen at Is. 2d. per yard. 1173. And the tweed would come to about 6s. Bd., so you could get a home-made suit for 12s. 9d. ?—Yes. 1174. What is the lowest price they are sold for retail in New Zealand?— Sometimes £1 2s. 6d. and 18s. 6d., colonial-made suit —that gives about 10s. for making, as against ss. 6d. to 6s. on the other side. 1175. Do you think it possible, as you said that the cost of production on the other side was from 30 to 50 per cent, less than here, that they could produce a suit at 50 per cent, less than 18s. 6d. ? —I am only speaking about the manufacturing price, not the making-up price. Ido not know anything about the finished article. I am told that the trade pay the factorymakers on the other side ss. 6d. to 6s. for a man's suit, whereas here it would not be produced under 9s. or 10s. 1176. Do you know anything about the hours of work in Victoria? —I understand they are from fifty-four to fifty-six hours per week. 1177. As against forty-five here ?—Yes, in Dunedin, Christchurch, and Wellington.
79
A.—4
Eobeet McKinlay examined. (No. 30.) 1178. Hon. the Chairman.'] What is your name ?—Bobert McKinlay. 1179. What are you ? —Boot-manufacturer. 1180. In Dunedin ?—Yes. 1181. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Twenty-eight years. 1182. Have you been in business or resided in Australia?— Never. 1183. Have you formed any opinions as to the advisability or otherwise of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I cannot say that I have studied the matter, unless from the point of view of our own business. 1184. What are the conclusions to which you have arrived on that point ? —I consider it would ruin our trade —from the experience within the last few months that we have had. I have seen Victorian boots imported here which I could not make up at the price. 1185. What is the difference in price ? —They might be from 3d. to Is. in some cases. When you take the tariff of 22-J per cent, into consideration it shows that we are a long way behind America. 1186. You probably heard the evidence of some of the witnesses this morning as to your trade in New Zealand being prejudicially affected by imports from America ?—Yes. 1187. What is your opinion on that point ?—No doubt American boots are coming freely into the market. 1188. More so within the last twelve months than ever, even with the protective duty ?—Yes. I think there is a prejudice to a certain extent in favour of American goods as against colonial goods. I can give you an instance of that. A man in the retail trade told me on Friday last that a customer came in and asked him if he had any American boots. The retailer told him that he had, and showed him a pair, but did not say they were American-made. He assured him that they were of American leather and made on the American last, and in every way equal to the American article. The man tried them on, they fitted him, and he seemed well enough pleased with them. After he had taken them he asked if they were made in America, and the shopkeeper said to me that when he told him they were not made in America he looked as if he would like to take them off and give them back again: simply because they were not made in America. 1189. Did he give them back?— No. 1190. Is there any other point of disadvantage that occurs to you in reference to the effect federation will have on the industries of the colony?—I cannot say there is. I heard Mr. Bridger's evidence this morning. We had a talk over the matter, and I indorse all he said. 1191. Can you think of any advantage that would accrue to New Zealand through federating with Australia?—No, I cannot. I think just now it would be the means, as far as I am able to judge, of wrecking our trade. 1192. You are speaking entirely from a trade point of view ?—Yes. 1193. Have you considered the question from the point of view of New Zealand retaining its independence?—l cannot say I have. 1194. Mr. Leys.] How do you account for the Victorians producing boots at a price cheaper than you can manufacture them at? —Simply because the larger population enables them to undertake bigger orders. 1195. And they send their surplus over here ?—Yes. America is worse in that respect than Victoria. The various classes of boots are specialised in these big places, whereas here one factory does what would be extended over a number of factories there. In America they sit down at the beginning of the half, and consider how many pairs of a line of boots they will make, and what profit they will put on. They run the whole season for all the machines are worth. At the end of the season they have made up a quantity, and they have a surplus, and they send that to the colonies. A Sydney merchant told me that American boots could be bought cheaper in Sydney than in America. 1196. Would it not be to the advantage of the New Zealand manufacturers to reorganize their business on these lines ? —I am afraid that would be impracticable in New Zealand. 1197. You think the small centres here prevent it? —Yes. 1198. In that case there is no prospect of improvement until the population increases to a large extent ?—That is so. And it seems to me that the workmen have come to that conclusion too, for I find that if a bootmaker can get work elsewhere he will do so. 1199. He will leave the colony ?—No ; he will leave the trade. 1200. The industry is declining?— Yes, certainly it is declining now. One man went to the Government workshops, another went to the country, and last week one went to another job. In fact, several of the manufacturers have come to the conclusion that the trade is on the decline. 1201. Do you replace these men who leave?—No, we cannot. 1202. Is labour scarce ? —Well, I do not know. We cannot get apprentices just now. According to our rules, we could put on from four to six apprentices just now, but they cannot be got. It seems to me that people have the idea that it is a languishing trade. 1203. You could not find a market locally for the output if you could get this labour just now ? —No ; things are slow just now. 1204. Would the fact of bringing in a further competition be disastrous ? —That is my opinion. 1205. For that reason it would not pay New Zealand to go in for federation ?—No. 1206. How many hands do you employ just now ?—I think we had ninety-five last week. The largest number I have employed at any other time has been 106 to 110.
A.—4
80
Wednesday, 13th Februaby, 1901. William Caer examined. (No. 31.) 1207. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you, Mr. Carr ?—I am an upholsterer and furniture salesman in Dunedin. For the last few years I have been upholstering myself. I have been twenty-two years in Dunedin, and was formerly at Scoullar and Chisholm's. I have been twentyfive years in Australia —that is, in Victoria and Tasmania—and twenty-two years in Dunedin. 1208. Have you been in Australia lately ?—No, sir. 1209. You ask the Commission to hear you upon the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ? —Yes. 1210. And I suppose, therefore, you have given the subject some consideration ?—I have given the subject some consideration, as far as a workman is able to do. 1211. I suppose you have considered it from the way it would affect the manufactures of the colony ?— Principally from that point of view, but I have also thought over it from a national point of view. 1212. Will you be good enough to give the Commission the conclusions at which you have arrived, and the reasons for those conclusions ?—1 have conferred with a good many in the furniture trade—workmen and manufacturers—and there seems to be a consensus of opinion on their part —and, of course, I thoroughly agree with it—that federation would not suit New Zealand at all—that is, from a manufacturing point of view. At present most of the principal towns in New Zealand supply their own districts. There are four or five different towns, and they do the greater part of the trade that is done in their own provincial districts. The consequence is that the workmen are spread all over New Zealand. In Australia there are Melbourne and Sydney : Melbourne, I suppose, supplies all Victoria ; and Sydney, all New South Wales, and the greater portion of the Continent as well. They also supply, to some extent, New Zealand at the present time. They send furniture over here and pay the present duties, and they are able to undersell us even now. 1213. Is that Australian-manufactured furniture ?—Yes, Austlalian-manufactured furniture. Now, in New Zealand, as a rule, there is not so much of the -highest class of work done in the furniture trade. At Exhibition time it may be done; but, as a rule, it is good, medium, or lower class furniiure that is manufactured here, while in Melbourne there is a great deal of the highestclass work, a large proportion of it showy lower-class work; and that is the work that is exported at the present time. In Australia Ido not think the wages vary very much from what they are in New Zealand —that is, to the better-class workmen. 1214. You mean in your particular trade?—ln our particular trade, of course. lam speaking from that point of view; but there are a greater number of apprentices and improvers employed in Australia. The work that is exported at the present time —the underwork is mostly done by juniors, and the finishing-work is done by a good hand. I will give you an example, if you do not mind, of that. Now, this is work of a common description that is imported into Dunedin [exhibit produced]; and I will show you some of the different materials in it. In Melbourne the common stuff —such as is imported here—the underwork of it can be put up much cheaper than we can possibly do it here. For instance, they put this seaweed in the bottom work of upholstered goods that come here. This (the dried seaweed) costs from £1 10s. to £2 per ton, while here in Dunedin you will see they put Phormium tenax (flax), that costs from £4 to £5 per ton. There is a big difference there. This seaweed is liable to get damp from variations in the temperature, and especially in a place like Dunedin, where the variations are very great. It is liable to get damp, and it rots the canvas over the springs, and in a little time the springs work their way through the stuffing. That [material produced] is from a Melbourne suite, and this [exhibit produced] is what we use in our own underwork. Well, in Melbourne they get English springs of a hard nature, and put a few in the suites that are imported over here—springs something of this description [spring exhibited] —a firm strong spring; but they do not use many of them : they cost about 12s. 6d. a gross. Here we put in a much lighter spring, a much nicer spring. You will observe the difference: this is a much better spring, it costs half as much again, and we put more of them in to make a more luxurious seat. 1215. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] What is that made of ?—lt is a steel wire coppered over. In the very bottom of all they put, over on the other side, what we call " webbing." In the foundation they put very little indeed—a very small quantity —but here we put a good number. The reason is that when we make a suite here we have to stand by it. You see, if anything goes wrong with it the people send it back and require it to be put right. But the suites that come over here are sold by dealers —people in the drapery trade, and so on, that make furniture a part of their business. Of course, if they sell a suite to a countryman, or to anybody else, they take no responsibility in connection with it. Then, as to the flock which is used, they use a very much lower description of flock over on the other side—that is, for all this class of work. Of course, they have good stuff too. I have samples of Melbourne flock and of our own flock here if you would not mind looking at them [samples produced]. Hon. the Chairman : Certainly, not that I know much about them. Witness : But even if you have no experience you will be able to tell the difference. That is Melbourne flock, and this our own; that costs £16 a ton, and this, our own flock, £24 a ton. Well, the difference in that is because the material used here is properly purified, while over on the other side this commoner description is used, and the same trouble is not taken with it. All these materials are put in the bottoms; the " improvers "do that portion of the work, and then a good man takes it in hand with the same class of cover that we use, and he is able to make a very nice finish on the top, and the job looks just as well as our own.
81
A.—4
1217. Hon. the Chairman.'] Ido not know that you need proceed much further. The result of this is, I understand, that furniture in Australia is manufactured from inferior materials to what are used in New Zealand?— That is, furniture for export, not that for their own use. 1218. For export to this colony ?—Yes, for ordinary export. Ido not say if a man sent for first-class stuff he would not get it. 1219. Do you think, then, that under these conditions your trade in New Zealand could not successfully compete with Australia ? —We could not compete with them at all under these conditions, because at the present time they are able to send these suites in at about £1 less than we are able to make them up for here. 1220. But, supposing New Zealand federated with Australia, how would that affect the matter, in your opinion ?—Well, I suppose freights would be considerably reduced on account of agricultural produce passing between the two countries, and they would be able to put the goods here so cheaply that I believe the manufacturers in New Zealand would not be able to keep going. I think the great majority would have to migrate to Australia, or to Cake up farms—one of the two. 1221. About the rate of wages: is there much difference?—No, not much difference in the wages of the leading hands; but they have a greater proportion of apprentices and improvers on the other side. 1222. Are the establishments there much larger than you have in New Zealand ? —Very much larger indeed. 4223. Would that give them an advantage ?—Oh, a very great advantage. If you are making up large quantities of the same kind, of course there is an advantage. In making up these things we make one or two, they three or four, dozen. ■1224. Is there any other point connected with the trade aspect you wish to mention ?—Yes. Of course, in Melbourne and Sydney in cabinetmaking there are large numbers of Chinese employed. In New Zealand we are not troubled in that way with coloured labour at all. I may say that all the lower-class furniture in both Melbourne and Sydney is made by Chinese—the lower class of furniture. A white cabinetmaker growing up, unless he turns out a very good workman, has not much chance of getting on. 1225. I take it you fear competition from the Chinese in Australia too ?—Well, importers would naturally get the furniture made where they could run it cheapest. 1226. You said you had considered the matter from a national standpoint?— Yes. 1227. Will you give us your views upon that matter?—lt seems to me rather presumptuous for a working-man to say so, but I have talked it over with a few friends at different times, and I do not see, myself, why there is not room in these seas for two nations—that is, an Australian nation and a New Zealand nation. I think that may be so if we go on along our present lines. We have here the nucleus of a splendid nation. I think so. Whether I am right or wrong I cannot say, but I think so. I think we are far better off as a nation "on our own " than if we were simply a joint in the tail of, I might say, the Australian kangaroo. 1228. Mr. Roberts.} You seem to emphasize the competition the trade of this city receives from Victoria and New South Wales : do you not find the competition much more serious from other places—America, for instance, and the United Kingdom ?—Well, it is pretty keen ; but at the same time my idea is that the people here do not take to the American class of goods ; they do not like the shapes. 1229. Well, during 1899 the total imports from Victoria and New South Wales were £4,700 ; from America, £10,000 ; and from the United Kingdom, £9,700. You have the fact staring you in the face that the competition with Victoria is much smaller ?—Yes, at the present time. 1230. You know that leaves competition with the United States of America? —You are speaking of furniture only ? 1231. Yes; imports under the heading of " Furniture and upholstery "?—There is not much finished American stuff comes down here. I cannot speak for Auckland and Wellington. I know, myself, from experience of the furniture trade, that the people here do not like the American shapes —they are not used. 1232. Is the flock used here colonial or imported ?—Colonial. 1233. Mr. Beauchamp.] During 1898-99,1 believe the cut-throat competition existing amongst some of the steamship lines reduced the freight to 10s. a ton : did that stimulate the importation from the States of furniture ?—I think it did. 1234. Possibly that would account for the importation during the year 1898-99 ? —I think it had an effect that way. 1235. Is there any quantity of Australian furniture imported into Dunedin ?—There has been in the past a fair amount;. 1236. Chiefly of the common description ?—Chiefly of the commoner description. 1237. Most of which, do you believe, has been manufactured by Chinese labour ? —No; it is' manufactured by Europeans. No Chinese work comes in at present. It would not pay; but if there was a very low tariff it would. 1238. Then, you think this colony, if there was inter-free-trade, would be used as a dumpingground ? —Yes; I can speak for several manufacturers, and say they have not the slightest hesitation in the matter. 1239. Mr. Luke.} I put the question to some one, I forget whether it was to a cabinetmaker or not, " Is much of the cheap furniture imported into New Zealand made-up furniture " ?—Yes, there is a fair amount. 1240. What is the value of a suite imported from Sydney to New Zealand—l mean a cheap suite ?—ln Sydney the cost price would be about £5 7s. 6d. 1241. Would you be astonished to know that I have seen a Sydney suite —two large chairs and six small chairs, covered with what appeared to me to be a nice material —landed at rather 11—A. 4.
A.—4
82
less than £6 ? Do you think that possible ?—Yes, quite possible. I have endeavoured to explain how it is done. 1242. Do you think that class of furniture would find a ready sale : do not people like something better and more substantial ? —You see, a large" number of people are not judges, especially country people. They come to town, see a nice pretty suite at a low rate, and buy it. Of course, if they do not use it to any extent it looks nice round a room, but if they do use it to any extent it comes to pieces. 1243. You are afraid that under federation the furniture and cabinetmaking business would be destroyed ?—Yes. 1244. Is there much American furniture brought in?—A fair amount, but it does not seem to take so well. 1245. It is of higher quality than comes from Australia?—lt is high and low. American furniture is machine-made. They do not want men in America at all; they want machines. 1246. Then, you think federation would very materially affect the wage-earning class in your own line of business ? —lt must affect them, because if goods are brought in in large quantities at low rates the same number of men cannot get employment. I think at the present time in our trade there is something like 1,294 males and fifty-seven females employed, and probably there might not be work for more than four or five hundred here under federation. 1247. That is, taking the whole colony? —Yes. 1248. Do you think a number of persons would find ready and more profitable employment in other upheres of labour? —Well, if they were very young they might; but if they have grown up, and have been at the trade for twenty or thirty years, it is not a very easy thing for them to start at something else. 1249. Have you considered the question at all from a political point of view ?—No, sir. 1250. Mr. Leys.] I suppose English furniture is largely superior furniture—you could hardly compete with it here ? —Yes ; the furniture that conies from Home is of a very good class. It is better wood: they have superior timber, and so on. People who want that, of course, send Home for it. We are not able to compete with that work, because we have not got the timbers. 1251. That does not seem a very large item—£9,ooo. Now, with regard to what Mr. Luke said about finding other employment, do you regard furniture-making as an industry natural to the country ? —Oh, yes. 1 think it is natural to every country. All countries should be able to make their own furniture. It is one of the articles that is a necessity. 1252. The New Zealand woods: are they not well adapted for furniture-making ?—Well, some of them are very good, but unless they are thoroughly seasoned they are liable to warp. Some of them are very handsome woods—red-pine, for instance. In Australia they mostly use cedar, which is much easier to work. Our New Zealand woods are very hard. 1253. Is the wood employed in furniture-making here mostly New Zealand wood ?—Nowadays the wood used is nearly all colonial wood. 1254. I notice that New South Wales is the chief exporter from Australia of furniture and upholstery to New Zealand :is that of Chinese manufacture ?—No, not to New Zealand. That is not made by Chinamen at all, but probably would be under federation. At present that work is made by white people. 1255. In New South Wales ?—Yes; Chinese furniture is not imported at all at present, but I have not the least doubt it will be if we get federation. 1256. Why is it not imported now ? —Because Chinese work is bulky work—the lower class of furniture: tables, chiffoniers, chests of drawers. It would not pay to send bulky work over under the present tariff. 1257. If this is a natural industry, and the wages about the same in New Zealand, could you not make this cheaper kind of furniture ?—We do make it here now. 1258. Could you not compete with Australia in these cheaper lines?— Not if Chinamen made them. 1259. But you say these are made by the English?—l have been trying to explain that they make up on different lines, and that we cannot make up on those lines, because if we did we should get them back. 1260. Why do not the people who sell the goods get them back ?—As a rule, the people who sell them are dealers, not manufacturers. 1261. Is there not a large furniture trade through the auction-marts ?—Yes. 1262. Could not that be made up of these materials ?—No; the people here have not got down that low yet. 1263. But they seem to be down low enough to buy when the things come from Australia; why not when they are manufactured here?—We could, but we do not. Most of the men in our trade who have been to the other side come back again. They like this cool climate better. 1264. Then, with regard to the better class of stuff, putting this aside, could you hold your own against Australia? —Not if they could bring it in at low rates as far as freight and duty are concerned. A small town cannot compete against a big town. 1265. You mean the larger output gives the advantage ?—-The larger manufacturing-powers on the other side would simply swamp us. 1266. Hon. Major Steward.] It has been explained by other witnesses, and I want to know if it applies to you also, that in making large quantities, with large establishments, vast machinery, and so on, it pays to manufacture more than is required for local consumption, and to dispose of the surplus at cost, or at about cost: does that apply in regard to furniture ? —Of course. Ido not know for certain, but I almost think that is the cause of furniture being sent over here so cheaply. 1267. In such a case the manufacturer who turns out a small quantity is at a disadvantage compared with the manufacturer who turns out a large quantity ?—Oh, yes.
83
A.—4
1268. That applies to furniture as to other departments of industry?— The same principle applies. 1269. Then, you think, if New Zealand joined .the Commonwealth, and therefore the manufactures of other States were entitled to come to it absolutely free of duty, the local manufacturer in New Zealand would not be able to compete as against the larger manufacturer on the other side ?—Not for a great number of years. James Cox Thomson examined. (No. 32.) 1270. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—I am a hardware and timber merchant, and have resided in New Zealand for thirty-three years. I have not resided in Australia at all. 1271. Have you considered the question of federating with the Commonwealth of Australia? ■ —Well, to a certain extent. It is too intricate a question to go into and give a decided opinion upon without further information than I have available. 1272. But have you considered it as it affects the industrial and manufacturing interests of this colony ? —Well, in a general way. It is rather difficult to say how it will affect them. 1273. What is your opinion?—l think the balance is in favour of federation, in so far that we should have a very large market close at our doors. I think at the present time our market is about as far distant as it can be; and we also have to face the fact that we shall have very serious competition nearer home from South America. I think our prosperity is dependent upon our natural productions, and if we have a market closer to hand than at present that is always an advantage to the colony. It is quite possible that federation might affect manufactures here carried on under our high tariff. Those not dependent upon the tariff I do not think would be affected so much. 1274. Are not the Australian establishments on a much larger scale, and have they not much more capital available ?—I believe they are. Ido not know the details of Australian business. 1275. If that were so, do you think the New Zealand industries could successfully compete with them ?—lf the labour conditions were the same. I understand the objection has been raised that labour in Australia can compete against New Zealand because it works for a longer time. 1276. And the wages are cheaper ? —lf the time was assimilated that difference would disappear. The wages in some cases, I believe, are lower. That I cannot speak of from my own knowledge. 1277. Have you considered the political aspect of the question at all?— Not so much. I recognise, of course, that in place of being an independent colony we should become one of the States of the Commonwealth. 1278. Do you think advantage would be derived from getting a larger market ? —I think the balance of advantage is with federation. 1279. Do you think we should be justified in forfeiting our national independence for that ?— It depends upon what that is ascertained to be. 1280. Then, you have not formed a definite opinion upon that ?—No. 1281. Mr. Leys.] When you speak of a larger market for our produce, do you consider the fact that Australia exports very much more in the way of products, and exports butter and wheat ? —Yes. 1282. And do you not think England will still be our chief market ? —For those products, yes. 1283. For all agricultural products ?—Yes; but we have a fair amount of business in our exports already with Australia, though it is to one colony only. If the whole of Australia was open to us I should think we ought to have an increase of that. 1284. Mr. Beauchamp.] The chief benefit you think we should derive from federation would be the market we should have for New Zealand produce : is that so ? —Yes, I think so. 1285. Have you considered that with inter-free-trade Australia might be a very serious competitor with our New Zealand farmers in grain, for instance; that the six colonies produce 39,998,295 bushels of wheat, as against New Zealand's 8,581,898 ? Does it not occur to you that under federation our New Zealand farmers might be seriously affected by the export of flour from Australia to this colony?— Well, they might be. 1286. You have not come to a conclusion upon the whole aspect of the case ?—No. 1287. Mr. Millar.] Which class of manufactures do you think would find a market in the Australian Colonies if there was intercolonial free-trade ?—I did not say I had considered the question of our finding a market in Australia for manufactures. I considered the bearing of the question on existing manufactures by competition from Australia. 1288. Then, you did not think there would be a larger market for our manufactures in Australia?—No, not for lines manufactured there. 1289. I suppose you are aware that the total value of the manufactures of the colony is thirteen millions per annum ?—1 do not know the total value. It must be something.very considerable. 1290. It is that approximately? —Yes; but that includes, I presume, the working-up of our natural productions. 1291. Yes, that is the total of the manufactures of every description, and includes meatpreserving and all that sort of thing ?—Yes. 1292. Well, in view of the fact that probably a large portion of these manufactures would be menaced, to say the least, do you think it would be advantageous to the colony to federate ?—I do not think a large portion would be menaced. My opinion is that those manufactures which exist in New Zeafand entirely owing to the high tariff which is here might be affected by federation. It might cause a disjointing for a time, but that the bulk would be affected Ido not believe. Ido not think the working-up of our natural products would be affected.
A.—4
84
1293. But all those manufactures that have a protective duty would be ? —Yes, they might be. I think they would be. 1294. Are there many manufactures upon which there is no protective duty that find a market in Australia now ? —Not necessarily find a market in Australia. 1295. Therefore federation would not be any benefit to this colony ; it would not put us in any better position than we are now ?—lt is a very difficult matter to give an opinion upon decidedly. I say my own conclusions are that the balance is in favour of federation. Ido not know that they are very much in favour of it. I could not say to what extent; but, generally speaking, I think the balance is in favour of federation. 1296. Do you think the balance is sufficient to make it advisable?— That is a point which has to be determined. I could not make that assertion. You can only determine the question after having taken all the evidence available, and that I have not at my disposal. 1297. Do you fancy that, from a manufacturing point of view, the colony would be developed as actively under a Government in Australia as it would be under what might be strictly called local government ? —Yes, I think so, because we should still have our local government. 1298. Yes. under the Constitution now ; but you are aware the Constitution can be altered?— Yes. 1299. Do you think it possible or probable that the States will be abolished in the course of a few years ?—Well, I do not see any necessity for it. There is a tendency to centralise, I presume. 1300. And in the event of that taking place we certainly would be governed from Australia? —Oh, yes ; we should be in a minority, so far as that goes. 1301. Do you not think the distance from the seat of government would tend to neglect on the part of the Government ?—I do not think it would seriously affect it; and that distance is being and will be reduced, as time goes on, by the employment of faster services. 1302. You were in the colony at the time of the abolition of the provinces ? —-Yes. 1303. Do you think the colony has been better developed on the whole under the General Government than under the old Provincial Governments ?—Well, Ido not know, lam sure. There was very good development under the old provincial system, and the colony has been going on since increasing, prospering, and developing. It has gone on steadily owing to its fertility and the abundance of its natural resources. Those are really the causes of its development, not the form of government. 1304. But one of the principal reasons given at the time of the abolition of the provinces was that government would be cheaper and better under a Central Government than not ? —Yes; we were a very small population in those days, and the expense of carrying on ??as much larger than it would be under a Central Government. 1305. Do you not think the same argument would apply in Australia —in fact, more so than in New Zealand, where there are two separate Islands ?—That may be the tendency ultimately. 1306. But, even in the event of that taking place, you still think New Zealand would receive as much attention and be as rapidly developed as wo would be if left to ourselves ?— the development would rest entirely upon the people and the resources of the colony. 1307. Do you think that our policy of acquiring estates for settlement would be carried out by a Government in Australia ?—Perhaps not. 1308. That settlement has played a prominent part in the development of the colony during the past few years ? —That is so ; but 1 do not know whether in every case it has been successful. 1309. But, taken as a whole, it has worked advantageously?—lt has. 1310. Well, if it has worked advantageously, it must be to the disadvantage of the colony if we cease it?—l think the tendency is generally for closer settlement as time goes on. 1311. There has been no attempt made for closer settlement in Australia? —Not to legislate for it—not by Government interference. 1312. Mr. Roberts.] Something like 29,000,000 ft. of timber was exported from New Zealand in 1899 : was any portion of that from Dunedin or from the South ?—I do not think so. 1313. Hon. Captain Russell.] You say you think, upon the whole, the balance of argument is in favour of federation ?—Yes. 1314. Would you kindly state to us what are the principal causes likely to operate for our benefit? —Well, the principal cause I have stated —a market close at hand, and an increasing market. 1315. Then, you have put it simply from the market as we have it to-day?— And its possible expansion. 1316. Well, in process of time, do you think our trade will increase with Australia or decrease, supposing we federate?—l think that it will increase. 1317. Then, you are not afraid of the competition of the workers in Australia ? —Not to those industries which are independent of our tariff. 1318. Yes; but, of course, if there is a Commonwealth there will be no tariff?— Just so. 1319. You are afraid that every industry which is protected would suffer if we federate ?—Yes, I think so. 1320. Then, from a manufacturer's standpoint, you think it would be detrimental to federate? —To a certain extent, certainly. 1321. Well, then, taking it from the financial standpoint, should we benefit or suffer by connection with Australia?— Well, I do not see that we should suffer, and I do not know that we should benefit very much from a financial point of view. You mean with reference to raising loans, and so forth ? 1322. Generally?—l do not think it would affect us. 1323. Take the question of raising loans ?—I do not think it would affect us.
A.—4
85
1324. You know, of course, that the Commonwealth would have the power of taxation? —Yes. 1325. Do you think that the Commonwealth, having the power of taxation, would increase or diminish the rate of interest we should have to pay upon local loans?—l do not think it would affect it very much. 1326. Do you think that by being members of the Commonwealth we should borrow cheaper than we are doing now? —That I could not say. 1327. You think it would not affect the rate of local loans. You do not know whether the Commonwealth is borrowing cheaper than we are borrowing now ? —I could not say. 1328. You remember the days of provincial loans ?—Yes. 1329. Did the provinces pay a higher rate of interest or a lower rate of interest than the General Government ?—I could not say that, but I have no doubt it is on record. 1330. Yes; I was wanting to arrive at the conclusions which are favourable to federation ?— Yes. 1331. At any rate, if the provincial loans were at a higher rate of interest than the General Government loans, would that be an argument affecting the question of borrowing if we were a State in the Commonwealth ? —Well, of course, I do not know that they were. 1332. I am assuming that they were ?—Assuming that they were, I do not think so, because the conditions were different then from what they are now. 1333. Then, you do not think the State loans, when the Commonwealth has the power of taxation, would be somewhat in the nature of a second mortgage?— No. 1334. Well, then, viewing it from a defence standpoint, should we benefit or the reverse— from a defence standpoint ?—Well, I think we ought to benefit. We could not be worse in the matter of defence than we are at the present moment. 1335. In what way should we benefit ? —Well, we should have much greater resources in men ; a very much larger number of men available for the purposes of defence all over the Commonwealth. 1336. But what is the first line of defence ?—Well, I presume the Commonwealth would see that efficient defence was provided for all the States at all points of attack. 1337. Do you mean with regard to naval defence?— Well, naval defence would be outside the Commonwealth, I think. 1338. That is what I was coming to. Do you think our position in connection with naval defence would be improved by joining the Commonwealth ?—No, I do not think that it would. 1339. Have you considered the question from a climatic standpoint at all ?—Generally the conditions are better in New Zealand for work than in Australia. The advantage would be in favour of New Zealand in that respect. 1340. Do you think that in the course of five or six generations there will be any material differentiation between the European people of a cold climate and of a warm one ?—I do not think there will be any special deterioration in Australia. 1341. We will not use the word " deterioration," but " difference " ?—Not a great deal. 1342. And do you think the white people of Australia will be able to work, to cultivate the country, and to carry on manufactures within the tropics ?—No. 1343. Do you think that question affects federation at all ? —I do not think it need. lam not aware of any tropical country where white labour has been effective. 1344. Do you know what portion of Australia is tropical or semi-tropical?—A very considerable portion. Ido not know the area. 1345. About two-thirds —north of the 30th parallel of latitude ?—The 20th parallel is within the tropics. 1346. But, in the tropical and semi-tropical portion of Australia, do you think that during the period of several generations the children—the descendants of white people—will be able to work in comparison with the people of a temperate climate like this ?—Well, of course, the climate of New Zealand is likely to produce a more robust race ; but I think the white labour in Australia will be quite effective. 1347. In the tropical and semi-tropical portions ?—Yes. 1348. You think that in the tropical and semi-tropical portions the white labour will be effective ?- Yes. 1349. Can you give us an instance in any part of the world where similar conditions prevail where white labour is effective ?—No; because no white people, except in Australia, so far as I know, make the country their final home. English people working in the tropics do not go there to reside permanently, as a rule. 1350. Why do they not go there to reside permanently ?—They go there for the purpose of making a competency and returning home. 1351. And what becomes of those that do not make a competency?— They remain there, I suppose. 1352. In the tropics?— Yes. 1353. But, still, you do not know that there is any portion of the globe where white labour can work under tropical conditions ?—No ; we have had no experience of it. 1354. But, still, you think that will not affect the race question in Australia?— Well, as I say, they will not be so robust as they would be in a temperate climate like New Zealand. 1355. Hon. the Chairman.] What disadvantages do you anticipate from New Zealand not federating with Australia ?—The closing of the Australian markets. 1356. You speak of our defences being about as bad as they could be—l presume you refer to the land defences?— Yes. 1357. Are you aware of the number of enrolled Volunteers in this colony ?—Not definitely, but I know that a large number have been enrolled lately.
A.—4
86
1358. Are you aware of the condition of the fortifications and mine-fields?—l suppose, generally speaking, that they are considered not up-to-date ; and lam aware of this fact: that we are enrolling a very large number of Volunteers at the.present time in New Zealand who cannot be armed. They are being armed with old Snider rifles—obsolete weapons. 1359. You are not aware of what arms are under order for the colony ?—No; I understand new arms are being brought forward. 1360. Is there any reason why the Defence Force of this colony should not be as well armed and equipped as the Defence Force of the Commonwealth ? —No. 1361. Therefore, assuming that they are, the question of defence would not be a very material one?— No. James William Faulknbe examined. (No. 33.) 1362. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your business?—We are wire-weavers, galvanisers, and blacksmiths. 1363. How long have you resided in New Zealand? —Twenty-four years. 1364. Have you resided in Australia ? —About twelve months. 1365. Have you visited Australia lately ? —Eight years ago. 1366. Have you considered the question of the federation of New Zealand with the Australian Commonwealth ?—But a very little. 1367. Have you any opinion as to how New Zealand federating with Australia would affect the manufacturing industries of this colony ?—I could not say. It all depends upon whether the people here would have protection against outside goods. From my own point of view, it would be a very good thing if we had a market at our doors for my own manufactures. We have no protection on our wire netting, and we are open to the world. 1368. Do you export to Australia?— No. 1369. Do you think there is any chance of New Zealand exporting to Australia ?—But very little. In my line I think it would be the other way about. You might possibly get other people's manufactures in there, but I do not think it would benefit me at all if New Zealand federated. 1370. Mr. Luke.] In view of the fact that we are exporting to Australia a little over £2,000,000 in cereals, and also in view of the fact that we have industries in this colony involving the employment of about 49,000 persons, and that the manufacturing industries would be affected seriously by federation, do you think that that element is against the probability of our being able to extend the market for our cereals ?—I think so. 1371. Do you not think that the larger manufaqtories in Australia, with their superior machinery, would seriously affect the manufacturing interests of New Zealand under federation?— Most decidedly. 1372. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is yours an important industry ? —I employ about fifty hands. 1373. And without protection you are able to compete successfully against similar imported goods ?—On one of my manufactures—bedsteads —we have a protection, but that is the only line we have protection on. 1374. And can you compete with the Home article with the present duty?— Yes. 1375. Is your trade steadily increasing ?—Very slowly; it takes a lot of pushing. 1376. Under free-trade you do not fear competition from Australia ?—I am not prepared to say. At present we compete against the English manufacturers, but how federation would affect me on the whole I could not say. 1377. Mr. Millar.] The conditions of labour are considerably better here than they are in Australia, are they not ? —Here they get better pay, and work shorter hours. 1378. Then, whether there was protection or not on the industry, with the conditions applying in Australia you would still be handicapped to that extent ?—Yes. 1379. Do you think the freight-charges would cover the difference ?—I do not. Of course, if the stuff could come absolutely free from the other side we should be handicapped. 1380. It would also be unjust to the workers, because to enable you to compete against the Australians they would have to come down to the same level ?—Yes. 1381. Is it not a great deal easier to reduce than to raise?— Yes. 1382. So that from the labourers' and the manufacturers' point of view it would be injurious to the colony to federate under present conditions ?—lt would interfere with them very much. 1383. Of course, the prosperity of Dunedin largely ia dependent upon the manufactures of this district ?—Yes ; they are the largest in the colony. 1384. Then, anything that would tend to injure the industries must react on the whole population of this district ?—Yes. 1385. On those grounds you do not believe federation would be advantageous?—lt would interfere with us unless we were put on the same footing. With them working the same number of hours, and paying the same wages, I would not be afraid of my opponents. 1386. Mr. Roberts.] The protection you receive, I suppose, is practically the cost of getting out the wire netting manufactured from Home—the extra freight ?—Yes. 1387. So that your industry is able to exist without any protection at all?—We had to do without. 1388. Hon. Captain Russell.] Mr. Millar asked you a question with regard to the present effect of federation: is it not possible that, owing to our superior climate, we might in process of time be able to send men to Australia who would have an effective influence there, and to a greater degree than people nurtured in a warmer climate ?—We may be able to. We have got the climate, but they have the population. 1389. I am trying to look ahead to, say, a hundred years hence?—Oh, it is impossible for me to go into that. I can only speak for the time being.
87
A.—4
1390. You refuse to consider it from any other standpoint than that of to-day ? —I can only speak of the present time, and as to how it would affect me. 1391. Mr. Leys.] I suppose you take an interest in public questions in New Zealand ?—Very little : I am not much of a politician. 1392. Not in public affairs, even as affecting the colony ?—No, I have been too busy to do that. 1393. Are you not aware of the Conventions and referendums on the matter in Australia?— I never thought they would federate with this colony, and therefore I never troubled my head about it. 1394. You are engaged in a manufacturing industry, and yet you say you do not know the condition of the same industry in Australia ?—No. I know there is a very large firm there — namely, John Lysaght and Co., Sydney—whom 1 would have to compete against, but I am the only manufacturer in New Zealand of wire netting. 1395. Do you think we could send our goods there and compete with them ? —That is a broad question. We could send a representative over there to make a report. 1396. What is your opinion?—l think it could be worked if we selected the proper person. 1397. And you think we could influence the Federal Parliament to such an extent that they would attend to New Zealand business'in the way we desired?—l should not like to pass an opinion on that point. John Bbadley Shacklock examined. (No. 34.) 1398. Hon. the Chairman.] What business are you engaged in ?—General ironfounder. 1399. How long have you resided in New Zealand ? —AH my life practically—thirty-six years. 1400. Is your establishment a large one ? —I think it is the largest in the colony of the kind, employing 105 or 110 hands. 1401. Could you give the Commission your opinion as to how federation would affect the manufacturing industries of this colony ? —Of course, provided the conditions were the same in Australia, we could compete with them in our particular trade. 1402. What do you mean by the conditions being the same ? —I mean the cost of the raw material, wages, &c. 1403. Are they not the same at present ?—No. I think the wages just now are a little higher in New Zealand. A few years ago they were about the same in Dunedin and Victoria. 1404. Can you import the raw material here as cheaply as they can in Australia?—l think in Sydney they have a little the better of us, but, as far as I can see, there is not much difference in the freights on such material as pig-iron. 1405. Can you see any advantages which would arise through New Zealand federating with Australia ?—I believe, as far as my own business is concerned, that the market would be enlarged. We have had to refuse a few orders because of the high tariff in Victoria. Personally, I believe in federation. I think it would be for the good of the colony as a whole, although it might seriously affect some industries at the start. 1406. Please tell the Commission why you believe it would be for the good of thecolony as a whole ? —Because we would be part and parcel of a larger nation, and I think we would be better governed from one centre than from many centres. 1407. You believe in central government?—l do. 1408. Are we not part of a large nation now ?—Yes. 1409. Then, what would be the gain in belonging to Australia? —The expenses of management would be lower per head of population. 1410. But there would be still the State Government of this colony : would there not be additional expense incurred by the creation of the Federal Government ? —Yes ; but that would be one of the preliminary expenses. 1411. But that would be the least expense : why do you think the expenses would be cheaper and the cost of government less ?—As far as my experience goes, taking a business view, it seems to me that a business or a country is better managed from one centre than from two or three ; and what appertains in business, I take it, will apply to the government of a country. 1412. Mr. Leys.] Do you think it probable that the States will be abolished ultimately?—lt is a probability that might happen. 1413. Assuming that were so, do you think our fifteen representatives there would be a better body than our New Zealand Parliament for developing the resources of the colony ?—I think they would be quite efficient. 1414. Do you think we can get representatives of various industries to go over there and devote their time to parliamentary life, or do you think they would become professional politicians? —I take it that our representatives would be representatives of the people in all industries. 1415. From what class do you think the representatives would be drawn?—l cannot say. The matter is in the hands of the people, and they can elect whatever class they like. I presume, when a man is voting, he does not look at the class. 1416. Then, do you think that a Parliament composed mainly of Australians could arrive at the same knowledge of New Zealand affairs that our Government has ?—They would be guided by the representatives of New Zealand. 1417. Are you sure they would ?—lf I were an Australian I would be. 1418. With regard to your industry, do you not think you might have some opposition, say, in the northern markets from the Australian manufacturer if there were free-trade ?—We might have ; but still, if we were part of the Commonwealth, things would adjust themselves in time, and it would only be a matter of time when the conditions would be the same in Australia as here, and then we would be put on the same footing.
A.—4
88
1419. Do you think, as an ironfounder here, you could compete against ironfounders who are situated so closely to the Newcastle coal ?—I think if the conditions were the same we could, because we have coal almost at our doors; and then, as far as the ironfounders in Victoria are concerned, they are as far away from the coal as we are. " 1420. But lam speaking of New South Wales: does it not cost as much now to bring coal from Westport to Dunedin as it does from Newcastle ? —I could not answer that question. We know we can land Greymouth coke cheaper here, and at a lower rate, than we can land Newcastle. 1421. Much lower?—l should say, 4s. a ton cheaper; and the quality is in favour of the New Zealand article. 1422. Then, with regard to the conditions being equal, will they not always have a much larger population to supply, and therefore the foundries be much larger in Australia than here?— But if we are in the Commonwealth we would have the same population to supply. 1424. You think that our isolation is no handicap in competing with Australia?—No; I do not look on it as a very serious handicap. The waterway is in many respects better than a railway, and it can carry the goods at far less cost than the railway. 1425. You say we would have the same population : do you mean that the fact that Sydney, for instance, has between 400,000 and 500,000 people is no advantage to Sydney manufacturers ?— If we were a part of the Commonwealth we would also have the advantages of that population. 1426. And you think that you would be able to compete with Sydney manufacturers for the supply of Sydney ? —Yes. 1427. And pay the freight?— Yes. 1428. You do not fear that, these largely developed industries in Australia would supply, say, Auckland cheaper than you can supply it from Dunedin ? —No. 1429. Neither by reason of the cheaper coal they possess, the cheaper iron, nor the larger factories? —No. Climatically, I think we are better adapted for manufactures than any part of Australia. 1430. With regard to the hours of labour, do they work longer hours in Australia than here in your trade?—l could not say definitely, but Ido not think they do. I think eight hours is the recognised day's work in Victoria, and also in Sydney. Of course, here the tendency is to get forty-four hours a week, which is doing away with eight hours a day. 1431. Can you speak definitely on that point, because we have had evidence to the contrary ? —No. 1432. Then, with regard to wages, are they lower in Australia than here in your trade ?—I think they are in the meantime. A few years ago they were not, but through the iron trade being so busy in New Zealand wages have gone up a bit. 1433. And you think that is not a permanent condition ?—No; I do not look upon it as a permanent condition. 1434. Mr. Beid.] Have you derived your information on this subject by reading what has appeared in the newspapers, or from a study of the question ? —Not from a very close study of the question, just simply from what I have seen in the newspapers, and from conversation with others. 1435. You are aware, of course, that the Commonwealth was established by Act of the Imperial Parliament: have you considered any of the provisions of that Act?— No. 1436. Then, I think you told us that it would be a good thing to be part of a great Empire, governed from one centre, not from many centres: from what centre are we governed now?—l presume from London, by the British Parliament. 1437. In one sense, of course, we are; but what is the capital of this colony?— Wellington. 1438. Then, if we were governed from London, and we are also governed from Wellington, would we not add another centre of government in Australia ?—lt would be a subordinate centre, of course. 1439. Which would ?—The Australian centre would be subordinate to London. 1440. In what sense can you say we are governed from London ?—Theoretically, of course. 1441. But, practically, in what sense are we governed from London? —I presume there are some Acts that are passed by the New Zealand Parliament that have to have the Eoyal assent. I do not know what they are, but I know there are some. 1442. But are you aware, as a matter of fact, that that provision can still remain under the Commonwealth? —I believe it would and should. 1443. And what would be the gain in depriving the States of that right of appeal ? State laws might still have to be referred for the Eoyal assent, and Commonwealth laws also, therefore where would the gain come in?—l am not prepared to go into the matter so exhaustively as that. 1444. Have you considered the question also from a financial point of view ? Shall we be able to borrow money better if we are under the Commonwealth ?—The only thing I think of in that respect is that I think we could get the money a little bit cheaper. 1445. Who would get the money cheaper—the State, if they borrow, or the Commonwealth, if they borrow ?—The Commonwealth. What I mean is that the Commonwealth would be able to borrow money at a little lower rate than the New Zealand Government does now. 1446. But the State Government would still have to borrow, and would do it at a disadvantage, on account of the security being less through the major portion of its revenues being taken over by the Commonwealth ?—I did not know of that. 1447. Mr. Luke.] I suppose you have considered the question more particularly from a manufacturer's point of view?— Yes. 1448. Following up Mr. Eeid's argument, would it surprise you to know that our Consols have remained pretty stationary for a considerable time past, while those of Australia under the Commonwealth have receded considerably—New South Wales, I think, from 117 to 113 ? That is rather a feature against your argument, is it not ?—Yes.
A.—4
89
1449. We have been told here—l think by Mr. Burt—that freights have been considerably less to Australia for heavy lines than to New Zealand—that frequently ships loaded with a very light cargo have required pig-iron as stiffening, and have broughc it out here for nothing, and very considerable quantities at ss. a ton : have you been aware of than ?—I have not. I might say that, in view of this matter coming on, I have made inquiries from an agent in the hardware trade who has recently come from Victoria, and he informs me that there is very little difference. We compared rates, and, as a matter of fact, there is very little difference. 1450. It is in view of the recurrence of that circumstance that the manufacturers in Australia would be put on a very much better level than in New Zealand : what is your opinion ?—Of course, I can only go from my experience here, and I think it is a long while since pig-iron came into Dunedin as ballast. 1451. I speak of Australia?—Of course, I do not know what is done there. 1452. Mr. Burt says that it has frequently come here ? —I cannot say that I have heard of it. 1453. You said that the Greymouth coke is as good as the Newcastle coke ? —Yes ; it is better than any Newcastle coke I have used. 1454. And yet Newcastle costs about 4s. to ss. a ton more, I think you said : is that so?—lf you want the exact figures I can tell you. I think it would be about 4s. more. 1455. Why do so many manufacturers in New Zealand import Newcastle coke, seeing that it costs so much more than the Greymouth coke ?—lt has yet to be proved to me that they do. 1456. Then, you think the manufacturers who are importing it here are making a decided mistake, and against their own interests ?—All I can say is I would not use it. 1457. Are you aware what the hours are in Australia?—-Not exactly. 1458. It has been stated here that the hours are nine a day : is that so ?—I could not say exactly. I know they make a great feature of their eight-hours celebration. Wages are higher there than here at present. 1459. What is the reason for that, do you think?— Owing to the general prosperity of the trade. 1460. Has the Court of Arbitration anything to do with it ? —No; I think it is the general prosperity of the trade. 1461. Do you think that, with the organization we have in New Zealand, wages will recede at all ?—You mean were we left out of the Commonwealth ? 1462. Yes? —I think they will recede a little. 1463. Do you think there is any possibility of wages increasing on the other side under federation ?—-That is a very big question ; I cannot answer it. 1464. Keferring to coke again, would it surprise you to find that we imported from Australia last year 946 tons ?—I would not be surprised to hear that. 1465. Well, I think it must be assumed by some manufacturers in the colony that the Newcastle coke is superior to the Greymouth coke, and that in itself would constitute an advantage to the Australians as against our manufacturers?—l can only go by my own experience. 1466. You think that under federation we would all be placed on an equal footing—that is to say, we could compete against Australian manufacturers ?—Of course, it would be a matter of time. Some industries might have to go to the wall altogether. That would apply to the Australians too, but time will rectify that sort of thing. 1467. Your principal item of manufacture is cooking-stoves ?—Yes. 1468. Do you think you could manufacture cooking-stoves and export them to Australia, and manage to pay the freight, and hold your own against their larger concerns ?—Yes ; as I said before, if we had the same conditions. 1469. I am not assuming we would have the same conditions : first of all, wages would be higher? —We must have the same conditions, otherwise we could not do it. 1470. You believe in federation if we had equal conditions ?—Yes, broadly speaking. 1471. And, if not, you think it would be a mistake?—l am not prepared to say. 1472. And, from a manufacturer's point of view, that our industries would not suffer?—l do not say that our industries would suffer, though some of them might. 1473. Mr. Beauchamp.] Are you the sole partner in your business?— No. Mr. Shacklock, sen., is unwell, or he would have been here to-day. 1474. Do his views agree with yours on this subject ?—I do not represent him in the views I am giving. They are my own views. 1475. You might not feel disposed to let us know what your father thinks on the subject ?— My father is not in good health, and he really has not discussed the subject. 1476. Have you done any business in Australia in your manufactures ? —ln only about three instances, where people went from here over to the other side. Things were good at the time, and they insisted on having some of our productions no matter what it cost them. 1477. What is the present duty on ranges here?—2o per cent. 1478. I suppose you know that Australian-manufactured ranges have been imported into this colony? —I have not seen any in New Zealand 1479. The ranges of a firm named Ward in Sydney—l have seen them in several cities. Have you come into competition with Australian-manufactured ranges in Dunedin?—No. 1480. Assuming that what I have said is correct, and these Australian ranges are paying a duty of 20 per cent., does not that seem to indicate the probability that under free-trade we would have some severe competition from kindred associations to yours in Australia?—No, I do not think so. If the conditions were the same I think we could compete. 1481. With respect to the character of the politicians whom we would be likely to get to represent us in the Federal Parliament, do you hold any decided views on that subject?— No. I think we would get equally as good men as we get now. The people would have the same say in regard to the Commonwealth as they have now. J 2—A. 4.
A.—4,
90
1482. Mr. Millar.] Presuming a large number of our industries are injured by federation, where would your population go?— They would have to go to where the industries are carried on. 1483. Is that going to benefit the country producer?—A larger agricultural population might come here, supposing the industrial population left. 1484. But, granted you had the whole place under agriculture, is that going to benefit the agricultural producer?—l should think so. 1485. Is it not generally understood that the greater the surplus in any product the lower the price ?—Yes. 1486. Take, for instance, your own trade : if you had ten or a dozen manufacturers here competing against you, would not that tend to reduce the price of ranges ?—Yes. 1487. Well, exactly the same thing must apply to the farming community?—l do not look at it in that light. 1488. How are you going to look at it ? —I look at it in this way : that if the whole of New Zealand were agricultural, and the colony were filled with an agricultural population, there would be more work to do, and it would benefit everybody. There would be greater production. 1489. Have you any idea what the value of the agricultural production is ? —No. 1490. Of course, you know that Australia is a very large exporter, and produces the same produce that we produce?—l understand it does. 1491. Therefore we could not look for a market to any extent in Australia for this increased production you look forward to: is not that so ?—I believe we would still export some of our productions to Australia. 1492. Assuming we would increase our production and ship to Australia, do you think it would be likely to give the farmer a better return ?—I think, probably it would ; but I cannot speak with any degree of accuracy on the subject. 1493. But you admit that, so far as your own trade is concerned, the greater the production the greater the probabilities of less profit ?—Yes. 1494. But you do not think that that would apply to agricultural produce ?—lt applies in a certain degree. 1495. It would apply in the same way as it would apply to you, would it not ?—I do not think so. 1496. Your general opinion is that those industries that would receive benefit by federation would more than compensate for the injury done to the other industries ?—I do not go that length even ; but, as I said before, my own view of it is favourable. 1497. On what grounds? If we are not going to derive any benefit from it, where is the advantage of federation ? Is it a mere matter of sentiment ?—Not of sentiment, although, I suppose, sentiment counts in everything. 1498. But sentiment, without some practical benefit, I am afraid would not do us much good. You said that, in your opinion, federation would mean a saving to the colony : have you any idea what the expenses of government are now of New Zealand ? —No. 1499. Well, the total expense of government—the salaries paid and travelling-expenses, from the Governor downwards—are £56,000. Those are the actual expenses of the Legislature. Under the Federation the State Government still remains, so the expenses would be increased instead of lessened? —Still they might be curtailed. 1500. They cannot be without their own sanction: are you aware of that?—l suppose they could be if the people decided they must be. 1501. Suppose the people decide to wipe away all the State Governments, do you think this colony is likely to be developed so well under a Central Government in Australia as under our own Government ?— I see no reason why it should not. 1502. You have direct control over the Government in New Zealand? —Yes. 1503. Would you have the same control over the Government in Australia ? —We would have as much control over them as we have now. 1504. How is that?—We would still have the vote. 1505. But would the public opinion of New Zealand be given expression to, or the results of that public opinion be given effect to, as well in an Australian Parliament as they would in a New Zealand Parliament ?—I believe they would—in the same way as the expressions of opinion of the people in Otago are given expression to in the New Zealand Parliament. 1506. Generally speaking, you do not think federation would be injurious to New Zealand ?— Not in the long-run. 1507. Hon. Captain Bussell.] You have told us, Mr. Shacklock, that you would like to belong to a large nation : do you think that Imperial Federation is likely to be assisted or retarded by the creation of the Commonwealth ?—I think it is likely to be assisted. 1508. Have you read of the state of feeling in regard to Imperial Federation in Canada, which is a very loyal country ?—Just merely casually—what I have seen in the newspapers. 1509. Are you aware that there is a very anti-Federal feeling in Canada?—l was not aware of that. 1510. And you think that as the Commonwealth increases in power and strength it will be more likely than at the present time to favour Imperial Federation ?—I think so. 1511. Do you or do you not think that the Australian Commonwealth and New Zealand might be more likely to lead to Imperial Federation than if New Zealand united with Australia?— No ; I favour the other idea rather. I look upon federation as being a matter of growth. 1512. How do you come to form your opinion that government will be cheaper under the Commonwealth than under the existing condition of things ?—lt is an idea that I have. 1513. I have here the lately published statistics. They show the public expenditure of New South Wales to be £7 4s. Bd. per head; that of South Australia, £7 lls. lid. ; Queensland,
91
A.—4
£9 Bs. 3d.; Western Australia, £15 ss. IOd. ; New Zealand, £6 16s. 6d.; Victoria, £6 ss. 10d.; and Tasmania, £4 17s. The mean is £7 10s. lid., against our £6 16s. 6d. To that has to be added the cost of the Commonwealth Government, so that it seems that the public expenditure •will be increased rather than diminished ?—lt looks as if it will for the time being. 1514. You were under the impression that we would get money cheaper as a Commonwealth than as individual States : how much cheaper?—l cannot say. 1515. What is the rate of interest of English Consols?— Even that I cannot say. Ido not appear as a financier. 1516. But you state we would get money cheaper: a good many say that, and I want to clear my mind on that point ?—lt is only an idea. 1517. You know the nominal rate of the last loan raised by New Zealand was 3 per cent. ?— Yes. 1518. If Consols at the present moment are at 2f per cent., is it likely there will be a very material decrease in the rate of interest the Commonwealth will have to pay?— Well, perhaps not. 1519. Then, under these circumstances, the difference we could borrow at as a separate State and as a State of the Commonwealth would be insignificant ? —lt would be, approximately. 1520. And it is by no means proved that there would be any difference ?—No, it is not proved. As I said, it is just an idea of mine. 1521. Sometimes we have reasons for our ideas ? —Sometimes we have, and sometimes we have not. 1522. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you mean that we could borrow cheaper in the matter of the local loans of the individual State of New Zealand ?—Yes, that was my idea on the subject. 1523. Do you think the Commonwealth would guarantee the loans of each individual State ? —Well, the security might be looked upon as being better through our being part of the Commonwealth. 1524. That was not so with the old provincial loans. It was expressly stated that the colony was not responsible for any of those ?—Still, the security might be looked upon as being better even supposing there was no guarantee from the Commonwealth. 1525. But do you think in all probability that it would be?—l think so. Joseph Spaeeow examined. (No. 35.) 1526. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name ? —Joseph Sparrow. 1527. What is your occupation ?—General engineer and ironfounder. 1528. How long have you resided in New Zealand ? —Thirty-two years. 1529. Have you resided in Australia at all ?—No; I have only visited it. 1530. Can you favour the Commission with your opinions as to the advantage or disadvantage of New Zealand federating with Australia?—l must explain, sir, that I have never considered the whole question sufficiently to be able to give an intelligent opinion any further than what the effect would be on myself. Under the more favourable laws that they have in Australia, by which a 'man can get paid for his work when it is done, I would not be afraid of Australian competition. I would be more afraid of America and Germany. But under the present system we are handicapped with laws which would cause federation to affect us very seriously. It does now. I have done a considerable amount of work for Sydney, being a free port, but I cannot do anything with Victoria on account of the tariff; but Victorians can work for New Zealand,' because they can land their goods on the wharf and get paid for them so soon as they send them over. Here we have to give credit for thirty-one days, according to the laws of New Zealand. Consequently, we must look for larger profits, which more than overbalance the 5-per-cent. duty and cost of freight. If that Act were done away with, and we had the same hours of labour and the same wages as other places, I do not know that I would have anything to fear from competition. In slack times here it would be worth one's while to cast an eye over to the other side, and pick up contracts. I have known that done, and people here contract for work in the iron line over in Australia, and make a good thing out of it. I have known steamers built here, and sent over to Sydney. The " Port Jackson " was one. She was a good boat, and the owners are well pleased with her. 1531. You say you are not afraid to compete with Australia : can you tell us of any advantages that would accrue to this colony through federating with Australia ?—We would have a larger field, and we would look to Australia for work. 1532. Can you speak of other industries in New Zealand ?—No; but there is no doubt that some industries must suffer, and that others would be benefited. I think it would regulate itself; but I have not gone sufficiently into the facts of the case. 1533. What industries do you think might be benefited by federation ?—I think that farming would be benefited by having an open market for the produce. 1534. But manufacturing industries ?—I do not know outside of my own, but there is no doubt there might be others that would be benefited. 1535. Have you considered the question in any way except as it affects the industries of New Zealand?— No. 1536. Mr. Millar.] You said that you believed that under federation we could compete with the other side ?—ln many cases, not in everything. 1537. Have we not got competition from the other side now ? —Yes; but that is because they have better laws than we have, and they get paid for their work when it is done. But for that I do not think they could compete with us. 1538. Under the Workmen's Wages Act you have to lie out of money for thirty-one days or a month ?—That is, before we can ask for it. If the article remains in our hands until the money was paid it would be safer, but it has gone out of our hands before we can apply for payment.
A.—4
92
1539. The loss of interest on the fourth part of the cost of a dredge benefits them to an extent more than the 5-per-cent. duty?— Yes, considerably more. 1540. Pretty stiff interest on money, is it not ?—lt is the quick returns, and they get the money right away. 1541. And the conditions of labour are different in New Zealand, so far as your trade is concerned, from what they are in Australia ?—So far as I have learned, there is a little but not a great deal of difference—that is, so far as wages and hours of labour are concerned. 1542. Would you be put on any better footing with New South Wales than at the present time with federation ? —Well, Ido not know that we would be on a much better footing. We are very busy here at present, and have not much time to go beyond New Zealand. 1543. But, assuming you were not, would you be on a better footing as far as regards New South Wales ?—Not New South Wales, but if a part of a large Commonwealth we would have the whole of Australia to pick and choose from. 1544. Are your industries developed to such an extent in New Zealand that you could go and compete with the engineering shops of Victoria to manufacture here and export to Victoria ?—lt has been done in New South Wales and Victoria. You could go over there sometimes and take work, partly manufacture it, and complete it there. 1545. And Victorians could come here and do the same?— They do at present. 1546. They have been competing all the time, and are increasing their plant at a rapid rate ? —Since the " boom " things have been very quiet over there as well as here, but since they began to get busy again they have not been competing much. 1547. Take the ship-repairing: do you think New Zealand could possibly compete with the Mort's Dock people?— Not with large machinery. 1548. Nor in Victoria ?—Not under the same circumstances. But our manufacturers have developed a great deal in the last few years, and would more so, provided a wider field was opened up. But it is easy to see that in the matter of shipbuilding and that class of work more of it is required in Australia than in a small isolated place like New Zealand. Ido not know if anything has been sent out of New Zealand for repairs. There may be some large things that we could not do. I remember one job that was very difficult to do in New Zealand. That was the " Eotomahana," there being no forge in New Zealand large enough. I think, in the matter of shiprepairing we have got on very well. 1549. Take the outlook for the next five or ten years : do you think it very likely that you will want any market outside of New Zealand ? —I think so. 1550. Within ten years?— Yes. 1551. What particular line do you look forward to getting an opening in on the other side ?— There may be Government contracts on the other side, and we could go over there and do them. 1552. There are large works in Sydney—Hudson and Co.'s—which do the bulk of the Government works ?—Those who have got the machinery for the class of work required will get the work, it does not matter where they come from. 1553. They have turned out so much of the work already, and having the patterns for the bulk of the work, it is not reasonable to suppose that the firms in New Zealand could compete with them ?—No. 1554. In the matter of bridge-building, I suppose any man might take that up?— Yes. Competition is very keen in small places, and they will work for smaller profit here than over in Australia. Since I have been here two-thirds of the engineering shops have gone to the wall because they worked too cheaply or paid too high wages and could not compete. 1555. If you look to Australia for a market, where would our population go?— They would follow. We would certainly take some of our best men with us. They would do the same over here in a larger degree. They are doing it now. 1556. You have no personal knowledge of any other industry that would be benefited under federation ? —No. 1557. And the benefit that would come to your business is not very much ?—I would not look at it from a personal point of view. I think the larger the country the less there is of petty feeling. Such, for instance, as was the case in 1870, when Germany and Prussia amalgamated all the petty States and made one strong nation. 1558. What were the boundaries that divided those German States at that time—a mere pencil-line drawn on paper ? —Yes. 1559. The same as exists in Australia at the present time?— Yes. 1560. Do you think this colony would be as well developed and the land opened up for settlement by a Central Government in Australia as by our own Government here ?—That I could not say. It might be better, but good land would open up itself. The Australians come here and take the land. 1561. You will admit that the development of the land is one of the principal things required for settlement ?—lt is one of them. 1562. So far, in Australia they have made no move to do anything of that description ?—As far as I understand, Australia is not so highly privileged in land as we are. The climate is more uncertain. 1563. The soil is equally good ?—But the climate burns it up. 1564. Do you not think that, under the Commonwealth, the enormous territory in Australia will debar the Government from paying proper attention to the development of New Zealand ? I think there will be representatives there to look after New Zealand interests. 1565. Do you call this a petty colony ?—Yes ; it is isolated and is only a small corner of the world, and could trade better with the outer world if joined to the Commonwealth. 1566. Mr. Beauchamp.] How many hands do you employ ?—About two hundred and eighty in Dunedin ; about three hundred altogether.
93
A.—4
1567. The number is increasing from year to year?— Not now. It did increase until very recently. 1568. Have you been in a position during the last six months, say, to execute all the orders placed with your firm ?—We have never got them completed up to time. 1569. Has any quantity of goods similar to what you manufacture been imported from Australia in competition with you ?—Yes. 1570. Is that because you have not been able to take orders offered to you?— There is a good deal of that, but they do it cheaper. I dare say freights, &c, make it more. 1571. With a duty of 5 per cent., you say that Australia at the present time can supply cheaper than you can ?—I do not think they supply cheaper to the companies. 1572. As cheaply, would you say ?—About as cheaply. 1573. Therefore, when under free-trade, they would be benefited to the extent of the 5-per-cent, duty?— Yes; but we would be more favourably benefited by the difference in the way of payment. We could work for considerably lower profit if we got our money when the article was completed. 1574. What rate of interest do you charge the capital in your business ?—7 per cent. 1575. Have you figured out the loss of interest on the 25 per cent, retained out of the total cost of a dredge?— No. But take the case of twelve dredges at £8,000 each : That would mean us lying out of £24,000 of our money. 1576. But suppose you did not part with the interest in that dredge until you got the full amount of the contract price?—We have to hand it over thirty-one days before we ask for the last payment. 1577. And you hand it over without any form of security whatever?— Yes. That law is very severe on the manufacturer, and we do not care whether we take any more work or not, because we are losing so much money. 1578. You do not take so much exception to other legislation affecting your business?—No; I believe that in time good will come out of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act if it is judiciously used. 1579. Owing to the size of the colony you think this is a petty colony—the same remark is applicable to Great Britain ?—lt might be, only Great Britain is a great Commonwealth altogether. 1580. Only created, however, by its age? —Yes; but it is doing trade with the whole of the colonies. 1581. Would not you consider this colony as self-contained as Great Britain?— More so. 1582. That is the reason why I hardly understand why you describe this as a petty colony?— It is, as a colony, great in resources, but you cannot do business outside the colony. 1583. You fear that by our not federating we cannot expand the volume of our manufactures? —Not so well as if federated, I think. 1584. Mr. Luke.] I understood you to say that you were handicapped by the inconvenience you were put to through having to stand out of the balance of your contract-money ?—That is so. 1585. That minimises the advantage of the o-per-cent. protecting duty that you have got ? — Far more than that. 1586. And the Australian manufacturers draw against their bills of lading, and receive cash for their work?— Yes. 1587. What class of work have you exported to Australia ?—Dredging-work—buckets, and such work as that. 1588. Not a complete dredge ? —No; only parts. I must admit I have got a bit of a name for manganese pins. 1589. Is not dredge-building practically a development of New Zealand ?—Yes. 1590. Is it not a fact that a great number of foundries in the process of development went to the wall ?—Yes. 1591. And these orders come to New Zealand because of your better knowledge of what is required for a dredge ? —I do not know that that is the reason ; they build part of the dredges in Sydney, and part over here. 1592. That is due to a reputation in manganese pins, and buckets ?—I think it was cheaper. 1593. You said that we were importing from Australia a great deal of dredging material ?— There are two reasons for that: one is that it is done cheaper; but the principal reason is that we could not turn them out quick enough. 1594. About how many dredges have been imported into New Zealand from Australia?— About twenty. 1595. Of an average cost of how much ?—£4,000, perhaps. 1596. That represents a big volume of trade ?—Yes. 1597. Dredging is being carried on in Australia now ? —Yes. 1598. And yet we have only exported to Australia portions of dredges?— Yes. 1599. How many dredges have you exported parts of ?—Pins for five or six; but large work for only two, I think. 1600. Nothing to represent the value of those twenty dredges imported into New Zealand ? —No. 1601. How is it that we are not exporting complete dredges ?—We have been so busy we have not had time to turn our attention to it. 1602. Have you had a chance of tendering ?—I could if I had liked. 1603. They have solicited your tender? —I have had chances, but have only done it when pressed on me. 1604. Under the uniform tariff of the Commonwealth you do not think we would be placed at a
A.—4.
94
disadvantage with Australia, where there is such a much larger population and larger plants for manufacturing?—! cannot say that we would. We have got a bracing climate here, and I would prefer my own men who have served their time here to men from any other part almost. 1605. We have been told by men who have worked in Australia that they can do as much work in a day there as here ?—There is more division of labour there. We want here men who are more general all-round hands. There is also a division of machinery there. 1606. Are not wages lower in Australia than here ? —I believe they have been lower, but Ido not think there is a great difference now. My opinion is that a good workman can get a good wage no matter where he is. Here a poor tradesman wants to get the same pay as the best one, and they think they will be " molly-coddled " by the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. 1607. What do you mean by " molly-coddled "? —They think they have nothing else to do but run to this Act and get whatever they like, but they are beginning to find out their mistake. 1608. You think that is a disadvantage in competing against Australia ? —Yes ; it frightens us, and causes us to be not so energetic as we would be with something substantial behind us. There was a decision last month which affects contracts I have in hand for the next six months. I ought to be taking fresh contracts, but I cannot, because it is not settled, and I do not know how it will come out. 1609. Is it not true that they get cheaper freights to Australia than here ?—I do not think there is much difference. 1610. Mr. Burt says that pig-iron comes out at ss. per ton as stiffening for big steamers in light freight ?—lt could come here too ; it has come here as stiffening for sailing-ships. 1611. You do not think that being twelve hundred miles away from where the largest population is would place you at a disadvantage in competing with Australia?—l do not think so. 1612. Do you think, looking into the future, that New Zealand will be a large manufacturing community, having regard, of course, to the big deposits of iron at Parapara, and having coal ?—I look upon it that people having money will not spend it in New Zealand on labour. 1613. Will not that be a difficulty in the future ?—That will keep New Zealand back. 1614. Will we not suffer in consequence if we federate ?—We may, but if we alter our laws we will not. Ido not believe in federation unless the conditions are the same. 1615. Mr. Leys.] Do you mean that we should not federate until the conditions are the same, or that we should go in and take our chance ? —I thought that when we federated we would be put on one footing. Ido not think it would be advantageous to us unless we went in on the same conditions. 1616. If on present conditions our industries would suffer?—l think so. 1617. With regard to retaining 25 per cent, of the purchase-money, have you lost any money through that ?—Yes ; I lost £400 about two months ago. 1618. You put that down solely to the retaining of 25 per cent. ?—Yes ; the dredge did not do well, and when I made a demand on them they went into liquidation, and the secretary of the liquidation cleared off a fortnight ago. Another one went on for a few months, and I gave them a considerable amount of work. After thirty days were up I began to look for my money, and they made excuses and ordered more work. I made this stuff and refused to deliver it. They got it somewhere else, and left the stuff on my hands. Then they tested the claim ; and when the thirty days were up, and I threatened proceedings, they came to the conclusion that the claim was no good. 1619. Would you have given them credit apart from this law?—No; unless I had got some security. 1620. But are you compelled to deliver your goods before you get this money ?—That is for Mr. Millar to answer ; I have tried several lawyers, and they say the law is against us. 1621. Do they say you must deliver the goods?— They say we must deliver the goods thirtyone days before asking for the money. 1622. You do not attach real importance on the interest of the 25 per cent, of the money? —The interest is a mere bagatelle. 1623. The duty on an £8,000 dredge would be about £250?— Yes. 1624. What would the cost of bringing it over be ? —We have got to bring our material over to New Zealand in any case. . 1625. Would the cost of bringing over the material make the difference?— Yes. 1626. About how much?—£loo of a difference. 1627. That would be a protection of about £350 on an £8,000 dredge?— Yes. 1628. Well, against that there is the interest of £2,000 for one month ?—You do not get it in a month; you only begin to look for it then : you may reckon on three months. 1629. Well, three months, the interest on that would be £25 as against £350 protection ?—Yes; but the probability is you do not get it all. 1630. But do you mean to say that the law is such now in New Zealand that you cannot make a cash contract? —Yes ; it suits those companies which are short of capital to keep it that way. It just suits them, and they take full advantage of it. 1631. Hon. Major Steward.] Under what Act of Parliament is that?— The Workmen's Lien Act. 1632. I think you said you would not contemplate New Zealand going into federation unless the conditions were made equal?— Yes. 1633. That implies that it would be necessary for this particular provision of the Workmen's Lien Act to be repealed ?—Yes, as far as it affects us. 1634. Do you think it possible to go into federation with Australia and make it a condition that certain clauses of a particular Act should be repealed ?—I do not think the Australians would accept the Act at all.
A.—4.
95
1635. Am I to understand that you contemplate we should make it a condition of the federation that certain portions of statutes in New Zealand should be repealed ? —Yes, that is so. One question I heard you ask Mr. Shacklock about coke. Coke was imported because they ran out of New Zealand coke. I myself import it and keep a stock on hand. Ido not like it so well as New Zealand coke, but I keep it in case of accidents. At the time of the fire round on the West Coast we used to club together and send Home for a shipment of English coke. 1636. You are aware that the New Zealand State Legislature would be retained under federa-tion-?—I was not aware of it. 1637. Mr. Beauchamp.] With respect to that 25 per cent, which is held over for thirty-one days or more, could you not insert conditions in your contract that that amount was to be paid into the bank, and held by the bank, and handed over to the manufacturer at the end of that time ?—There are consulting engineers between the employers and the manufacturers, and they take full advantage of that Act, and will not take a contract from any one who will not give those conditions. 1638. Could you not, as manufacturers, use your power and accomplish what you wish?—We tried it, but the consulting engineers were against us. The engineers say that the company was liable to a fine of £50 if they alter the conditions, and they refuse to let the companies accept a condition that will make them liable to a fine or imprisonment. Febdebick Mallabd examined. (No. 36.) 1639. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—My present occupation is that of an insurance expert. I have lived permanently in Otago—the last time for thirty-nine years. I have known New Zealand from a boy. I have been in the North Island. I know Australia also; and I know the political history and the constitutional history fairly well of the whole of Australasia. 1640. Have you considered the question of the advisability of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—I have, sir. 1641. Do you think it would be a prudent thing for New Zealand to federate with Australia? —Highly objectionable from every point of view. 1642. Well, will you give some reason for that opinion ?—I wish to say at the outset that I am an Injperial Federationist. I do not like the word " Commonwealth "at all, and I believe in sticking to the old flag. lam the son of a naval officer, and my ancestors have been naval officers for three or four generations. I was brought up in the navy myself. As I look upon the financial aspect of the question as the most serious of the whole, I would respectfully ask the Commission to look forward to the year 1903. If you will just imagine for one moment that you are in the year 1903, that New Zealand has federated with this "Commonwealth" thing, and that you, sir, are the State Treasurer. I would ask the Commission to refer in the first instance to the published accounts of the Government of New Zealand for the financial year commencing the Ist April, 1899, and ending the 31st March, 1900. On page 12 you will find—of course, lam assuming that we all know the intricacies of the patchwork Bill—you will find the receipts—l have based the figures upon last year's, but, of course, they will increase as we go on—we are now a State; our receipts then, after losing our Customs and excise revenue, will be £2,321,582. Our State expenditure, assuming the figures to be the same as last year—and, of course, they will be increased in three year's time— our expenditure then will be £3,955,469 as a State, after, of course, we lose our Customs and excise revenue. We then find ourselves with a deficiency in our State revenue of £1,623,987, or about the same deficiency that we have for the State of New South Wales. Now, the State Treasurer will find his finances in anything but a pleasant condition. He must either do one of two things : reduce his State expenditure by that amount, or he must increase his taxation. The question then presents itself, From what source is he to increase taxation to the amount of £1,623,987 ? I fail to see how it is going to be done ; because, in addition to that, we have to make provision in 1903 for fresh banking legislation, which will necessitate a further £500,000 at least for deficiency under the Assets Realisation Board. That being so, Ido not see from what source the State Treasurer is going to get this money. 1643. Yes; probably we need not consider the source from which it is to come, but you arrive at the conclusion that there will be a deficiency of £1,630,000? —That is so, sir. 1644. Now, apart from the financial aspect, on what other ground do you object to the federation of New Zealand with Australia ? —I object to it on every ground. 1645. You have pat two—first, loss of national independence ; next, the financial aspect of the question. Well, now, how do you think it would affect trade and commerce ?—lt would be very detrimental to the whole of our trade and commerce. From a manufacturing point of view, the manufacturers must only look, and can only look, for the development of manufactories to the requirements of this colony. It is impossible it should be otherwise. The money invested in manufactures on the other side in Victoria is three times the amount of ours, and in New South Wales twice as much, so that it would be much to the detriment of our manufacturers, because they would naturally be swamped from the other side. 1646. Yes; can you conceive of any gain that there would be to the Colony of New Zealand from federating with Australia ?—I can conceive of no gain whatever. From a defence point of view we should absolutely gain nothing. A belligerent would cut our cables at once ; and if I were a belligerent I would attack your commerce with two or three raiders, and not attempt to land here at all, because, of course, I know very well that if I should land I would not get away again. I should do the same as Waddell did in the " Shenandoah," and as Sernmes did in the " Alabama " : I would raid your commerce and destroy your exports. 1647. Then, you think New Zealand could gain nothing in the way of defence from federating with Australia?— Absolutely nothing whatever. Indeed, it would be to the contrary. The Commonwealth of Australia in time will want a Lord High Admiral of its own, and then there would
A.—4
96
be a conflict between His Excellency the Commander-in-Chief, under whom we should serve, and the Admiral; and every military man knows that you must have one supreme head. Our separation would, I believe, be beneficial from a defence point of view, because I believe the headquarters of the fleet—the British Commander-in-Chief— woufd shift his headquarters and come down to Auckland. 1648. How do you think it would affect us in social matters if we federated?— Socially, we should be politically dead, as we are at present in Otago by being governed from Wellington. I am a Provincialist to the backbone; and we should pass through an infinitely worse period than we did when we lost our provincial system of government, and we should be governed by a class of officials appointed under the States. There is a Bill being framed at present to define the duties of these State Commissioners, and the Colony of New Zealand would be absolutely under the control of these State Commissioners. Or, in other words, we should have the same as we had in the provincial days—two systems of officers: the General Government officers, who would represent what were our provincial officers; and the State officials from Melbourne, because that is going to be the seat of government. We should be infinitely worse off by being governed in that way by Government officials. 1649. You anticipate that some inter-State Commissioners would be resident in New Zealand? —Would be permanently resident in New Zealand ; that is my opinion, and I have studied the thing, too. I think it is one of the worst-drawn things that I have ever read ; in fact, as I wrote on my copy this morning, "Itis a patchwork of portentous potentiality." That is what I term the Act, and it is no credit to whoever framed it. If they had framed it the same as this little thing which every one of you have seen —the Act for the Abolition of the Provinces —so that they would- have taken over every duty when they took over the different colonies, it would have been right enough; but they take over our revenue and leave us to provide for our expenditure. 1650. Well, you have given us your reasons against federation : is there anything that occurs to you on the other side ?—Absolutely nothing, sir—l have approached it with a judicial mind as fairly as I possibly can ; absolutely nothing. The whole of our political life and political prosperity, and the development of the colony, would go to the dogs ; we should be outvoted right and left over there. In point of fact, the Bill was never framed anticipating that we would have anything to do with it. It is only when they have got into a mess themselves that they want us to get into the mess with them. The trouble is not finished yet. They will have the same trouble there that we had here. There will be the two conflicting elements. You will remember the fight we had down here on one occasion to take charge of some of the Government offices. Mr. Eichmond, I remember, came to me —he was Colonial Secretary at the time—and asked me what I was going to do. I said, "I am going to preserve the peace, and Ido not care for any of you." The same thing will occur, but infinitely worse. 1651. You have given us a very exhaustive statement of your reasons against federation, and you say you can find none in favour of it. Ido not know that there is anything further to ask you?—lf it was not taking up the time of the Commission I could go on to this time to-morrow. 1652. Ido not think that is necessary. You have stated the thing very succinctly and very fairly—put the matter in a nutshell, as it were ? —There is only one thing I would like to add by the way, if the Commission will bear with me, and it is this : There has been a great deal said about reciprocity, and that sort of thing. Well, it is a nice academical word, but, after all, trade is only barter, and not a month ago some potatoes that were grown in Germany were imported into Melbourne, and these German-grown potatoes, imported by a German ship, fetched in overt market, over the Warrnambool potatoes —a district I know very well, as I helped oo survey it —they fetched £3 10s. a ton; so that you may expect a flood of German potatoes. 1653. Hon. Captain BusselL] I do not know whether Mr. Mallard gave us his views upon the racial question ?—The racial question, I look upon it as an international question affected by international law. What have we to do with the interior of Australia? The interior of Australia must be settled by Japanese, or by some people that can work in the tropics. It is simply absurd for these little colonies to override international law. lam going to leave notes with the Chairman, and you will see I have quoted from an international writer—Wheteon, I think, is the name—who distinctly lays it down as an absolute fact that no country can keep its lands unoccupied for its own particular purposes to the detriment of another nation. Japan is a firstclass nation now, and we must be careful how we treat the Japanese. We must remember that we are not everybody. Although I am a regular " John Bull," a fighting-man, and think we are bound to rule the roost, we must not forget there are other people to be considered. The racial question can have no effect whatever upon New Zealand. The white man will occupy New Zealand, but the northern part of Australia will be occupied by the Japanese. 1654. Then, if the coloured races get into northern Australia, will they in due course of time— say, three hundred years hence—permeate the whole of the Australian Continent ?—I doubt it very much, if you keep the Chinese out. History seems to tell me this : that wherever the Chinese go they will not mix with the Europeans—they are so Conservative. The Japanese will mix. It is Japan I am afraid of. 1655. But coloured people, do you think they will permeate the Australian Continent ? —They will certainly permeate the northern part of it. 1656. But you think it will be possible to draw a hard-and-fast line south of which they will not come ?—Oh, I should hope they would not try it. I was one of the first to object to the Chinese. When they came here, knowing something of the Chinese, I begged the people to have nothing at all to do with them. There was one gentleman, a very wealthy man, who said he did not care. After the argument was over, he said, "I don't care tuppence"—he did not say " tuppence," but used the adjective—" so long as I can sell my rice." I said, " You will find you will not be able to sell your rice; they will trade with themselves." Ido not like the Chinese.
97
A.—4,
Wherever they go, somehow or other they always outnumber us; they will not mingle with us. It will be Chinese or nothing ; it is not so with the Japanese. 1657. Then, you think the Japanese would intermarry with the Europeans ? —I should not be at all surprised but what they would. There is no reason why they should not. The Japanese are cultured gentlemen ; cultured men equally with ourselves. My reading of history leads me to that opinion. Look at what they have done in twenty-five years. Everybody has been against them, and yet they have come right up into the favoured-nations clause : they have the favourednations clause everywhere—even with France. You must remember, too, that we are a progressive colony, and that if we federated our labour laws would be smashed to " smithereens," because you could not have any law antagonistic to the Federal law. On the question of defence I have figures here. We pay absolutely nothing of the £27,500,000 for insuring our commerce—the British Government do not pay more than £3 11s. 4d. per £100 of Great Britain's commerce for insuring the commerce, and of that we pay nothing. I want more money spent on the fleet. I will leave these pamphlets and Government statistics of Tasmania if you will have them, and if you like to write to me I shall be only too glad to give any further information. Mack Cohen examined. (No. 37.) 1658. Hon. the Chairman.] Your occupation, Mr. Cohen ?—Journalist. 1659. You have resided in New Zealand for how many years ?—Very nearly forty. I arrived here in 1863. 1660. Have you lived in Australia? —Yes, as a boy. 1661. Have you visited it often?— Not often. I went back about six years ago, after an absence of thirty years, and again quite recently. 1662. As a journalist, your attention has, no doubt, been much attracted to the question of the Australian Commonwealth : have you considered in that connection the advisability or otherwise of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth as one of the Federal States?— Not to the extent of forming any definite opinion on the matter. I have read a great deal, and been brought into contact with prominent minds in Australia during my two visits. As a matter of fact, I made it my business to meet these men on both occasions with the object of learning, as far as I could, what might be the effect on New Zealand of the formation of a Commonwealth Federation, which at that time —1895—had not reached the region of practical politics. Since then I have diligently pursued the question, but only with the object of pressing on the authorities here the need for inquiry on the part of New Zealand before the door was closed in our face. 1663. And what is the result of your reading and of your discussions with prominent men in Australia?— Unhesitatingly I say that, as a result of my two visits, and after conversing with prominent public men in Australia, and reading, as far as I was able, between the lines of public opinion, which is strongly expressed there—it is not so in New Zealand; in fact, there is no public opinion on this question in New Zealand—the feeling in Australia is that New Zealand should not neglect her present opportunity of considering this question from the broadest standpoint. A great deal has been said and written about the advantages of reciprocity with Australia. Let me say, as one who has taken some considerable pains to ascertain how far that aspiration is likely to be realised, that we are living in a fools' paradise. Australia will not agree in any sense to enter into a reciprocal treaty with New Zealand. I have no hesitation in saying that as my deliberate opinion, as a result of long and earnest conversations with those men who are likely to shape the destinies of Australia for the next twenty years. 1664. Victoria entered into a reciprocal treaty with Tasmania?— Yes, but it was a failure. At least, there is'no such treaty on the statute-book to-day. New Zealand and Canada and New Zealand and South Australia also tried it during Mr. Ward's visits, with no result. The opposition was as strong in our own Parliament as in the colonies and countries Mr. Ward endeavoured to make the treaty with. Mr. Seddon also tried unsuccessfully to get the Premiers' Conference at Hobart to entertain the proposal. 1665. South Australia was willing to reciprocate with New Zealand on certain lines, but the New Zealand Parliamenfrdeclined to ratify the proposal ? —There are gentlemen at this table who know about that matter better than I do, and who are familiar with it. I would not like to express an opinion about it. 1666. You do not hold out any hope, then, of a reciprocal treaty between the Commonwealth and New Zealand ?—I am only giving you the reflex of the opinions of men with whom I have been brought into contact. 1667. What is your own opinion on the matter? —I should say that their opinion will be borne out by facts. I think they speak by the card. 1668. What is your opinion about New Zealand federating or not federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I would not commit myself to a definite opinion at this juncture, for the reason that lam in search of light, so to speak, on the question; but as at present advised, and having regard to all the surroundings—political, commercial, and otherwise—l am rather in favour of federation while the door is still open to us. 1669. Please state to the Commission the grounds on which you found that opinion, so far as commerce is concerned ?—Well, you can hardly expect a man in my walk of life to do so. I am only repeating what I have heard in certain quarters. lam told there is a market that might be largely extended under federation. If Australia goes in for a protective tariff, then to that extent our exports will suffer. We have seen the effect of closing the door against us in New South Wales under the Dibbs Ministry, and how our exports increased when the wall was somewhat broken down by Mr. Eeid. As to the imports and exports of the colony, a great many people say we import and export so-much from and to Australia, forgetting the fact that our importations comprise very largely transhipments from oversea. It is not a fair comparison—not fair to ourselves as producers, at all events. 13—A. 4.
A.—4
98
1670. What are the principal items that New Zealand can export to New South Wales ?—I think the returns speak for themselves. I will leave that to statistics. It is considerably over a million. 1671. Have you considered the political aspect of the question?—l have. lam a student of such questions, and I regard the Constitution of Australia as the most democratic Constitution of its kind known to the world, and to say it is not' to be interpreted nor understood is a foul libel on those who conceived it. It is an admirably conceived political instrument, and provides for every reasonable contingency. The States are supreme within their own borders in certain respects, and the Federal Legislature has the oversight of certain matters towards which we were naturally drifting by the constitution of the so-called Federal Council. There were certain large matters annually dealt with there. It is only the transference of authority from one body to the other. 1672. Do you think the present Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia is an improvement on the Federal Council ?—A great improvement—an improvement to an extent that cannot be measured in words. 1673. What political advantages would New Zealand gain by joining the Commonwealth ? — Of course, the question of terms arises at once. As the Constitution is framed, we cannot enter as an original State except within a given time. There are several things that will have to be rectified, no doubt, and I think it is to be regretted that New Zealand was not represented at all the Conference Conventions. Our power for good was admitted, and the gentlemen who were sent over in 1891 were recognised authorities on matters political and constitutional, and carried great weight in that Convention, and would have done so in successive Conventions. 1674. New Zealand could not now enter as an original State ?—No. 1675. Do you think, then, that New Zealand should enter at all under the circumstances? — I think so. From what I know of the public men of Australia, and of those who will occupy the foremost places in the first Federal Parliament, they will treat New Zealand on exceedingly liberal terms. They have said publicly—and we should not doubt their sincerity—that they will extend the right hand of fellowship to New Zealand, and will take no advantage of her exclusion from the original-State clause of the Constitution. Ido not see why we should be distrustful. 1676. Do you think it likely that New Zealand would be admitted on the terms of an original State? —I would go further, and say my deliberate opinion is that she would be admitted on the same terms as though she had entered with the original federating colonies. 1677. Possibly you have read the evidence given before the Commission by persons connected with trade and manufactures?— Yes. It is evidence I expected to be given from a manufacturer's standpoint. ■ Doubtless I should be in sympathy with it if I were a manufacturer, but I refuse to believe that the prosperity of New Zealand is indissolubly bound up with our manufactures. There are other things that make for national prosperity that have not been considered in the matter yet. 1678. To what do you refer?— Largely to our agricultural and our mineral products. 1679. Agriculture was considered to some extent in Invercargill ?—To a very limited extent. I heard one witness declare that if the industries suffered the prosperity of the colony would vanish. That is all " buncombe." New Zealand is not made of that material. 1680. What do you think would be the effect on the finance of the colony if we joined the Commonwealth of Australia ?—Everything depends on what the tariff of the future is to be. 1681. You know that under the present Constitution the Customs revenue would go to the Federal Government? —Yes; and in return for that the Federal Government undertake certain large duties which have to be paid for. 1682. And the result would be that New Zealand would part with a considerable portion of the revenue which is raised now by indirect taxation ?—Yes. To counterbalance that the Commonwealth would, I think, obtain money for reproductive purposes at a much lower cost, and so set off the loss in that way. 1683. Do you think the Commonwealth would borrow money for reproductive works in the different States, apart from works which are essentially works of the Commonwealth ?—I do not go that far, but I take it the Commonwealth would go on the London market for borrowing purposes. Much as 1 think our own Legislature ought to have gone on the market and*borrowed for all purposes of a public nature, and so eased the burden on the local authority, I have always contended that it was the duty of the State to raise all moneys required for expenditure within the colony, and lend them to our local bodies, subject to proper supervision, and a check on local expenditure such as obtains in the Old Conntry. If that had been done the taxpayers would be greatly benefited, and the public would receive a great advantage. 1684. Have you considered the matters relating to the judiciary and the constitution of the Federal Court of Appeal ?—I can only express an opinion from a layman's point of view. I may say Ido not know why all these matters should be referred to London for final settlement. Our judiciaries are all sound lawyers and able jurists, and I consider that the Federal Court of Australia could settle questions as well as the Privy Council. I oppose the colony sending everything to the High Court in London. 1685. On the whole, then, you think that federation would be an advantage to New Zealand ? —Subject always to the reservation that we know what we are to get in return, and that certain things are rectified before we join. For instance, there is no provision for our aboriginals being represented. Then, I would be averse to any dislocation of our industries. No tariff can come into operation within two years, and I am exceedingly doubtful if it will be brought on the board ready for adoption by the Federal Parliament in that time. We should be given the same time as was accorded to Westralia—say, six years—before our tariff is superseded by the Federal tariff. 1686. Mr. Luke.] Do you regard the prosperity of Dunedin as being derived more from the agricultural or from the manufacturing industry ?—I am not looking at the matter from a Dunedin
99
A.—4
standpoint, but from a New Zealand or national standpoint. Whilst giving proper place to industries in the matters that make for colonial prosperity, I know there are other factors that have made the colony what it is to-day besides manufactures. Ido not myself regard New Zealand as a manufacturing country at all, and never have done" so in the sense that its prosperity will be built up entirely on manufactures. 1687. Do you not consider the manufactures an important element in the prosperity of the country?— Yes, unquestionably. 1688. Do you think that, in face of the evidence of large manufacturers that the industries of the country would be destroyed, it would be advisable for the colony to go into federation?—l have heard the cry repeated so often when an attempt was made to revise the tariff that I do not pay any attention to it. 1689. You do not believe it ? —■Nβ ; unhesitatingly, no. 1690. With regard to the constitutional question, do you see anything that New Zealand could gain in the government and administration of its own affairs by joining the Commonwealth?—" Government" and "administration " are large terms. If you mean the taking-away of the right to legislate on certain subjects you may be right, but I think the powers of the State Legislature are ample over all other fields. Certain questions are remitted to the Federal Parliament, and those only. Outside those we have as much power to deal with questions as we have now —very large questions too ; and I take it that when Sir Robert Stout declares that our last year's legislation comprised 110 Acts, and that only seven of them would fall within Federal legislation, he is speaking of something he knows. 1691. Do you think that under federation our resources would be fully developed? —I think we should not lose anything even if shorn of the power to deal with certain large questions. There is this, too: the power of united Australia would be felt in the councils of the world, whereas little States count for nothing. If we had had federated Australia twenty years ago we would not have lost New Guinea and some of the islands of the Pacific. 1692. You do not see any advantages, then, as far as internal administration goes?—l really think our affairs would be interfered with to a very slight extent. 1693. Is it not a fact that the Federal Constitution can be easily altered ?—lf there are any material alterations there is a certain procedure to be gone through, and anything affecting a State must be carried only with the consent of that State. 1694. Will not the popular vote of the Commonwealth amend the Constitution without reference to the State ?—I think not. I have never read it so. I place very high value on the referendum adopted in the Constitution. It is a valuable safeguard and will prove most useful. 1695. Is it not the tendency of all Central Governments to enlarge their powers ? Was not that experienced in the United States? —One can only give an answer to that as the result of one's reading. After speaking with those who have been in the States I have come to the conclusion that neither the power nor the glory of the States has diminished. Certainly, the States do things that in a British community would not be tolerated, and they part with valuable privileges that we would not think of losing for a moment, but that is more the fault of the Constitution under which they work, and is not the fault of the Federal system. 1696. Is it not the case that the powers of the Federal Government in the United States have been increased by liberal interpretations of the Constitution ?—Yes, an interpretation derived from the judicature and not from the people. 1697. Has not that resulted in the powers and importance of the States declining?—l am only telling you what has been told to me. Those who live there deny that assertion. They say the powers of the States are as great to-day as they were a hundred years ago, and I think it looks like it. Look at the conflicts between the Federal Government and the States, but where has the Federal Government triumphed in the matter of State rights ? Point to an instance, if you can. 1698. With regard to the powers of the Federal Government as expressed in the Constitution, are not these already somewhat wider than the powers of the Federal Government in the United States ? —Yes; I take it, it is a more liberal Constitution in every way than the Constitution of the United States. 1699. That being so, is it not a fact that even with the administration of those more limited powers the Federal Government of the United States has absorbed the whole of the Customs revenue ?—The Customs revenue, I take it, would be Federal revenue in any case. If you are going to work a Federal organization effectively that is a decided advantage. 1700. You think that ultimately the whole of the Customs revenue will be absorbed by the Federal Government for Federal purposes ?—I should say, from my own knowledge, that we in this colony raise a Customs revenue largely in excess of our actual requirements. That is a policy matter that affects those responsible for it. I think there is no occasion for it. If the Federal Parliament like to pursue the same policy, so long as they have a majority behind those responsible for it they may do it, but it is not good government. 1701. You look forward to the time when the Customs revenue will be the revenue?—No; 1 look forward to the time when direct taxation will be the revenue. The people will then know where the money they pay as taxation is going to. 1702. Under the present system, as laid down by the Constitution, the Federal Government collect all Customs and excise duties, and retain one-fourth for ten years ?—Yes, that is so. 1703. Three-fourths of the revenue was secured to the States under a clause inserted by Mr. Braddon? —It is called the " Braddon blot," but I think it is an effective safeguard. 1704. Do you think that would be a permanent provision of the Constitution ?—No. I think it is intended to cover a substantial time till things shape themselves to what is wanted. 1705. You believe that ultimately the States will be thrown on local taxation for State purposes ? —For purely State purposes ; and rightly so, too, in my judgment.
A.—4.
100
1706. Looking forward to that time, do you think we are likely to have any better credit in borrowing for State purposes than the States of the United States have?—l would not like to put the United States of America, with their peculiar methods, on a level with any colony governed according to English constitutional methods. 1707. Do you think they are less honest? —I think the British lender is much better disposed to those of his own immediate kin. He is also satisfied with the security offered by the colonies. In this very room twelve or fourteen years ago, when a member of the City Council, I was greatly struck with some remarks made by Mr. Westgarth in a discussion he had with us on the question of colonial loans. We were then considering a matter of finance, and he said that when Australia federated the ease with which she would get money would almost compensate for the step about to be taken. He said, too, that the early part of the century would see Australia getting all the money she required for public purposes at 2£ per cent. I think he was right. He spoke with a mature judgment. That low rate of interest, then, is likely to be one of the benefits of the Commonwealth. The Federal authorities would go into the money-market on better terms than we could do. 1708. You think the Federal Government would do all the borrowing?—l hope so. Years ago the New Zealand Government should have done it for all New Zealand, instead of allowing the local bodies to go into the market and borrow at prices that were often extreme. 1709. Shall we not have to secure the sanction of the Federal Parliament to every purpose for which we wish to borrow —say, for instance, the purchase of lands for settlement?—At present that is one of the matters reserved to the State Legislature ; but I should think, seeing what a large question it is, and that it affects all the States of the group, it will become one of the subjects to be handed over by consent to the Federal Parliament, which will deal better with it. 1710. You contemplate an absorption ? —I did not say that. I think it is one of the large powers that should properly go to the Federal Legislature. 1711. Do you think the fact of having to go to a distant Parliament for authority for such measures as that will materially interfere with the development of our own country ?—Not in the slightest. Ido not pay any attention to the distance argument at all. lam in hopes that in the near future that question will be reduced to a very small one, and we will wonder it was ever raised by sensible men. 1712. You think there is no practical force in the objection ?—For my own part, I do not. 1713. Now, we have had a number of leading men from Otago before us, and almost without exception they have stated that they are unfamiliar with the bearings of this question, and that they are unwilling to express an opinion about it : is it not a fact that the question of federation is well known in Australia? Have not popular votes been taken on it?— Yes. For years it has been one of the large questions of the day there. But how has it come about ? Associations were formed to discuss and ventilate it, the public men took to the platform upon it, and the Press wrote about it, till, with all these helps, it became one of the burning questions of the hour. You could not go into an hotel or a railway-carriage without hearing some one raise it, and, as a result of all the discussion, every issue became familiar to the people. In New Zealand the class who take an interest in it is limited, and I will guarantee that two-thirds of our people do not know anything about it at all. There is no public opinion, in the proper sense, on the question here at all. 1714. If there is no force in the argument of distance, how comes it that, while all Australia is familiar with the question, New Zealand knows nothing about it ?—I do not say that New Zealand knows nothing about it. 1715. Or little about it ?—lt does not know enough about it. 1716. Is that because of distance ?—No, but because we have had other large questions to consider, and because New Zealand did not take her proper share in the deliberations of the Conventions. 1717. Is it not rather because our interests were not in common ? —I do not think so. It is a question that will be brought readily home to the people when their pockets are affected. If a tariff of from 15 to 20 per cent, is raised against us in Australia, you will see how quickly it will become a live question in this colony. 1718. Do you not find a difficulty in the colony of getting a national opinion owing to the widely separated divisions of the colony ? —No. I think if the Legislature were wise enough to give us the initiative and the referendum, by which people may raise such questions and discuss them freely, you will soon have a live and sound public opinion in New Zealand. 1719. Has that not been so in New Zealand in, the past ?—No. The amount of knowledge does not obtain in New Zealand that is necessary to promptly accomplish any reforms. One reform in which I was engaged took us fifteen years to accomplish from that cause. 1720. Would not that apply to a much larger extent if we were federated with Australia ?—I think not. 1721. With regard to representatives, do you think we should get such a good representation of all industries and interests in the Federal Parliament as we are able to do in our own local Parliament, or do you think that members would become professional politicians ?—I would beg to be excused from answering that question. Ido not see that any opinion of mine could have any weight. 1722. But the fact of having to go to such a distant Parliament would prevent the men who were engaged in business from entering the Federal Parliament?—l think, on the contrary, the extended sphere of usefulness and chances of promotion in the service of the Empire are factors that will have an influence not only in bringing out desirable State candidates, but in giving to the public service the energies of our best men. 1723. Has it worked out in that way in the United States ?—The United States have not got all the best men, but they get some excellent men.
101
A.—4,
1724. But not mostly of one class?—No, Ido not think so. I have met a few of them, and they are men of broad intellect, advanced ideas, and able men in every respect. 1725. You think that would not be the case in connection with our own representatives?—l have got a better opinion of my fellow-colonists than to think they would always vote for the professional politician as against the able man. 1726. When you spoke of increasing our exports to Australia ?—Understand, I did not put forward any opinion of my own ; I was just telling you what was told me by men whom I regard as being of considerable weight, both in Melbourne and Sydney, and they were very strong in that opinion, and 1 am just repeating it. 1727. You have no opinion on that subject? —No, not first hand; but I know a very strong opinion obtains in that direction in Australia. 1728. I understand that if the door was widened and we were admitted as an original State it would be an advantage to us to join ? —lt would be to our interest. 1729. Do you think it likely to remove these anomalies ?—One can only express the opinion of men who to-day are in the front rank of Australian statesmen, and there was a consensus of opinion in that direction —that they would treat New Zealand with deference. 1730. We should be a minority ? —We have representation according to our population. It is not fair to assume that Victoria and New South Wales would ride roughshod over us. 1731. You think that the smaller States hold a good deal in common, and could thereby bring about equality in things ?—I think so. 1732. We have all the necessary raw materials here for manufactures, and, that being the case, do you not think it likely that we shall develop into a manufacturing community very largely ?—I have tried to persuade myself that that was so, but I do not see the evidence of it, except under the influence of " coddle," which is not good for the State. 1733. We have got rich iron-deposits at Parapara, which give a larger percentage of pure ironore than any other in the world, and we have abundance of coal and limestone contiguous; and there is a probability of copper being developed, too, to a very profitable degree, and also tin ?— I have considered all that. 1734. Our exportations in the way of cereals to Australia amount to a little over a million a year. We have engaged in the factories of New Zealand about forty-nine thousand persons, and the value of our products out of these factories is estimated to be about twelve to thirteen millions: is that not an element against the million we export to Australia, especially considering that this progress has been made since 1895 ?—I hope so; but we must not take years of prosperity solely for our guide. I have seen it stated, but I have not seen it proved, that wages in New Zealand were higher all round than in Victoria. 1735. We have got £7,000,000 or £8,000,000 involved in manufactures in New Zealand : do you not think, under federation, that with the larger shops and appliances they have got over there this property would be very materially affected?—lf it is proved that labour is much cheaper there, then my argument is largely disproved. I thought also that eight hours a day obtained in Victoria and New South Wales. 1736. You do know there are very large manufactories there as compared with New Zealand ?—Yes. 1737. Would New Zealand be prejudicially affected as against these manufactories?— For a time it would, but in time we would get to the forefront, and very quickly. At all events, they say so over there. 1738. You have paid a good deal of attention to technical education ?—Yes. 1739 Do you not think, then, that if these industries passed away the necessity for technical education will pass away? —There I go the "whole hog" with you. If you want to capture markets elsewhere you have got to make the colonial workman as efficient as possible, and technical education is a necessity for doing that. 1740. You think we would develop agricultural interests to the detriment of the industries?— No. I would assist industries as far as possible, but I decline to say that if your industries suffer a temporary check the national prosperity of New Zealand could never recover therefrom. 1741. You think the dominating influence is that of agriculture?—l say it is the largest, if not the most important. I should be inclined to say it was the most important. 1742. Mr. Beauchamp.] In view of the balance of trade in favour of Australia, do you think it likely that, in the event of our not federating, Australia would assume hostility towards us by putting on big duties and excluding the produce of this country ? —I cannot say ; but it seems that the opinion of those able to enforce it in the Legislature is that they will. 1743. They do not seem to place very much importance on the trade which they had with New Zealand ?—I think that if the figures of our imports from Australia were analysed it would be found that they include a large value for transhipments—a larger amount than many people are prepared to believe at the present time. 1744. It points to the fact that there is a considerable trade between Australia and New Zealand ? —lf it represented products from Australia, that would be so. 1745. If the exports do not bear a large proportion to the whole you would admit that it is not likely that Australia would put up a large ring-fence against us ?—No; I think it will be found to the contrary. 1746. One witness the other day said he was distinctly of opinion that the Commonwealth was hastened by the keenness displayed by Victoria to join the union, but that she would not have shown the same desire if New Zealand had been to join as an original State?—l disagree entirely with that. I think it was due to a different cause entirely. When I went to Australia in 1895, what struck me most, as an old Victorian, was the difference in the state of trade in Melbourne and Sydney. It was the increasing loss of trade that caused Victorians to look this question squarely in the face.
A.—4
102
1747. You do not think that Victoria fears competition with New Zealand by inter-free-trade ? —No. 1748. With respect to raising money, you notice that money has been cheaper in this colony than in the open market in London ?—Yes; but Canada raises money lower than any other colony, and that as a dominion. 1749. Under present circumstances, I take it, you recognise that it is not advisable for us to federate ?—No; the conditions want amending considerably. 1750. Mr. Millar.] In what respect do you think federation would be of advantage to our commerce ?—I say it is going to be of considerable advantage to the agricultural industry, and I think the manufacturing industry will ultimately reap an advantage. They will have intercolonial free-trade, and will be able to command a market there which would be closed to them under other conditions. 1751. Is it not a fact that the only reason for sending to Australia is that it is the best market available ?—I would not venture to offer an opinion on that. 1752. You believe that a man ships to the best market ?—That is an axiom that none will attempt to dispute. 1753. Therefore, if South Africa was a better market than Australia, Australia would be valueless?—We are not going to get our own way in South Africa. There is going to be a federation, too, there one of these days. 1754. Do you think the social condition of the workers in Australia is equal to the social condition of the workers in this colony ? —I think they will improve under federation. 1755. Do you think they are equal to ours now ?—No ; our legislation is decidedly in advance of theirs, but they are following pretty close in our steps. 1756. If we federated we would have to wait till they came up to us ?—I do not think there would be so much standing-still as some seem to think. There will be adult dual suffrage, and that ought to make for progressive legislation in the right direction. You must remember that the legislation in some parts of Australia is defective owing to local circumstances. They have tried often enough, but have been stopped in the march of progress by their Upper Houses. 1757. If we join, our votes will be divided by half, for wherever there is the dual vote the vote is divided by half so as to bring all on an equality ? —That is so ; hut there will be female franchise in Victoria before this year is out, and the double vote will operate in federated Australia before three years are over. 1758. You do not consider that our manufactures would suffer?—l do not say that. I said I thought for a time they would, but that they would quickly recover themselves. 1759. If they suffer, the probability is that our men will drift away to Australia?—No; I think work would continue to be found for them here as now. 1760. Despite the fact that even now Australian manufacturers find a market here despite the tariff?— Yes. 1761. And the only place that New Zealand gets into in Australia is New South Wales?— Victoria, too, with woollens ; and it is only because of the high tariff wall that we do not get into Victoria more and supply the market. 1762. You think that, if we were to federate, the social conditions of this colony would develop as rapidly as under our own form of government ? —Seeing the large powers retained by the State Legislature, I think, yes. It would, be better if Australia were to have some of the powers which are to be left to the States. Divorce, bankruptcy, and other like matters ought to be handed over to the Federal Parliament. 1763. With your experience, do you not think it highly probable, when the Commonwealth Parliament go to take over all the Customs revenue, postal revenue, and other departments of that description, that there will be an outcry from a portion of these States ? —Canada has been many years a dominion, and they jealously guarded all the rights belonging to the States. That cry has never been raised there ; and they come of British stock, like ourselves. 1764. We did it in this colony, which is nearer home ?—We did it, but do not forget that we were much injured in the house of our friends. 1765. Could it be done without the voice of the people ?—lf the people say it has got to be done it will be done. 1766. If that took place, do you think this colony would be developed as rapidly or looked after so well as now ?—Well, if there are plenty of J. A. Millars about in that day it will not take place. 1767. Generally speaking, you cannot see any disadvantage to this colony in federating?— With the safeguards I have mentioned, no. 1768. Mr. Boberts.] You remarked on the absence of any sound public opinion on the question of federation : in the absence of that, would you recommend federation ? —No ; I would prefer to see the people thresh the thing out first. 1769. You consider it is not desirable until public opinion has been formed ?—No. 1770. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] We have been speaking of the Canadian Dominion and the Commonwealth : these are Federations all on one continent ?—That is true. 1771. Do you know of any case of a federated constitutional Government separated by such a large distance of sea as separates New Zealand from Australia ?—No. 1772. And you still think that would be no objection ?—lt is no valid objection, to my mind. 1773. You say that there is a very strong feeling in favour of New Zealand federating in Australia, but that there is none in New Zealand?— No. I said that those Australians who had lived in New Zealand, or were now engaged in business connections with New Zealand, thought the advantages were in our favour if we decided to go in as an original State. 1774. You do not think they had any desire on their own account that we should go in ?—
103
A.—4
What I say candidly is that the Victorians, speaking as Victorians, would rather see us stop where we are. 1775. And the New South Wales people?—l did not hear that opinion expressed in New South Wales, but I did hear it in the country parts of Victoria. The Victorian farmer thinks he can do everything that is required over there to feed the Victorians. 1776. If we join we give up a great deal of our autonomy? —Yes. 1777. We should require to be able to show strong reasons and advantages for giving that up ? —No doubt. 1778. Do you see any strong ones at present ? —I would not think of expressing an opinion on the military aspect, but there are strong reasons from a military aspect alone to warrant the matter being considered. 1779. Do you think there will be any very great change from the present state of the markets ? We are largely dependent on the Home-country, and, I presume, will be for a long time ?—One can only look so far into the future as to see that Australia must grow, and as she grows her markets must extend, and to that extent we should consider it. If there is any good in Imperial federation, surely there must be some good in the genesis of it in Australian federation. 1780. Is that the same?—lt is the first step in the right direction. 1781. The Commonwealth would be a part of the Imperial Federation, and so would New Zealand, whether she joined the Commonwealth or not ?—lt will be a part of it, but not an effective part of it, it strikes me. 1782. What do you think the comparative influence of New Zealand is as compared with other parts of Australia on the Government of the day ?—I am inclined to think that they must have an important effect on the future of Australia. 1783. Do you think there is any great community of feeling between them ? —ln expressing that opinion Ido so with some diffidence, because I know the contrary view is largely held. Great numbers of New Zealand colonists to-day are Australian born and bred, and I cannot get it out of my mind that their feeling towards that continent is just as strong to-day as it was the day they left Australia. lam just as strong an Australian now as I was when I was a boy in Ballarat, yet I yield to no man in my love for New Zealand. 1784. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Why would Australia not agree to reciprocity?— That was the consensus of opinion amongst men in a position to-day in Australia to make the policy of the Federal Parliament in Australia. There was no concealment of their opinion on that point. 1785. Why did they arrive at that decision ?—Because they said that to enter into a reciprocal arrangement was one-sided, and therefore would not be entertained by them. 1786. They were jealous of us in the matter of reciprocity ?—I would not like it to go forth that that was what was conveyed to my mind by their conversation. They seemed to think that Australia would not, under any conditions whatever, consent to reciprocal duties, and that it was no good buoying ourselves up with false hopes on the matter. 1787. What caused that strong feeling?—l could not tell you what operated in their minds. 1788. Do you not think it possible it was jealousy of us in some way or another ?—lt would be asking them to state one thing and act differently, because they are expressing an opinion in the contrary direction. 1789. If they are jealous of us in the matter of reciprocity now, what might their attitude be when we are allied with them ?—I understand their antipathy with regard to reciprocity was that they had tried it, and it had failed. 1790. Do you think there is any comparison between the agricultural and industrial interests in New Zealand ?—I think the relative proportion cannot be represented by bald figures. 1791. If Consols are at 2f, and we can nominally borrow at 3 per cent, as an independent State, is it reasonable to suppose that we will borrow very much cheaper if a portion of the Commonwealth ?—I say I believe the Commonwealth will succeed in borrowing at 2 \. 1792. When English Consols remain at 2£ ?—Yes. 1793. Under the Commonwealth Act the Commonwealth has power to pledge the security of the Customs and other taxation : will that not materially interfere with our power to borrow for State purposes ? In other words, will not our lands be in the position of second mortgages ?— That will be the position; but I was looking forward to the possibility of the Federal Parliament borrowing for the constituent parts of the dominion, just as we wished this colony had borrowed for the provinces. 1794. Do you think it is within the bounds of possibility that the Commonwealth will alter their Constitution straight away in order to admit New Zealand on the conditions of an original State ?—I do. 1795. Then, if she is prepared to alter her Constitution within a few months, is that not rather a dangerous position for New Zealand to place herself in—to take a part in a Commonwealth which will alter its Constitution from year to year ?—Does that follow ? I think it is rather an act of grace towards a great country which is disposed to make terms with the Commonwealth for a specific advantage gained. That cannot be construed into a desire on the part of the Federal Parliament to make " ducks and drakes " of the Constitution. 1796. May there not be a danger, if all the other States are coterminous, that there will be an Australian influence which might be antagonistic to New Zealand in the Commonwealth ? —No. I think the position is rather the other way—that we should be Australasians first and NewZealanders afterwards, and as such help to make the Empire stronger than it now is. 1797. Do you attach any importance to the climatic differences ?—Yes. 1798. In the course of four or five generations, do you think there will be any striking contrast between the people of a temperate climate and the peoples of a semi-tropical climate ?—There must naturally be a difference between the people inhabiting northern Australia, but in the
A.—4
104
southern parts there will be no difference between the average Victorian, the South Australian, or New-Zealander. 1799. You think the difference will not be intensified in the course, say, of two hundred years ? —No. I see no difference to-day, and I have been away for thirty years. 1800. Taking the question of the possibility of coloured labour going into northern tropical and semi-tropical Australia, would you express any opinion on that ? —I do not think the Australian people, as I understand them, would stand it. 1801. What would become of central and northern Australia?—l think that if sugar cannot be grown without black labour it will have to go. 1802. Do you believe the Anglo-Saxon can toil in that land ?—Up to a certain point he can do a lot. Asiatic labour of a kind will be imported for those tropical districts. They will not be a menacing factor. 1803. You think they would never have political rights ? —I am satisfied that the trend of thought in Australia is all against it. 1804. You know that the blacks in America were granted political rights after the war of secession ?—The people of Australia are going to have no war of secession. 1805. Why not ?—You will never see a statute-book of Australia burdened with a statute giving equal rights to the coloured people. 1806. You think the coloured people will not go into northern Australia ? —I think the Japanese will find their way there as labourers. There will be locations for industrial purposes, but beyond earning their wages there will be nothing of them. 1807. Are they prolific ?—I do not know. Ido not think for a moment that they will intermarry with the whites largely. 1808. Do you not think it probable that the coloured races will breed and multiply there?— They will obey the laws of nature. 1809. They will override Mr. Barton in time ? —They will not increase so as to be a menace. 1810. Then, the country must lie idle ?—lf you want to press me down to that, I will say that the northern part of Australia will never be cultivated, if only black labour that must have equal political rights with Europeans must do it. 1811. You think that the law of man will be able to draw an arbitrary line across the continent, and say, " Thus far and no further shall you cultivate " ?—lf the employment of black labour is the only condition under which it can be cultivated, I say Yes. 1812. Assuming that the coloured people go there, will that affect the remainder of the continent ?—No. 1813. You know, of course, that powers were granted to the negroes in the Southern States of America, and that they have taken possession ? —Yes ; I know the conditions under which the enfranchisement took place. I say they will never be in sufficient numbers in northern Australia to cause them to be a danger to the body politic. 1814. If New Zealand joined the Federation it would have a powerful influence on Australia ? —That is my opinion. 1815. Why should New Zealand influence it ?—I can only say from observation that I have seen New-Zealandersin various walks of life, and in their immediate environment they had affected their neighbours. 1816. It is quite remarkable wherever New-Zealanders go ? —Yes. 1817. Does it not show that the divergence of race has already commenced ?—No. I think it goes to show that the climatic conditions here are favourable, and produce stamina of a kind which enables New-Zealanders to stand many things in Australia which Australians cannot. 1818. Will that not be intensified in the next two hundred years? —It may give the NewZealander a much better show. When he gets the show on equal conditions he usually comes out on top. 1819. Does it not go to show that there will be a difference in type ?—Australia will benefit by it considerably, if it be so. 1820. Do you imagine that the creation of a Commonwealth will tend to Imperial federation, or the reverse ? —lt will strongly assist Imperial federation. 1821. And you think that a powerful State like New Zealand and the Commonwealth —the two together —are not more likely to assist in federation than if we were one people only ? —I do not think so, if there is sufficient to make a powerful federation. We are limited to a few islands of the Pacific. As part of united Australasia we will occupy a very different position in the eyes of the world. At the same time New Zealand to-day undoubtedly occupies as strong a position as possible in the eyes of the United Kingdom. 1822. In the 57th clause there is a power, where there is disagreement between the two Houses of the Legislature, to appeal to the combined vote of the two Houses voting together: is that not prejudicial to State interests ?—No. 1823. You think that the greater number in the House of Eepresentatives will not outweigh the votes in the Senate ?—No. The two Houses sitting together as reasonable men are more likely to come to a conclusion in the best interests of the country than the appeal to passion, in the shape of an election. 1824. You think the Senate" will represent the State interests against a combination of two large colonies? —It represents exactly the same people as the other House does. 1825. But when you come to vote jointly the States' interests are subordinated to mere numbers ? —lt would be as a matter of figures ; but I decline to believe that men who represent this colony in the State Legislature are not as capable of reaching a just decision as men in the Lower House. I have got a great belief in the value of free conferences. 1826. In the House of Eepresentatives New South Wales and Victoria, if they add a Queens-
105
A.—4
land or South Australia, will dominate the position?— You are taking an extreme case. If these two great countries pull together they can do many things, but I do not think the two most powerful States will always be arrayed against the small ones. 1827. Mr. Leys.] On behalf of your paper you interviewed a number of men, did you not, in Australia?—l made my inquiries independently of the paper. 1828. But they were interviewed on behalf of your paper ?—Yes. 1829. And among the statesmen interviewed was Sir John'Forrest?—Yes, quite recently. 1830. In that interview, as published in the Dunedin Star, the following statement occurs : " One was the difficulty with Western Australia. Our colony can bridge that by a railway. New Zealand cannot. I should like to see how Western Australia fares under federation before advising others." There Sir John Forrest lays great stress on the question of isolation :do you think there is anything in that argument'?—l have got it in my mind that to the eleventh hour Sir John Forrest was against federation, and was forced into it against his will, and he does not like it now. It will take some time, further, to make that railway, and without it Western Australia is in no worse position in regard to distance than Wellington or Auckland would be to-morrow if we joined the Federation. 1831. Referring to those same Governments, did not Mr. Barton, the Federal Premier, indicate that that railway would be constructed at the expense of the Commonwealth ?—Yes ; he hinted at the possibility of it. I dare say some day it will be made at the Commonwealth expense. If it can be demonstrated that the railway is necessary for the ends of settlement or defence, then the railway will certainly be built. If the interior of Australia has to remain a waste, no railway will be built. 1832. Can you suppose that the railway will be of any use to New Zealand—we should have to pay our share ? —lf you enter into partnership you cannot get all the plums and leave the others only the bad fruit. 1833. Mr. Beauchamp.] If the sugar industry can only be maintained by black labour you say it must go?— Does it follow it cannot be prosecuted by imported black labour from the islands? Black labour is employed because of its cheapness. I prosecuted that question very diligently. They are determined not to allow Australia to be overrun by black men. 1834. A white Australia ? —They have made up their minds in that direction. 1835. Hon. Major Stexuard.] The objection to reciprocal duty arises probably from the impression that we should get the best of the bargain, as we sent more to them than we got from them ?—That is their fear. If you can get reciprocal treaties with Australia, then the necessity for our joining" a the Federation, in my opinion, is very largely gone. Mackay John Scobie Mackenzie examined. (No. 38.) 1836. Hon. the Chairman.] You have resided in New Zealand for many years?— Thirty years. 1837. And you have taken an active part in the politics of New Zealand?— Yes, tolerably. 1838. You have represented a constituency on several occasions in different Parliaments?— Yes. 1839. Have you resided in Australia at all ?—Yes, for nine years. 1840. As a colonial politician your attention, I suppose, has been directed to the question of the federation of New Zealand with the Australian Commonwealth ?—Yes, rather forcibly. 1841. Will you be good enough to give the Commission the conclusions at which you have arrived on the matter ?—Certainly. I would like, first of all, to draw the attention of the Commission to the character of the federation proposal, which is, in my opinion—to state it nakedly, but at the same time without any exaggeration —to take the government of New Zealand out of the hands of the New-Zealanders and to transfer it to the Australian Continent. Ido not think there is any answer to that proposition at all—anything to refute it. Well, if that is so, one would naturally expect that for so tremendous a sacrifice—the right of self-government is about the last sacrifice of a State —something would be given in the way of compensation, some great advantage received in return. Personally, Ido not agree that compensation enters into the question. There are some things in this world that do not admit of compensation ; they are priceless. The liberty of the subject, the honour of a man's domestic household, and so on, are instances. I suppose that, if we could conceive any Power offering the Parliament of New Zealand a matter of fifty millions to renounce the right of the colony to the Habeas Corpus Act, no representative body would disgrace itself by considering the proposal at all. That is an illustration. The autonomy of a State accustomed to self-government, I take it, is in much the same case. There is practically no compensation at all for loss of autonomy. That is my personal conviction. But, in deference to what may be the opinions of other people, it may be well to assume that some sort of compensation is possible, and can and will be given; and, that being the case, I should naturally be—and for some time past have been—anxious to know what it is. Well, I have read everything that came in my way that has been uttered in Australia, and I have read most that has been written on the subject in New Zealand; I have talked with scores of people, most of whom were in favour of federation; and I have never heard fall from the lips of a single individual, or seen in any newspaper, one solitary reason why New Zealand should join the Federation of Australia—absolutely not one. There is no doubt what may be called the argument of the oats. I have heard it used and called argument by sensible people in New Zealand. They say we export oats to a certain extent to Australia, and therefore we would gain somewhat by joining the Federation —that is to say, we would get a better price for our oats. Well, without desiring to use strong language, I can only say that argument is the most remarkable and—-if my premises are correct—the most sordid and contemptible I have ever heard fall from the mouth of man. The imaginations of the members of this Commission may be more vivid than mine, but I am unable to conceive any New-Zealander outside of a lunatic asylum 14—A. 4.
A.—4.
106
saying to his neighbour, "We must abandon our right of self-government; we will get a better price for our oats." The thing to me is quite inconceivable. As against what lam saying, it may be argued that if by federation we would lose the right of self-government the other Australian Colonies would equally be sufferers: why, then, should we fear to do that which they are so ready to do ? The answer at once is that the two positions are not at all the same, that the Australian Colonies —I am now speaking from local knowledge—are making no sacrifice whatever, they will scarce be aware of any change of government; all the conditions will remain to them practjcally the same, whereas the oversea distance from New Zealand makes the whole of the difference. lam speaking of oversea distance, not of distance. The answer to this you get from Australia is, "It is just as far or further from Western Australia to Queensland than from New Zealand to Queensland." But the oversea distance is where the whole kernel of difference lies. Wherever you have an intervening sea journey you separate a people in a quite different sense from the continental. If the Commission is ever travelling in Australia —say, in Queensland —and should meet a lot of working-men there, and enter into conversation with any one of them, you will find, as a general rule, he has some knowledge of practically all Australia. They may not have travelled over the whole of it, but they have absorbed the knowledge that comes inevitably from living in a homogeneous country. That is the case with me. I know Victoria and New South Wales, but I have never been in Queensland or in South Australia; but I can tell you all about these places —the character of the country, its general features, the nature of the people, their main occupations, and so forth—without having been there, because I have lived on the continent, arid was never separated from them by any real obstruction. It is the same everywhere wherever sea intervenes between countries as against an artificial boundary. It would be generally admitted that the isolated and hostile position of Ireland as against Scotland has at least something to do with the intervening channel, narrow though it be. It is a well-known fact to any one who has travelled on the Continent that the French people know all about the Italians and their country, although they speak a different language, and the Italians the French, and the same with the Germans, but the French and the English people are absolute strangers to each other; the ignorance is crass on both sides. Then, there are marked differences, apart from climate, even between the North and South Islands of New Zealand. It is a wellknown fact among members of Parliament that if southern members have to deal with a question affecting Canterbury, Marlborough, or Nelson they will enter into it at once, but when a North Island question comes up, such as the Native-land legislation, the custom is to say —improperly, no doubt—" We do not understand this. This is a North Island question, and we should defer to northern opinion." No doubt the marked difference between the two Islands is largely due to the fact that you do not pass readily from one to the other as to admit the mass of the people readily coming and going. Yet the distance is but forty miles of sea as against the twelve hundred to Australia. I say the mass of the people of New Zealand know absolutely nothing of the mass of the people in Australia, and never can know ; and that itself is the strongest possible reason why they should not federate. It also goes to prove what I have said—viz., that the proposal simply means the handing over to Australia of New Zealand's autonomy. I ought to qualify, in one sense, what I have said. From my knowledge of Australia —it was the land of my youth, and I have a warm side for it—l have no doubt if, in a fit of temporary aberration, we should join the Federation, Australia would endeavour to govern New Zealand well and reasonably. It would be government by Australia, because the minority from New Zealand in the Federal Parliament would be absolutely and for ever hopeless. But I have no doubt Australia would endeavour to govern New Zealand reasonably. Under all ordinary circumstances the representatives of the Continent of Australia would say, as we southerners are in the habit of saying with the North, " This is purely a New Zealand question, and I will defer to the views of the New-Zealanders." That would be so under most circumstances, and until some large explosive question came up the government of New Zealand would go on much as usual. But, after all, this would mean that the good government of New Zealand would rest on the easy-going good-natured ignorance of the representatives of Australia. That is what it comes to, and, if so, it is a condition that is not to be entertained for an instant. I can only further say lam utterly at a loss to understand why the Australians want federation with vs —if it be the fact that they do —and I can only conclude that in the excitement and enthusiasm of these patriotic times, while the subject is largely surrounded with an atmosphere of sentiment, they have not given very close attention to the circumstances. It seems to me that New Zealand joining would weaken the Commonwealth very much. Australia as it stands now is a magnificent compact continent, but if New Zealand joined the Federation there would be, as it were, a disastrous breach of continuity in an otherwise grand dominion, and might subject it to responsibilities and difficulties that under certain circumstances would be very difficult to meet. I cannot understand why Australia wants the union, and I doubt very much if the people really do want it. I have heard it said the question of mutual defence largely enters the question. For myself, I utterly disbelieve that. Whether we federate or whether we do not, our interests in the way of defence will be vitally identical with those of Australia for all time. If we can conceive some enemy of the future coming down on the Commonwealth and swallowing it, as it were, it would not be long before New Zealand would be gobbled up also; and if New Zealand were attacked Australia would be in a most dangerous position. Our interests in defence, in federation or out of it, remain entirely the same. Then, finally, I think—and Ido not see it can be denied—that, while federation is going to add enormously to the power of Australia, in equal proportion it adds to the status of New Zealand. Hitherto New Zealand could scarcely enter into competition with a number of the Colonies of Australia—l mean, in status and in the opinion of the Empire and the world. Victoria and New South Wales are hopelessly ahead, and we would have strong competition with Queensland —in status and general importance, I mean —and with South Australia. But now that Australia has become a Commonwealth New Zealand takes a
107
A.—4
great position as the second great Power in these waters—second in population and wealth, I mean, but with an individuality so sharp as to practically place her in the same rank. But we would entirely lose that individuality and derive no benefit at all, but rather suffer a severe loss—the most severe loss a nation can suffer—by joining the Federation. I think these are practically all my opinions. 1842. You think that New Zealand would practically be forfeiting her legislative independence by joining the Commonwealth of Australia ? —Absolutely. 1843. What do you think would be the effect in reference to local administration in New Zealand as a State of the Commonwealth, supposing we did become a State of the Commonwealth?—l think the inevitable result would be that the State Government would acquire a vast deal of popularity at the expense of the Federal Government in Australia—that is to say, the people in New Zealand would have a warm side towards their domestic Government, and that a strong anti-Federal and Home Eule party would be the immediate outcome. 1844. How do you think it would affect the public finances of New Zealand if New Zealand joined the Australian Commonwealth ?—That is a subject I have not specially gone into, for the simple reason that I want to emphasize the fact that questions of manufacture and production, and so on, have nothing whatever to do with it—not a scrap. It is too big a political question for that—that is to say, the loss of self-government is too big a thing to be weighed in the balance with our small Australian market either for oats, or manufactures, or anything of the kind. If we had to suffer by joining, or otherwise, we would have to suffer and look out for new markets, and therefore I have given no special attention to the aspect; but, I take it, heavy demands would be made upon our existing revenue as our contribution to the cost of Federal government. That, however, I regard as outside the question. 1845. You think the whole matter is centred in the one consideration of our national independence ?—Yes, I think so. It is too big to be weighed in the balance with any other considerations that have been so far mentioned. 1846. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] You have said your feeling is that there are larger considerations than any physical ones?— Yes. 1847. You have, no doubt, read the Commonwealth Bill ?—Yes, casually. 1848. What do you think of the provision which makes the Commonwealth and the States both dependent on one particular branch of the revenue —both of them taking from the Customs, from the one source —both dipping in the same purse ? —I think that is an extremely awkward arrangement. 1849. There is no such arrangement in Canada? —No. The result would be to damage very materially the financial powers of the subsidiary Government. 1850. Do you think there is any probability in the future of the Commonwealth Government abolishing the States altogether?—l do not think they would dare do that. Ido not think it is conceivable. We ha/ye the example of America in that respect. State rights, for their protection, immediately gathered about them a very large and powerful party which is at times dominant in the country. 1851. We did it in New Zealand?— Yes, in the case of the Provincial Governments, no doubt; but we did it with all but the unanimous consent of the people throughout the colony. It was a case of our own Government altering its own Constitution, but without affecting outside States, as the same action in the Commonwealth would. 1852. If such a thing did take place we would be worse off than under State government ? — Yes ; we would lose our local government, which could deal with the smaller matters affecting the colony. 1853. Mr. Beauchamp.] Your opinion is that we have everything to gain by abstaining from federation ?—I think we will lose nothing by it. Ido not see what we have to lose if we do not federate. We do not depend on Australia for our markets. I suppose our oats would represent about a fiftieth of the exports of the colony. I think that would be the average value of the last ten years—£2oo,ooo per annum, or less—and our total exports now are about thirteen millions. 1854. Mr. Luke.] Your objections are mainly on political grounds?—lt depends on what you mean by " political." The word is loosely used to mean parliamentary. 1855. I mean objections having to do with our institutions —our form of government and our identity ?—Yes. The objection comes within that form of politics which takes cognisance of the highest rights and liberties of the people. 1856. The industries are not everything?— No. I admit the vast importance of industries,and I have abundance of reason for knowing the necessity for a large manufacturing industry, but trade considerations are not everything. We now export thirteen millions. If we by one stroke could increase that export to fifty millions to-morrow, on condition that we should incorporate ourselves with the Russians or the French or the Germans, I would not insult any British subject by supposing he would do it. Trade is not everything, and my desire to give evidence to-day was for fear the trade idea would take too big a part in the business. 1857. You think we have all the elements of a self-sustaining colony? —Yes, everyone of them. I believe also we shall be able to enter into reasonable commercial treaties. I do not believe Australia is going to do anything to injure herself. All the threats of what we shall lose if we do not join is the idle talk of the moment. My belief is that the Australian tariff will be extremely reasonable, and that the Australian people are not foolish enough to shut themselves out of a necessary staple in order to injure New Zealand. 1858. You have studied the provisions of the Act ?— Casually. lam not a student of it. 1859. Are you familiar with the provisions relating to the Court of Appeal?— Yes. 1860. Would they be of advantage to New Zealand if we joined the Federation?— No. I think the power to go to the Privy Council, although beyond the power of most of us, and not
A.—4
108
often used, is a very valuable bond existing between this and the Mother-country. I would rather see a question settled finally in this country than go to Australia to be settled. 1861. You would prefer to see a case go to the Privy Council rather than to Australia ? —Yes, certainly ; otherwise we can decide it ourselves. 1862. With regard to the provisions as to legislation generally, would there be any advantage to New Zealand in having uniform legislation on such subjects as bills of exchange, the marriage law, divorce, and so on?— There might be in some way I cannot recognise, but Ido not see that uniformity is a very pressing reform. Ido not see the special advantage of uniformity. To me it seems that what we want is a marriage law or a divorce law, or whatever it is, that suits ourselves. Ido not think it matters a brass farthing whether it is the same in Australia or not. And if we want it the same we can legislate it without federation. 1863. At the present time we have a law that allows marriage with the deceased wife's sister, which is not the law in England?— Yes. It might be an advantage to have uniformity there, but it is not an advantage we should be called on to make a sacrifice for, and especially such a tremendous sacrifice as the loss of autonomy, which is the point that seems to me to be so important. I would put the question of the uniformity of the law on the same footing as that of the trifling export of oats, and things of that sort. It is very desirable to have an open market in Australia, and very desirable to have uniformity of law; but if we cannot have them except at the cost of sacrificing our autonomy, then I say, in God's name, let us go without them. 1864. Taking the commercial law, for example, do you not think it would be an advantage to have a uniform law ?—I have no doubt it would. 1865. You think, however, that we might purchase these things at too great a cost ?— Certainly, that is my opinion. 1866. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that, short of abolishing the States, the tendency of the Central Government would be to aggrandise to itself larger powers in the Government ?—I have no doubt that would be the attempt, and a very natural one. 1867. Has not that been the experience of the United States—that the Central Government have taken wider powers, and the States have shrunk up in authority ? —To a certain extent, but in the United States'the Senate enters the question in a very remarkable way. The Senate has taken to itself all the great powers and assumes all the importance, and the House of Representatives takes a very secondary position^. 1868. Do you think in that process the Federal Government will ultimately retain the whole of the Customs revenue for Federal purposes, and throw a>ll the local administration on to direct taxation, as in the United States at present?—l think it is likely enough. The natural tendency of the Federal Government would be to seize all the revenue it can, and establish itself on the firmest and strongest basis. That is only human nature. At the same time I believe the very fact of its doing so would raise up in an isolated State like New Zealand an exaggerated regard for our local Parliaments, shorn of their powers as they would be. There would be a constant conflict of opinion in the colony, and entirely new and virulent parties and questions would be formed. 1869. You think the result would be intense friction almost to the border of revolution ?—I would not go quite the length of saying so. As long as things remained in an ordinary way, government might proceed easily enough; but in this world you must expect questions to arise to excite men's minds, and if any question of that sort arose I believe the people of New Zealand, having the Federal Government so very far away, and never knowing intimately any of the men at the head of it, would never cease clamouring to recover supreme power in their own hands. We know nothing about the people over there. We do not know the names of the leading men—our people do not. The Australian States are different. They know in large measure the Governments of all the colonies and what they are doing, and the character of the men. We here would never know them or see them. 1870. You think we should inevitably repent ? —I think so, decidedly. I think we never could take to a Government that was constantly, as it were, out of sight and out of touch with us— divided from us by the ocean. 1871. Hon. Major Steward.'] No doubt when in Australia you noticed the fact that their newspapers make little mention of what is going on in New Zealand ? —That is so —naturally enough, possibly. 1872. In conversation with people about New Zealand affairs, do you not find a disposition to treat them as matters of small importance as compared with the affairs of any of the Australian States ?—I do not think there is at all a jealous or malicious desire to minimise New Zealand. The general Australian's opinion of New Zealand is that it is a fine country, and that the NewZealanders are fine fellows, but that the colony is unimportant as compared with an Australian State.
Thuesday, 14th February, 1901. William Cuezon-Siggebs examined. (No. 39.) 1873. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a clergyman?—An M.A., and vicar of St. Matthew's, Dunedin. 1874. We understand that you have given some consideration to the question of the federation of this colony with the Commonwealth of Australia?— Yes, ever since the first Convention in Sydney. 1875. Have you been in Australia yourself?—l have lived from the extreme north, in the Gulf of Carpentaria, to the south, in Victoria, for a period of eleven years. 1876. Have you studied the Commonwealth Act ? —I have ; and I have given the question much consideration.
109
A.—4
1877. Will you kindly give the Commission the result of your inquiries into the matter?— I am opposed to federation for every reason. First of all, I will speak from the national point of view. We are, under the destiny of God, an insular nation. Australia is a continental nation. The history of all races shows that continental races and insular races diverge further and further apart. On the ground of history, then, alone 1 should strongly oppose federation. Then, Australia has its own line of tendency, New Zealand has its. They are different people, themselves fashioned a great deal by the countries they dwell in respectively. There is, in my opinion, plenty of room for two great nations in these southern seas, who will bear the same relation to one another as England does to the Continent of Europe. I should say, too, that the problem of the two people varies, owing to the fact that they have in various points some dissimilarity. As an illustration of that, I should say that in New Zealand we have no great octopi as you have, for instance, in Sydney and Melbourne, and as there is a tendency in Brisbane. Our people are scattered—fortunately so —in smaller towns, spread in smaller settlements. This, of course, affects political questions in more ways than one. Then, looking at the matter from that of defence, it seems to me absurd for any one to suppose that in case of foreign attack New Zealand has any need of help from Australia, or any right to expect such help. To begin with, we have the fact that Australia is so large that you can place the whole of Europe in it and then you can walk round it; and in the defence of Australia every man able to bear arms would be required, owing to its enormous area, to defend it. The conditions of the country are such that it is not so easy of defence as New Zealand; and, while it is quite conceivable that an enemy might enter New Zealand, it is utterly inconceivable that any enemy would ever get out again. Those who, like myself, have been through South Africa, and know intimately the South African country and the conditions of warfare there, would know full well that New Zealand is almost a counterpart of those portions of South African country where our greatest difficulties have been, and thus you, sir, as a military man, would easily see how easy it would be to defend this colony with a very small Force, and how unnecessary it would be to rely upon another Force coming from outside. They would want all the men they could possibly get in Australia to defend themselves. And then, from the naval point of view, the naval defence of Australia,would require a squadron to protect its own enormous sea-coast, and when you reflect on the enormous area of sea-coast there as compared with our own smaller one you will see how unreasonable it is to suppose that any squadron could spare a sufficient number of ships over here to help us. Furthermore, we ourselves can by means of torpedoes and other defences safeguard our chief ports, and especially our coalfields; and if, for the sake of argument, an enemy should seize any of our principal towns we have still the power of starving them out, and we have still the power of preventing them seizing the country. Further, I consider that, owing to the geographical position of New Zealand and its climate, there will be a greater tendency towards the formation of a New Zealand naval defence as distinct from a land Force, which would be the dominant feature of Australian defence. With regard to the matter of law, I know some think there may be an advantage in appealing to a higher Court, such as the Supreme Federal Court of Australia will be. On the other hand, I would like to say that lam very fond of reading law decisions, and I have read the most eminent decisions given by the leading Judges in Australia, and I have read the decisions given by our own Judges here, and for lucidity, and for grasp, and for power, I should say there is no man in the whole of Australia equal to our own Mr. Justice Williams; and we have other men also on our bench—Sir Eobert Stout, for instance—quite equal to any one over there ; and therefore I fail to see that matter of appeals to Australia we would be likely to get any legal decisions that would satisfy us more than the legal decisions we can get here; and, if we are to have any appeal, then by all means let us appeal to the greater lights of the Old Country. With regard to the Parliament itself, it seems to me that, owing to distance and the expense, the moneyed class—the leisured class—would be those who would be of necessity chosen, because others, I think, would not come forward as our representatives in the Federal Parliament. That seems to me, in the view of all history, to be not only a detrimental but a backward step, for the leisured do not seem to understand the needs of those who are continually working, and neither do the moneyed class. Therefore I should say that it would be a retrograde step from the point of view of our representatives if we joined the Federation. It also appears to me that we should lose a great deal of our independence. The Federal Government must be maintained, and it must seize as much revenue as it can. This would mean, of course, a good share of our revenue going to Australia without any compensating advantages, so far as I can see. I might also point out, having had some considerable experience in the matter of poverty on the other side, and having taken part in the relief movement as a public Commissioner, and having had a visit during the last fortnight from a member of one of the Eoyal Commissions on the other side, during which we had the advantage of comparing notes as to the state of poverty during the five years I have been absent from Australia, and the means used to alleviate such, that there is no poverty in New Zealand practically compared with the poverty in Australia. Our people are better clothed, better fed, they have better wages and work better hours, and there is not that grinding poverty you find in Australia. If there is poverty here it is more a case of misfortune, perhaps in some cases of old age, or there may be some cases of a few men here and there in which they are to blame for it themselves; but, compared with Australia, there is no such thing as poverty in New Zealand. Then, with regard to trade and wages, I would like to point out that, in regard to your furniture trade, if you federate you will have to compete with the great Chinese work in Australia. Of course, in Australia you will find that perhaps one of its manufacturers will notify that all work is European, but, of course, those who are behind the scenes know very well that this European work is all produced by Chinese workers in Melbourne. Then, you have to face the question of the black labour, which is absolutely essential in Northern Queensland. The white man cannot possibly work amongst the
A.—4
110
sugar-cane. It is too hot a work altogether to carry on. A few white men can be employed as overseers, and they are so employed, but the work itself amongst the canes is only suitable to black men. There must also be always a large amount of alien labour, such as Japanese and Chinese and Kanaka, imported. It seems to me that you have two sides to this racial question; and you would have in the Commonwealth, supposing New Zealand joined, two sets of alien races. You would have your Australian blacks in large numbers, and perhaps they would increase in numbers as the industries increased; for as Northern Queensland developed you might find black labour a still greater necessity there, and the black labour must increase. Then, you will have the problem of pitting against the coloured races your own noble Maoris, and you will find it impossible to make the ordinary Australian, who is the advocate of black labour in the north, understand the difference between the Maori who has the right to vote and the black without that right, which they will never give him in Australia, and wisely so. In the matter of wages, when I came over to New Zealand first I took the trouble to find out the wages paid in different trades in parts of Australia, and on comparing them with the rates paid here I found that the wages in Australia were considerably lower in various trades than in New Zealand. As an illustration, I might say that only this morning I received a letter from a man I knew on the other side. He is a member of a firm of plasterers, and he told me that he wished to come to Dunedin, owing to the fact that his trade was not paying a sufficiently good wage. 1 have compared the different rates of wages of carpenters and ironworkers, and I might say that the wages in Australia are very much lower ; in the fellmongery trade, knowing the rates paid in Australia, I compared them with the rates paid in Auckland, where they are very much higher, and that fact enabled me to account for the fact that the manufacturers in Australia could produce and make a small article with a greater profit than they can in New Zealand. Here we have everything to our advantage as tending to develop a people essentially progressive and essentially endowed with all the traits of insular people, and whom you might sum up, as I recently summed up a sermon, as a people "to whom you can teach nothing, who know everything"; and that is, perhaps, one of the traits of British character which is certain to become thoroughly one part of the New Zealand character, and which will necessarily develop more and more as time goes on. It seems to me that federation will be a most retrograde step, viewing it from one's study of the history of insular nations or races as confpared with continental nations, and the various problems I have set before you. With regard to the matter of a few oats, well, if you are going to federate for that, it is a matter that will regulate itself, and if they shut your oats out you must remember they cannot grow oats of the best quality on the other side, and the best will always rule the market. You will also require their sugar, and you can decline their sugar in favour of Fiji or South-east Africa. Hostile tariffs are valueless against good workmanship and productions, as British commerce proves. As far as I can see, in Otago one has only heard oats used as the argument in favour of federation. 1878. Do you think that the recently expressed declaration of Mr. Barton in favour of a white Australia can be given effect to ? —No, I do not, excepting by crushing out the sugar industry, and making it impossible to grow vegetables. The Chinese seem to be almost a necessity in Northern Queensland, especially for vegetables. European labour has been tried, but proved a failure. I was a member of a small party who tried to run a white man's garden, just merely to encourage them, but it failed for the simple reason that the white men worked the garden until a gold-rush arose, and then cleared out after doing a fair amount of progressive work, and left us to pay the expense. The Chinese are not subject to such rushes. 1879. I think you stated, Mr. Curzon-Siggers, that the mental calibre would not be improved by federating with-Australia in the same degree as they would be by remaining independent? — Most decidedly not. I should say that if you were to take any of our university students and a number trained under similiar circumstances in Australia, and allow the London University to examine them, the New-Zealander would get a far larger percentage of marks than the Australian. 1880. You think there would be nothing to gain by incorporating ourselves with Australia ?— Most decidedly not. The history of races shows that insular races tend to diverge further away from continental races. 1881. Hon. Captain Bussell.] How long were you in Northern Queensland? —For six years. 1882. Did you take notice of the descendants of the original settlers there ?—Well, you see, there are not many descendants of the original settlers in the extreme north, as it had not been settled long enough to speak of what you mean by settlements there. 1883. I mean, say, north of Bockhampton: is there any apparent fading in stamina or physique ? —Yes, necessarily so, owing to the climate. 1884. Do you think the mental characteristics have suffered in regard to vigour?—lt must undoubtedly be so mentally and physically, just in the same way as the mental characteristics of the people in Otago are bound to be superior to those of the north of New Zealand. 1885. Thank you, lam a North-Islander. As to this question of federation, viewing it not as one of to-day, but for a period of all time, do you conceive that there will be a marked differentiation between the people of New Zealand and the people of tropical and sub-tropical Australia in the course of a few generations ?—lt must be so, excepting all history is to be proved false in this experiment. 1886. You may have noticed in the morning paper that part of the policy of the Federation will be to open northern Australia : have you any idea what that signifies? —The Northern Territory is to a great extent a mere barren waste, with here and there mining settlements. I had a parish 100,000 square miles in extent, and you only came across a few trees, with a fair amount of grazing here and there. The great trans-continental railway scheme from Port Darwin, which was overthrown some years ago, would have opened that country up.
111
A.—4
1887. What will be the form of the opening-up of the industries?—ln the high lands a certain amount of agriculture —or, rather, grazing—and in the very outlying portions there is the possibility of finding gold. 1888. Take Australia from the 30th parallel of latitude north : would it be possible for generation after generation of Anglo-Saxons to work there ? —No. They would gradually get weak. I had two years' experience in the Gulf of Carpentaria and the Town of Normanton, which is one of the finest settlements in the north. It was not at all an uncommon thing for me to marry a couple and to bury the wife within a short time. The white woman could not stand the extremes of climate. My wife came out to me from England strong and healthy, she contracted fever in the Northern Territory, and has suffered from it ever since. I have seen men who have withstood fever in all parts of the globe struck down there by fever known as the " Gulf fever." 1889. Excuse the personal appearance of this question, but did lose your own energy there ?—To a certain extent I did. It was a case of working with a very big effort. 1890. Then, if there is anything in the statement that the Federal policy is to open up that country, it means bringing into operation coloured labour : could such labour be carried on by a permanent Anglo-Saxon race? —Not by a permanent resident one, permanent in the sense of going on from generation to generation. It could never be done by the Anglo-Saxon without the continual infusion of fresh blood. 1891. If it had to become dependent on itself you think the race would run out?—lt must in the extreme north. I think the labour would probably be carried on by an importation of Japanese. 1892. Who in process of time—two hundred years, for instance—will have established a race of their own ?—I should say so, by intermarriage. Of course, a few white people have intermarried with aliens in Queensland. 1893. Do the Japanese women migrate with their men ?—Not in large numbers. 1894. Do you imagine that northern Australia will be occupied by a coloured people in the future ?—1 think there will be a possibility of a certain amount of admixture with European blood by intermarriage. You have very much the same conditions in northern Australia as you have in some parts of the Transvaal. 1895. Do you not think the Commonwealth will pass laws to prevent these coloured people coming in?— No. I think that Northern Queensland especially would hardly have come into the federation if they had thought for a moment that there would be any interference with the importation of labour. 1896. What does the phrase "white Australia" mean?—l attach no political significance to it at all. The majority of Australia is white. After living in the north one cannot see how things are to be managed without a certain amount of coloured labour. 1897. Do you know of any country in the world where white labour has been successful in the tropics ?—No, not as labour. 1898. Then, I suppose you think that, even if the Commonwealth were to pass a law to exclude coloured races, the law of nature would be stronger than the law of the Commonwealth ? —I think so. That is just my point. That is the distinction between New Zealand and Australia. 1899. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] You spoke of each Government—New Zealand and Australia—being obliged to depend on themselves in the matter of defence, and you mentioned naval defence in that respect: will not both of them be dependent on Imperial defence by sea, and will they not have to contribute accordingly ? —Quite so; but it would be a Pacific squadron, and in that case it seems to me it .would be a very costly defence to require that squadron to come here ; it would be required in Australia, which is more vulnerable than New Zealand. 1900. Is not the theory of the navy more that they should seek their enemy, not watch the coasts ? —That is so ; but if your enemy is going over there you would have to go for him. It seems to me the enemy has more to gain by going over there than remaining here. Naval defence would be one defence, but we, as a smaller partner, would have the least share in it. 1901. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think there could be any community of interests between the two countries, for the reason that in Australia their aspirations and ideas must be entirely different from those of New Zealand ?—The community of interests would be simply a sentimental one. 1902. In the course of your work, of course you are brought into contact with rich and poor, high and low : would you say the moral tone of the people of Australia is lower than that of the people of New Zealand ? —Decidedly so. The moral tone of the New-Zealander is superior to that of the Australian, especially when you go amongst the poor. 1903. With respect to white women and children living in northern Australia, you say that neither can exist for any length of time without deterioration, therefore it is necessary to send the children away ?—Yes; it is the custom for men who can afford to do it to send their wives away for the summer season to recuperate. 1904. As to the class of men likely to be elected to represent us in the Federal Parliament— you referred to the moneyed class and the leisured class—have you any idea of suggesting the creation in this colony of a type of professional politican ?—Yes; I thought that was quite a possibility. 1905. And in that case you would consider it just as objectionable a class as the moneyed class or leisured class ? —Not quite. The professional politician would study matters more thoroughly, it being a matter of his profession ; but I do say that, with regard to the moneyed class, they would not vote themselves £40 at the close of a session. We would not have that moral stigma against us; but, apart from that, I think the professional politician might perhaps suit us best. 1906. Mr. Beid.] You spoke of the poverty existing in certain parts of Australia: to what part do you particularly allude ?—I refer to the great cities of Sydney and Melbourne.
A.—4
112
1907. You are acquainted with the conditions of life both in Melbourne and Sydney?— Yes. 1908. These conditions are still existing and likely to increase ?—-The opinion of the visitor I alluded to, who was a member of the Eoyal Commission, was that it would certainly be so ; and I might mention here, with regard to the question of the" Arbitration Court, that this gentleman was very anxious to know about the working of our Arbitration Act. He was very much impressed by what one could tell him about it, and he thought something similar would be a gain to Australia, although he did not think it was likely at present. 1909. You are aware that Mr. Barton has mentioned that that Act will be passed ?—He has said so. 1910. Do you think it will be likely to be carried out there as full as we have it here ?—Not so fully. 1911. Are there not already provisions with reference to conciliation existing in Australia?— Yes, in Victoria, but not to the same extent as here. 1912. They are not so far-reaching?— No. 1913. I think you also said that our people were more intellectually developed than they are in Australia?— Yes. 1914. Do you not think that there might be in the future, therefore, a gain to us in that respect if we join the Federation ? —Most decidedly not. 1915. Would it not tend to give our men greater preponderance in the councils of the Government ?—No. 1916. Would not our men have an opportunity of becoming part of the Government ?—Yes, provided they were elected. 1917. By exercising a more intellectual influence on the Government?—lt would be to the gain of Australia, without any compensating advantages to us. 1918. Eegarding the right of appeal, are you aware that the right of appeal from the State Courts to the Privy Council is not excluded from the Commonwealth Constitution ?—lt still remains under certain provisions. 1919. Not necessarily under certain provisions, it is an appeal as of right. There are certain provisions under which it is excluded?—-Just so. 1920. You think, on the whole, you would prefer our right of appeal to the Privy Council not interfered with ?—Most decidedly not. 1921. Mr. Leys.] With regard to community of interests, I notice Mr. Barton has announced a trans-continental railway scheme and the opening-up of tropical Australia as a Federal work : could that be of any advantage to New Zealand ?—No ; excepting that our generosity would be developed by our being required to contribute so-much towards the cost. The only advantage would be to have quicker communication between Port Darwin and Queensland. There would be no gain to New Zealand. 1922. This trans-continental railway is a railway to Western Australia, is it not?—l understand there is eventually to be a railway from Queenland right across to the north. 1923. But is there not also to be a trans-continental railway to Western Australia ?—Yes. 1924. Can we gain from the carrying-out of that scheme ? —Nothing would be gained by New Zealand. 1925. Would it not result in Commonwealth taxation for purely Australian works ?—That is my objection to your joining. Your Customs revenue is taken over by the Commonwealth, and you will have to bear extra taxation for the benefit of Australian schemes. 1926. Another Federal scheme propounded is the creation of artesian wells in various parts of tropical Australia-: can we gain anything from that ? —No. It is a very fine scheme ; it will open up thousands of acres to grazing, and perhaps settlement, but it can be no gain to us. 1927. Hon. Major Steward.] You mentioned that in Queensland there was already a notable differentiation of national type arising from climatic conditions ?—Yes. 1928. Is it hot noticeable also, but even less, in New South Wales ?—Yes, to a certain extent in the hotter portions of the country; and, of course, in the same way in the hotter portions of Victoria. 1929. That differentiation is not confined solely to physical characteristics, but more or less reflects itself upon their mental characteristics eventually ? —-Quite so ; and their moral ones, too. 1930. You stated, in your opinion, white labour would not be capable of carrying on certain industries in northern Australia, Queensland particularly?— Yes. 1931. Now, supposing that the idea of a white Australia is attempted to be carried out to the full, involving the exclusion altogether of any coloured labour from Australia, would not that tend to develop great friction as between, say, Queensland and the Commonwealth, which would be a menace to the security of the Commonwealth itself ? —Most decidedly it would. But I do not think it probable that even in Queensland any such interference would take place. 1932. Supposing New Zealand joined the Federation, and an attempt was made to equalise matters as regards the rates of wages, what do you think would be the result if the equalisation was brought about : would it be a levelling-down or a levelling-up ?—lt would be a levellingdown here, because we pay higher wages and we are a smaller part of the Federation than the others. 1933. On the basis of population we should have about fifteen members in the Commonwealth Legislature out of ninety; and, supposing that the best men are selected to represent us there, do you think that under those circumstances we should be able to secure the interest of New Zealand receiving fair attention should they clash with the interests of Australia ?—That would entirely depend upon the power individually of the fifteen men representing you there. If they were strongwilled and determined they could do almost anything. A strong-willed, determined man can lead a Parliament or any other assembly of people as he pleases. It is a great deal a matter of will-
113
A.—4
force, but one has to remember that these men, after they have had their say, might be blocked by a motion for adjournment, and they might lose a very important question through the adjournment. 1934. Because force of numbers might tell? —Quite so. 1935. Hon. the Chairman.] Have you considered what would probably be the functions of any State Commission which is mentioned in section 101 ?—No. 1936. Do you think New Zealand would suffer from the principal centre of government being at a distance of twelve hundred miles ? —I think so. 1937. In what way?— You would suffer in the matter of your representatives being so far away from the centre. ' 1938. Are there not the same disadvantages with reference to administration ? —Yes, most decidedly. That is shown by the fact that in Northern Queensland the Government had to open up a State branch of the Registration of Titles Office at Townsville to facilitate business, there being so much difficulty in getting titles. That argument would apply with equal force to New Zealand if it federated with Australia. 1939. Do you see any advantages which would accrue to New Zealand if it joined the Commonwealth ?—I see none at all—l see all disadvantages. 1940. Mr. Luke.] What Royal Commission do you refer to, a member of which has been visiting here lately ?—The Commission set up by New South Wales to deal with the question of want of employment, and to provide for men out of work. John William Milnes examined. (No. 40.) 1941. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you? —Manager of the Phoenix Company's biscuit, confectionery, and jam-making establishment in Dunedin. 1942. How many do you employ ? —A hundred and fifty. 1943. How long have you resided in New Zealand?— Twenty-one years. The industry has been established over that time. 1944. Do you do any export trade ? —None. 1945. If New Zealand federated with Australia, how would that afiect your industry?—lt would not open up any new market, and it would affect us prejudicially as far as competition with factories in Australia is concerned; because I think a certain importation of goods would take place from the Australian Colonies. The geographical situation of New Zealand does not favour the establishment of one great centre where one very large and perfectly equipped factory could be established. Only the large populations of Melbourne and Sydney afford opportunities for the establishment of such concerns, and probably by the inauguration of the Commonwealth the shipping facilities would be greater, which would enable factories in Melbourne and Sydney to land goods at our distant ports quite as favourably as we can land them from Dunedin. There is a tendency always in large manufacturing concerns to work to their full capacity, and to export their surplus product, upon which they put none of their permanent expense or cost; and therefore they assume it does not cost them so much, and they would be willing to sell it here for less money than they would be willing to sell it in Australia. Federation would prejudicially affect the development of the fruit industry in New Zealand, because the very favourable conditions under which fruit is grown, especially in Tasmania, and the cheaper labour, would encourage the export to New Zealand of jams to such an extent as to discourage the present activity in the development of our fruit-growing resources. 1946. Have you considered the question of federation apart from the manufacturing industries ? —rSince receiving the summons to attend this Commission I have turned the subject over in my mind. The only conclusion I have come to in favour of federation —and it is a very crude one—is that from an Imperial point of view—from an international point of view—it might be desirable, but only from that point of view. One strong nation in the Southern Ocean might be an advantage in our dealings with foreign Powers. 1947. Mr. Leys.] I judge from your evidence that you think the tendency would be, under federation, to centralise industries nearer the centres of population? —Yes; it would also tend to reduce the status of those engaged in the manufactures of this colony. Our factories would become of less relative importance than they are now—that is, that the larger concerns on the other side would dominate ours, and our small men who now make a good living in the trade would be unable to do so. 1948. And that, you think, would tend to decrease the wages ?—Yes ; and to lower the number of hands we employ. 1949. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is your industry flourishing here ?—Comfortably flourishing. 1950. Would you regard Tasmania as a country where you could produce fruit of a better quality than can be produced in Otago and Southland?— The large volume of fruit that can be produced in Tasmania at a very low rate would discourage the industry here. Our population is better off than theirs, and do not turn to fruit-growing unless it pays them well. In Tasmania they are content to take less for their fruit than we can pick it for here. 1951. Have you to import much pulp from Tasmania for jam-manufacture?— Not necessarily so. Mconomic conditions sometimes compel us to do so. 1952. Generally speaking, can you depend upon the local New Zealand fruit? —It is only now becoming possible to depend upon the local supply. 1953. Do you get a superior class of fruit in the North Island to what you get in the South ? —We get a better variety in the South Island. 1954. Mr. Millar.] I understand the fruit industry is being well developed, and there is a probability of that continuing ?—Yes, if things should remain as at present. 1955. Which means necessarily an advantage to the colony ?—A great one. 15—A. 4.
A.—4
114
1956. The more we keep ourselves self-contained the better it is for us?— Yes. The fruitgrowing industry is a very desirable one for the colony to cultivate. It does away with the poverty in country townships where it becomes established (such as Mr. Siggers has referred to as existing in Australia) —it provides an income for children. 1957. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you make up much fruit in the course of the year into jam ? —A fair quantity. 1958. Where does it come from?— From New Zealand, and a little from Tasmania. A few years ago a larger proportion came from Tasmania, now it nearly all comes from New Zealand. I believe, in the North they import more fruit from Tasmania than we do. 1959. What makes you think Tasmania is more suitable for the growing of fruit than New Zealand ?—The climate appears to mature the fruit better. It is dryer over there. 1960. Does that apply to all New Zealand or to only a particular locality ?—ln the same way as it applies to Tasmania. It is only particular localities in Tasmania that are favourable to it. 1961. Do you not think it a fact that New Zealand ought to be able to produce enough fruit to supply her own wants, and probably to export to Australia ?—I do not think we could export to Australia for a long time to come—not from this part of the colony. Ido not know what the conditions are in the North. 1962. Take apples: surely you ought to be able to grow them better in Otago than in any part of Australia ?—They will not grow so well here as they grow in Tasmania. 1963. Is it not a fact that the harder fruits, which take longer to mature in a cold country, are supposed to mature better on that account ? —I have not studied the question. 1964. You say it is essential for profitable manufacture that it should be carried on where there is a large population in a large centre?—l did not say it was desirable, but the fact of its being more profitable introduces what I call a mercantile element into the manufacturing. By running the machinery full speed manufacturers may produce more than they require; the more they make the cheaper they can make it. All that can be produced above a certain quantity is made at a cheaper rate and pushed on to any outside market. 1965. Does that benefit anybody ?—I do not think it will benefit this colony to take the cheap surplus manufactured productions of Australia. 1966. Supposing that to be the case, in process of time shall we not have some large centres in New Zealand? —The cost of transport alone is against the establishment of one large centre, 1967. But when we have got a population of forty-five millions in New Zealand shall we not then have large centres ?—I think our present four or five centres will keep their relative importance. 1968. And will not that population bear the same relation to the population of the country as it does at the present time ?—Excepting that the population of the rural districts may be much larger in proportion to what the towns are to-day. 1969. Do you not think Dunedin may have a population of a hundred thousand in a hundred years ? —lt is quite possible. It has fifty thousand now. But the population of Melbourne and Sydney will be larger, and relatively they would be in the same position then as they are now to us. 1970. Do I understand that a town population of twenty million would be able to manufacture cheaper than a town of two million ? —Possibly so; the growth of the town would tend to keep the industries that were established there developed to their very highest capacity. 1971. My question is whether, when the time has arrived that our large centres of population have grown, we should not be able to compete with part of Australia in certain productions ?—I think federation would probably prevent our Downs growing to the same extent as theirs have grown. Our manufacturers would tend to centre on the other side, .drawing off our best men, and leaving us relatively smaller than at present. 1972. Assuming that in course of time Dunedin becomes as large as Melbourne is to-day, would we not then be able to manufacture on the very best terms ?—Possibly better than Melbourne does to-day. 1973. In that case, need we be afraid of federation?— Not if you wish to abolish all the factories until Dunedin is as large as Melbourne is to-day. 1974. Do you wish me to assume that New Zealand, from one cause or another, is unable to compete with any part of the world in any production of any kind ?—No. 1975. What are you not afraid of then ? —The natural productions of the soil. 1976. I mean in reference to manufactures ? —The conditions of labour are different, I suppose, in most other countries than what they are here. The position of labour is much higher here. 1977. Do you think we are unable to compete in any manufactured articles in any country in any part of the world ?—With free-trade we could not compete with Europe in the markets of South Africa. 1978. Do you think in any industry in any part of the world we are unable to compete ?— Ido not say so. lam referring to my own lines of business only. 1979. You object to federation for fear of competition ? —Looking at it from the point of view of the industries already established here, and from the point of view of the workers and employers, I think federation is undesirable. 1980. For the future, shall we be absolutely at all times unable to compete ?—I could not say that. 1981. You are looking at it from the standpoint of simply to-day?— Yes. 1982. Mr. Luke.] Is there much development of small-fruits industry in the Nelson District?— Yes. 1983. Is it not a fact they grow more small fruits there than they are able to dispose of? I do not know.
115
A.—4
1984. Is not the price paid for raspberries this season considerably less than last ? —Slightly less. 1985. I was told that in Motueka it did not pay to grow raspberries at present prices : is that so ?—This year there has been .a very good season in Tasmania, and it has been possible to buy the Tasmanian crop at less than half the money that the Nelson people want for theirs. 1986. You want protection for your business of jam-making, but the fruit-growers here are beaten by the small-fruit growers in Tasmania ?—Yes. 1987. In what proportion is this pulp imported from Tasmania used in regard to the whole manufacture ?—lt is not largely used in this end of the colony. I think it is imported more largely at the northern end of the colony—at Auckland and Wellington. 1988. Therefore the importation is not likely to be one of great importance to the growers of small fruits in New Zealand ?—Not under present conditions. 1989. Not if they are obtained so easily by the Tasmanian growers ? —They are not obtained easily, but in a favourable season it is possible that they may undersell our growers. 1990. What duty do you pay on pulp ?—There are three different classes of duty—on small fresh fruits the duty is fd. a pound, on large fresh fruits it is Id., on pulp it is from Id. to lfd., according to the way the pulp is preserved. We do not import pulp, but fresh fruits. 1991. How many jam-factories are there in the colonies?— There are four on a fairly large scale, and there are others. 1992. Is there any possibility of these concerns agreeing together as to what price they will give the fruit-producers in New Zealand ?—There is no movement in that direction, so far as I know, at the present time; it is possible, but Ido not think there is any probability. 1993. Do you think there is nothing in this statement, made by several fruit-growers : that it will not pay to produce the smaller fruits unless they get better prices ? —I think it would pay them very much better than our friends in Tasmania. 1994. What price has been paid for raspberries in bulk ? —Prom 3d. to 4d. a pound at the factory. 1995. You think that under average circumstances the Tasmanian fruit-growers can compete with the New Zealand fruit-growers ? —Yes. 1996. Does that not argue that for jam-making the business is not of very great importance to New Zealand ?—No ; it is that the Tasmanian people are willing to work for less money than our people. 1997. Is that a desirable state of things ?—No; I would rather see the conditions such that our people could earn more money. 1998. If they are beaten already under present conditions, what inducement is there ?—They are not beaten under average conditions, and the duty does not require raising. 1999. Has there not been large quantities of pulp imported last year?— No. 2000. You do not think it would be to the interests of New Zealand to join the Federation, seeing we would have as one advantage a cheaper production of fruit and cheaper jam ? —I do not ■ think, from any point of view, it is desirable at the present time. 2001. Mr. Leys.] How much fruit does it require to produce 1 lb. of pulp ?—I do not think it is necessary to go into these details. 2002. But the question has reference to the industry and the necessity for protecting it?—We do not make pulp here ; we should buy it as pulp if we required it. Jambs Listee Passmoee examined. (No. 41.) 2003. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your occupation, Mr. Passmore?—Managing director of the Donaghy Eope and Twine Company. It has been established about twenty-two or twentythree years. We employ 110 to 120 hands, and I have been connected with this particular business for seventeen years. 2004. Can you say whether the industry would be affected in the event of New Zealand joining the Australian Federation ?—The bulk of our trade is in binder-twine, and if we federated it would be a great advantage to us. 2005. In what way ?—For this reason : that the whole of the Australian Colonies, with the exception of one, are very highly protected, whereas in New Zealand we have no protection at all. If we federated we would be able to compete on an equal footing with the markets over there, and in that case we could compete with the manufacturers who have now in some cases a benefit of £8 per ton protection against vs —that is, in Victoria. In South Australia, if they go on as they have been for the last few years shipping binder-twine to New Zealand, where it is landed free of duty, we cannot compete at present, because if we wanted to retaliate we have to pay this £8 a ton duty before we can land it. 2006. Are there any other advantages which occur to you as likely to accrue from federation ? —No. I simply look at the matter from a business point of view—its effect on the business I am connected with. 2007. Hon. Major Steward.] What proportion does that £8 a ton bear to the value of the article? —About one-fourth of the market-value. It is a prohibitive duty. 2008. Do you manufacture your binder-twine from New-Zealand-grown flax ?—Not wholly, but partially from imported manila. There is a greater quantity of Phormium tenax used than formerly. 2009. Supposing you had a free market over there, do you think you could successfully compete with the local manufacturers of binder-twine ?—Yes; we could compete with the world if we had an open market. 2010. Do you think, under those circumstances, you could largely extend your industry here ?—We could to a great extent; perhaps doubly.
A.—4
116
2011. Mr. Leys.] Is there much twine imported here ? —There is a fairly decent quantity coming in from Australia this year. Two years ago there was a lot coming in, and there are quantities imported every year from America. 2012. If a small import duty were placed on binfier-twine in New Zealand you could extend your business considerably ?—Yes ; it would keep any surplus stocks from being shipped into the colony; but at the same time we never fear opposition from a country where there is a free port. We ship to New South Wales only, but we are in the unfortunate position at present that we have to stand to be shot at all round, and we are helpless to retaliate. 2013. Then, if the Federal tariff opened the door to New Zealand productions you could retaliate by shipping binder-twine to Australia ?—lf we federated we would not only be protected from the competition of the Australian Colonies, but also from the world. If we do not federate we have simply to hang it out as best we can. 2014. You would not suggest a protective duty ?—No; there was a duty of 20 per cent, at one time here, but it was taken off some years ago. 2015. You think it is not an advantage to have a duty ? —lt is really no advantage so far as New Zealand is concerned, because we can always compete with any part of the world if the competition is fair. 2016. Of course, you have no reason to assume that the larger agricultural industries in Australia will tolerate a prohibitive duty on a necessity like binder-twine under the Federal tariff?— There is only one colony at the present time where there is any duty, and under the Federation it will, I believe, in any case be an average duty, and under such circumstances we will simply lose the only outlet we have at the present time in New South Wales by a duty of £5 per ton going on. 2017. You could not export under an average duty?—No ; I would not like to say that. We do many things that are not profitable at times. 2018. Mr. Beauchamp.] Would the cost of manufacturing be very much reduced by the extra quantity put out ?—lt is a fact all over the world that the larger quantity turned out the cheaper your cost of production is. 2019. You say there is no duty on binder-twine now in New Zealand ?—No. 2020. Mr. Millar.] How many industries do you think would be able to find a market in Australia if we were to join the Federation ?—I am not prepared to say. I have given no further consideration to the matter than in so far as it concerns the particular business with which I am connected. 2021. Do you think, from any point of view, that there is any commercial advantage possibly gained, and that would repay us, by joining the Federation ? —Well, that I have not given sufficient consideration to to enable me to express an opinion on. 2022. I presume that Australia would only be a port of shipment for us so long as it remains the best market ?—That is so, especially if there are oth.er markets opening up which would pay any one better to ship to. Then they would not trouble about Australia at all. 2023. So that it is quite possible that, if there are other markets opening up, Australia would be practically valueless ? —-We do not look upon Australia as being so valuable as a market in that way, but we look upon the matter from our own point of view—that if federation is taking place we would be protected against Australia, because we would be on a fair even footing with other manufacturers. 2024. Your business has been steadily increasing, has it not?— Yes. 2025. Do you anticipate that, for many years to come, you will require a market outside New Zealand ?-—Well, it is possible we will. Year by year we have been looking for foreign markets, and our business has also increased in foreign countries outside Australia. 2026. So that you still have these markets in front of you outside federation?— Yes. 2027. Then, you would not suffer very seriously from your own trade point of view if we did not federate ? —No, we shall be no worse off than we are at present ; we are certainly at a great disadvantage owing to having a free port here, open to all the manufacturers on the other side to send their surplus stocks here. Their season is ahead of ours, and directly it is finished they dump their stuff into New Zealand, in order to save storage on it in Australia. 2028. Would not that still apply under federation ?—No; under federation we would have to be satisfied, because we would be no worse off than our neighbours. 2029. I suppose you have given some study to social matters : do you think that wealth is better distributed in New Zealand than in other parts of Australia?— Decidedly so. In any country like this, where the centres of population are not so great as they are on the other side, the wealth always is much better distributed. 2030. Then, in the general interests of the colony, it would be better for us to continue in the position we are in now ?—Well, from that point of view it would, but as regards my own personal business it would not. 2031. From an economic point of view, it would be ?—Yes. 2032. Then, if we were to do anything which would reduce our present advantage in that respect, the result must be detrimental to ourselves as a nation ?—That is so. 2033. Therefore federation would not be an advantage if it were shown that that would be the result ?—As a rule, I do not think federation would be of any use to the colony, unless by federating the manufacturers of this colony would be put on a better footing, and not be placed at the disadvantages they are at the present time as compared with the Australian manufacturers. 2034. Mr. Roberts.] In addition to binder-twine, I think your company makes rope ?—We do to some extent. Hope is subject to an import duty of 20 per cent. 2035. And the industry could not live without that tariff ? —No, we can only live now.
117
A.—4
2036. Mr. Beauchamp.] Under the present tariff, is your business likely to be progressive or retrogressive ? —We can just get along, as it were. 2037. In the event of our not federating, could your business be made profitable if you depended upon the domestic trade of the colony ?—Practically so. Thomas Whitblook Kempthoene examined. (No. 42.) 2038. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your firm here, Mr. Kempthorne ?—I am the managing director of Kempthorne, Prosser, and Co.'s New Zealand Drug Company. 2039. That firm has very large operations in New Zealand, has it not ? —Yes ; it has branches in the four chief centres, and employs about 160 hands. 2040. Would federation with Australia be beneficial or prejudicial to your business ? —On a uniform tariff it would be very beneficial 2041. Will you kindly explain why?— Simply because here we have a very small market for some 800,000 people, whereas if other Australian markets were open to us we should have millions to trade with. 2042. You think you would be able to compete with those in a like line of business in Australia ?—Certainly. 2043. Have you considered how federation would affect industries in New Zealand other than your own?— Yes; I have considered the question generally. I have noticed, of course, that the chief source of scare, or trouble, here seems to be wages. Under federation the wages might come down. I should be very sorry to see this; but Ido not think it would have that effect if we had federation. 2044. How do you think federation would affect other industries ?—I have noticed and read, of course, the reports made by such men as Mr. Glendining and Mr. Burt, and that they were against federation, for the reason that they thought they would not be able to compete with the other people in the Commonwealth; but I think that idea is a mere scare, and I believe, if these Australian markets were opened to them, these very men who now seem so very much afraid of competition would soon get to the top. 2045. Have you considered the question from any other point of view than that of trade ?— Yes. With regard to the political aspect, of course the distance of Australia from New Zealand seems to impress a number of people, who think we should stay where we are, on the general ground that the people of New Zealand are intellectually more capable than the people of Australia ; and yet they say we should stay where we are. Well, it strikes me most forcibly that if we are intellectually superior, and go into the Federation, our influence would tend to elevate the greater mass. 2046. Would that involve the more intellectual people going to reside in Australia?— Possibly. Ido not know that the people of New Zealand are more intellectual than the people of Australia. 2047. Would not that imply that if we were to take the commanding influence which was suggested we would elevate New Zealand, and our men would become leading men in Australia?— It is not necessary for them to leave New Zealand. They might go to Australia and open branches there, and they would succeed. Our climate and resources are such, however, that the other people could not compete against us. 2048. Then, I take it that you are in favour of federation with Australia ?—I am strongly in favour of it. It seems to me that to isolate New Zealand, and prevent its going into this general Federation, is a very narrow-minded policy. 2049. Have you any other reasons why we should federate ?—The general impression is that the federation of the English-speaking communities should be brought about, and if the people of New Zealand, instead of joining that Federation, refuse to have anything to do with it, we shall simply remain as we are ac present—a little State within ourselves —without helping to bring about that general federation of the English-speaking people which, in my opinion, is very much to be desired. 2050. Supposing that there was an Imperial Federation of the English-speaking races, what would be the position of New Zealand then as distinguished from what it is now ?—We can hold our own at the present time, and if we cannot hold our own in New Zealand with conditions that are so favourable to us we ought to be blotted out. 2051. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do I understand you to mean that federation with Australia would expedite Imperial federation, in your opinion ?—Quite possibly. 2052. How? —Because if we all joined, and expressed a desire to federate Imperially, surely joining with Australia would help forward that movement. My opinion is that it would hasten the general federation. 2053. Mr. Eoberts.] The products your company manufacture are all duty-free, are they not, Mr. Kempthorne ? —The manufactured articles are. 2054. So that the industries which you are carrying on are in no way fostered by protection ? —No. 2055 So that you have no hesitation in saying that you would be perfectly open to compete with the world ?—We are open now, and hold our own. 2056. Mr. Millar.} You said that our industries should be able to compete on the other side : as a business, is it not a fact that capital always gravitates to the large centres? —Oh, yes ; you have greater competition in the large centres where there is the population. 2057. With Victoria and New South Wales carrying the population that they do at the present time, is it not highly probable that, with federation, capital will gravitate there to a still greater extent ?—I do not think so, but where the numbers are there the facilities for making money are greater.
A.—4
118
2058. Do you think that New Zealand, all things being equal, could compete with Australia in regard to manufactures?— Most certainly she could, if she had an open market. The only drawback between this and Australia is the high freights, duties, and the slowness of the vessels. With rapid steamers, low freights, and uniform tariff, New Zealand would have every advantage to successfully compete, in my opinion. 2059. Is not coal a considerable factor in most industries ?—Yes, coal is indispensable for most industries. I can get lignite which, with a mixture of other coal, is as cheap and as good as can be got anywhere. 2060. In that respect, so far as New South Wales is concerned, is she not on a better footing than we are?— New South Wales has exceptional advantages, no doubt. 2061. We in Dunedin have lignite coal, but other portions of the colony are not in the same position ?—But they are nearer to Westport. 2062. Do you think the cheapening of coal in the large industries would bring about such a reduction in the cost of production that our manufacturers would be able to compete all round ? —I think so, decidedly. 2063. You would have to assume that the hours of labour and the laws affecting labour were equal ?—Yes. Ido not think labour would come down. I should be very sorry to think so. 2064. But unless there is a sort of equalising law in force our manufacturers would be unable to compete —they would be unduly handicapped ?—Yes ; you must have a uniform tariff all round ; if you are handicapped you cannot compete. 2065. All things being equal, you still believe in federation?— New Zealand would simply jump ahead. 2066. Do you think the colony is going to derive any benefit from it financially?— Money is as cheap in New Zealand as it is elsewhere. You cannot look for much cheaper money. 2067. As a State, or as a nation, keeping outside the Commonwealth, we would still be as favourably considered in the London market as we would be if a State of the Commonwealth, would we not?—l do not think that would make much difference to us. 2068. Then, there would be no great advantage from that point of view ?—There is every advantage in New Zealand joining the Commonwealth of Australia. 2069. Do you think we ought to sink our autonomy?—l think we should raise ourselves. The thing should be to make New Zealand a centre of attraction for all these islands in the South Seas. 2070. We talk about becoming the Greater Britain of the South : could we possibly do that if we became a part of the Commonwealth? —Yes, I think we should steadily advance. They cannot stop us, but you will stop yourselves if you exclude yourselves entirely from the Commonwealth. 2071. Has not Great Britain's splendid isolation made her the most powerful nation in the world ?—That is true; and is it not possible that New Zealand might follow suit ? 2072. By her manufactures ?—Yes. 2073. I suppose you will admit that we have all the raw material in this colony to make us a large manufacturing nation ?—There is no question about it; we have the raw material at our feet. 2074. Do you not think that with all that natural wealth there is a greater probability of our making ourselves a nation by keeping aloof ?—Certainly not. 2075. Would federation be any assistance to us to develop our industries ?—Yes; it would give us a wider field. 2076. Would this colony be as well developed under a central form of government in Australia as under the New Zealand Government? —I think the term "central form of government" is a bugbear. The distance from Perth to Brisbane, for instance, is more than from New Zealand to Australia. You can have cables every minute in the day. As for sending over our representatives, it has been said our men are of higher calibre, and if they are so they will make their influence felt. Ido not say our men are of a higher calibre. 2077. The people you are talking about are portion of a great continent, and there is a community of interest among them which does not exist between that continent and adjacent islands ?.—-They keep their eyes on New Zealand as a centre. I heard it said here in regard to defence that it would require all the troops and ships available to protect Australia, with its great seaboard, but I would say, in reply to that, that an invading army will not go into a desert; it will make its way to the chief centres. 2078. As far as defence is concerned, our first line of defence will be the navy?— Yes. 2079. And if we did become federated with Australia we would have to pay our share for the navy as our first line of defence ? —Yes, and it would be our duty to do it. 2080. You consider it would be in the interests of the colony to go in for federation ? —Yes; I unhesitatingly say so. 2081. Mr. Beauchamp .] Have you branches of your house in Australia ? —No. 2082. Do you ship produce to Australia?—No, not the manufactured products. W 7 e could not do that on account of the freight. Our export trade with Victoria is small—only in the wa,y of exchange. 2083. In what way are you handicapped—by the duties?— Yes. All manufactured articles we make up are, in Australia, protected up to the extent of £5 a ton, except those sent to New South Wales, which is a free port for such lines. 2084. In the event of federation, you would lay yourselves out for trade with the Australian Continent? —Yes, provided-there was an opening. 2085. You have considered the financial aspect of the question, and you cannot see that we would be prejudicially affected by federation ?—Not at all. The resources of New Zealand are so great she can borrow anything she wants —in fact, her temptation to borrow at current low rates is too strong even now.
119
A.—4
2086. You do not think we would sacrifice our independence by joining the Australian Commonwealth ? —I think we would raise it. 2087. It has been said we would become a mere appendage?—Oh, no. 2088. Why do you think that in course of time" New Zealand will become even greater than Australia? —Our position is isolated, our climate is good, and our resources are so numerous that we must of necessity become the leading colony. 2089. In that case, would she not be likely to attain such a position as Great Britain has attained to-day ?—Great Britain does not stand alone. Every market of the world is open to Great Britain, except America ; but we cannot export as she does. 2090. Why should we not export as well as Great Britain ?—We may in time, but not in our day. 2091. Have you studied the present conditions of the Commonwealth Bill?—I have read it. 2092. Have you studied it closely?— Not so closely as you may have done, but I have looked through it. 2093. And, notwithstanding the existing conditions which some witnesses consider inimical to New Zealand, you think we should federate ?—Yes. I respect the opinions of those witnesses ; but I do not agree with them at all. 2094. Mr. Luke.] You think that New Zealand will go up by leaps and bounds?— She will steadily rise. 2095. You think it is a superior country and a superior people ? —I do not say the people are superior, but the country is. 2096. And under federation would we not be towing behind an inferior country ?—I do not know about that. We might tow Australia eventually. 2097. Would we not be at a disadvantage ? Would we not be loading ourselves with an encumbrance that would hinder our progress ? —I think not; with everything on an equal footing, it would be an immense advantage to New Zealand to join the Commonwealth. 2098. You -have heard of the illustration of the tail wagging the body: do you think that New Zealand, as the tail, would influence the great body ?—Not immediately. 2099. You think that generally the effect on industry and produce from the soil would be an advantage ? —Everything being on an equal footing, it would—that is to say, if there was a uniform tariff, ours would be the better country, and we would have larger resources. 2100. You look on it from a philanthropic point of view?—l look on it from a business point of view, and from a patriotic point of view. 2101. You think that federation will take place sooner or later?— Yes, I think so, certainly. 2102. You believe in the federation of the British people ?—Yes, and in our federation with the British people. 2103. Mr. Leys.] There is a free-trade market in New South Wales now ?—Yes. 2104. Can you mention one manufacturing industry in New Zealand that exports to that market ?—They do not want to do it, for the reason that they merely manufacture now for themselves—the small area they control. They have no surplus. 2105. Could they do it better under federation ?.—Certainly, if the whole market is open to them, and they lay themselves out for a bigger business. 2106. Would there be any advantage if they could find a market in New South Wales ? —They do not want it at present. For their limited output they make provision, but if they had a wider field they would adapt themselves to circumstances. 2107. Is not-New South Wales a wide field ? —Yes. 2108. Does-it not consume a large amount of manufactured goods?— Yes. 2109. Why do our manufacturers not take advantage of it, then ?—You once get into the Commonwealth and they will do it. At the present time we could send a lot to New South Wales, but we are not attempting it, because we would call forth opposition against ourselves. If we were working under a common head we would know where we were. It is a question of competing one against the other. 2110. If we were under the Commonwealth, would not that competition be called forth ?— They have this disadvantage : that the New Zealand market is small, against our having their market, which is very large. 2111. With regard to the federation of the English-speaking races, do you not regard the present political relations of the British Empire as solid relations?— Yes; but I say we want to make them more solid. 2112. Do you think we should be improved if we had government from England instead of as we have now —perfect autonomy ?—I do not think we should be governed from England, even if we had Imperial federation. 2113. In what respect do you think our present relations could be improved ? What is the something we may reach, in your opinion ? —The federation of the British Empire ; and at present the federation with the Commonwealth of Australia. 2114. Is not the British Empire federated at present?— There is no Imperial Federation in its literal sense. 2115. I suppose you have noticed that Mr. Barton, as Premier of the new Federal Executive, has announced certain great Australian works to be undertaken out of Federal revenues ?—Yes. 2116. There is the construction of the trans-continental railway, the opening-up of the tropical part of Australia, and works of that character : can we benefit in any way from those works ? —What injury could they do us ? 2117. Can we get any benefit from them ?—We might benefit largely in the end through the opening-up of that country.
A.—4
120
2118. How would it benefit us?—lt would settle a larger population, and call for more of our manufactures. 2119. Those will be costly works, will they not ?—Yes, I apprehend so. 2120. I suppose you are aware that under the Commonwealth Bill the Federal Government in the first instance derive revenue from the Customs ? —Yes, the main element is the Customs taxation. 2121. Are you aware that our Customs revenue at present amounts to £2,000,000 a year?— Yes. 2122. That revenue would be collected entirely by the Federal Government ?—Yes. 2123. Would that revenue in the long-run be largely absorbed by this great Federal undertaking for the benefit of Australia ? —Not if you have proper representatives How could it be , ? 2124. You do not think the fact that our fourteen men, however intellectually superior they may be, are enormously outnumbered by the representation of Australia with a common interest might lead to these works being undertaken in spite of us, and paid for out of our money ?—I do not think so, unless the conscience of the Assembly is affected with injustice. 2125. Mr. Barton regards the trans-continental railway as a benefit to New Zealand from a defence point of view. His conscience, then, is apparently quite prepared to construct that railway at the expense of New Zealand ?— Pro raid, no doubt, we would have to contribute, but they would contribute to us in the same way ; and if it is a matter of pro and con what need we care ? 2123. Does it not mean that a large amount of our revenue will go for the benefit of Australia ? —I do not think so. 2127. And that we will have to increase our direct taxation here ?—I do not think so. 2128. Is it not the fact that the United States Government, with powers not so large as those of the Australian Commonwealth, absorbs the whole of its Customs taxation for national purposes, and leaves the States to carry on all settlement works, education, and so on, with local taxation ? — You must know that the United States protects itself with a protection for its own people. It is a protected nation. They keep everything within to themselves. 2129. But is it not a fact that they use all the Customs revenue raised under the protective tariff for national purposes, and leave the States to carry on all their works of development by local taxation?— Yes ; and they do it very well. They are improving the condition of the country by spending the money. 2130. Is that not likely to result in the case of the Australian Commonwealth ?—No. 2131. Will not the Customs revenue be altogether taken for Commonwealth purposes? —I do not think so. William Stevenson examined. (No. 43.) 2132. Hon. the Chairman.] Are you a member of the firm of Irvine and Stevenson?— Yes. 2133. What is your business?—Preserved-provision manufacturers and starch-manufacturers. 2134. How many hands do you employ ?—About 130"or 150. 2135. Has your business been long established here ?-—As manufacturers, about fifteen years. 2136. Are the articles manufactured by you, or many of them, protected by Customs duties ? —Yes, nearly all are protected. Duties put on in the old times still remain ; but they are of no moment to us now. 2137. Do you export much to Australia ?—We export a fair amount to Australia. 2138. How do you view the matter of New Zealand federating or not federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ? Would it affect your particular litre of business ?—I consider that what we would lose in one way we would gain in another. We should do a muah larger business in some lines in which we now do'nothing owing to the tariffs in Australia. 2139. As far as your business is concerned, would it be an advantage to New Zealand to federate? —I think it would, looking to the future. It would make little difference to us at present: The business we are doing now will always be done. They get at present the products of this country which they could not produce themselves. We supply them in spite of their protective duties. 2140. If they cannot supply themselves with those articles, how would federation affect the matter? —As regards the special lines, we would no doubt do an increased business there if their duties were taken off, as the goods would become cheaper to the people. 2141. Are there duties against you there ?—Yes. 2142. And with a free market your export trade would increase ?—-Yes. 2143. Have you considered the question as it affects other industries besides your own ?—I am more familiar with food-products than any other line. Federation would be against some of them, but I think that on the whole New Zealand will not come out second in the manufacture of these lines. I think we could hold our own with Australia, and perhaps in years to come it would be a benefit to New Zealand. 2144. Have you considered the political aspect of the question?—l have not. Personally, I cannot see any benefit we shall receive by federating with Australia politically ; we may commercially. I have not studied the question from the political aspect. lam not a politician; lam a business-man. 2145. Your evidence is purely on the business aspect ? —Yes. 2146. Mr. Millar.} What particular lines do you think would be increased by the opening of the Australian markets to you ?—ln the way of preserved provisions—meat and fish products. We could increase those lines. 2147. Are there any large meat-preserving works in Australia?—l believe there are a number of meat-preserving works there. 2148. As a business-man, you will agree that where there are large centres of population, and larger industries are carried on, the conditions are favourable for manufacture ? —Yes.
121
A.—4
2149. Up to the present, Victoria has been the manufacturing centre of Australia?— Yes. 2150. She has done that under a system of border tariffs and protective duties ?—Yes. 2151. Do you not think that it is likely that in the course of a few years the bulk of the Victorian manufactures will gravitate to Sydney?— They have done so now. 2152. And will do so more when there is no duty against them in New South Wales?—l do not think the factories themselves will gravitate to Sydney. This new state of affairs will stop that gravitation. They will manufacture in Victoria, and send to New South Wales, which they could not do in the past owing to the tariff. They had to open factories in Sydney to enable them to compete. 2153. Will the cost of production in New South Wales be any less than in Victoria?—l do not think so. I think Victoria will maintain the lead in Australia in manufactures. 2154. Is she not handicapped through want of coal?— Yes, but she has the advantage of being the first in the field. The industries are established, and the labour has become used to the methods of manufacture, which is a big pull. I believe Victoria is now getting a lignite coal for her factories. 2155. Under federation Victoria's markets will be widened considerably ? Western Australia will be closed for five years yet, but she will have Queensland and South Australia to send to : the probability, therefore, is that Victoria will still further increase her output? —Yes; I think they are looking forward to that. I also know for a fact that several works are now doubled in output in view of federation. 2156. And if Victoria increases her output and increases the size of her factories, is it not likely there will be a tendency to send any surplus products to New Zealand ?—-Yes ; will be able to defend ourselves. For my own part, in the manufacture of starch, which is made in Victoria, if I found that the Victorian manufacturer sent his surplus here and sold at a lower price, I should retaliate by opening a factory m Victoria. 2157. Then, it would be a question of who had the longest purse ? —The man with the smallest factory, providing he was not depending on the manufacture of a single article, would be a great thorn in the side of his competitor, and would probably bring him to terms in the end. I should not be afraid to take up that position. 2158. If our factories go to the Commonwealth the people'would have to follow ?—Not necessarily so. 2159. But if a man is brought up to a certain trade, and can get no work at that trade in New Zealand, he will go where he can get it ?—The labour will be there already. All we would require to take would be the leading men—the men to manage the departments in the factory. That is the course we would pursue in the event of our exploiting their country. 2160. The best men in your factory would be taken away ? —Yes. 2161. That would not be beneficial to the industries of the colony ? —We could get more. We can raise skilled labour here as elsewhere. 2162. Have you markets for your products outside of Australia?— Yes. It has been a hobby of my own to find outside markets, and in my own little way I have found some encouragement in exploiting foreign markets where we get a fair field. I have not found much success in the big centres. Of course, our goods are more consumed in mining communities and in communities at a distance from civilisation, such as Western Australia. We have always been able to compete with any of the other colonies of the Australasian group or with Great Britain. 2163. Have you ever tried the South African market ? —Yes. We are doing a considerable business with South Africa at the present time. 2164. Is there a prospect of further development in that part ?—I think so. I have thought so for many years. . 2165. Would it be to the advantage of New Zealand manufacturers to endeavour to open that market ? —Certainly. I have strong opinions on that matter, although I have never expressed them in any public way. I have found there is a market almost anywhere when you put your mind to it, and when you have a good article behind you. We have now to compete with the Australians as manufacturers, and we do so favourably. 2166. You think that, with a fair field in South Africa, there is a probability of that place taking our surplus products ?—Yes. If Australia was shut to us to-morrow, South Africa would form a market for our food-products for years to come. 2167. From a commercial point of view, then, the outlook is not serious whether we join the Federation or not? —It would not make much difference to me. If I cared to live on the Australian Continent I am satisfied I could do more business there than in New Zealand, because all the markets I cannot exploit from here could be better exploited from there owing to the shipping facilities. It is difficult to export goods from New Zealand, because we have no shipping lines. We are always confined to one line. 2168. And with that drawback removed ?—I would not be afraid to tackle any country this side of the line, or in the East, in my line of business. 2169. Many of your manufactures at present find a market in Australia, and will always do so? —Yes. I would also like to say you had some evidence about the manufacture of jam. That is a line in which we compete in export with Australia favourably. We can export it if we have a surplus ; but on the other side they seem to be able to manufacture it cheaper and sell it cheaper than we do—not much cheaper. 2170. But sufficient to give them the trade ?—That is so. However, the supply of fruit is not so large yet in this colony that we need to worry about an export market for that commodity. 2171. As far as jam is concerned, in Australia there are factories that turn out more than we do? —Yes. In fact, as far as jam is concerned, they can manufacture against the world, both for quality and quantity. 16—A. 4.
A.—4
122
2172. You have given no thought to the question from any other point of view? —No. I have been in the large cities on the other side, but lam not familiar with the country districts. I have seen it stated that there would be a big market for our oats, and I know there is, but I have yet to learn that the salvation of this couDtry depends on oats. It seems to me, the less oats we grow the better for us. There is no use growing a commodity if it does not pay. The farmers are always turning their land to some other use. I agree with Mr. Kempthorne that we have nothing to fear against Australia as a competitor if we go into the market together. What benefit it would be to New Zealand, politically or socially, I see none myself, but I am not familiar with that phase of the question. 2173. Unless from a commercial point of view it is to be a very great advantage to New Zealand, do you think we should federate with Australia ? —I do not know what advantage it would be. A century after this circumstances might be very much altered. We might have a population here that would be large enough to necessitate and control a large export business, and we must have markets. Perhaps the time is now to secure those markets. Ido not know. lam not competent to solve that problem. 2174. Still, you are of opinion we should derive some great advantage before we federate ?— Yes, there should be some advantage. Of course, if the majority of our manufactures are holding their own, there will be the advantage of a big market with protection against the world. 2175. Assuming a thing that is possible—that the Federal tariff is somewhat lower than the existing New Zealand tariff —will that not cause competition to come from outside of Australia altogether, which would be too great for either one side or the other ?—I do not know that it would, because nearly all the articles manufactured here under protection are sold cheaper than the same articles imported. 2176. Do you not think that, even with a lower tariff than exists in New Zealand now, our manufactures would be injured by outside competition with America, or Britain, or Germany ?—I do not know that. I do know about the general trade. I am speaking more particularly from my own standpoint, and I do not think I am competent to give an opinion on the question you ask me. 2177. Mr. Roberts.] Starch is subject to a duty of 2d. per pound : is that protection necessary for the continuance of the industry?—lt could exist without it now that it is established. I believe in protection as a means in young countries of establishing industries. After the industry is established it makes little difference whether the duties are taken off the statute-book or not. At any rate, you will find that starch is being sold cheaper to-day than it was before the commodity was manufactured here. The consumer is getting the benefit. 2178. In reply to Mr. Millar, you said your firm exports produce of different sorts to South Africa: does that include starch?— No. In that respect we are at present only overtaking the wants of the colony. Ido not mean to say that we could not compete in this article with the English manufacturer. Certainly we have a longer distance to carry the raw material, but, all things being equal, I could make starch against Colman at any time. 2179. Mr. Beauchamp.] What are the relative values of colonial and English starches in Dunedin? —Colman's starch is s£d. wholesale, and ours is 3fd. 2180. In regard to New South Wales, is that your only market at the present time ? —We do little trade with New South Wales. We do most with Western Australia. We do considerable business with Melbourne, but not much with Sydney. 2181. In preserved meats, do you come into competition with the American goods?—No, not in the colonies. The colonies pack meats cheaper than the United States. 2182. In Sydney I see Armour's goods exposed for sale ? —We do not export heavy lines of meats to Australia, because they manufacture their own. 2183. Are you doing more trade with South Africa now than previously ?—Yes. 2184. How long has that market been open to you?—We commenced the exploitation of the South African market twelve months before the war. What it was before that I cannot say, but I believe there was always a market for us. We were not in a position to take it up. 2185. You have been doing business with South Africa for two years?— Yes. 2186. And ho.w long with Australia ?—Ten or twelve years. 2187. Is your business with Australia increasing or diminishing?—l think it is stationary. 2188. Hon. the Chairman.] You said the manufacturers in Australia have an advantage owing to the shipping facilities ?—Yes. There are a number of shipping lines with a terminus in Australia. I went there two or three years ago to find an avenue for Manila, which was then looming up on account of the war, but I found the Australians had already exploited it. Since my visit they have been doing a large business with Manila, but we cannot reach it from here. 2189. Assuming the population of New Zealand increased, do you think it would be possible for this colony to offer sufficient inducements to these same lines to make a terminus in this colony, and so open those markets to the New Zealand manufacturers ? —I do not think the commerce of this country could do it. It would require subsidies in some form from the Government to find vessels for these lines, and I believe it would pay the Government to- spend a large sum in that direction. 2190. You think it would pay the Government to subsidise some of these lines to come on to New Zealand ?—Yes. I am sure New Zealand lost a large sum of money through not being in a position to send goods direct to Western Australia during the last seven years. I have no hesitation in saying that, because I know what lam talking about. If the Government of the day had been in a position to put on a steamer every month even, we would still be controlling the trade of that colony, whereas it has drifted to Melbourne ; and if that trade had been established it would now have been a stepping-stone to the Cape.
123
A.—4
Frank Oakdbn examined. (No 44.) 2191. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your occupation ?—Manager of the Millburn Lime and Gement Company, Dunedin. 2192. Is that a large concern? —Fairly large. We have about £35,000 invested, and employ about 120 hands. We have lime-works in different parts of the colony, and one cement-works here. We are also interested in some works in the North. 2193. How long has the industry been established ?—lt is twelve years since the company was formed. 2194. Do you export to Australia at all ? —No, not at all. 2195. Is there any duty against you there ? —New South Wales is the only colony that is free. 2196. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ? —So far as our own business is concerned, I have. I consider that if we federated to-morrow it would not make any difference to us, because the price per ton is so small, compared with the cost of transporting, it would not pay us to send to Australia, nor would it pay Australia to send here, either lime or cement. Under certain circumstances we might do a large export business with Australia. 2197. That is, in the event of federation?— Yes, when certain circumstances would be altered. In the coal industry, for instance, the principal coal in New Zealand is costly, whereas in New South Wales it is cheap. Other things are the same—labour, for one. I believe the New Zealand labour is better than the Australian labour. The raw materials are in quantity, but not so in Australia. The conditions generally are better in New Zealand for making cement than in Australia, and I have no doubt a large business would be brought about if we could get cheaper coal. 2198. Have you any surplus of your manufactures beyond what you dispose of in New Zealand ?—No. 2199. How long would it be, if circumstances were favourable, before you could establish an export trade from New Zealand?— Six or twelve months. It is only a matter of doubling the size of the works. 2200. Have you considered the matter as it affects other industries besides your own ?—No, except bond fide industries—industries almost indigenous to the country, which will undoubtedly hold their own whether we federate or not. 2201. What class of industries do you refer to? —Iron and coal and woollen. So-called local industries that have to import all their raw material Ido not place in that category at all. Many of our industries would hold their own with Australia. I have been from Brisbane to Western Australia, and know most of the towns pretty intimately. 2202. Have you considered the question as regards the political aspect?—l do not see that anything we would get from the Commonwealth would compensate us for losing control of the colony. 2203. Hon. Captain Bus sell, .] Do we import much cement? —From Germany and England we do—about 10,000 tons a year. 2204. And what is manufactured here ?—Not more than 15,000 tons, but it is a growing industry. Our business has grown in the last three years, until now it has practically doubled itself. 2205. Can New Zealand make cement as good as the imported?—We contend it is as good. 2206. In the matter of export, being nearer, could you ship cheaper to Australia than they could export from Germany ? —We would practically ship at the same rate. 2207. Is the industry dependent on the protection afforded to it?— Yes. We have to compete with cheap labour at Home and on the Continent, and also with surplus stocks sent here. 2208. But, now that the industry is well established, and we manufacture more than we import, would not the business continue even if it stood entirely on its own foundation ?—Undoubtedly it would, provided we get the unfair element removed —that is, that occasionally cement is brought out as ballast. That cement has been made in England or Germany, where wages would be £1 a week for ten hours a day, while here we would pay £2 a week for eight hours a day. Under those conditions we could not compete favourably. 2209. Is it possible they will manufacture cement in Australia ? —They are doing it now, but not under the favourable conditions existing in New Zealand. 2210. Generally speaking, I would understand you to say that any industry natural to the country would hold its own ?—Yes. 2211. And on that ground we need not be frightened of them ?—That is so. 2212. Do you speak with knowledge or is it only your opinion when you say the labour is better in New Zealand than in Australia ? —I have employed men in Melbourne and Sydney, and whether lam prejudiced or not Ido not know, but I think I get more out of my men here. They work better, and the conditions of life are better. The climate, of course, is quite enough to prevent a man doing a full day's work in, say, Sydney in summer. 2213. Mr. Boberts.] Have your company not been able to export to Sydney?—No, not of late years. 2214. Is that inability to export, or is it an arrangement you have with the manufacturers there not to export ?—lt is owing to the fact that the price of cement has been kept low through the big export of cement from Home. 2215. Although they might be paying as much for production in New South Wales as here, the cost of transit from here to Australia would be a sufficient handicap to keep you out ?—Quite so. 2216. Mr. Millar.] You had a big struggle to get the industry established ?—Yes. We have had the ups and downs incidental to colonial industries.
124
A.—4
2217. But your trade is now yearly increasing?— Yes ; in the last three years it has about doubled. We have put in special machinery to keep up to date, and our works are now as complete as any works in the world. 2218. Presuming we federated, and the Federal tariff against the outer world were lower on cement than New Zealand at present imposes, how would that affect your trade ?—I can only repeat that it would greatly depend on the shipping. If cement is brought out as ballast it puts us in the worst position to compete. 2219. Mr. Beauchamp.] Did you say that in the event of federation you thought you could do a much extended trade with Australia ? —lt is possible. Our manufacturing conditions are more favourable, and would enable us to compete with Australia rather than Australia with us, provided coal be available at a reasonable price. 2220. Even with the handicap of freight between here and Australia ?—Yes; we could ship by sailing-vessels. 2221. Do you think the freight between here and Australia would be less than between Germany and Australia? —Yes, by sailing-ship. One company exported hydraulic lime, and under certain circumstances we could all export Portland cement. The New South Wales Government put a duty of 2s. a cask on this hydraulic lime, contending that it was equal to cement, the analysis being identical. If it had not been for that a large industry would have been built up. These works are now being rebuilt at Limestone Island, Whangarei. 2222. Is there much German cement sent out here ? —No. I think we are doing 90 per cent, of the trade. 2223. As to the carriage of cement as ballast, is it a fact that within the last two or three years it has been brought out here practically as ballast ? —Yes, about three years ago. 2224. As a matter of fact, you have not had the competition in cement for the last two or three years that you had previous to that ?—That is so. 2225. And the Government consider your cement sufficiently good that|they specify it in their contracts, do they not ?—Yes. 2226. What are the relative values of cements—German and your own ?—Practically the same. Our wholesale price in Dunedin is 125., and the German is from 10s. 6d. to 11s. The best English has no wholesale price ; it is all retail. 2227. What would the wholesale people sell to the contractors here for?— They would charge probably a shilling a cask more than they get for ours. 2228. What is the duty ?—Two shillings a cask. Eiohaed Hudson examined. (No. 45.) 2229. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—l am engaged in the manufacturing business with my five sons. It is now E. Hudson and Co. (Limited) —a private company—no outside capital. 2230. How many hands have you employed in the business ?—Just now we have a number of carpenters, bricklayers, and engineers employed, so I should say there would be pretty well close upon two hundred altogether. 2231. Some are employed, I suppose, building?— Yes; lam putting up a large factory. 2232. But how many do you employ in the business itself ?—About a hundred and seventy. It does not come under my particular notice; my eldeat son manages. 2233. Has the business been long established ? —Over thirty-two years. 2234. Have .you any knowledge of Australia—your own personal knowledge ?—I have been there several times, and have been there quite recently, with a view to seeing their manufactories. 2235. Are the concerns there much larger than your own?— Some of them are. 2236. To what extent? —Well, they do things we do not do, and we do things they do not do. Why, in cocoa and chocolate there is no firm in Sydney with so complete a plant as we have got. There is a plant just now being imported by Statman and Co. I saw their works, and gave them information as to what it was necessary to procure to bring their plant more up-to-date. They were very courteous to me, and I told them to come over here and learn anything I could show them ; and they have been here to learn our methods. 2237. Is your business protected by tariff?'—Yes. 2238. To what extent ?—From 15 to 25 per cent. 2239. Do you export to Australia? —No. I have tried that, but not successfully; the tariff shuts us out. We could sell both in Melbourne and Sydney, but the tariff' shuts us out. 2240. Supposing New Zealand federated with Australia, how would your business be affected ? —Injuriously at present. There is no doubt the manufactures over there are beyond their requirements, and they would ship their surplus stuff here. 2241. Would you not be able to retaliate? —I should try. 2242. Do you think you could with any success ? —I could not say with what success; I think so. In some things, certainly. In the higher class of goods we could ; in the cheaper we could not. With the freight and charges on the lower-class goods we would not be able to, but in the higher-class goods we should be able to do so, especially in chocolate goods. We make a better article, and I believe we could compete successfully in price. Of course, the climate of Australia is against the manufacture of these goods. It is necessary to use refrigerating-chambers in the manufacture of these goods there, and that is not necessary in Dunedin. 2243. Have you considered how manufactures other than your own would be affected in the event of New Zealand federating with Australia?—l think most of them would be injuriously affected. All except probably the woollen-manufacturers ; they, I believe, would probably be able to hold their own against Australia. Nearly all the others —furniture, certainly, and nearly everything else that is manufactured here, would be injuriously affected by free-trade between the two
125
A.—4
countries —that is, if it took place between the next fifteen and twenty-five years. We have not had time to establish our factories here on such a scale as would enable us to compete, and it is partly owing to the population being split up into.so many centres. You must remember that there is a manufacturer of these goods in every centre here. I believe there are more manufactories for these things in New Zealand than in Australia—more in number, with New Zealand's small population. 2244. Are there any advantages which occur to you as likely to accrue to New Zealand, so far as its manufactures are concerned, if New Zealand federated with Australia ? —Advantages that would accrue to New Zealand, no. 2245. Well, now, apart from the manufacturing point of view, have you considered the question of federation ?—Not much; but from what I have I do not think it would be wise for New Zealand to join Australia. It would be far better for her to go on as an individual country than to sink herself in a larger country, where she would be always outvoted upon any question— always outvoted by the larger number of members in Australia; and in all questions where selfinterest came in with the Australians, of course sentiment would have nothing to do with it. And I think individuality is better for a country like this. I think it is a great deal better for us to learn to go alone. I should like to say, further, that I should not be afraid of free-trade now between the two countries, but I have no desire to see federation. 2246. But, supposing there was a protective tariff' in Australia against New Zealand, how then?— Well, if you have a protective tariff here we shall develop and become strong. Ido not see why we should have any particular desire to supply Australia with our goods. 2247. If New Zealand becomes able to export it would find markets outside Australia?— Yes; the cost of sending goods further is very little. 2248. Then, supposing there to be an advantage in the way of trade from federating with Australia, you do not think it would be a sufficient compensation for sacrificing our political independence ? —Certainly not. If it weakened us as a people or as a country, it would do us much more harm than the money advantage would do us good. 2249. Which do you think better for New Zealand , —To paddle our own canoe. 2250. You anticipated my question. I was going to ask whether it was better that we should stand alone as part of a great nation, or as a State of the Commonwealth ? —Stand alone. William Ekic Reynolds examined. (No. 46.) 2251. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are, you Mr. Eeynolds?—l am a produce and seed merchant. 2252. Trading on your own account ?—Yes. 2253. How long have you been in business in New Zealand ?—Well, I have only been in this business for ten years. I was a farmer before that. 2254. Have you lived in Australia at all ?—Not lived in it: I have visited it. 2255. Have you considered how your business would be affected by federation with Australia? —Yes, to a certain extent. 2256. And what is the conclusion at which you have arrived ?—Well, it depends on what action Australia takes after the States have federated. If they put on a protective tariff, or a tariff of some kind, it will affect us very prejudicially. At present Victoria is very highly protected, and New South Wales is a free port. New South Wales takes a very considerable amount of produce from us regularly ; Victoria does, too, but most of it is for transhipment under bond. But if they put duties on, and all colonies except New Zealand are on the one footing, and Victoria has freetrade with New 'South Wales and New Zealand has not, it will certainly affect the whole of our produce trade, there is no question of that, very prejudicially. It seems to me that perhaps sufficient notice is not taken of the fact that if we do not go in for federation we are bound to lose something. We cannot stand out and not lose. 2257. That is, lose commercially? —Yes ; to a great extent, too. I may say it is not a question of gain on the one hand and no loss on the other. We are sure to lose if we do not go in. 2258. Is not there loss if we do go in, the loss of our independence as a colony?— Yes; well, Ido not think that signifies. I think whether we go in or not is more a political question, and a matter of finance. I think the manufactures here that require too much bolsteringup are perhaps not worth anything to us, because one must recognise that in bolstering up manufactures the consumer has to pay more for his goods. New Zealand is distinctly an exporting country, and the producer has to pay more for his tea, sugar, and things like that, wearing-apparel, boots, and so on, because everything is protected. 2259. Which is the strongest colony in Australia in of manufactures ?—ln Australia, Victoria. 2260. How has that been brought about ? Has it not been brought about by protective duties ?—Yes, I should say it has, very largely so; though one must not forget that Victoria is the furthest developed country, and the most fertile with the raw material. There is no doubt about that. 2261. Very well, you think there will be certain advantages of trade to be gained by New Zealand if she federates ?—I do not think it, I am certain of it. 2T262. That is what I mean. Are there any other advantages you think will accrue to New Zealand by adopting federation ?—Well, it seems to me, listening here this morning, that it is a good deal protection versus free-trade. Wages are dearer here, probably, than anywhere else. That means elevating the classes to a greater or lesser degree; but at the same I hold that if other countries are not running even with you dry-rot is bound to set in. New Zealand has not, perhaps, run long enough to feel what the effect of that may be ; yet I believe the day will come when she will feel it. Of course, it is such a big question Ido not like to diverge too far into it.
126
A A 111 M
2263. I asked you if you could name any other advantages that would accrue to New Zealand beyond expansion of trade ?—Well, I think expansion of trade is a very vast one. I am not sure but what joining the Commonwealth would mean very much better shipping facilities. Ido not see how New Zealand can get the shipping facilities it ought to have and remain outside the Commonwealth ; not only Australian shipping facilities, but possibly to the eastern countries—Africa, and so on. 2264. If New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, how would that secure her greater shipping facilities ? —By the far greater volume of trade passing between Australia and New Zealand. I believe it would be greater. 2265. Would not that have to be transhipped ? —Yes; but I question whether New Zealand can hold the outside trade without transhipping. I doubt whether we can do that for very many years to come. 2266. You say that if we federate these channels of trade would open to her?—l think so, by the more definite fixing of vessels leaving Australia, and vessels running here to connect with them. 2267. That could be secured under the present system ?—I do not think so. 2268. Why not? —Because Australia is heavily protected. 2269. But outside markets : why not send to them ?—Because the volume of trade is not sufficient to allow of our shipments going with sufficient regularity. 2270. Ido not follow you ? —I mean that the New Zealand trade, if we do not federate, will become of less value to the shipping companies, and very greatly increased in value if we do federate, and they would then cater much better for it. Australia's shipping facilities could be made use of by us to all eastern countries, such as Manila, China, Japan, &c, by transhipment. 2271. What have protective duties in Melbourne and Sydney, supposing them to exist, to do with trade with Manila and South Africa ? —Because, if we federated, I hold that our carrying trade would be greater, and well worth while being better looked after. 2272. But they would not pay duty in Australia for transhipment to Manila?— No. 2273. Then, how do these duties affect the produoe sent from here ?—Simply by allowing the trade between Victoria and New Zealand to increase to such an extent that transhippers could catch every vessel. We have now a boat once a week or once in ten days. Probably, with freetrade with Victoria, we should have two, or three, or four boats a week all through, and therefore could hit every transhipment. We should have far better facilities for sending over to those ports. That is what I mean. 2274. Mr. Leys.] What lines of exports do you think would increase between New Zealand and Australia under intercolonial free-trade? —Intercolonial free-trade—l think all our lines of produce would. 2275. Do you think you could send wheat into Australia ? —lt goes in now. 2276. To what extent? —Not to a very great extent. - That it would increase I would not like to say, but I think it would. 2277. But is it not the fact Australia, taken in the aggregate, is a much larger exporter than we? —Yes. 2278. If they can compete in the English market with their wheat, is it likely that we can put any wheat into Australia ?—There is no accounting for the anomalies of trade. It is absolutely impossible to account for them—at least, in a general sense. Our wheat does go into Australia now. 2279. To what extent ?—lt depends entirely on the markets. Often enough Australia overships Home; shortages take place, and they come to New Zealand to ship to a rising market. 2280. If they do that —if they overship, and have not sufficient for their home market—would not they still have to take New Zealand wheat ?—lf New Zealand is cut out in that way, I do not think they would to the same extent, because the protective duty enhances the value of wheat locally, and prevents shipments Home to the same extent, possibly, as now takes place. 2281. Is not Australian wheat better for milling purposes than New Zealand wheat?— Victorian and South Australian wheat is slightly better. There is as much difference between New Zealand wheat —Otago wheat and Canterbury wheat. 2282. Yes ; but on the whole ?—Yes, it is rather better on the whole. 2283. Now, is there not a danger, if the duty were removed, that Australian wheat would come in to supply the northern mills instead of the Canterbury wheat ?—I do not think so, leaving the freight the same from Canterbury to Auckland and Auckland to Australia. When the market is low it is not influenced by local conditions, it is gauged by the London "market ; and freights from Australia are usually less than from here, consequently it is a very difficult matter for Sydney to get away to the northern mills as against Lyttelton. 2284. Because of the duty ? —Oh, no. 2285. Is there any great difference in the freight between Sydney and Auckland and Lyttelton and Auckland ?—Practically the, same. 2286. Is there any difference between the wheat quotation in Sydney and the wheat quotation in Lyttelton ?—Yes. 2287. How much?—lt is considerably higher in Sydney. 2288. How much?— Twopence, anyway. 2289. I see that on the 6th February milling-wheat is quoted in Sydney at 2s. 6£d. to 2s. 7id. ?—Yes. 2290. Was the quotation very much less in Lyttelton ?—Not much less—2s. 4Jd. to 2s 6d. Of course, you have to take the prime wheat. If it was prime wheat it would be worth 2s. Bd. f.0.b., Sydney. 2291. These quotations are from the local papers. If that is a fair quotation, and it is a quotation from the local Press, the wheat is of higher value for flour-making purposes ?—No, not New
127
A.—4
South Wales. I told you Victorian and South Australian. I do not think New South Wales is better, if it is as good. 2292. The evidence at Invercargillis that it is better? —I do not hold with it. 2293. Have you had anything to do with the milling of Australian wheat ? —No, only with handling it. No milling experience further than one picks up in the trade. 2294. Is it not a fact that bakers can make a larger amount of bread from Australian flour than from southern flour?—l said Victorian and Adelaide wheat, which is very dry, does make more bread per ton of flour, not New South Wales wheat. There is a difference in the value of these wheats. 2295. Is the quotation for wheat in Melbourne materially higher than the quotation in Sydney?— Yes, and in Adelaide too. 2296. Do you know to what extent ?—About Id. a bushel generally ; just the difference in quality between the two places. 2297. You mean to say there would be no danger ?—None whatever. 2298. Not of competition with Australia?— Absolutely none. 2299. Is it not the fact that before the protective duty was put on the northern mills were mostly supplied with Australian wheat ? —That is so long ago I could not say. Possibly the developments were not so great as they are to-day. I have seen wheat come in from San Francisco to Auckland even in the face of duty. It does not do any harm ; it is when values are inflated, and it is a good thing that it can happen. 2300. You were talking about the probable increase in the export: is there not also a chance that there may be an import of grain ?—No, absolutely none. 2301. Do you think the export of wheat, the increased export of wheat, really would amount to very much?—No, I do not think so. 2302. To Australia?—No, not very material. 2303. Well, then, gutter: I suppose you know the four colonies of Australia are large exporters of butter now ?—Yes. 2304. That South Australia, Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland are large exporters of butter?— Yes. 2305. Are we likely to get an increased market there, except as such markets arise from droughts and scarcities—temporaiy things that we should supply in any case ?—lt is quite likely not. It is a thing very difficult to say whether we will or will not. 2306. But we are talking about probabilities ? —I think, taking the probabilities, that we will. Judging from the trade done to-day, I should say we would get an increase of trade. 2307. Notwithstanding that Australia as a whole, and even every colony of it—every important colony of it—is now competing in the English market with us ?—Yes, notwithstanding that, because we get a fair trade now. At the present time there is quite a fair trade, with some more than others, and it is only reasonable to assume that that trade will be kept up. It is one of the anomalies of trade. You can find wheat going from here to Lyttelton, and wheat coming from Lyttelton here. 2308. Would not that go on in any case?—l think it would if we could leave things as they are ; but I am presuming that by opposing federation we should have a duty put on against New Zealand, you understand. 2309. Of course, that is an assumption ?—Yes, that is an assumption. 2310. Is it not the fact that at present Australia is shipping to us a larger amount of goods than we are shipping to Australia?— That I should be very much surprised to learn. 2311. Well, the figures are about £1,060,000 of all New Zealand produce, excluding gold, to Australia, as against £1,300,000 shipped from Australia to us ? —Does that include under bond shipments ? 2312. Oh, yes ; but our exports to Australia under bond are given. Do you think that Australia would make a tariff deliberately intended to boycott the New Zealand trade, in face of the fact that we are such good customers of theirs?—Oh, well, that is a question that is really beyond me. Ido not know what action they might take at all. 2313. But may we not be scaring ourselves with a bogie so far as this boycott of New Zealand trade goes ?—No, I do not think so. I think there is more in that than perhaps we allow. I think there will be a friendly hand held out to us if we go into federation, and if we do not I think there will be the reverse. Very likely we shall be met with duties all round. 2314. You think they would regard our trade as not woith having to them—that they would wish to boycott it ?—They might not look at it that way, but to have protection to their own farmers. They are protected very highly in Victoria just now. I think it is only right to assume they will reduce that, and make a compromise with New South Wales. 2315. Are you aware that already, notwithstanding the protective tariff of Victoria, we are sending goods to the value of £200,000 and upwards to Victoria—New Zealand goods of one sort or another?— Yes, I should quite think we were. 2316. Well, that amount is not likely to be decreased, is it?—No, I should say not; but then it might be largely increased by doing away with the duty. 2317. In what item is it likely to be increased?—Oh, well, cheese, for instance, I should think would be very largely increased. 2318. Although it is a dairying country?— Yes. 2319. What other item ?—Seeds—seeds, I think, are likely to be increased. 2320. Is there any duty on seeds in Victoria? —None now. 2321. Then, why should that be increased?— Simply through the increase of business between he two places. 2322. On what other item ?—Well, I should think, on the whole general trade—on the woollen industry, for instance; but that is not within my particular function.
A.—4
128
2323. Oats —do you think they would send oats there ? —No, I do not think oats would increase to any great extent, except in dry seasons. 2324. You think Victoria now, in oat-production, is placed on a permanent footing ? —I think, practically so. 2325. Then, you cannot specify any more definitely in which we should increase our exports ? —No, I think not. Of course, there is Western Australia again. It is a very difficult matter to say how federating with Australia would affect us. We can only give impressions, and my impression is that trade would develop very, very soon, and would go on increasing ; but I cannot give more than my impression, because it hinges very much on what action they take, if they do go in for federation singly and apart from New Zealand. 2326. Then, with regard to manufactures, I judge you are a Free-trader on principle ?—Judge I am a Free-trader ? 2327. From your evidence. You do not believe in the protection of manufactures?— Well, I do not know but what I do believe in protection if you can do it; but one must not forget the fact that, while we place a duty on all English goods coming in here, we get free access to the London markets for all our produce. Now, that is not fair. Britain might easily put a duty on all our products, and if that was done we should be practically swamped. 2328. But does it not suit England to take these raw products? —Well, I suppose it does. 2329. Do you suppose that England takes our products for our benefit or for their own benefit ? —For their own benefit, undoubtedly. 2330. Can you tell me of any country—any important country —apart from England, that does not protect its manufactures?—No; but perhaps New Zealand can go the length of unduly protecting hers. 2331. You said the effect of protection here would probably be "dry-rot"? —I think, very probably. 2332. Has that been the case in any Protectionist country you can mention ? —I do not know that I said so much the present protection policy as the present policy. Of course, Ido not mean to cast a reflection upon anybody, but Acts are passed on the idea that the people here are bound to give a certain wage per day—say, Bs. for eight hours—and you can get ten hours' work done in Germany for 4s. When the difference is so great Germany can pay freight here, and perhaps 20 or 25 per cent, duty, and compete against us. The only hope for legislation such as New Zealand is surrounded with to-day, in my opinion (it is evidently an attempt to elevate the white races—the Anglo-Saxon race, if you like), is for it to be made general. New Zealand will find a difficulty in standing alone. 2333. Then, your objection is not so much to protective duties as to the social legislation of New Zealand? —To the legislation being ahead of the times a little. That is the way I should put it. 2334. But we have had manufacturers here who have given evidence, and we have not had one of them who has complained seriously of the effect of the labour legislation ?—No, as long as we remain alone; but if we federate they all say it does affect them materially. 2335. Pursuing that a little further, do you think federation would break down our present unique system of labour legislation ?—I certainly think it would partly break it down. It would break it down until you got the other portions of the Commonwealth up to it, which I believe ultimately would be the result. 2336. But what would be the immediate result ?—I believe the immediate result would be just as Protectionist Victoria has to back down to a certain extent, and Free-trade New South Wales has to come up to a certain extent, so it would be with our New Zealand labour laws. 2337. Then, you think the immediate result would be to lower the remuneration of labour to the Australian level ? —Yes, or to introduce perhaps longer hours and have the same pay; but not to any exaggerated extent —to a partial extent. 2338. You mean, really, to bring us down to the Australian level at first ? —I think, not so far as that. New Zealand might bring them up to a certain extent. 2339. Although they are in the majority?— Yes. 2340. Do you think it would be a good thing for the New Zealand population to be brought down to a lower level ?—I would not put it " brought down to a lower level." Ido not like it put that way. I think it would be a good thing. I think people get off very much too easily. 2341. They are too well off ?—I did not say " too well off." 2342. You think they do not do enough work for their money ? —Yes, compared with other countries. I approve of plenty of leisure for every man; but you cannot go ahead of certain times ; you cannot rush right ahead of other countries. 2343. Is it not the fact that this country is thriving at present ?—I think so, undoubtedly. 2344. That it is increasing in wealth? —I think it is. 2345. That there is a wide diffusion of prosperity ?—Well, might I ask you one question: Who is the hardest labourer in it ? The farmer. 2346. Is not the farmer a prosperous man?— Yes, he is. 2347. In what way do you anticipate benefit from a lower general'status?—l do not think there would be a lower general status. It would increase the farmer's wealth a little if for anything he requires he had to pay a little less, and if he got more labour for the wage he pays. 2348. I think the testimony of all the large manufacturers here is that their industries would be destroyed under intercolonial free-trade. If that were true, and the working population were either unable to produce as largely as they do now, or were driven from here to Australia, where they would find work, would not that be a great disadvantage to the farmer?— Well, if New Zealand is naturally a producing country more than a manufacturing country, I do not hold that it is within the power of man to make her a manufacturing country. It seems impossible. You
A.— 4
129
might lose a great number of men, if you go in for federation, in manufacturing ways, and you might largely increase the number in agricultural ways. I think that is quite possible—loss on the one hand and gain on the other —and I think the gain there would be vastly superior to the loss. 2349. Do you think that a larger area of land would be put under cultivation ?—Yes. 2350. And that more people would be employed farming if there was no manufacturing population to consume their products than if there was such a population: is that the conclusion ?— No ; but it is quite possible to produce a larger volume of raw products here, which would go to Australia to be manufactured, than would be manufactured here as things at present exist. 2351. You think that if the working population was shifted to Australia they would eat New Zealand produce ?—Yes. 2352. And you think New Zealand would progress ?—Yes. 2353. As well under that system as it is doing at present?—l think New Zealand would progress infinitely better than it is doing at present, if the matter of finance is satisfactorily arranged. That is the point. lam satisfied that, as far as federation is concerned, a great deal hangs on how the finances are to be dealt with, because I recognise, as you were instancing this morning, that the formation of a continental railway in Australia might result in New Zealand paying a share without any benefit to be derived therefrom. These points, I think, are more political points than commercial, and this is not one I should like to speak of ; I do not know sufficient of it. 2354. Then, your mature judgment is that we could face the destruction of our manufacturing population with perfect equanimity, in the hope that we might export a larger amount of produce to Australia? —No; I would not put it that way at all, because there are several manufactures in New Zealand that are bound to go ahead with federation. My own opinion is that it is only those factories that are unduly held up that would be inclined to go down. Take the iron industry, for instance: what one man loses another gains. If shareholders can build dredges for less sums through federation, you must admit that is a gain to the dredging industry, though it is a loss to the manufacturer. It is a difficult point to arrive at, which is the greater loss or gain. 2355. Could you mention any industries in which we are likely to become exporters ? —You had one this morning, such as the rope- and twine-works. I should say that would. Of course, it never does to speak positively of these things without actual knowledge, but flax is a New Zealand product, and that industry, I think, would increase ; and our woollen industries I should also expect to increase. 2356. Eeferring to what you have said about the large undertaking in Australia, have you considered at all the financial effects of federation ?—No—well, very little ; not sufficiently to express any opinion upon them. 2357. Mr. Beauchamp.] You are aware that Australia is a large wheat producing and exporting country ?— Yes. 2358. Have you any idea of the quantity of wheat grown in Australia ?—Oh, I have an idea that it is very, very large. 2359. I can give you the figures. Eoughly speaking, it is 40,000,000 bushels, against New Zealand's 10,000,000 ?—Yes. 2360. From most of the quotations I see for various parts of Australia, flour in Sydney and Melbourne seems to be always cheaper than in New Zealand : have you noticed that ?—Yes, I have sometimes noticed it. 2361. That is the ruling value ?—Mind you, flour goes from here to Australia. 2362. But I think, generally speaking, it is cheaper there ?—I would not like to say " generally speaking." • 2363. But frequently ?—Yes. It is not generally cheaper—wholesale prices are sometimes given against retail. 2364. Presuming the freight from Sydney to Wellington to be the same as from Dunedin to Wellington, is it not likely that intercolonial free-trade would lead to the importation of flour, and very prejudicially affect the milling industry of this colony ?—lt has no right to—it cannot. 2365. Why ?—We have facilities for growing wheat here better than they have in Australia. If we like to increase the labour laws, to make the employes' wages greater or the hours smaller, and at the same time the farmer has to pay more for labour, and the Union Company pays higher wages for labour, so that the cost of everything in production to delivery is greater, it would cost more, you understand, to land our flour in Wellington from here than from Sydney. 2366. Your idea is that by reducing wages you would enable the manufacturer—the millers— to make flour cheaper, and that we could compete ?—We can compete even as it is. 2367. In that case it is simply at the expense of the working-class ?—I do not like it put that way. It is not the way I intended. The impression might be that I objected to the labouringclass being well cared for—getting a full day's wage. That is not so. What I have said, or intended to say, is that I do not believe New Zealand can go alone advancing the wages of labour as she is doing. Ido not believe it can be done alone. I believe we can do it with the whole of the English-speaking race, or with a great portion of it, but not alone. 2368. You admit that in this colony trade is prosperous, and that the industries have greatly developed during the past two decades: is it desirable to do anything now that would interfere with the monetary position of the working-classes ?—Well, of course, the question of federation is one so vast that we cannot look at advantages that are of a momentary kind. Take, for instance, a year or two ago : Last September twelvemonths the amount of produce lying in New Zealand was extraordinary. If it had not been for the South African war coming on it is hard to see what the result would have been. The quantity sent there relieved us of enormous stores of grain and other produce, and that has helped materially to produce the prosperity of New Zealand more than any one is aware of. 17—A. 4.
A.—4
130
2369. I gather you are under the impression that our trade with Australia is of much greater importance than it actually is?—l admit that, if the total trade with Australia is only £1,000,000 annually, it is less than I anticipated—that is, if it includes transhipments. 2370. Well, the figures supplied are substantially correct. You thought the figures were larger?— Yes. 2371. And that probably caused you to conclude that federation was of greater importance than it is ? —No ; I think, undoubtedly, the trade will increase between here and Australia. 2372. You laid stress on the fact that there would be increased shipping facilities, and that our trade would be greatly stimulated?—l think so. 2373. Have you any idea of the development of shipping and commerce for the past two decades ?—lt is very large. 2374. The figures are as follows: Take, for instance, 1880 as compared with 1899—the shipping inwards and outwards for 1880 was 1,516 vessels, with a tonnage of 819,716; and for 1899, 1,213 vessels, with a tonnage of 1,619,049; or, practically speaking, just double the quantity of that for the year 1880 ?—ls that with Australia ? 2375. With the whole world. Take the commerce of 1880: The total exports and imports were £12,514,703; the total imports and exports for the year 1899 were £20,677,968. What I want to bring out is that without federation, I think you will admit, our shipping and commerce has been greatly developed, and is hardly likely to have a greater development under federation. That is the view I take; Ido not know if you coincide ?—No, Ido not. You are speaking now of the total commerce, which is nearly all New Zealand to Britain. You take the one-million exports to Australia, and it leaves the rest—Bo or 90 per cent. —to Britain, which has gone ahead in an extraordinary manner. 2376. But I understood from your remarks that you were of opinion that shipping had not developed at the rate it might have done under federation ?—Between here and Australia only is what I meant. 2377. I have not the figures here, but I am inclined to believe the development is in about the same ratio ?—I think it would give us facilities for shipping to Manila, China, Japan, and Singapore, and all those markets, through being in the Commonwealth, and that we will have to face one of two things: either to be cut out of the trade altogether, or to specially subsidise New Zealand steamers to establish a trade with so many ports; and the question is whether the trade would be sufficient to enable us to do that—for many years, at any rate. 2378. Have we, in your opinion, lost any important trade through the absence of those shipping facilities ?—Yes, I think there is no question that we have. 2379. Therefore you would approve of any proposal in the direction of subsidising by this Government a line of steamers to run regularly from here, for instance, to South Africa ?—Yes, I would. 2380. You think that would meet the case partly?—lf asked on that subject, I would like to say that some boats have been put on, but it is impossible for people in business to get in communication with South Africa if they are told a boat is leaving in two weeks' time. What is required is that a list of boats should be fixed for a matter of two or three years. The people here would have the opportunity, with the knowledge that boats were fixed for two years, of going to South Africa to establish a trade. 2381. I think you have referred to the advantage of being able to ship once or twice a week : do you not think a boat once a month would provide what is wanted?—l am afraid you misunderstand me. I meant between here and Australia, so that we could catch all transhipping boats. 2382. Is not the demand at Manila simply due to the American war? —Yes; but I think it will go on the same as with Africa and with all the eastern countries. They are going in for wheat and produce grown in the Australian Colonies. 2383. Have you carefully read the Commonwealth Bill?— No. 2384. So you could not express an opinion whether it is wise or unwise to federate under the present conditions of the Bill?—No; I think it is a matter of politics. The whole thing, in my mind, is the question of finance. I would willingly go in for federation : the difficulty is to be satisfied on the matter of finance, administration, and other matters. 2385. That being so, you would not countenance or recommend a leap in the dark ?—I am not going to recommend it, because I am not conversant with it. 2386. Well, we ask you your opinion ?—Well, I never leap in the dark, so far as I am concerned. 2387. Mr. Millar.] In the light of the evidence you have at the present time you do not believe in federation : you say you would not make a leap in the dark ?—-That is not the way I put it. I did not say Ido not believe in federation. 2388. Do I understand that you, from a commercial point of view, do believe in federation ?— Most thoroughly, from a commercial point of view; but I qualify it by saying lam willing to admit the grave responsibility politically before undertaking the step. 2389. Your reason is that the advantages to accrue from federation would outweigh any disadvantage?—l think so; yes. 2390. You have heard stated the value of the exports to Australia at the present time: you anticipate a large increase in that ?—Yes. 2391. Would you presume it would be doubled?— Yes, I should think so, and more. Mind you, I am not looking one or two years ahead, but in the distant future it will be far more than doubled. 2392. Well, within the next twenty years you would anticipate it would be doubled ?—Three or four times over.
131
A.—4
2393. "What lines do you think would go?— What lines? 2394. I understand you to say you expect no increase in oats ?—Not momentarily, but finally. There is no accounting for the interchange of products. You get cocksfoot coming from Taranaki to Dunedin, and going from Dunedin to Taranaki; from Christchurch to Dunedin, and from Dunedin to Christchurch. The same thing applies to Australia :we are sending flour from here to Australia. 2395. Is it not the fact that the only reason you are shipping to Australia is that it is your best market?— Yes. 2396. Presuming a market opened in South Africa, a better market than Australia, what then would be the value of the Australian market to you ?— -A market opens up in South Africa ? 2397. Yes; a better market in South Africa than in Australia, where would you ship to?— Well, it is hard to say. It is hard to see that a good market in South Africa prevents a good market in Australia. 2398. As a business-man, where would you ship to? —One would ship to the best market, but it is hard to tell which is the best market. We cannot have too many markets. We want both Australian and South African markets open to New Zealand. 2399. Does South Africa produce very much of what we would ship there?— Well, I have never been there; but from what I have'been able to learn from the people who have been, I should say No. 2400. Australia is largely going into that market?— Yes. 2401. Well, Australia and ourselves produce very similar products ? —Yes. 2402. Therefore, if the market for wheat was better in South Africa, the probability is that the Australian market would not be so good for us ?—That is quite possible. If New Zealand stands out of federation, and a protective duty is put on by Australia against New Zealand, I think we should have a better chance of holding the South African market than if we federated ; but this would not recompense us for losing Australian markets by any means. 2403. Then, that market, to all intents and purposes, would take the place of the Australian market, which we have at the present time ?—I think we need both of them. 2404. What I want to get at is this : that, having federated, if we do, we shall have gone in wholly and solely for the benefit of one particular class—for the benefit of the commercial class, or for the benefit of one particular portion of the industries—the commerce of the colony, and that having departed ?—No, Ido not think we should do that. Ido not approve of that. Unless federation is in the interest of the whole Colony of New Zealand, Ido not approve of it. I think it will be, commercially, much in the interests of New Zealand. 2405. That is what I want to get at?— But I hold it is. You hear, perhaps, this or that manufacturer, who comes here with certain knowledge, and speaks against it because it affects, himself. Ido not want federation for my sake, but for the sake of the producing industry, and I have no money involved in the producing of anything. My investment is in produce stocks, which are readily saleable. 2406. Have you any idea of the manufactures of the colony ?—None. 2406 a. Would it be a surprise to you if I told you the value of the manufactures of the colony is approximately £13,000,000 per annum ? —You mean the total output ? 2407. Yes?—l would, not be surprised; but Ido not hold that it is going to abolish these manufactories. Ido not agree with that. I think it will perhaps make the profits of a few less, and send a few to the wall, but the harm done is very small compared with the good that must result. 2408. You are aware that now, with our protective duties, there are certain lines in many industries in which there is competition from abroad and from Australia?— Yes—well, Ido not know; but that being so shows very conclusively that somebody is paying too much for these goods. For any section of the community to gain by the bolstering-up of protection there must be a certain number of lines on which people are paying a higher price for that production than they should. One must not lose sight of it that, if that is so, in the leather industry, for instance, somebody is paying too much. Leather is an industry that is natural to New Zealand. We have the hides and everything else here, and I do not see why New Zealand should not be able to turn out boots as cheaply as Australia, unless it is a matter of wages, and I explained that before : that we might overpay people, and get into, as I expressed it, a condition of dry-rot. 240y. Has history not shown us that the most posperous nation is the nation that has the greatest purchasing-power ? —I do not know in what way you mean to apply the words. 2410. That the more equally wealth is distributed, the greater the purchasing-power of the people, the more prosperous the nation ?—Yes, I should say so. I quite approve of that; but Ido not approve of going too fast, because I hold we cannot go faster than other people around us. We must all go on to a certain degree together. 2411. Then, the labour legislation, which you state is hampering industries, came into effect in 1894? —Yes, and later years up to the present. 2412. In 1895 the number of hands employed in factories was 29,000 ?—Yes. 2413. And in 1900 they were 50,000 ?—Yes. 2414. Has the colony ever been in a more prosperous condition, within your recollection, than it has been in during the last five years?—No; but then we must not forget that that may be through other causes. In my opinion, it is through other causes. 2415. What are the other causes? —Well, I take the value of land as a gauge of the prosperity of a country, and how it runs up and down. The value of land is gauged by what it can produce and what that produce will realise, and I suppose it will be about eighteen years or thereabouts that the land was very high; the boom burst, and things began to come down, and many and many
A.—4
132
a family in Otago had to leave the places they had spent the best part of their lives in practically penniless. There were companies that had advances against these places ; they really were banks with reserve funds made in good previous years, all of which had to be written off, which allowed other people to buy in at low prices, which started their prosperity. 2416. Was the farming community better off when the boom was on ?—There was not a farming community then as now. 2417. It was young?— Yes. I have followed it closely, because I was a farmer myself at the time. 2418. Is not the home market —not the English market—the domestic market—always the best market for the farmer?—Oh, I think so, yes. 2419. If you reduce the population of the colony through any injury to its industries you will reduce the domestic market for the produce of the farmers ?—I do not think the effect upon New Zealand, supposing it did federate, would be to reduce its industries except to a very small extent. I do not think it would continue reducing them. 2420. But you do not know ? —No, because the colony is firstly a producing one. 2421. Yet I have shown from a manufacturing point of view it has developed most rapidly during the past five years? —That is the raw products possibly. The producer brings that. 2422. The demand is there for it ?—F.o.b.? 2423. No; to be worked vp —we have the firms to work it into leather?— That is the best market. 2424. Therefore the more we increase that the better it will be for the farmer?—He can pay too dear for it. 2425. Has he paid too dear for it?—l do not say that he has. They can overpay for their boots. 2426. They pay more for boots, but in return the workmen buy their butter?— Yes. 2427. And we know the difference between the home price of butter and the manufacturers' price ?—I agree with the argument if you get more than New Zealand to go in for it. If New Zealand goes alone it will end in disaster. 2428. But it has not.so far ?—No. 2429. I did not gather what you meant about the hours of- labour : was I wrong in understanding you to maintain that the people of the country worked too short hours to enable them to compete against nations ? —Well, from the meagre information I have, I hold ij is so; not that it is my desire they should work longer. 2430. Is not that answered by the very fact I pointed out—that our factories are increasing the number of their hands all the time?—No; I think we are going through years of prosperity. I think these are matters over which we can have no control. 2431. Do you consider the people ought to work longer hours to enable them to compete with the other side ?—I am only giving my opinions. Possibly they are not very correct, but I have given them, all the same. There are such things as olives, for instance, that can well be grown here, but not in competition with Spanish labour. Wages in Spain are very low, and they can afford to grow olives and send them here cheaper than we can produce them. Thus an industry is lost to us, and that is what I want to show. 2432. I understood you to say that the necessaries of life were more expensive than they would be under free-trade ?—Well, by the extent of the duty put on them, I should say. 2433. Would it surprise you to find out that in Melbourne the necessaries of life are cheaper than they are in Sydney—that is, that they are cheapest in the most highly protected country there is in Australia?— Yes. 2434. I have a list of the necessaries of life showing that eleven articles are cheaper in Victoria, as against seven in New South Wales, and that three are the same price—all necessaries of life ? —Well, that does not speak too well for the prosperity of Victoria. 2435. It is a fact ? —lt is most extraordinary. 2436. But, unless you can see some very great advantage to New Zealand trade from federation, you would not advise federation from a commercial point of view ?— I strongly advise federation from a commercial point of view; but I qualify that by saying I consider it is for the political heads of the colony to look very carefully into the financial aspect of the question. That is my view of federation. I think we have very much more to gain commercially than we have to lose by federation. I feel satisfied of that. James Eobeetson Scott examined. (No. 47.) 2437. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—l am a produce exporter and commission agent. 2438. In business on your own account ?—Yes. 2439. How long have you been in business here?— Since about 1878. 2440. Do you know Australia at all?— Yes. 2441. Lived there?— For a short time, both in Sydney and Melbourne. 2442. Have you given consideration to the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia?— Yes, I have read about it. I cannot say that I have given it very great consideration, except from my own point of view. 2443. So far as it affects your trade?— Mainly that. 2444. What is the conclusion at which you have arrived in that respect?—-Well, I have come to the conclusion that, so far as our trade is dairy produce, it would not affect us to any very great extent whether we federated or not—that is to say, I presume federation would mean free-trade, and, of course, I hold this, both in my own branch and in everything else, that New Zealand has nothing to lose by free-trade.
133
A.—4
2445. Will you explain your reasons for that conclusion?—l said just now that I did not think it would affect us very much, and my reason for saying so is this: that in our business our main trade is with Great Britain ; both for butter and cheese our trade is with Great Britain. 2446. Then, of course, that is out of the question ?—lt is very little we send to Australia. New South Wales is free-trade, Queensland has large protective duties, Melbourne the same, and South Australia the same, and Western Australia, which does not produce any cheese at all, has duties, too. The trade with Australia in dairy produce is very fitful and changeable. Some years we do a good deal, and some years very little. It entirely depends upon the weather in Australia. If they have droughts they are compelled to take a large quantity of produce from us, duty or no duty. If they have a good season, Sydney and Melbourne ship to London, but under a heavy protective tariff they can feed themselves, and they have commenced, not long ago, to do an export trade in butter. If a drought comes in all these colonies, prices rise, and, notwithstanding the duties, we export to them; but in ordinary seasons Melbourne and Sydney can produce as cheaply as we can, and, generally speaking, they have a very large surplus to export to* England—that is, in butter, but not in cheese. 2447. I understand the advantage you consider New Zealand would gain would be free-trade ? —Yes. 2448. Is there any other advantage you see would accrue to New Zealand by federating?— No, I cannot say there is. 2449. Do you consider that is a sufficient advantage to justify New Zealand parting with its independence ?—No, I would not like to say so; certainly not. 2450. Have you considered the political aspect of the question at all ?—I cannot say I have, and I would not consider myself competent to judge. I leave that to the leading politicians to deal with. 2451. Not having considered that, do you consider yourself in a position to say whether it would be wise or not for New Zealand to federate with the Australian Commonwealth?—-Well, I am perfectly certain of this : it would certainly benefit the farming community, and they are by far the largest interest to be considered in the colony. The farmers—the producers—of the country, I think, would be greatly benefited, and I maintain they ought very largely to be considered. They are the backbone of the country, and I think should be considered. 2452. Oh, yes, they should be considered, no doubt; but what about the manufacturing industries ? Have you considered the effect upon them ?—I do not think it will affect in the very least any industry that is really a bond fide industry. It will not affect them at all if they are really industries that should be carried on here. Of course, if industries are to be carried on under heavy protective duties, and by means of the heavy taxation of the people of the colony, then that is a different thing altogether. John Lethbeidge examined. (No. 48.) 2453. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Lethbridge?—l am the Dunedin manager for the firm of Dalgety and Co. (Limited), and have resided in New Zealand about eighteen years. 2454. The firm of Dalgety and Co. (Limited) have considerable business transactions in New Zealand?— Very large. 2455. And in Australia?— And in Australia. 2456. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?—l have given very little consideration to the question, and it seems to me a very large question to be called upon at an hour's notice to give an opinion upon. Speaking of it in a general way, lam not prepared to give' an opinion; but from a trade point of view, so far as I have been able to consider it, I am in favour of it. 2457. Have you given considerable attention to it? —No, I cannot say I have; but I have gone into it from a trade point of view. 2458. So far as you have gone, will you tell the Commission the conclusion at which you have arrived ?—Well, as a Free-trader, I welcome anything from a trade point of view that enlarges the area within which free-trade is carried on. I hold this view, and I have always held it. I consider that if we had free-trade with a large continent like Australia, where the business must always be increasing to a very large extent, that would be of great advantage to a small country like this. 2459. Then, on the ground of free-trade you think federation would be an advantage?—l think it would, if that was the only point of view. 2460. But have you considered the financial view so far as it affects this colony and the Commonwealth of Australia ?—No, I have not done so ; and there may be large national points of view of far more importance than the question of trade, so that trade questions would have to give way. 2461. Have you considered the question of the independence of the colony ?—I am not prepared to speak on that aspect of the question at all. 2462. Have you formed any opinion whether the obtaining of free-trade would be a sufficient consideration for this colony sinking its independence and becoming a part of the Commonwealth ? —There might be weightier questions than questions of trade which would tend in the other direction ; and I would not set questions of trade alone against, possibly, national points of view which may be of more importance 2463. Mr. Luke.] Then, you think it possible your opinion might be modified when you have looked more thoroughly into the political aspect of the question ? —I have not formed an opinion a all on the general aspect of the question. I only speak from a trade point of view. 2464. You think free-trade might be purchased at too dear a price ? —Certainly.
A.—4
134
2465. You think it important we should have some control of our finances and the political management of our country?— Certainly ; but, so far as lat present understand the question, we should not give that up altogether, though we had federation. 2466. It would be considerably diminished?—lt-would be diminished. 2467. Hon. Captain Russell.] You think it would be for the benefit of trade if we federated with Australia ?—Yes; I think the wider the market you can get the better for the trade of a country, both from a commercial point of view and from a manufacturing point of view. From a commercial point of view I could not specify many articles, but I can think of one that specially affects this part of the country, and that is oats. We have a large production of oats in this part of the colony, and certainly, if we could have free-trade in them with Australia, it would be a benefit to some to that extent. 2468. Do you know what portion of the trade of New Zealand is done with Australia?—No, I cannot say that. 2469. You know, of course, that a very large preponderance is with England ?—Yes, certainly. 2470. Do not you think it possible, then, that federation with the Commonwealth may perpetuate a protective policy against the rest of the world?— Yes, it might have that effect. I certainly would like to see, if we could have it, free-trade the whole world over; but I should be better pleased with half a loaf than with no bread, and I should prefer to see free-trade within a bigger area than we have at present; and that we should have if we federated with Australia. 2471. But do not you think it possible the policy of the Commonwealth will be to exclude, as far as possible, all trade except what can be done within its own borders ?—To a large extent I should be afraid of that, although the fact that New South Wales has been so strongly in favour of free-trade may modify that policy. 2472. But if we were allied by federation with Australia we should be compelled then to adopt their protective policy if they chose to have one ?—Certainly. 2473. And, judging by the position in America, is it not natural to assume that the Commonwealth of Australia may adopt a somewhat similar policy ?—I do not know. We have Canada, which has not yet, at any rate, gone the length of the United States. A purely British community such as the Commonwealth might not follow the United States. To some extent, certainly, the tendency, I am afraid, would be to have a considerable protective tariff. 2474. In other words, a majority would be against trading outside the Commonwealth, and we should be tied up in a protective tariff with the Commonwealth ?—Yes. 2475. Would that advance free-trade ?—lt would advance free-trade within the States. With regard to the outside world, it is doubtful, in my mind, whether we should have under federation a higher protective tariff than we have at present in New Zealand. It is a considerable protective tariff we have now. 2476. But if nine out of ten parts of the trade is done with the outside world, and but one part with the Commonwealth, the question of free-trade in its broadest sense is not materially affected ? —No, I do not think it would be. 2477. Hon. the Chairman.] You said you would like to see free-trade universal ?—Yes. 2478. If that were so, do you think the manufactures of this colony could compete against those of Germany and America ? —Those that are most suitable to our soil and climate would be fairly well protected by freights and other charges, and should be able to compete. The only difficulty, of course, is the question of wages; where you have cheap wages in the Old Country it might affect it. 2479. Do you think there is any hope of wages in New Zealand being as cheap as they are in the old countries of Europe ? —I do not think so. Of course, in certain industries we might not be able to compete, and those industries might have to fall out; but I believe that any industries that could be raised under free-trade would be strong and healthy, but that those brought up under protection, especially a heavy protection, are merely hothouse plants, and die out the first time you take away that protection, unless they have other qualities that will sustain them. 2480. In that view, probably you think that many of the industries that have so far been established in New Zealand, if free-trade was adopted, would languish and die ? —Those that were most suitable to New Zealand would continue and increase, and those that could be carried on better in Australia would die here, no doubt; in the same way, anything that was most suitable to Australia would thrive there; but, as we have the more temperate climate, which has a great deal to do, I think, with manufactures, I think that New Zealand would stand in a very good position to become a large manufacturing country if it had a large outlet, such as it would have in the Commonwealth. 2481. Do you wish to add anything further to what you have already mentioned?—No, sir. John Macfaelane Eitchie examined. (No. 49.) 2482. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Eitchie? —I am a merchant, the manager of a company, and a general agent in Dunedin. 2483. How long have you lived in New Zealand ?—Thirty-six years. 2484. Have you resided in Australia?— No. 2485. Have you watched the progress of federation in Australia ?—ln so far as reading the newspapers is concerned, I have watched what has been going on. I have never had anything to do with politics, and I have never been a member of Parliament. 2486. Have you formed any opinion as to the advisability or otherwise of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth of Australia?— Yes. 2487. Will you kindly state to the Commission the conclusion at which you have arrived, and the reasons for it? —I am in favour of it. I have so much confidence in the capabilities and advan-
135
A.—4
tages—advantages both natural and otherwise—of this colony that I want to see her placed on the same footing as all the other States in connection with this new nation that is being formed on this side of the world, and the large population that it contains. 2488. What are the special advantages which you think would accrue to New Zealand from joining that Federation ?—Well, I think the natural advantages which she possesses in climate, fertility of soil, abundance of water, and all the rest of it, are such that she must have the advantage in the long-run in everything relating to production, both from the soil and from her manufactures, over any of the other States; and therefore, that being so, New Zealand would be bound in the long-run—l do not say at once—to have her full share, and a greater share in proportion to the rest of them, of the advantages that would accrue from the custom of such a large population, freed from any trammels, as would be the case. 2489. Have you read the Commonwealth Act ?—Only a summary of it. 2490. Have you considered the financial aspect of the question—as to the sacrifices New Zealand would make to the Federal Government ? —Not in detail; but, so far as lam able to follow it, it seems to me it practically comes down to this : that we should have to pay for our share of the new government —the General Commonwealth Government; and that, so far as the rest is concerned, it is a matter of detail and adjustment, but that in the end we should not be worse off as regards finance than we are, beyond whatever might be the amount of our share of the cost of the General Government; and we might possibly have a very considerable advantage in the course of time in borrowing money cheaper, if one may judge from what has happened in Canada. 2491. Do you mean the State borrowing or the Commonwealth?— The Commonwealth as distinguished from the State —that is, general loans, which, I believe, are to be taken over by the Commonwealth. 2492. There is nothing about that yet?— Anyhow, on the question of borrowing there would be an advantage. lam not clear about the details. 2493. Do you anticipate that the Commonwealth would borrow for the individual States ?— Only such money, I suppose, as would be required for general purposes. 2494. But not for individual State purposes ?—I do not think the individual States would suffer as regards their power of borrowing. 2495. Do you think they would be able to borrow on more advantageous terms simply because they were States of the Commonwealth?—No, I should not expect that; but I should not expect it to place them at any disadvantage. 2496. Do you attach any importance to the fact that New Zealand would lose her identity as a colony?—I do not quite follow your meaning. do not think her forming part of a large Commonwealth would be any disadvantage to her as compared with her being independent and going her own way by herself. Ido not think it would be any disadvantage to New Zealand ; I think it would be an advantage. It is a sentimental one perhaps, not practical, but it would have a tendency to minimise if not to do away with a great deal of what is parochial in politics. At present one is apt to think, from what one reads, that the aim and object of a member of Parliament is to get the most he can for his district in the way of roads and bridges, and so on. Federation would, I think, have a tendency to minimise that, and to make men take broader views, and perhaps to let them understand in the end that there are more important things than pounds shillings and pence in connection with the government of a country. 2497. If the representatives of New Zealand did take a proper view of political matters, as you suggest, in the Federal Parliament, would it not be likely that there would be a narrower and more parochial view taken of matters by the State Parliament ?—That is possible, unless the feeling of being part of a great nation might operate in a direction away from that. . 2498. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you think the tendency would be for the best men to go over to the Federal Parliament ? —lt is difficult to answer that question. I think it is quite possible. It might be for the advantage of the States, if they see it practicable, to pay the members of the Federal Parliament, in order to make the selection. 2499. They are to be paid £400? —Then, we should have a free choice, as we have at present. Supposing the present system to be the best for getting a free choice of members, we should have the same for the Federal Parliament. 2500. Do you think the best men would be tempted to go to Australia to attend the Federal Parliament, or would abstain from one cause or another?— Well, if the honour and dignity operates, as it is likely to operate, more in a large Parliament than in a smaller one, as it must do, if we are to judge from what happens at Home, I think probably the best men might be tempted to go. It is difficult to say. 2501. Then, if they do, it necessarily follows that you do not get the highest class for your local Parliament ? —Unless we have plenty for both. 2502. If you send the best men away you cannot have the best remain ?—There may be sufficient good men, I should put it, for both. 2503. Is there no danger of the parochial feeling not diminishing even if a Federal Parliament is established ?—There would then be certain things, at any rate, to elevate us into a wider and bigger sphere. I suppose there must always be a certain amount of parochial feeling. 2504. You know there are thirty-nine important subjects upon which the States Parliaments will be unable to legislate ?—Yes. 2505. Do not you think that would have a lowering tendency upon our public men—that they would be little more than members of County Councils or Eoad Boards ? Do not you think it would dwarf the energies of public men if they felt that so many important subjects would be taken away from them ?—I think that would be balanced by the fact of our having to consider these important subjects in the Commonwealth Legislature. 2506. But not in the local Parliament ?—That would necessarily have its field of operations narrowed.
A.—4
136
2507. Therefore the probability is that the men who remained in the State Parliament would not be men of such a high standard as those who now belong to the Parliament, or who may belong to the Commonwealth Parliament?—lt might be argued that would be so, but I do not know that it necessarily follows. 2508. Do you not think there is a considerable danger of a divergence of opinion being created between Australia and New Zealand, seeing that all the States of Australia are coterminous and we are very widely separated? —I do not think so. The distances in the United States, and even the distances in Canada, are much greater than the distance between here and Australia. 2509. But they are all coterminous, are they not? —They are separated by land instead of by sea. Ido not know that there is very much difference in that. lam inclined to think that what is very much wanted here, as soon as it can become commercially possible, is larger and speedier steamers between here and Australia, and that may be helped and furthered by federation very considerably. There would then be a sort of pressure in that direction which it would be very difficult to resist. Of course, at present it means that somebody has to pay for it, the thing itself will not pay; but then something might be done in that direction. Even the tendency to be drawn together more which would be imparted by our being within the same Commonwealth might tend to better and increased communication, and so on. That would lead to the advantages which we desire. 2510. The fact is, there would be difficulties in the way of access to Australia ?—Certain difficulties. 2511. Do you not think that an important factor in the matter?—l do not know. lam told that it took about ten days longer for members of Parliament to reach Auckland in the early days of the colony than it would for them to reach Australia now. 2512. And provincial feeling was very strong in those days, was it not? —I suppose it was. 2513. Much stronger than it is now ?—Yes. 2514. Then, we may presume provincial feeling will exist between New Zealand and Australia ?—lt is possible. 2515. You say you think an advantage of joining the Commonwealth is that we should be able to borrow cheaply : to what extent do you think that will be an advantage ? —lt was only a passing remark. I have no very fixed idea on the subject. I said that possibly there might be the advantage of money required for general purposes being got cheaper under the Commonwealth than not. 2516. To what extent ?—I cannot say. believe the difference between Canada's borrowings and New Zealand's is somewhere about -J- per cent, at present. 2517. Our last loan was floated at 3 per cent. ?—Yes; it fetched £95, or something like that. 2518. And the rate of Consols is at present 2f —something under the hundred ?—Yes. 2519. Then, if there is such a small difference between borrowing at the present time and English Consols, is there much margin between the Commonwealth and New Zealand?—No; I do not think it would be very much, but I dare say it would tend to grow. They seem to prefer at Home these large States that become strong, and look strong, and have a large variety of capabilities and capacities to fall back upon. 2520. Do you imagine the amount of money to be borrowed by the Commonwealth for general purposes would be at all equivalent to the local loans we are likely to want for the opening-up of our country and the purchase of land ?—No, I suppose not. I am sorry to say I have no very clear ideas about the details of the finance at all. 2521. You know the Commonwealth has the first grip upon the Customs revenue, and further powers of taxation if necessary ?—Yes. 2522. Very well; will not all State loans be somewhat in the nature of a second mortgage only?— No. 2523. Seeing that the Customs revenue is what we have to pledge ?—The point that seems clear in the matter to me is that what the Commonwealth retains, or what we do not get back in some form or other, is only our share of the cost of the General Government itself, and the cost of such services as they take in hand, which, it may be presumed, would not be more than the cost of that service to the State. 2524. But it does not improve the nature of our security, does it ?—I do not think it would have the opposite effect. The assumption is that all the Commonwealth would do would be for the benefit of all the States individually, subject to the paramount consideration of what is for the general benefit. 2525. Have you thought of the question of Federal defence —as to whether that would benefit us materially ?—I should think so. I have always felt that the more that is concentrated and dealt with under a general plan the better, and, probably the cheaper, we are likely to have it. 2526. I suppose you will agree that naval strategy will be independent altogether of the Commonwealth? —I do not know. It is very difficult to say. I could not give any opinion upon that. 2527. But you will, I suppose, agree that for a very long period of time we must depend primarily upon the Imperial squadron for naval defence?— That is so, no doubt. 2528. And therefore they would take comparatively little notice of anything the Commonwealth might wish? —Until the enemy lands, which is unlikely. 2529. Do you imagine it possible they would land ? —lt is within the bounds of possibility ; and then, I presume, we should have to fight them ourselves. 2530. Then, if that day comes, do you think it possible that, England having lost command of the sea, we could send troops to Australia, or they to us ?—But troops might have been concentrated before that. At any rate, I cannot imagine any occasion on which we should be at a dis-
137
A.—4
advantage in the matter of defence through having joined the Commonwealth, and it is probable there would be advantages. 2531. One wants to hear the distinct advantages to be gained before one abandons one's isolation ?—I could not say much on that point. 2532. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] With regard to distance, Mr. Eitchie, is it not always the case that sea-distances make a very much greater difference in the character and management of nations than land-distances?— Possibly. 2533. Where States are coterminous ?—Possibly. 2534. Is there any instance in the world of any constitutional government carried on, any federation between two States so separated by water? —I believe not. There is a good deal that has been done by New Zealand lately of which there is no other instance in the world. 2535. But do you think there will be any great divergence in type and feeling between countries so situated, as to climate and distance, as New Zealand and Australia ? —I do not know that distance makes any difference in that respect, but the character of the country people inhabit largely influences them. 2536. Do not you think an island population differs a great deal from a continental one ?— Yes; but I think the advantage lies with us, and that therefore we are the more likely to have the pull when the time comes. 2537. Yes; but we want to see whether the larger number that will have the same instincts will not very much outnumber the people of this country? —Yes, that is possible; but there is a large divergence of character and disposition in the Commonwealth already, quite as much between Queensland and Victoria as between Australia and New Zealand. 2538. With regard to belonging to a great nation, does not our greatness or importance in the world depend on our connection with the Empire rather than with any part of it ? Would it make any difference in our position in that way? And, as to the feeling that would widen the minds of the people, would not the feeling be one of belonging to the great British Empire rather than that we are part of a Federation which is connected with the Empire ? —I dare say that is so; but, speaking for myself, I should feel, I think, if this country were left out of the Commonwealth, that we should be left a great deal out in the cold; I should feel as if my surroundings were cramped, and that the important State in which we live was narrowed a bit. I should like to look over the wall and see what they were doing in that large country, and to have a say in it if I could. 2539. As we are considering questions of that sort, is there not a certain advantage in there being two Powers in these seas —separate British Powers, I mean —with a view towards Imperial federation in the future ? With a view to connection with the Empire, is it not well that there should be two Powers here? because New Zealand will be the greater Power in proportion to her size ; its power of carrying population will be very large compared with Australia. Will there not be a certain advantage in having two Powers, so to speak, watching each other, so that there would be more likelihood of there being no coup d'etat, no sud-den difference with the Old Country, and so on ? The most important thing for the colonies, for their safety, I take it, is the holding-together of all parts with the Empire : is that not so ?—-That is true ; but I do not see that there would be any advantage gained, either to the Empire or to parts of it, by two or three separate parts holding on to the Empire, as distinct parts, as distinguished from one large homogeneous part holding on to the Empire. 2540. We all know that democracies are subject to sudden gusts of passion: if one Legislature or Government were suddenly to get into a quarrel with the Old Country, the other one would hesitate to carry out a division, if they had not taken part in it, if there were two Powers instead of one-: is there not something in that? — I could hardly give an answer to that. I think probably anything desired in that direction would be better fought out by the Federal Parliament than by independent communications between independent colonies and the Old Country. 2541. Mr. Roberts.] I understand you to say that the climatic and other advantages which New Zealand possesses would give her a pretty full share of the advantages of federation ?—Yes. 2542. I take it, in that you refer mainly to the productions of the country, particularly the productions of the soil?—No, I would not confine it to that. I think the conditions of life here are better than the conditions of life in Australia, and that the advantages the people who live in this country have in the way of generating energy, and matters of that sort, would give the advantage to our manufacturers. 2543. You have no fear that the farmers, at any rate, would suffer any disadvantage ?—No. 2544. Would you have any fear that the manufactures would suffer?— Not in time. 2545. Because we have it strongly in evidence at the present time that anything in the shape of the export of manufactured articles, even on an intercolonial free-trade basis, could not be carried on ?—lt is very difficult to prophesy what might happen. So far as I have thought the thing out, it seems to me that if we have the advantage as regards our conditions of life we should have an advantage in producing, and that with that advantage in producing we should be able to compete upon more than equal terms with our neighbours over there, and perhaps have an advantage greater than the freight, which would be our only handicap. 2546. Still, as the scale of wages is higher or the hours of labour shorter than in Australia, it has been given in evidence that our manufactures would not, under the existing circumstances, be able to compete with the Australian manufactures, but you think that would rectify itself later on ?—Yes. 2547. Theirs would increase?—Of course, as a Free-trader, I have no faith in any industries that are exotic. I think if they have to be supported by contributions from the mass of the people it is only a question of time when they will flicker out and die. 2548. Another name for that would be "protected industries"?— Yes; I have no faith in them—that is, in industries which owe their existence to protection. Ido not mean to say that 18—A. 4.
A.—4
138
protection for a time and to a certain extent does not apparently give an advantage, but in the end it will not, according to my opinion. Therefore it seems to me that that view of the question does not come strongly into the case. 2549. Mr. Millar.] I would like to ask Mr. Eitchie if it is a fact that capital gravitates to the largest centres of population ? —I do not think so. 2550. Not for manufactures ?—I do not think so. 2551. Has not that generally been proved in older countries?—l do not think so. 2552. Could you mention any case in which capital has become diffused in industries ?—ln what way ? 2553. In a general way, has not there been a concentration of capital upon one or two big industries in a particular part?—l do not think so. Take, for instance, the Old Country : There has been a huge industry begun, continued, and made to prosper enormously at Belfast, where the capital for that particular industry was not concentrated, where even the workmen were not, but where other conditions—the energy of the people, and other things—brought it there in spite of these drawbacks. 2554. You think a large amount of capital would be invested in New Zealand in industries, when New Zealand has a population of 850,000 and Australia a population of four millions ?—1 should not be surprised to see capital drawn here, and industries that do not lead a very flourishing existence in Victoria and New South Wales become flourishing here, because the conditions attaching to our country are better in every way. 2555. Are the conditions of manufacture better here than in Australia?—l think so. 2556. What about coal, one of the vital factors ?—The industries in which coal is a vital factor would be drawn where coal is cheapest, but there are many other things that tell the other way. 2557. What are they ? —lndustries relating to products of the soil. Coal may be necessary, but is not a vital factor always. 2558. The frozen-meat industry?— The frozen-meat industry is an instance, and there are the industries connected with the manufacture of woollens. Coal is not a vital factor. 2559. These principal staple products of this colony would not be affected one way or the other by federation ? —You mean to say our natural products would not be affected ordinarily; because every four, five, or six years they get a great many things we have to supply. 2560. It is only in a time of shortage that they take from us ? —lt happens very often. 2561. Now, out of this great continent there is about two-thirds that will not be any good?— In what way ? 2562. It is tropical, and will not be inhabited by white people ?—Tropical countries have their uses. 2563. It would really want a different class of labour to develop it ? —I do not know that that is proved. I cannot speak of it. 2564. Do you know of any industries developing in tropical climates ?—I notice, as far as my reading goes, that some people think they will, and some think they will not. As a matter of fact, the United States has large areas of tropical and sub-tropical country which seem to have advantages—in fact, they have advantages. 2565. But it is pretty well all coloured labour that is employed, is it not ?—I suppose it must be. I suppose the negroes are the chief labourers there. 2566. If they have two-thirds of a large continent worked by what we look upon as alien races, do you think they should have equal rights with others? —-I am afraid I should have to think over that. ■ I do not think they should have, but I really could not pronounce upon that. 2567. They have in America?—To a certain extent I believe that is so, and that there is no disadvantage from that. 2568. Yes, I believe there has been very strong objection taken to it in America; but, if the Japanese and Chinese race peopled the northern part of Australia, the question is whether they should have equal rights to come down amongst our people ?—I should not think so. They have not equal rights at present. There is legislation to keep them out, and that might be continued. 2569. If legislation kept them out, then two-thirds of the continent would be allowed to remain idle ?—-Yes; if you do not cultivate it, itr would be. 2570. So that you limit considerably this large continent, the trade to which you were looking to open ?—But the Federal Parliament might admit coloured labour for all I know, and make the tropical country a great success. 2571. Would you have a hard-and-fast dividing-line over which they should not come, or would you allow them over the States ? —I could hardly answer that question ; but Ido not see the disadvantage to a large continent from the fact that it might be necessary to have coloured labour on a certain part of that continent. 2572. Would it not come into competition with white labour?— But you say it would not. 2573. Would you draw a dividing-line, or give them the right to go over all the federating States ? —I could not answer that question ;itis a question for the Government. 2574. It is a question we would have to consider ?—I do not know. The Government would be expected to do the best for all the States within the Federation. 2575. Do you think the social condition of the workers in Australia is equal to that of the workers in New Zealand ?—I have no information on that subject. Ido not know. 2576. If they were not, our federation with them would mean one of two things : our people would have to go down to their level, or they would have to rise to ours?— Probably there would be as much chance of one as of the other. 2577. Judging from the past, there is not much prospect?— That is where New Zealand might give a helping hand to other workers to their advantage.
A.—4
139
2578. Would they have any power to influence them?— Certainly, in every way ; to leaven the whole lump. Mr. Millar: That is what they say, but I have my doubts. 2579. Mr. Beauchamp.] You have a great opinion of the natural resources of New Zealand ? —I have. 2580. Do you not think it is sufficiently self-contained to enable it to take a good position among the nations of the earth without becoming an appendage ?—Yes, I think so; but I do not think it would become an appendage, but an integral part of the Commonwealth. 2581. Do you not think that, as a separate entity, a portion of an Empire such as Great Britain, she would hold a better position ? —No. 2582. I take it you recognise the chief benefit to be derived from federation would be the gain to trade ?—Yes; I hold that trade is the paramount influence over all—politics and everything else. That trade is not an appendage of Government, but Government of trade, and therefore that, if the commercial advantages are great, all other advantages would necessarily follow. 2583. Of course, you know what proportion that trade bears to the whole, that it is less than a tenth ?—Yes. 2584. Do you think it would be wise to risk some of our important industries with the view of expanding that trade ? —I do not think that is a fair criterion. We have practically only had trade with New South Wales. If we had markets in Victoria, Western Australia, and Tasmania, the volume of trade might be very different. 2585. But from one remark you made you seemed to think the demand chiefly arose from adverse climatic conditions, so that if we do not federate I take it we shall do a large trade with Australia ?—We should probably do the trade we are doing, but would not do more, because we should have a tariff; but for that we should do a great deal more. With federation, if we have a tariff wall set up against us, the wall will be complete; whereas there has been a breach in it hitherto in New South Wales. 2586. Under inter-free-trade, do you not think that one portion of the Commonwealth would be able to supply another that was affected by adverse climatic conditions ?—I question if any of them would have the advantage we have in supplying certain commodities. 2587. In other words, we should stand a chance of getting a fair share of trade, federation or no federation ?—Well, it might be said that if they have a tariff the wall will be complete, and we should be much worse off. If they have free-trade we should be better off then, even if we do not join them. 2588. Have you given consideration to the question of our liability in respect of some great works that are proposed by the Federal Parliament, particularly in respect of the construction of a great trans-continental railway, and the development of Northern Queensland? Have you considered how we are likely to benefit by those great works ?—I have assumed it would be no business of ours. 2589. But that we should be called upon to bear the cost of those works ? —No. 2590. Do you know as a fact that we would be called upon ?—-No, I do not know that. 2591. Assuming it to be so, do you not think it would be to the disadvantage of this colony to be compelled to bear a portion of the cost of such works ? —lf we have to bear a portion of the cost of works which could be of no advantage to us, of course to that extent it would be a disadvantage. I did not understand that that was so. 2592. Have you noticed that since the establishment of the Commonwealth Australian stock has declined, while New Zealand's has remained firm ? —They are always rising or declining. I do not think such a fact as that can be spoken of as an advantage by one country over another. 2593. You cannot explain the reason for New Zealand's advancing and the Commonwealth's declining?— No. Perhaps ours were too low before. 2594. Do you think, in the event of an enemy attacking either New Zealand or Australia, that, with or without federation, we should help one another? —I think that very likely. I laid more stress upon a common plan, directed by one set of officers and tending towards a common end. 2595. In your opinion, there would be some benefit by their being defended by one Government practically ?—Yes. 2596. Mr. Luke.] I think I understand you to say the main factor—the reason why we should federate —is trade ?—To a very large extent. 2597. You have read Mr. Mackenzie's opinion, given yesterday, as to the political aspect of it ?—No. 2598. Mr. Mackenzie thought the predominant reason was political, and that that was a very strong reason why we should not join ?—I noticed that he waived aside entirely the question of trade. I look at it from exactly an opposite point of view. 2599. Can you account for so little trade being done with New South Wales under the conditions that exist?—l do not consider it small, considering the few articles to which it is limited. 2600. Two or three main articles ?—Chiefly what comes off the ground. 2601. You do not think we are likely to suffer from intercolonial free-trade under federation because of the distance and the cost of freight?— That would always be, to a certain extent, a handicap; but lam inclined to think our natural advantages would counterbalance everything. 2602. But some of our industries may be driven to the wall ?—lf they are on a sound foundation they would not be, and before long things would adjust themselves. 2603. Looking at it from the political side, what prospect would, say, fifteen members in a Parliament of ninety have upon the question of the expenditure of public money, of seeing that we got a fair proportion ?—I understand each State would be left to expend its own public money.
A.—4
140
2604. But in the expenditure of moneys controlled by the big Parliament: they contemplate taking over the railways ?—Of course, this has been threshed out before the States federated. The assumption we should proceed on is that the Federal Parliament would not legislate to the distinct disadvantage of any one of the States. 2605. Would not this condition of things possibly arise : that in the great Continent of Australia there would be public meetings and political influence brought to bear, and, as those who make the greatest clamour often exercise the most political influence on Parliament and Government, would Australia not be likely to predominate over a State like New Zealand, so far away from the seat of government ?—I do not think so. 2606. Mr. Leys.] Have you not seen, Mr. Eitchie, that Mr. Barton has already announced as part of the Federal work the construction of great trunk railways and the development of the Northern Territory ?—No, I did not notice that. lam not quite sure that I did not see it, but I could not understand it. I think I read it once, but am not sure. The effect produced upon my mind was that only the States that would be affected would have to contribute to the trunk railways. It did not strike me that trunk railways over the Continent of Australia would have anything to do with New Zealand. 2607. But if New Zealand had to pay for those railways should we reap any advantage?— I should say it would be unjust, unless some advantage attached to them which I do not know of, and cannot very well imagine. 2608. The Commonwealth revenue is derived entirely from the Customs; they may impose direct duties, but at present they derive their revenue from the Customs. If they engaged" in these schemes that the Commonwealth are undertaking, should we not pay our share of taxation towards them ?—I should not expect us to unless there was an advantage to us in connection with them, which I can hardly imagine. 2609. It was stated by Mr. Barton, in the course of an interview, that he considered New Zealand would be benefited by a trans-continental railway in Australia in the matter of defence: can you see that —in the concentration of troops ? —lt is difficult to see it, but it might possibly be so, for all I know. 2610. Do you not think, looking at the experience of other countries, such as America, that the Federal Government will engage in a large number of schemes that will absorb the whole of the Customs revenue in time ?—I should not expect so. 2611. But is not that the case in the United States, and with fewer powers ?—Not , that I am aware of. 2612. Do the States get the Customs revenue ? —I do not suppose they do; but there are a large number of States that cannot possibly have Customs revenue of any kind or description, because they are surrounded by land. 2613. But, as a matter of fact, does not the United States Government use up the whole of the Customs revenue of that country for its own purposes ?—I cannot tell you. 2614. But that is the fact, is it not ?—I do not know. 2615. Now, is not the first duty of any new country like this to develop the resources of the country : is not that the first work in all new countries?— Well, yes, I suppose so. 2616. Do you think that under federation we are likely to develop our resources better than we are now doing with perfect control both over our revenues and our laws ?—I do not see why we should not develop them as well if we joined the Federal Parliament; quite as well. 2617. If a large portion of our revenue is diverted to great schemes in Australia, shall we not suffer to that extent in the development of our own resources ? —I have already said that we should be at a disadvantage if we are asked to pay money for which we can get no return. 2618. Should not that be carefully looked into ?—Certainly. I have assumed that that is something that is not likely to happen. 2619. Apparently, it has already happened?—l am not aware of it. 2620. If that is the case, would you be prepared to recommend New Zealand to go in for federation —with that risk ?—Well, I do not think there is any risk. 2621. But, if there was such a risk, would you be prepared to recommend that we should go in for federation ? —lt would depend upon the extent of the risk—what it involves. 2622. I suppose you have visited Australia pretty often? —Yes. 2623. Do you not find a community of interest and public feeling pervading the whole continent ; and, as compared with the interests of Australia and of New Zealand, do you not find a wide divergence between the public opinion of Australia and the public opinion of Now Zealand ?— Upon what subject ? 2624. Upon general subjects. In every way, do you not find identity of feeling in Australia; and, as to New Zealand, do you find they know anything about it ?—Know anything about New Zealand? 1 suppose they know just about as much of us as we know of them—that is, the general public. 2625. But is that much?—No; it ought to be more. I should say the general mass of the population in Australia do not know much about New Zealand, any more than we here know of them if we have not visited them. 2626. Does not that go to show that a division by sea is a more serious division than you were disposed to concede in reply to the Hon. Mr. Bowen ?—I do not see that division by sea is so material. I question if the people of Victoria do not know less of Queensland. It is merely a matter of huge distances, it does not matter whether by sea or land. 2627. Of course, you are aware there was great hesitancy on the part of Western Australia to come into the Commonwealth on that very ground ? —I am aware of that, but it was overcome. 2628. Yes ; but was it not overcome on a sort of understanding that the trans-continental railway scheme was to be brought about? —Well, that might have had some weight.
141
A.—4
2629. Do you not see a community of interest on the continent in which we have no share, and can never have any share ?—No, the reverse is the case. I should think there is more antipathy in some things, and in a good many things between New South Wales and Victoria, for instance, than between New Zealand and the States of Australia. I hope and believe that will be overcome now by federation, and I think it would be if New Zealand federated with them. 2630. I do not mean the difficulties arising out of border duties ?—There have been jealousies about many other things. 2631. You cannot recognise any community of interest in Australia that we do not participate in ? —No community more than that they are members of the same Empire, and are ready to stand together under certain circumstances and not under others. 2632. No community of interests ?—No, rather the reverse. 2633. Hon. the Chairman.] Which of the Australian Colonies do you consider stands first in the matter of manufactures ? —I am afraid I could-not answer that question. 2634. You know they have been developed very largely in Victoria, do you not ?—Yes. 2635. And that has been under a policy of protection ? —Yes, it has been; but Ido not know that they have been successfully developed. I have heard very many complaints about the industries of Victoria—many more than I have heard about the industries of New Zealand. 2636. Does Victoria export her home manufactures very largely? —I am inclined to think she did not, but I would not be sure. 2637. Mr. Beauchamp.] Just bearing on the question of protection :in America, of course, manufactures have been much bolstered up by protection ? —Yes. 2638. Is it not a fact that America claims now to lead the steel trade of the world ?—Well, the last papers I had from Home state, since the price came down, that Scotland has it, and that the Americans are out of it all together. I think a few .millions' worth go over occasionally, and the most is made of it. 2639. You attribute the diversion to America to the fact that England had more than she could overtake ?—Yes ; that is what is told me. Edwaed Bowes Cabcull examined. (No. 50.) 2640. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name ?—Edward Bowes Cargill. 2641. How long have you resided in this provincial district?— For forty-four years. 2642. You were one of the earliest settlers ? —No. I came ten years after the foundation of the settlement. 2643. You have seen a great deal of the settlement of this part of the colony?—lts entire growth, I may say. 2644. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia?—ln a general way. 2645. Will you give the Commission the benefit of any opinion you have formed ? —I am forced to the conclusion that New Zealand must sooner or later join in with the Commonwealth, and that it would be greatly to the advantage of New Zealand if she did so. I cannot understand New Zealand standing out by itself when amalgamation is the general tendency throughout the world. We have seen elsewhere contiguous States united together, notably those of Canada, the elements of which are more diverse than those of New Zealand and the Australian Colonies. We should be in a very disadvantageous position if we remained out of the Australian Commonwealth. 2646. You mentioned Canada, but Newfoundland has not joined that Federation?— Newfoundland has hung out for some time, but Lower Canada and British Columbia are separated by very long distances, and have very diverse interests. 2647. What do you consider would be the advantages to New Zealand by joining the Commonwealth?—l think, for one thing, it would be a great advantage that we should have free interchange of produce and manufactured articles between every part of the Commonwealth; that it would be mutually advantageous to sweep away the Customs and taxation troubles, and have free interchange of commodities all round. It would certainly be a much more economical way of dealing with our produce to have it freely distributed and extended in that way than to go on in the restricted manner of the Customs, as at present. 2648. You are aware that New Zealand would have to make a very large contribution from the Customs revenue towards the expenses of the Federal Government ?—Of course, if New Zealand joins in the Commonwealth she must contribute her proportion of the expenses of the Commonwealth Government in common with all the States, and it must be a first charge on the New Zealand revenue. 2649. Do you think the money for that purpose should be raised through the Customs ?—That seems a convenient source to take it from. 2650. Do you think that the people would consent to contribute it through the Customs ?—I do not see how the people could object. 2651. Beyond the advantage of intercolonial free-trade, can you suggest any other advantage to New Zealand from joining the Commonwealth ? —We should, I think, occupy a better position amongst States as part of the Commonwealth than as an isolated colony. ' We should have the advantage of being united with all the others in all those matters which are common to us, and in which our interests are the same. 2652. At present there are differences in the laws —divorce, and so forth—between New Zealand and Australia : do you not think we are in a better position than they are in that respect ?— However that may be, I think we should be all the same, and not have one law here and another across the sea in territory belonging to the same people. 2653. You would not wish that, if the laws enforced in Australia were worse than our own?— I cannot assume that they would be worse. The united wisdom of the best men from all the States should bring a result of better laws.
A.—4
142
2654. Did you read the evidence given by Mr. Scobie Mackenzie before this Commission? —No. 2655. What do you think of New Zealand sinking her identity as an independent colony by joining the Commonwealth?—Of course, we should sink our position as an independent colony. We should become a State instead of a separate colony. 2656. Do you think that is not too great a price to pay for the advantages you have mentioned ? —I do not think so. 2657. Mr. Leys.] Do you think it possible for New Zealand, under any conditions, to make greater progress than it has made in the past ? —I do not know. 2658. Has it not been marvellous the extent to which this colony has grown up in the development of agricultural and manufacturing resources ?—Yes. 2659. Has it not been due to its control of its own affairs, and its ability to use all its powers in the development of these resources ? —That and the energy of the colonists themselves. I do not know that any of our leading industries have been due more to the Government ordering of things than to the industry and perseverance of the people themselves. 2660. Do you not think there is a danger of diminishing that complete control of our resources and destinies ?—lt does not appear to me to be so. 2661. Do you see any absolute gain in government or administration to be obtained for New Zealand by joining the Federation ?—I am not prepared to define or to state more than my general ideas. Ido not think we have before us sufficient details to enable us to judge how it will work out on all points. 2662. It may be a leap in the dark to some extent ?—To some extent it may. 2663. Do you not think our position as a member of the British Empire will always overshadow any local alliance we may make with a neighbouring colony ?—That is always the first factor; but I think the title "Federation" is a misnomer. The British nation is all one great Confederacy. " Federation " as regards the Australian Colonies is not a word that should be used. I think " amalgamation " is the right term. All the States were originally one, and because of the difficulties of distance and want of communication they were separated and made into different colonies. The time has now come when distance has been annihilated, and they come together again for mutual assistance and strength. We were originally joined to New South Wales, and it is a question whether we should stand out and be different from others now. 2664. Do you not think we may lose some of our individuality ?—I do not know. We are all one people, with one Sovereign, one supreme Parliament, one supreme judicature, one language, one religion, one everything. Ido not know that we want to be too distinct. 2665. That will be so whether we federate or not ?—Yes. 2666. Mr. Beid.] Is it not a fact that Otago owed its development to the Provincial Government, and not to the General Government ?—That is a very difficult question to answer. Unquestionably the first development of Otago was under the Provincial Government, but then the Provincial Government went rather wide in the matter of finance. All the Provincial Governments borrowed money, and not very wisely. It was thought heie by some that in abolishing the provinces we were improving matters very much, and others thought it was disadvantageous, because local administration was too much interfered with. For my part, I always looked upon it that there was a great advantage in drawing all the finances together to one centre. As it was, we were running on to ruin from the extravagant use of borrowing- and spending-powers in half a dozen separate and irresponsible centres. 2667. You are aware that there are divergencies in our laws, and these difficulties would not be eliminated simply by our joining the Commonwealth ?—I presume they would be ultimately. 2668. Hon. Captain Bussell.] You said it was desirable that we should form portion of a large people : is it not probable that we, as a race, shall grow into the most populous country in Christendom ?—We are bound to. 2669. Is it not reasonable to assume that the population of New Zealand will grow into half of the population of England ? —lf we go into that question we will find ourselves landed in very big calculations. 2670. Our country is capable of carrying half the population of England, at any rate?—lt is very hard to say. I suppose this country should contain a very much larger population than it does. 2671. In area, we are the same size as England, Scotland, and Wales: may we reasonably suppose that some day we will carry twenty millions of population?—We are bound to increase very rapidly, although the progress has not been so great lately as formerly. 2672. If, then, England was the greatest Power at the beginning of last century, may we not in future see a great Power before us ?—I suppose so, if the people are properly governed. 2673. Is it essential to our growing into a big people that we should be allied to Australia ?— That seems to me a very narrow view. If we have a good property here, there is no reason why we should seek to keep it all to ourselves. 2674. But you would agree that we shall have the potentiality of a great people ?—No doubt. 2675. And, therefore, if we remain out of the Commonwealth we need not exactly be an insignificant State ?—We should exist, and go on and prosper. 2676. But could we grow into as populous a State as England was at the beginning of the last century ?—I presume so. 2677. Was she not a gigantic Power at that time ?—Yes; but I do not see that these two things necessarily follow. It does not touch the question of the Australian Colonies growing in the same way. All parts of the British Dominion are bound to grow enormously. If the people increase as they are doing just now, there will not be standing-room on the face of the earth for the English-speaking population.
A.—4,
143
2678. I was just asking whether we should be an insignificant State or not ?—By no means. 2679. You were alluding just now to the Federation of Canada: are you aware that there is a strong feeling in Canada against Imperial federation ? —That is the old French element there. It has always been a little bit troublesome. They maintain their positions as aliens in race and religion. 2680. You know such is the case?— Yes. 2681. You narrated to us the conditions which led to the disruption of Australia: that was because they were not close enough for having Central Government ?—Yes. 2682. Are we not more remote than any portion of Australia was ?—No. 2683. The distance between Victoria and Sydney is how great?— Only five or six hundred miles, but there were then no roads, or steamers, or telegraphs. 2684. And between Brisbane and Sydney ? —ln the same way the communication was very difficult. 2685. But it was the question of the distance which brought about the separation?—l believe so. That was the principal thing, and the growing-up of local interests beyond the control of the distant centre. * 2686. In other words, they wanted to have government under their own eyes ? —I suppose so. 2687. Can we ever have the government of New Zealand under the eyes of the people if we join the Commonwealth?— The local government of the colony will be left pretty much as it is now. We will have the management of local affairs, public works, education, and all that is necessary for the good government of the country. 2688. You know that there are thirty-nine questions which are considered the most important in the matter of government that have been reserved for the Commonwealth : that surely takes away the greatest power of our Government from it ? —To be sure it does. 2689. Do you not think that would tend to dwarf public questions ?—lt, might tend to improve them. All those subjects might be better conducted if the united wisdom of the other colonies was brought to bear upon them. 2690. But the State's Government in which we are interested, would that not be dwarfed by the fact that thirty-nine matters are taken away from our cognisance ?—I cannot think so. It is taking a poor view of the intellectual capacity of the future. 2691. Have you taken notice of the constitution of the first Federal Government?— Yes. 2692. Have you realised, then, that every State has given its best men away from the State Government to go to the Federal Government?— Sir Eobert Stout, in an article contributed to a review, impressed upon the different States that they should be careful not to make too little of their States, and to put their best men into their State parliaments as representatives. But, really, if we are to be denuded of all capable men by sending one or two over to the Commonwealth, then it is a poor prospect for us. lam not prepared to put so poor a value on our capacity as a people. 2693. Is there not a tendency for the best men to abandon the State Legislature and go into the Commonwealth ?—I suppose there are other able men to be found in the States. 2694. But the fact remains that the men chosen for Premiers of the Commonwealth States have abandoned their States to go into the Federal Government ? —Yes; but why they were the best men in the States I cannot say. 2695. It is certain that they have abandoned their States to go into the Commonwealth ?—lf we have the best men in the Commonwealth they are not likely to do much mischief.
CHEISTCHUKCH. Monday, 18th Febeuary, 1901. Gboege Gatonby Stead examined. (No. 51.) 1. Hon. the Chairman."] What is your name ?—George Gatonby Stead. 2. What are you ?—-A merchant in Christchurch. 3. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Thirty-four years and a half. 4. Are you acquainted with Australia at all ? —Yes ; I have visited Australia many times. 5. Have you taken any interest in the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I naturally have taken an interest in it, but Ido not know if I can give an opinion of very great value. I know a good deal about the export trade of New Zealand to Australia. 6. We have that principally in statistics ; what I want to know is whether you can give us any help in considering the question of whether it is advisable or inadvisable for New Zealand to federate with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—Well, I have come to the conclusion that if the principal benefit New Zealand is to derive from federation with Australia is an increased market for our natural products, then I think the results would be very disappointing to New Zealand. I have been an exporter for over thirty years, and I have watched the exports to Australia very carefully, and I have arrived at the conclusion that there is very little hope of there being a material increase in the exports to Australia, and for this reason : I think before long Australia will produce all that is needed for her own requirements. I remember towards the end of the sixties, or the beginning of the seventies, that New Zealand exported a large quantity of oats to Victoria. Ten years later the export of oats had lessened; twenty years later they were smaller still; and at the present time New Zealand practically exports no oats to Victoria. Victoria now grows all she requires for herself, and has been exporting during the past year to South Africa. The same remarks apply, to a great extent, to New Zealand exporting wheat to New South Wales. This export has fallen off very materially within the last few years, and at the present time the export of wheat to New South Wales is practically nil.
A.—4
144
7. You consider that the ceasing of the export of oats to Victoria has arisen from production in Victoria, and not to the imposition of the duty?—l have no doubt that the imposition of the duty first stimulated the production of oats in Victoria, but if any one notices present prices they. will see that the price is as low almost in Victoria as" in New Zealand, which seems to point to the fact that Victoria can produce oats as cheaply as New Zealand. 8. Is there any of our products besides oats that will be interfered with by federation with Australia ?—I do not know that I said the production of oats would be interfered, with by federation. What I intended to convey was that those who anticipated an increased market in Australia would be disappointed. 9. You think the establishment of free-trade with Australia, so far as fostering an increase in trade with Australia, will not realise the expectations of the people of New Zealand?— That was my opinion. No doubt at the outset we would find an increase, but to what extent it is impossible to say ; and in the long-run we would be disappointed, because, so far as I can judge, Australia is producing nearly all her requirements in such products as we have in New Zealand. Take butter: As we all know, they a/re exporting butter very largely from Australia. A few years ago we exported butter there to a very considerable value. Barley, again, used to be exported in large quantities to South Australia, and now we export to there practically none. We export a certain quantity of malt, onions, potatoes, and other odd products, and no doubt we will continue to export potatoes; but, generally speaking, Australia is producing its own butter, hams, bacon, wheat, and oats, and if no other object is to be gained or no other benefit to be looked for than increase in exports New Zealand producers would be disappointed. 10. Speaking still on the commercial side, can you mention any advantage which, in your opinion, would accrue to New Zealand from federating with Australia?—l have failed to discover any branch of commerce in New Zealand that would be benefited to any considerable extent by our federating. No doubt it would facilitate trade to a limited extent, but not to a considerable extent. 11. What do you think would be the effect upon the manufacturing industries of this colony in the event of New Zealand federating? —I am disposed to think that, so far as the wage-earners are concerned, the tendency would be rather to reduce the wages of the workers here to the level of the workers in Australia ; therefore, on the whole, I think the New Zealand workers would not benefit by federation. 12. Do you think the New Zealand factories would be able to compete with the larger firms and the greater centralisation of manufactures in Victoria ?—lt is more than possible we would be able to compete with the Australian factories as regards our home market, but I fail to see how we would be benefited to.any great extent. 13. Have you considered federation in its financial aspect?—l have been unable to satisfy myself to an extent that would warrant me in publicly giving an opinion. 14. Mr. Barton says the Federal Government will require eight millions and a half a year ?— Yes, I have noticed that. 15. Do you not think that indicates that a very considerable contribution will be required from this colony ?—On the whole, I have come to the conclusion that if we federate we would find our taxes increased rather than decreased, but I have not sufficient data to warrant me in giving an authoritative opinion on the subject. 16. Have you considered the matter from the political standpoint ?—Well, I am of opinion that the social legislation in New Zealand during the past ten or fifteen years has, on the whole, been for the benefit of the workers, and I cannot help thinking that, if we federated, our social legislation would be retarded rather than advanced. It seems to me that, if we had representatives from the Federal colony meeting together, instead of hastening social legislation, it would tend to check it. Of course, it entirely depends upon our attitude regarding the social legislation whether that would be an advantage or otherwise. Personally, I think any legislation that results in improving the position of the workers is for the benefit of the community at large ; but, of course, there are others who consider that we are too advanced in our social legislation. That is not my opinion, and therefore I think it would be a mistake for us to federate with Australia, because I believe the tendency would be to retard our social legislation, which so far has been very beneficial. 17. Do you think there will be any difficulty in getting suitable persons to represent New Zealand in the Federal Parliament?—l think not. I should say that we would find our best men would offer their services if we federated. The position would be one of great importance, and would call for the services of the best men. 18. Have you considered how the fact of our being so great a distance from Australia would operate on New Zealand in the matter of government ?—I cannot help thinking that New Zealand would suffer rather than otherwise : First, from the matter of distance ; and, secondly, from the fact that the interests of the federated Australian Colonies, such as Victoria, New South Wales, and South Australia, are identical, but are not the same interests as New Zealand's, and therefore the chances are that New Zealand would suffer. 19. Are you prepared to give an opinion as to whether Mr. Barton's desire for a white Australia is likely to be realised?— J cannot offer an opinion on that subject. 20. Mr. Leys.] I notice from the statistics that there are only 26,641 acres in wheat in the whole of the North Island, as against 243,000 acres in Canterbury and Otago. At present Canterbury and Otago are the wheat-growers for the colony: do you think, in the event of federation, that Australian wheat will come into competition with Canterbury wheat in the North Island? —I think not. I think we can produce wheat in the South Island more cheaply than they can in Australia, and the distance Australia is from New Zealand would be a sufficient protection to the growers in the South Island. There would be imports of wheat, but not to a material extent.
A.—4
145
21. Are the prices of wheat in Australia much higher than in New Zealand ?—The conditions and terms of sale are such as to mislead, to some extent, a non-expert. Here we sell with bags extra, and certain other little trade differences; whereas in Australia wheat is sold with the sacks included; but, making all allowances for the trade teTms, wheat is 2d. to 3d. higher in Australia than in the South Island of New Zealand. 22. Is Australian wheat relatively higher in quality than New Zealand?— The quality is higher than anything we can produce in New Zealand, more particularly if the wheat is to be made into flour to be used in a hot climate. New Zealand flour made from New Zealand wheat is excellent flour in a temperate climate like that of New Zealand, but when sent to Queensland or South Africa the flour gets sour. New Zealand flour is made from wheat ripened in a moist climate, and the flour will not stand the heat in the same way as that made from South Australian wheat, which is ripened in a dry climate. 23. Would that difference in quality counterbalance the difference in price?—To some extent, yes; even now there are bakers who import in certain years a small quantity of Adelaide flour for the purpose of improving the bread. The quality of their flour is better than that of ours ; but, on the whole, the difference in price and the difference in exchange, and other charges, would always be in favour of the South Island to a reasonable extent. No doubt there would be importations, but not to a considerable extent. 24. Do you think the competition through importation of Australian flour would be sufficient to lower the value of Canterbury wheat and flour—to lower the market-price ?—I think the difference in price would be sufficient protection to the southern flour, and it would still retain the northern trade. 25. You do not think the competition would be sufficiently severe to force down the price of Canterbury flour and wheat, which is now protected?—To a limited extent, yes ; but I do not think the Southland trade, to use a phrase, would be " wiped out." 26. Do you think the present duty is not needed for the protection of the New Zealand industry ? —Practically it is not. In certain seasons, because of droughts, &c, there is no doubt an advantage in the duty ; but, on the whole, we have good seasons, and I do not think we need the protection on either wheat or flour. 27. Of course, you know there was a time when the northern mills were almost entirely supplied from Australia?—No, they were never entirely supplied, but they were largely supplied. A considerable amount of wheat was imported. 28. You think the conditions have changed to such an extent that that would not occur again ? —I think so. 29. Do you think the exports to Australia are largely dependent upon the conditions of the Australian seasons —for instance, I notice potatoes to the value of £120,647 were sent from Lyttelton in 1898, and in 1899 only to the value of £26,000 ? —There is no doubt the exports from New Zealand to Australia are very materially influenced by the fact of its being a good or bad season in Australia, but the general tendency in Australia is to increase the production of similar products to those which we export to Australia, and they are beginning to increase the growth of these products in Australia at such a rate that it makes it almost hopeless for us to find a market there, even if we federate. They are producing the same as we are. The chief staple agricultural products of New Zealand are being grown to such an extent in Australia that I think in a very few years they will grow all they require, except when drought or other exceptional causes prevents them. 30. Do you think the credit of the colony in borrowing for State purposes would be depreciated in any way by the fact that the colony, through federation, would lose control of its Customs revenue ?—I should think that the credit of New Zealand would be on a footing with the credit of Australia, and therefore, if the assets of Australia and New Zealand were, so to speak, given in security for State borrowing, it would rather increase our credit than decrease it. 31. Do you assume that the Federal Government would do all the borrowing?— That is what I tried to say in answer to Colonel Pitt. lam not sufficiently conversant with all the details to give an opinion, but I was under the impression that the whole of the borrowing would be done by the Federal Government. 32. You have noticed that Mr. Barton has announced certain great Australian undertakings as Federal work, such as the construction of the trans-continental railway, the construction of artesian wells, and other works for opening up the country : do you think New Zealand would be benefited by such works as those ? —■Nβ. From a sentimental point of view we would be very pleased to see such works carried on, as they will be of great benefit to the Commonwealth, but I fail to see how those works would increase the wealth, comfort, or happiness of the individual in New Zealand. 33. I notice Mr. Barton stated that his reason why New Zealand should be interested in those works, and should assist in paying for them, was that the trans-continental railway would be of great advantage for defence purposes ?—I cannot see how it would assist in the defence of New Zealand if the necessity arose. 34. You would think, then, I assume, that if New Zealand was asked to tax itself for the construction of the trans-continental railway it would be rather an injustice to New Zealand ?—From a selfish point of view we would have every reason to object to it, but from a sentimental or philanthropic point of view we could not object. 35. Assuming that New Zealand is called upon to contribute to such works, would not that materially reduce the power of New Zealand to carry on works necessary for themselves ?—lf we are taxed to provide money for the railway in Australia it must reduce the spending-power in New Zealand for our own works. 36. Assuming, as you seem to do, that the Federal Government will be the chief borrower, do you think we could persuade the Federal Government to borrow for such purposes as acquiring 19—A. 4.
146
A.—4
land for settlement and undertakings of the kind we have been accustomed to go in for in New Zealand ?—That would be difficult to say. Of course, in fairness, they ought to do so ; but, as I put it, there are seven colonies, and with six of them the interests are identical, and different from New Zealand, and it is likely that they would legislate for themselves and forget us. 37. You think, then, we should be safer to retain the control of our own Government so far as to give us an elastic finance in dealing with questions of that kind?— Personally, I have been unable to see what material advantage the residents of New Zealand would gain by federating with Australia. It appears to me that we should be bound politically by the decisions of the majority in the Commonwealth Parliament, and the chances are that those decisions would be for the good of Australia rather than New-Zealanders. 38. Have you considered the question from the point of view of defence ?—I cannot say I have given much attention to the question from the defence point of view; but, on the whole, I should think it would be of value to New Zealand for the sake of defence to be associated with Australia. I think if we were federated, and a broad scheme of defence were decided upon, it would be of a more complete character than New Zealand could hope to arrange by itself. But Ido not think that that advantage is of sufficient importance to warrant our federating. 39. Do you not think the main defence of New Zealand will depend upon the fleet, and that really the Imperial Government will have to arrange the naval defence for a great many years to come?—l think the war in South Africa has taught us that we could defend ourselves on shore if the necessity arises. 40. Do you think there is a likelihood of an independent Australian fleet being organized ?— Independent to some extent; but I suppose it would be an offshoot of the English navy, the same as now. 41. Does that not imply an enormous expenditure on defence by the Federal Government?— I do not necessarily say that the expenditure on defence could be very much more than it is now. 42. Assuming they are going in for the construction of warships and the organizing of an auxiliary fleet, would not that involve an immense expenditure?— Yes; but I was not under the impression that they were going to have ships of war of their own. 43. I assume that from your answer you thought they were going to act independent from the Imperial Government in the way of defence ? —No ; I said they would continue to do as in the past —by contributing to a fleet supported by the Imperial Government—and that New Zealand would benefit rather than suffer in the matter of defence if we federated. 44. Looking at the fact that the Federal Government have entire control of the Customs revenue, and that they exercise larger powers than the United States Government now exercise, do you think it probable that ultimately the Federal Government will use the whole of the Customs revenue for Federal purposes, and leave the States to arrange their revenue by direct taxation ?—I would not like to offer a too decisive opinion on that point. On the whole, I think the results ultimately will be that our taxes in New Zealand would increase rather than decrease if we federated, that the whole of the revenue received from Customs would be required for Federal purposes, and that we should have to supply out of other forms of taxation the whole of the moneys required for our local self-government. But it is difficult for one to form a very decisive opinion on the question of finance, for, as far as I can make out, even the leaders of federation in Australia seem undecided themselves as to the effect of federation. 45. You have noticed the clause dealing with this revenue, compelling the Federal Government to hand over three-fourths of the Customs revenue to the States, is only binding for ten years: would you think that implies that the Commonwealth contemplate taking the entire Customs revenue over ? —I should think ten years was made the limit in order that they might be enabled to modify at the end of that time. But I should not think at the end of ten years the conditions would be altogether changed. If found workable, they would probably continue on the same lines. I cannot see it implies that the conditions will necessarily be altered after ten years. 46. Do you remember anything of the provincial finance in New Zealand ? Originally the condition was somewhat similar, but the provinces received something out of the Customs revenue ? —Yes. 47. Is it not a fact that the Government reduced that amount ?—The financial needs in the early days were very great, and I can quite understand that the General Government required all the funds they could get. Australia, however, differs from the state of New Zealand then, inasmuch as it is very prosperous; and I cannot see that the Federal Government will require the whole of the revenue. 48. Mr. Luke.] You think, from an agricultural point of view, there is no advantage to us in federation ? —That is my opinion—little or no advantage. 49. I see that the margin of difference in trade between Australia and Lyttelton is £83,000 in favour of Australia. You do not think there is anything m the cry that we are losing our trade with Australia —in other words, you think the trade will go on ?— I think there will be no material alteration in the balance of trade between Australia and New Zealand. 50. Turning to manufactures, I think I understood you to say that you think the manufacturers of New Zealand could compete against the manufacturers of Australia : did you mean that we could export to Australia our manufactured goods ?—No; I think our manufactures in New Zealand could hold their own in New Zealand, but I very much doubt if there is any chance of Zealand manufacturers being able to send manufactured goods to Australia successfully to any material extent. Of course, in the matter of odd articles or odd times, they might be able to do so. 51. We have had evidence to the effect that New Zealand workmen turn out a greater volume of work in a day than the average workman in Australia : if that is so, would that not be an advantage to New Zealand ?—lf true, it would be ; but I doubt whether the tradesmen here make more goods than they do in Australia. ■ . .
147
A.—4
52. You do not think that the hotter climate has any effect on the workmen ?■—Not to the extent of altering the conditions of trade by enabling us by reason of the increased output to send goods successfully to Australia. 53. Do you not think that those works where heat is applied, together with the climatic heat, would give the New Zealand manufacturer or workman an advantage ?—I do not think it would to the extent that your question implies. 54. You think one effect of federation would be to reduce wages?— That is going rather far. I would not be prepared to go quite that length, but I would say that the tendency would be more in that direction than otherwise. 55. They are introducing social legislation there now —conciliation and arbitration laws ?—I am aware of that. 56. Do you not think the tendency is to elevate the social conditions of the workers of Australia to the level of those in New Zealand ?—lt might tend to raise the social level of the workers in Australia to the level of those in New Zealand ; but I was looking at it from the standpoint of the New-Zealander, and feared his being reduced to the level of the Australian. 57. You do not think the conditions, if equalised, would benefit the manufacturer here ?—I cannot see that it would to any material extent. 58. Do I understand you to say that the distance we are from Australia is a disadvantage under federation ?—Certainly. I cannot see any material advantage to vs —in other words, I think we may lose, and cannot win, by federation. 59. You think they have a community of interest that does not apply to us ?—To a considerable extent, yes. 60. You have great experience in financial matters: do you not think that if the States continue to borrow for inter-State requirements, that going on the money-market with the great Commonwealth behind them they will be able to borrow more cheaply than if apart?— Yes; if the whole of the borrowing is done on the security of the assets of the Commonwealth, I should taka it that we would borrow more cheaply than at present. Not materially so, because the credit of New Zealand stands very high to-day; but, on the whole, I should think that the assets of the Commonwealth would find favour with the English capitalist, and borrowing would be done on better terms than if New Zealand offered her own security. 61. But, supposing the Commonwealth does not father the loans of each State, would not the mere fact of the State being associated with the Commonwealth enable its borrowing to be done cheaper than if it kept apart ?—lf I understand you correctly, I should say No. I cannot see that the moral aspect would affect the English capitalist. If New Zealand federated, and had to borrow for local State purposes, the chances are that the Commonwealth borrowing would overshadow the State borrowings, with the result that New Zealand would have to pay a higher rate of interest than now. 62. Mr. Beauchamp.] You have a large number of important industries in Christchurch ?— Yes. 63. We have been told in the South that, owing to the centralisation of the manufacture of goods in Australia, the cost of production is much lower there than in this colony : supposing that to be so, do you not think that our industries would be prejudicially affected by inter-free-trade ?—On the whole, yes. I think our industries would to some extent be affected. 64. I understood you to say that we could raise products sufficiently cheap to compete with the Australian houses —that is, to keep out exports from Australia ?—I think we will continue to manufacture what we require to supply our own market, but I doubt if we can manufacture cheaply enough to supply the Australian market. 65. As to the cost of production in Australia, how does that compare with the cost of production in New Zealand? —In Australia they can grow wheat at less cost per acre than in New Zealand. Oats also; but that is explained very easily. The average yield of oats in Victoria and New South Wales is 20 bushels to the acre; in New Zealand it is 30 bushels to the acre. Well, it stands to reason that you could handle 20 bushels cheaper than you could 30 bushels, and therefore at per acre you could produce cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand. I am inclined to think that we could produce a bushel of oats cheaper than in Australia. As regards wheat, in South Australia that is stripped, and not threshed; it is winnowed and put into the bags right away. Here the wheat is cut with the reaper-and-binder, stocked and stacked and threshed, which is a much more expensive form than that of stripping. Therefore at per bushel they can produce wheat cheaper in Australia than we can, in one sense. On the other hand, we have much larger yields. 66. I noticed that the Commonwealth at present produces about 14,000,000 bushels of wheat, as against our 9,000,000 bushels : is not it reasonable to suppose that under those circumstances, with the lower cost of production, the millers on the other side would be able to compete with the millers in the matter of flour ?—I think I mentioned that, as a rule, the net cost here, or the marketprice here, of wheat is about 2d. to 3d. a bushel lower than the price in South Australia. The conditions in Australia are that wheat is sold, bags included, and free of brokerage. Under those conditions the market fluctuations are somewhat misleading to those outside the trade ; but, putting the whole matter down to bed-rock, the price of wheat is about 2d. to 3d. per bushel higher in Sydney, Melbourne, and Adelaide than it is in Christchurch, or possibly Dunedin. 67. As to South Africa : you have had considerable experience of the South African market ?—■ I ship there very largely. 68. Are you of opinion that that market is likely to be open for a considerable number of years, even after the close of the war ? —That is a very wide question to answer. I think South Africa promises to give us a far more satisfactory market for our products than Australia does. The chief difficulty, of course, is the question of freight. If we can have supplied to us freight at
A.—4
148
the same rate as is paid from Australia, I think we shall find a very excellent market in South Africa for many of our products; but, while on this subject, I think I referred a short time back to the quality of our wheat, or perhaps to the quality of. our flour made from our wheat. Our flour does not give satisfaction in South Africa, for the reason that our wheat is harvested in a comparatively moist climate, and, when turned into flour, that flour will not keep so well in a semi-tropical climate such as South Africa as it will in a climate like that of England or here. Our flour would keep in England or New Zealand, but not well in a tropical or sub-tropical climate. Adelaide wheat stands splendidly in South Africa, and that wheat sells to better advantage than the New Zealand wheat. 69. Do those remarks apply with equal force to oats ? —No; the oats grown in New Zealand are decidedly superior in quality to the oats that they can produce in Australia, and our oats would always have the preference in South Africa to oats grown in Australia, because of their superior quality. 70. You referred to the question of freights : are you, as an exporter, fairly well satisfied with the rates of freight now advertised by the combined line ?—That, perhaps, would be rather an unfair question to answer, as I am both a director of a shipping company and an exporter too. 71. I will not trouble you about that. With respect to finance, I think you said that you thought the Commonwealth would probably be able to raise loans cheaper than a colony like New Zealand could if it went on the London market : have you noticed that quite recently the New South Wales 3|~per-cents are something like £3 cheaper than the New Zealand 3f-per-eents ? — Yes; but there always will be fluctuations of that description in the securities of the various States. What I intended to say was that if the credit of the associated colonies is at the back of any loan it would enable the associated colonies to borrow at a somewhat cheaper rate than any individual colony. 72. Do you not think it is possible through the establishment of the Commonwealth, and it goes on the London market shortly to raise a heavy loan for certain international works, that it might not have an effect on the loans already issued, and that it might have caused that fall of 3 per cent. ?—I should think that the alteration in the prices at Home is probably due to the disturbance of the money-market through the South African war. There is no doubt that the war has affected the money-market very seriously, and, for proof, look at the price of British Consols to-day and the price two years ago. I think there is something like a difference of £14 or £15. There may be a question at Home which has something to do with the difference. Perhaps the interest on the Australian loan has just been paid, and that would account for the fall. 73. Seeing that England is so largely dependent on New Zealand for her food-supplies, do you not think we can largely look to her to assist us in the matter of a navy for defence purposes ?— Did you say that England was largely dependent on New Zealand for her food-products ? because lam not quite prepared to admit that England is so largely dependent on New Zealand. Of course, our frozen meat has been a benefit to the English consumer, but our oat, wheat, and other products are, of course, a mere drop in the ocean as compared with what she gets from other countries. 74. I should say New Zealand in common with Australia?— She is not altogether dependent on Australia either. 75. You do not think the idea of federation meets with anything like the approbation of any special class of people, such as manufacturers or importers?— No. 76. And, apart altogether from the matter of sentiment, do you think there is nothing in it ?— No. 77. Mr. Roberts.] With respect to agricultural products, they are, to a large extent, shipped to Sydney, which is a free port, are they not ?—Mostly ; and any shipments made to Victoria are generally for the purpose of transhipment to South Africa or Western Australia. 78. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I understood you to say, Mr. Stead, that, in your opinion, it is only in exceptional seasons that New Zealand produce would be exported to Australia in the future should we federate ?—Yes. 79. And that therefore the question of tariff with regard to agricultural produce is not so important as it appears in some cases? —I tried to explain that I think in the future it would be so. The importations from New Zealand have been gradually falling off, more particularly in Victoria, and also New South Wales, and I think in the course of a few years they will be almost independent of New Zealand, excepting in exceptional years of drought, when they must have our produce. 80. We we talking just now about the financial danger—the question of the absorption of the Customs revenue, and so on : do you not think the root of the whole difficulty is the fact that by the Constitution both the States and the Commonwealth dip into one common purse, and that there are no separate sources of revenue, which are set aside for each, as in the case of Canada ? Do you not think that the real root of danger is that both are allowed to dip into the Customs revenue?--I think that undoubtedly is a difficulty. 81. Was not that the difficulty regarding the Provincial Councils of New Zealand ?—lt was one, and I think it will be one in this case if we join the Commonwealth ; but, as I said earlier in the morning, the financial arrangements appeared to me to be so undecided, even with the heads of the present Commonwealth Government, that I do not care to hazard anything more than an opinion on the matter. <- 82. With regard to borrowing—of course, the Commonwealth has the first call on all revenues in the matter of borrowing over all the States connected with it: do you think there is any danger of the credit of the State itself being damaged by that—that they would be put into the position of something of a second mortgage ? —Certainly the individual States in the Commonwealth would suffer in the matter of their individual loans.
A.—4,
149
83. The question might arise of reciprocity—that is to say, whether, in the absence of any political union, the reciprocity treaty can be brought about: do you think some arrangement of that sort would be advisable ?—I firmly think it would be very desirable if we could arrange a reciprocal treaty with the Australian Colonies. I Would very much prefer that to federating. 84. There have been difficulties previously in the way of reciprocity : do you not think it would be facilitated by the union of all the States now, and that there would be a better chance of its being carried now than there was when we had to treat with the separate colonies ?—I am inclined to think it would rather tend to delay matters. I think there would be a certain amount of jealousy on. the part of the Commonwealth owing to New Zealand declining to join them, and that that fact would make them rather object to a reciprocity treaty. 85. That question of the idea of resentment has been mentioned before; but do you not think that reciprocity means an arrangement between people who find it to their interest to agree on the matter, and therefore the question of sentiment and resentment would not come into it ?—That is quite true. It is very difficult to induce States to enter into any arrangement on sentimental grounds ; they usually look for some benefit to themselves. 86. Do you think that there are grounds which would make it beneficial to both parties to enter into a reciprocal treaty ?—I think, on the whole, it would be better for Australia and better for New Zealand if we had a reciprocal arrangement with the Australians, but whether they would receive as much as they gave is quite another question. 87. You mean it was a matter which could be arranged ?—I think we would do better with it than they would. 88. With regard to defence : some question was asked about that, but is not that confined to more a question as between the colonies and the Empire than between two separate colonies ?—lt is all naval assistance practically that will be given to each other. I thought I said that, as far as our land defences are concerned, we have learned from South Africa that determined men, well armed, fair shots, although small in numbers, could defend their shores against a foreign enemy. As regards sea defence, that will, to a great extent, be in the hands of the Empire. 89. Then, you think that practically there is no great question of defence as between the two countries ?—I do not think it is any great matter. If anything, I think we shall probably benefit in that respect by being associated with Australia, but I do not think the point is of sufficient importance to warrant our federating on that ground alone. 90. One more question, and it is a matter of opinion merely. Which do you think would be most conducive to the ultimate building-up of the Empire and the holding of it together—there being only one great British Power in these seas, or two ?—You are considering New Zealand as a great British Power? 91. Yes ;it is the future we have to look forward to—a hundred years hence ?—I take it that the intention of your question is this : whether or not, if the whole of the Australian Colonies and New Zealand and the South Sea Islands—which we are now supposed to take in—became one consolidated Commonwealth, they would become so arrogant in the future that they would be disposed to throw off the connection with great Britain ? 92. Yes. They may not altogether mean that, but democracies are somewhat given to talking of cutting adrift, and I was asking your opinion whether the fact of there being two British Powers in these seas would be a check on one another against their doing anything rash ? —- I think the tendency would be that one would check the other ; but the day is so far distant before such an event is likely to occur that we"* are bound to leave posterity to look after itself. I do not think it is a practical question yet, or of sufficient importance to influence us as to whether we should federate or not. 93. Do you not think that the most important question we can advance is the question of looking ultimately to the permanence of the Empire ? —Personally, I am an Imperialist, and I suppose that is the plainest answer I can give you. As an Imperialist, I should prefer any measure that would tend to keep us as part of the Empire, but I do think that the view you have in your mind, Mr. Bowen, is too distant to warrant us in deeming it a question affecting the one of federation at the present time. 94. Hon. Major Steward.] In connection with the remarks that have been made on the financial aspect of this question, have you thought it possible that the credit of the Commonwealth would enable them to float loans on slightly better terms than either of the States ?—That is my opinion. 95. I want to ask you whether, in view of the quotations of the Stock Exchange given in this morning's paper, which I think you will find are as follows : For Consols, 97-J- —that is, I take it, for 2f-per-cent. loan; New Zealand 3J-per-cents, 107-j-; and Victoria, 102-J-; and seeing that federation has been accomplished for some weeks, and that there is a difference in some classes of stock in our favour of 5 per cent., it does appear that, so far as federation has been concerned, the Commonwealth's securities have not improved very much, but that ours have improved?—ln the first place, I should very much doubt these figures. I think they must be misleading, or are capable of some explanation. I do not for a moment think that if our stock are selling at 107J, that Victorian, on the same day, and under the same conditions, could only be worth 102-J-. It might be a Victorian loan expiring in a year or two, and ours may be a distant one, and one on which six months' interest is due. 96. You see that their stock is falling as compared with our 3^-per-cents—-the difference is £s—in5 —in other words, it is a matter of very nearly a year and a half's interest, and therefore it cannot be accounted for by the fact that there might be four or five or six months' interest accrued on the loan : is that not so ?—I think I explained that I thought possibly the Victorian loan may be maturing in a year or two, when it would be repaid at par, whereas our loan may be a long-dated one.
A.—4
150
" 97. Then, allowing for that, does it not appear to you that, at any rate, there is no argument from these figures to show that there would be a very material benefit accruing to us under federation ?—There is nothing there to show that, and I do not think the argument will apply—that is, a Victorian loan'as against] a New Zealand loan. IHo not know what position we would be in if we had a Commonwealth loan, as the revenue of the whole of the States would be pledged as security and interest. 98. Presumably, if a Commonwealth loan would be floated on more satisfactory terms than the loan of an individual State, therefore a fortiori it appears that the credit of the whole Empire would enable us, if we were not federated, to obtain money on exceedingly more favourable terms than the Commonwealth could do so ?—I think so. 99. If you look at the quotations for Consols, 2f-per-cents, 97-J; New Zealand 3J-per-cents, 107J, does it not appear to be a very wide margin which would be necessary to enable any pronounced benefit to accrue to us by going into the Federation ? —I should not in any way assume that English Consols at 97J are selling practically at worse prices than New Zealand securities. 100. No, Ido not say that; but are they selling at so very much better than New Zealand 3£-per-cents, and showing a margin sufficient to indicate that we should be likely to get any great advantage by|joining the Commonwealth ?—I think we should consider this : that at the present time the English Government are raising loans almost every day to provide for the cost of the South African War. As they are borrowing from ten to twenty millions every month or two, it must tend more or less to depress the English market, whilst we have not been borrowing for some time past, and therefore the market-value of our loans remains stationary. A fairer comparison would [be to have taken the market two years ago, when England was at peace, and 2-J Consols were selling at 112. 101. You still think it is possible that we should derive some benefit in that connection in the floating of money if we federated ?—I think the Commonwealth loans would be raised on somewhat better terms. 102. I am prepared to agree with that, but I want your opinion as to whether there would likely to be any great margin of difference ?—I do not think so. 103. Then, if there were a considerable margin, or such margin as you imagine likely to arise, do you thinkjj it would be a consideration sufficient to govern our decision on the matter ? —I do not think the difference could be of sufficient importance to induce us to federate if that were the only benefit we were going to receive. 104. As compared with the very large considerations that would have to be taken into account ? —No. 105. Hon. the Chairman.'] Have you formed any idea of what is likely to be the population of this colony, say, fifty years hence? —No; I would not like to hazard an opinion on that point. 106. In your opinion, would there be any improvement in the mental condition of the people of New Zealand through their becoming an integral part of the Commonwealth?—l cannot quite see how federation with Australia would improve the mental condition of the people here. 107. Taking the question broadly, are you in favour of or against New Zealand federating with Australia? —I am, on the whole, against New Zealand federating with Australia, as I prefer that we should maintain our independence —the independence which has resulted, I think, in the condition of the masses of New Zealand being superior to the condition of the masses in any other part of the world. As far as I can form an opinion—and I have been through America, Europe, and Australia more than onee —I do not know that there is any place in the world where the workers are better off than they are in New Zealand, and if we consider the greatest good of the greatest number I think we had better remain as we are. 108. Do you think sufficient advantage would not arise from our federating with Australia to justify New Zealand giving up her present political independence as an individual colony?— That is my opinion. 109. Is there any other matter, Mr. Stead, which you have not been questioned on, and which you would like to make any statement upon ? —No ; I think you gentlemen have exhausted every idea I had. William Eeece examined. (No. 52.-) 110. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are the Mayor of Christchurch, Mr. Recce? —Yes. 111. What is your occupation?—An iron merchant. 112. How long have you resided in New Zealand? —I was born in Christchurch, and lam forty-four years of age. 113. Have you given consideration to the question of New Zealand federating with Australia? Merely in its general aspect. I have not devoted special study to consider all aspects of the question. 114. Have you considered it as to its effects upon the trade of this colony with Australia?— Yes. 115. Well, upon the commercial aspect of the question, would you be good enough to give the Commission your views ?—Perhaps I had better state my views generally. Much as one might admire the self-denial and patriotism of six States joining this Commonwealth, I feel that the financial question alone is sufficient to deter New Zealand at present from joining in the Federation. Some of the most able men of Australia have been considering this question for years, and they seem to have fairly satisfactorily disposed of nearly all matters but that of finance, and I feel that the direct taxation that New Zealand bears to-day per head is quite as much as she can bear, and I cannot help feeling that the financial proposals of the Commonwealth are at present so involved that it is impossible for us to see clearly how they would affect New Zealand. There are many questions which have been raised as to the advantage of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth.
—4
One in particular is that of New Zealand's financial status and her position in. the eyes of the world being enhanced. I think it is probable that that would be so. With regard to the question of our defences, I think we look mainly to the navy for our defence, and we are situated too far from a suitable base to enable any foreign Power to'do us a great deal of damage, and any attempt to attack New Zealand, as we have seen in South Africa, would be attended with very great difficulties. Therefore I feel that the question of defence is not an important feature in the case. I think the question of the Customs tariff is a very vital one. That is one of the questions which is to be tested. We understand that it has been stated .that somewhere about 20 per cent, may be the Federal tariff, but there is no question at all that an alteration in duties may affect some of the industries of New Zealand. We can see the present tendency is to reduce Customs duties and make the taxation more direct; that the duties proposed by the Commonwealth will not be very much less than 20 per cent., in which case the many industries of New Zealand—and I refer especially to what I might call the natural industries of New Zealand—which use up our own raw materials, would be placed in very great jeopardy, trade would be dislocated, and our workers would suffer very considerably. With regard to the question of produce, that will be one of very great difficulty in connection with so many of our small settlers who grow such produce as onions and potatoes. For them it will no doubt be a great hardship to be cut off from Australia; but we know this: that Australia is using every effort to introduce that class of cultivation; that more of those products will be grown over there than hitherto, and more cohesion between these States, owing to the Commonwealth, will stimulate settlers to produce sufficient to meet all their own requirements. Therefore I do not consider that we can look upon Australia as a permanent market for these articles of produce I have referred to. Then, there is the question of how some of the manufactures we are sending at present to Australia will be affected, and I think that is where the consideration of a reciprocal tariff could come in. We know from the experience of America that the large centres of population can maintain factories and manufactures which such a colony as New Zealand —at any rate, for a great number of years—could not possibly carry on, and therefore Australia, having initiated these industries, can produce many things that we can buy from her, in addition to her natural products, such as wine, &c. But, as I said before, the financial question is so very much involved that I feel that New Zealand should wait, and should not at present join the Commonwealth. I think New Zealand should wait until many grave matters of difficulty between the States are settled, and I have not any apprehension that there is going to be any hostile spirit of reprisal on the part of the Commonwealth against New Zealand. It is but natural that, seeing this is a question of a partnership for mutual benefit, the conditions should be clearly defined before an arrangement is entered into. 116. Can you mention any advantages which will accrue to New Zealand through her joining the Commonwealth?— There are no others than the general enhancing of her status in the eyes of the world as a State of the Commonwealth, but I think it is more a sentimental question than one of real benefit. 117. Do you think that is sufficiently advantageous to justify New Zealand in parting with her independence ?—Not as we are at present advised. 118. Speaking of manufacturers in Australia, are there many large manufacturing industries in the Canterbury District ?—Yes, there are industries here. The most important, to my mind, are what I would call the natural industries—those consuming our own raw material, such as the woollen industry, and the allied industry of manufacturing the wool into clothing. These are the most successful industries; and there is also the boot-and-shoe industry. 119. How do you think the boot-and-shoe industry would be affected ?—Of course, I have not any particular knowledge of that, but the boot-and-shoe industry is more affected at present by the competition of the Old World and America. 120. Supposing New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, would she be in any better position to compete against America than she is now ?—I think not. 121. Begarding the woollen industry, we have been told that if New Zealand federated with Australia she would be able to export more largely to Australia than she does at present: do you think that would be so? —That might be so probably for a time owing to New Zealand having, I think, initiated that industry, and being, I think, ahead of Australia in the matter of the quality of our manufactures; but I cannot help thinking that this will not be lasting. 122. Take the iron industry : what is the largest number of hands employed in the Canterbury District in any manufactory ?—I could not say. The numbers vary very considerably. Lately there have been a large number employed on dredging machinery. There are a hundred men in some, probably. 123. You are aware that wages are cheaper and hours of labour are longer in Australia than in New Zealand?— Yes. 124. Under these circumstances, do you think there is any chance of the iron-manufacturers in New Zealand successfully competing with those of Australia ? —I do not think so, excepting in one or two special instances in the case of machinery, where our manufacturers have special patents. 125. Taking the iron-manufacturers all round, do you think New Zealand could compete with Australia?—l do not think so, for one moment. 126. In the event of federation, how do you think the industries of New Zealand for local demand would be affected?—l think that probably they would be affected very seriously, for the same reasons which I mentioned before : that all large centres attract manufacturers, and the shipping facilities are so enormous in Australia that New Zealand is not likely to be able to compete. 127. Is barley very largely cultivated in the Canterbury Provincial District? —There is a fair amount cultivated, but I can give you no exact information about the industry.
151
A.—4
152
128. You know, of course, that the States, and New Zealand amongst them if we federated, would have to contribute pretty largely from their Customs revenue towards the taxation for Federal purposes. You do not think that New Zealand could stand any more direct taxation, then how would that loss of Customs revenue be made good ? —By direct taxation, in the shape of land-tax, or by the imposition of other duties. 129. Then, you look upon it that that would be a grievance for which we should get no corresponding advantage?— Exactly. 130. Mr. Boberts.] Have you considered the probable financial effect on New Zealand of federation, treating the matter as a whole? For instance, you know that the Commonwealth will doubtless institute a tariff of their own : supposing it is anything like a fair tariff, do you think the advantage would be against or in favour of New Zealand ?—That refers to so many questions. 131. Taking it all round, Mr. James Allen, who has gone into the matter exhaustively, estimates the probable loss of Customs revenue alone to be something like £600,000 if an ordinary and fair tariff were introduced as against the tariff we have now : what is your opinion of the financial effect of such a change ?—I cannot help thinking that it would be to the detriment of New Zealand, but that is a question of calculation as to the approximate result. 132. In reference to the woollen industry, you seem to anticipate a considerable increase of business would take place under federation and intercolonial free-trade ?—-I say that, New Zealand having initiated the industry prior to the Australians, probably for a while we should maintain our trade. 133. I do not think you are quite correct in saying that we established our industry prior to the Australians. There were woollen industries in Australia before we began here ? —I am speaking about New Zealand generally, and not of Canterbury in particular. 134. During the year 1899 the total export of woollen goods was only £8,389 for the whole of New Zealand, and we have had evidence that a considerable portion of that was exported from Dunedin, so that the whole of the exports during 1899 were comparatively trifling ? —Yes. 135. Then, the imports into the colony during the same year were somewhat heavy; they amounted to £267,000 in piece-goods alone, and out of that amount nearly £17,000 came from Victoria and New South Wales ? —1 think those were probably transhipments. 136. Do you think that federation would ultimately injure the woollen industry here ?—I think it would ultimately injure all our industries. 137. Do you not think the tendency of the times is towards the equalisation of labour all over the colonies ? —I think so ; I hope so. 138. So that, while the cost of production may not increase here, it will probably continue to increase in Australia. If the cost of production were equal in both countries, would we then be in a position to export our surplus to Australia, just the same as they do theirs to New Zealand?—ln some industries, and it would apply to the woollen industry particularly. 139. Mr. Beauchamp.] Referring to the hours of labour and rates of pay, do you think that federation would have the effect of levelling up or levelling down so far as New Zealand is concerned ?—That depends on the broader question as to the success of our industries in proportion to the success of the industries in Australia. If we had to cut our prices to meet the Australian competition, it might be necessary to cut down wages. 140. What is your opinion as to the large industries in Australia being able to compete with others of the same class in New Zealand ?—I think in Australia they would be able to produce more cheaply than we can owing to the advantages of freight, and for the many reasons which go to show that large centres of population are able to produce more cheaply than small ones. 141. I understood you to say, in reply to one question, that if there is a moderate tariff imposed, as against the highly protective powers now existing, with intercolonial free-trade, our industries would be bound to suffer prejudicially?—l think so. 142. At the present time there are some fifty thousand men employed in the industries of this colony, and would not the throwing of these men out of work, or the driving of them to larger centres, have a serious effect in this colony ?—Yes ; I think we had an example of that in the introduction of the linotype and other machinery; and, while it is all very well to say that ability will find its own level, we also know that money finds its own level, and therefore I think that under federation many of our industries will be dislocated, and great hardship will be the result. 143. Some people interested in agriculture say that it would drive more people to cultivate the soil, and that we would naturally have more production, and that even if we killed some of our manufacturing industries we should have the compensating advantage : do you think that would be beneficial or otherwise ?—I think it would be a benefit if the people were to cultivate the soil instead of taking so much to town life ; but I do not know that it would be a good thing to drive men from the trades they are brought up to and endeavour to make them farmers. 144. You think that instead of driving them on to the soil it would drive them out of the colony ? —I think so; because farming requires as much experience as any other business. 145. Hon. Major Steward.] Is it not a fact that in Sydney and Melbourne Chinese labour is used largely in the furniture industry, and would come into competition with the labour here if we federated? —That is quite true. 146. And those articles made by Chinese labour coming into the market here would be a serious injury to our workmen ?—Yes. 147. Do you think that in the large centres of population it is possible to establish manufactures more successfully than in smaller ones on account of their being able to turn out larger quantities ? —That is so. It is acknowledged that a larger output can, for many reasons, such as economy of material and labour, be produced at a lower rate than a small one. 148. And you can afford to sell the produce a little under cost price in a foreign country because of the profit on the local market ?—Yes, that is the position.
153
A.—4
149. Seeing that Melbourne and Sydney have the start of us as regards population by a very long way, do you not think that New Zealand would always be at a comparative disadvantage because of the smaller centres—that Melbourne and Sydney will always relatively be at a considerable advantage by reason of sending out large quantities ?—I do ; and for another reason : they will get their raw material at a very much lower freight than we can. 150. Mr. Luke.] One has heard that the industry more particularly affected in Canterbury is that of the small producers : how do you account for the large falling-off in 1898 and 1899 in produce ?—I understand there was a larger supply in Australia. 151. Last year?— Yes. 152. Did they have a bad season in 1898, which led to a large export?— Yes, I think so. 153. You do not think these small producers will be affected if we keep out of federation?—l think they will for a time. 154. You think that a portion of the trade done in these lines is due to climatic influences ? — Yes, to a great extent. I do not think they would buy from us from choice; it is a case of necessity. 155. That will exist, then, whether we federate or not?— Yes. They grow those products themselves. 156. And will become a stronger competitor with us for those classes of goods ?—Yes. 157. You think the effect of federation would not be to equalise the hours of labour and the payment of labour between New Zealand and Australia?—l am afraid not. 158. We are credited with being a very progressive people, and it has been pointed out that the influence of fifteen members in the Federal Parliament would be so dominating that the social legislation would go forward by leaps and bounds ?—I think it probable that the Australian States would consider each other, and vote more in accord with their interests than with the interests of New Zealand. 159. Do you not think the great feeling of brotherhood and good-fellowship in the Commonwealth of allied Australia would extend such consideration to us as would make federation possibly in our interests?—l am afraid one would have to alter the whole trend of human nature. 160. Then, do you not think there will be some advantage from the defence point of view if we federate?—No; I stated that I thought our main defence was the navy, and we are entitled to look to the Imperial Government for that defence. 161. But do you not think it possible that a great Commonwealth, such as Australia would be, would be able to bring such influence to bear on the Admiralty as would cause them to increase the number and size of the men-of-war in our waters, and that we, being a little side-colony, a remote country, may suffer in the degree of attention, whereas if allied to Australia we should of necessity receive the attention of a larger proportion of the navy? —I think the best answer to that is the reply of the officer of a warship which has just come to the colony. He said it would be much closer to Britain, and not out here, that the battles of the Empire would be fought. He was replying to the statement that we should have a larger portion of the navy out in the Pacific Ocean, and he was of opinion that we were quite well enough off with the ships we at present had. 162. It is just possible, however, that though the battles might be fought around the centres of activity near Great Britain and Europe, that for spiteful reasons they would come out here and do what damage they could, and disable these offshoots of the Empire. In that case, would we likely not suffer ? —That is the only way they would do damage. In that case it would be an advantage to have more ships. 163. Mr. Leys.] The density of the population in big cities is always operating as a difficulty towards raising wages, by reason of the larger supply of labour ?—To have a greater supply than the demand would have that tendency. 164. Would it not be more difficult to enforce social legislation in places that were closely peopled than in a country like New Zealand, owing to the competition between the individuals in the dense populations?— Yes, from that standpoint. 165. Then, with regard to the small agricultural producers in New Zealand, is it not possible that the disturbance among the working population of New Zealand through Australian competition would spoil their market here for their produce ?—Yes, most certainly. There would not be the same demand for their produce. 166. If the industries largely composed of the working population of New Zealand were either reduced in purchasing-power or compelled to seek work elsewhere, would not the local producer suffer more than he would gain by reason of the wider market in Australia which federation had opened up for him ?—Yes, I should say so. 167. Taking the view of it that the local industries would be disturbed, is it likely that the small producer would gain ?—On the whole question, Ido not think he would gain. 168. Is it not a fact that New Zealand depends more largely upon Customs than do some of the larger States in Australia ? —Yes. 169. For instance, the average Customs revenue collected by New South Wales is only £1 ss. 7d. per head, while New Zealand collects £2 18s. per head ?—Yes, that is so. 170. Now, the absorption of the Customs revenue by the Commonwealth: is that not calculated to disturb New Zealand finance far more than the finance of New South Wales ?—Yes, certainly ; it will make our direct taxation more heavy. 171. You see in this absorption of Customs revenue for Federal purposes such serious disturbance in New Zealand's finance that it would be practicably impossible for us to go in at present ?—Until that question is settled, and they are able to put forward a clear basis of action for the future for us, I think we should not go in. 172. Hon. the Chairman.] New Zealand having to contribute largely, as she would, to the Federal Government from the Customs, do you think that would have any prejudicial effect upon 20—A. 4.
A.—4
154
New Zealand in the matter of raising State loans ? —No, I think not, as the question of the colony's condition or prosperity would carry most weight. 173. You do not think the fact of the Customs revenue being lost would affect the security of the loan in any way?—No; there are other sources-of taxation. 174. But you told us that you thought direct taxation had practically reached its limit ?—I think it is quite as high as we can stand already. 175. Upon the question of defence, to which you seem to have given some attention, you said that one reason why you thought we would not require the assistance from the Commonwealth was that in the event of a European war the battles would be fought nearer to England ; but supposing the war was with Japan, which is a considerable naval Power at present, and also a military Power, how then ?—That would certainly raise the question of the strength of the navy in these waters. Japan attacking New Zealand, however, would be a very long way from its base. Any Power with its base so far removed would find New Zealand a tough nut to crack. 176. Germany has a base at Samoa?— Yes, but it is a base at which they will not lay in any large supplies of ammunition or coal. 177. It has also to be borne in mind that in the war between America and Spain America attacked the Spanish colonies first ?—Yes, that was so. 178. Do you think the Central Government being twelve hundred miles or more distant from New Zealand would affect New Zealand prejudicially in the event of federation ?—I do not think that is a very great point, considering that many of the other States are much further away than we are. 179. Hon. Mr. Bowen.} Is there not some misconception that we are benefited by ships of war hanging about our coasts, and that the real naval power is to seek the enemy out and not to wait for him ?—That is the opinion of naval men. 180. Mr. Leys.] Is it not a fact that the American States, thrown upon direct taxation, have repudiated their borrowing in some instances ? —I have not heard of it being done to any extent. I do not think it was very important. 181. Are you aware that the evils of State borrowing were so serious that, in more than thirty of the States of America, the Constitution now expressly prohibits them from borrowing?— Yes, I know. 182. Does that not seem to indicate a serious difficulty in State borrowing—that the State will not have complete control over its finance ?—The question put to me was whether it would affect the facility for borrowing. 183. Assuming that at present the Customs revenue from New Zealand is £2,187,000 —that is the latest figures we have—assuming that that amount, which we have now as security to offer to the British creditor, is taken away from our control, must not that necessarily affect the price of the loans ?—lt may affect the price of the loans, but I maintain that the general prosperity of the colony, method of government, and other matters are also very important considerations. It might have that tendency, but 1 think there are other questions of great importance in the consideration of the rate of interest and the credit of the colony. 184. Then, the fact that we have no control over the levying of the Customs duties, does not that embarrass our means of meeting any loans we may desire to raise ?—lt is not expected that the whole of the Customs revenue will be taken by the Federal Government permanently. 185. We have no power to reduce or increase the Customs duties ? —No. 186. During last session the Parliament threw off something like £70,000 of Customs revenue, and next session they could put it on if they required it for State purposes, but they could not do that under federation ?—That is so. 187. Would that not embarrass our finance in future borrowing for State purposes ? —lt would affect the colony's finance, but Ido not think it would affect our credit. We should be part of the Federation still. 188. The difficulty in the American States, as I understand it, is that they have no elasticity. Their sources of revenue are so circumscribed that they offer no security for these loans : would that apply to us to a certain extent ?—The whole question of finance is involved in such a consideration, and that is one of my main grounds for opposing federation. 189. Hon. the Chairman.] The States will have no voice in the raising or diminishing of the Customs revenue ? —That is so ; the amount to be raised will be fixed by the Federal Parliament. 190. You say that will not affect the rate of the raising of State loans ?■—No ; I said it would not affect the credit of the State. Hugo Fbiedlandee examined. (No. 53.) 191. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name?— Hugo Friedlander. 192. What is your occupation o —General merchant—grain and wool. 193. Are your business operations of considerable magnitude?— They are very extensive. 194. How long have you been resident in New Zealand?—l have been here since 1870. 195. Are you acquainted with the Australian Colonies, either by residence or by visiting?—l have visited them. 196. Where do you live ?—Ashburton. 197. That is a large agricultural district ?—lt is the largest agricultural and pastoral county in New Zealand, with the exception of one in Southland, which is slightly larger, but it holds the premier position as regards grain. 198. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ? —Not as closely as I should like to before giving a definite opinion. 199. Take the agricultural interests: how do you consider they would be affected supposing New Zealand federated with Australia ?—I am scarcely prepared to express right off a definite
A.—4
155
opinion on this important question of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth. If pressed to do so, I should say, " Let us leave well alone," and for the following reasons : (1.) We cannot afford to lose our best public men, who would in the natural course of events be chosen to represent us in the Federal Parliament, and who would in all probability make in time their home there. (2.) The vast sheet of water between this colony and Australia is also, to my mind, a very important factor militating against our colony's interest if we were to join the Commonwealth at present. (3.) The voting-power is so enormously in favour of Australasia, and the members of the Federal Parliament being only human, it will follow as a natural consequence that more attention will be paid to the wants of Australian States and very little to the needs of New Zealand. From experience we know that it is very difficult to get redresses from one's own Government with headquarters in one's own colony: how much more difficult will it be to have our grievances attended to by a Parliament of which the members to the extent of about 85 per cent, would know little or nothing of our colony ? (4.) Even if we were willing to join we should certainly know first upon what terms we wiH be admitted. lam not quite so sure that Victoria will be over-anxious to have us. I think they like us best from a distance. (5.) As far as the grain business is concerned, I doubt veiy much if New Zealand will be seriously affected either one way or the other by remaining as we are. In bad seasons the Federal States will require to import what they are short of, and they must come to us for it. They will not cut off their noses to spite their faces, and pay more for produce they require to other countries, because we did not join the Commonwealth. Moreover, New South Wales is gradually extending its agricultural usefulness. I understand that as the leases of large tracts of land are falling in they are being divided into smaller areas and leased to agriculturists. This year New South Wales will have several millions of bushels of wheat for export. In Victoria, also, many owners of large estates are making arrangements with farmers for cropping their lands, and it is perhaps only a question of time when the present Commonwealth States will supply all their own wants, as far as produce is concerned. If they will not be able to do so, I have no hesitation in saying New Zealand will be able to successfully compete with other countries in supplying the wants of the Commonwealth. (6.) Upon the whole, lam in favour of our remaining New-Zealanders and continuing to work out our own destiny. Our colony is doing all right; we are very prosperous; many of our resources are still lying undeveloped, and the majority of our people are evidently satisfied with the way they are being governed. Why, therefore, join the Commonwealth, which is only in its experimental stage? Already a great fight is taking place between free-trade and protection. The question of raising the everalmighty dollar to cover the current expenditure in connection with administering the new Constitution is a very serious one. Black labour versus white will give the Federal Government a lot of anxiety before it will be satisfactorily settled, as also will many other matters. We have heard already that the Federal State of Tasmania is dissatisfied because it is not represented in the Federal Government. If free-trade is the policy of the Commonwealth, I take it our goods will be admitted free; if a protective policy is adopted we will not be in a worse position with our exports into the majority of the Federal States than we have been, and yet we have been able to hold our own in the past. We have gone through a serious financial crisis and commercial depression, the same as the sister colonies; we have come out of these difficulties much quicker than any of the Federal States have—we have come out of them with more credit to ourselves—and this colony is more prosperous than any of the other States are. Surely all this is a very good proof that we are doing well, and can hold our own. Even if we can increase our export, and the step will be of a monetary advantage to us, are we going to sell our birthright, and oiany other privileges we highly value, for a plate of pottage ? The wiser policy would be to wait quietly, watch carefully the working of that new and great Constitution, and if we are after a few years satisfied that we can with credit to ourselves and our Australian brethren join them, and they will have us, then will it be soon enough to do so. Meanwhile, and as already said, let us leave well alone. It is the best and most prudent policy to follow for the present. 200. Have you considered the financial aspect of the question? —Yes. 201. How do you think New Zealand would be affected in finance by federation ?—ln my opinion, we have nothing to gain; but the chances are that we, as a State, will not be able to borrow at the same advantage as we can now by remaining independent. 202. Why not ? —lt follows that, if the Commonwealth has power to pledge our credit, the State will only appear like a second mortgage ; and in my experience— and I have had a good deal— I generally find that you can get a much higher rate of interest on a second mortgage than on a first, because the second-mortgage security is not as good as that of the first. 203. How do you consider the manufacturing interest of the colony will be affected in the event of federation ?—I think, speaking generally, our brethren on the other side will not give us all our own way. They will look after their own interests ; and, seeing that New South Wales and Victoria will have forty-nine representatives to our fifteen, I do not think we can look for much chance to make laws simply to suit New Zealand. I think there will be a certain amount of pressure brought to bear on the Federal Parliament, and members will be influenced to a certain extent by the people they represent. 204. Apart from politics, as a matter of trade, do you think our establishments could compete with the larger ones of Australia?— Not at present. Labour on the other side is cheaper and the hours are longer, and the result will probably be, if they equalise matters, that it will not be a very forward step if they bring our labour to the same level as the other side. 205. But in the event of federation there will be free-trade between the States?— That is so. 206. Would not that give the Australian factories an advantage over the local factories ?— Decidedly. 207. We are told that Victoria is now an exporter of oats and agricultural produce, and that now federation has come about she will supply New South Wales ?—Yes.
A.—4
156
208. New Zealand hitherto has exported largely to New South Wales ? —Yes. 209. Where will New Zealand look for a market ?—I am not so sure that the market of New South Wales will be closed to us, for this reason : Victoria, up to the present, has had the same privileges and greater facilities to send her surplus protluce into New South Wales on account of the geographical position, and if they have not been able to do so before, why should they be able to do so hereafter ? 210. Supposing the New South Wales market is closed to New Zealand, do you think we would have any difficulty in finding a market elsewhere for our surplus agricultural produce ?—Well, as I have already said, it may have just at the beginning, but I do not think that is a very important factor. I think the energy of the people of New Zealand will be able to find markets for any surplus which New Zealand has got to export; and, after all, the losing of one market does not mean the entire loss of the produce or goods we are likely to send to that market. It can only be the difference between what we may get in that closed market and what we get in the market we shall have to export to. 211. Mr. Leys.] I suppose the price of wheat is really fixed by the London market? —■ Absolutely. 212. In view of the fact that Australia is able now to export a large surplus of wheat to London at the London prices, would not a portion of that surplus be apt to come into the North Island and compete with the Canterbury wheat, which supplies the North Island?—l think it would, because the charges for shipping between Canterbury and the North Island are, if anything, greater than between Sydney and Auckland. The position really is that there is a monopoly, and we have simply got to pay whatever rates the Union Company chooses to ask. There is sufficient at present to keep all the steamers fully supplied trading between New Zealand ports; but when we send produce over to the other side, and the steamers come back empty, it would pay the Union Company to carry it at a much lower rate than they would accept when here with full cargoes. -213. Then, with regard to flour: Australian flour is a much drier flour, and makes a larger number of loaves than does our flour, does it not, owing to its power of absorbing water ? Is it not probable that these Australian mills would ship to Wellington and Auckland, and other nonwheat producing districts, large quantities of their flour, and so be a serious disturbing element in New Zealand?— Unquestionably, our wheat contains a much larger percentage of moisture than the Australian. We would find that the bakers would give a preference to the Australian flour over New Zealand. 214. Well, now, looking at the fact that New Zealand is a market for 5,000,000 bushels of wheat, would it not be a very serious thing to our farmers if this Australian wheat came in free ?— There is no question at all about it. I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that, unless the people living in the Auckland Province stick to Canterbury, the Canterbury merchants would lose the entire trade of the North Island. 215. Is there any relative gain that you can see will accrue to the agriculturist that would compensate them for this serious competition which they may anticipate ?—I cannot see any. 216. In any other respect, do you consider the agriculturist will suffer through disturbance of the local industries caused by competition ?—I should say, yes —Canterbury in particular. 217. With your knowledge of the agricultural trade, which is extensive, do you think the influence of federation from an agricultural point of view would, on the whole, be disadvantageous ?—I do. 218. Do I understand that, from an agricultural point of view, federation, you think, is undesirable ?—Not to my mind. 219. Further south we seem to have it dinned into us that, from an agricultural point of view, it was a decided mistake not to federate ?—That may be so; but, if the Southland people will excuse my saying so, 1 do not think they have got the experience in grain-exporting that the Canterbury merchants have got. 220. Do you not think that the small producers—onions, potatoes, and such lines—will suffer materially if the Australian market is cut off from them ? —Probably they would to a certain extent, but they would be able to pay attention to other produce which will take its place. I may point this out with reference to potatoes: that last year they were such a drug in the market that they could not be given away, and, although for years New South- Wales had taken large quantities, last year it was only right at the end of the season that any demand came along. 221. Do you think that many of these potatoes were exported at a loss, merely because there was no market here ?—Yes. 222. From a social point of view, you think it is not a good thing to federate ? —1 think it will not have the effect of levelling up, but will act in the opposite direction. 223. Would it not be to our advantage to be part and parcel of a Commonwealth with a population at present of five millions, which is rapidly speading into twenty millions ? —At present the population of Victoria and New South Wales is considerably larger than that of New Zealand, and in the natural course of things the increase in population of these two Federal States will be greater than in New Zealand, and I do not think we shall gain very much. I do not think we will overtake them in a hurry in the matter of population. 224. We have all the elements of manufacture —coal, coke, great iron-deposits at Parapara, which they say will supply iron for hundreds of thousands of years to come : do you not see in that large possibilities of trade with the other colonies ?—Why, in the present uncertain state of things, should we anticipate a probable export ? If we were entirely dependent upon the iron export I should say it might have some weight. The place you have mentioned at Parapara, I think, came under my notice more than twenty years ago, and it has not been developed yet, and it might wait another twenty years before it is developed. I would rather prefer to pay a little more later on than put confidence in our undeveloped possibilities.
157
A.—4
225. We have no assurance that we could get in at any price later on ?—You have got no assurance that you are going to get in now. 226. There is a prospect of getting in ? —I think they like us best at a distance. 227. Do you not think that to be part of a great Commonwealth will give opportunities of expansion that are not possible under the present state of things ?—No; I like to remain a NewZealander and part of the Empire. Under the Commonwealth I think New Zealand would become extinct. 228. You believe in retaining your political independence?— Very much so. 229. Hon. Major Steward.] Your business lies principally among the farmers and producers ? —Yes. 230. Naturally, your interests are identical with those of the farmers and producers?— Yes. 231. And in expressing the opinions you do you are expressing an opinion not only as an exporter, but also the opinion of your clients ?—Yes. 232. For several years past you have conducted export operations on a very large scale ?— Yes. 233. Would you have any objection to going into figures as to the quantity you handled during the last eighteen months or two years ?—During the nineteen months prior to the issue of the Jubilee number of the Canterbury Times I prepared a return of our grain business for the purpose of advertising in that issue, and, if I remember rightly, the quantity we exported amounted pretty well to 2,500,000 bushels of grain. 234. Would you mind stating what that export consisted of generally ? —Grain, wheat, oats, barley, grass-seed. 235. What market was the wheat sent principally to ?—The largest portion went, of course, to the United Kingdom. 236. Was any quantity sent to Australia ?—We may have sent a little fowl-wheat. 237. Australia is not a market for our wheat, so far as your experience goes ?—No. 238. Are there any oats sent to Australia?— There was a considerable export of oats last year, but the largest proportion were simply bought for transhipment to South Africa. 239. Was there any large quantity of oats taken from Canterbury last year for Australia ?— From Canterbury not a very large amount, but I think there was some from the south. 240. What part of Australia took the oats ?—Victoria took the most, for transhipment. 241. Supposing New Zealand did not join the Federation, and a duty is imposed applying, of course, to New South Wales and other parts of the Commonwealth, will that shut out such oats as we have been sending there ?—No, I do not think so. 242. Is it not a fact that lately Victoria has been an exporter, not a consumer ?—Yes. 243. She will be in a position to supply oats?— Yes. 244. Are Victorian oats equally good, compared with those produced here ?—No. As a matter of fact, it will pay us now, if we can get reasonable freight, to ship our short heavy oats to London, and a net result will be returned to the farmer, larger than by exporting to New South Wales. 245. Supposing that any market we can have for oats in Australia is lost to us, do you think it is possible for us to find a market anywhere else for our surplus ?—I think South Africa will always be open —at any rate, for some time to come. 246. The trade to South Africa is interfered with by the fact of there being no return freights ? —Yes. 247. Is there anything we will be able to import from South Africa in order to give us freight back ?—I think the energy of the exporters in New Zealand will overcome that difficulty. 248. In establishing a trade with a new country, is it not difficult to get regular steam communication without some sort of guarantee being given to the shipping companies as to the results of their enterprise ? —Yes. 249. Do you or do you not think it is good policy on the part of the Government to come forward and offer assistance for a period of years until the trade establishes itself ?—Yes. 250. From your experience as a business-man, do you think it possible to establish reciprocal arrangements with Australia?— The older countries are doing it, and have been doing it, and I take it they do not do it simply for the love of the thing. They think it an advantage, and I should say it would be an advantage for New Zealand to enter into such an arrangement with Australia. 251. You are aware that there are articles produced in Australia which we need here, and there are articles made here which they need in Australia : is that not a basis for reciprocity ?— Yes. 252. And, if reciprocal arrangements were carried out, would not we gain all the advantages of federation, and have none of the disadvantages ?—That is so. 253. You have seen the freights to be charged by the combined lines of steamers to South Africa ?—Yes. 254. How do they compare with those of vessels trading between Australian and South African ports ?—They are quite high enough; but I would rather not give a direct answer to that question. 255. With a view of enabling the companies to quote cheaper rates, would you suggest that the Government subsidise the lines between here and South Africa ? —I would recommend that the Government subsidise the lines, provided that an undertaking is given that the steamers will be run regularly. At present, from what I can see, this move on the part of the shipping companies is not an arrangement by which the shipping companies are bound to send their vessels away at regular times, and unless the merchants here know that they can get their stuff away regularly I think we will be better without the line altogether.
A.—4
158
256. I take it that the regularity of the line will depend upon the produce available ?—No; if an arrangement is made with the Government to send their steamers away at stated intervals, for which they get a certain amount of money by way of a subsidy, the contracting companies will have to carry out the terms of the contract. 257. They would go away full or empty? —No, Ido not think so. If they made the freight low enough they would nearly always get a full cargo. 258. You look to future developments of the trade ? —Yes. 259. You have exported largely to South Africa?— Yes. 260. With satisfactory results ?—Yes. 261. How are your exports of produce to South Africa compared with the exports from Australia? —They are in advance. A large quantity of Victorian crops is cut into hay. They have got facilities there for pressing it and shipping it which we have not got. To show you the shipping and freighting advantages they have got over there, I need only state that the Victorian people can come over here, pay a good price for oats, pay all the charges of handling and shipping, and then compete with us in the African trade. They would not continue to do it at a loss, and there must be something in the freight arrangements over there which enables them to do so. 262. That applies to what prevailed prior to the establishment of this line of steamers?— Until they lower the rates here they will not get much support. 263. Having regard to the distance, are you of opinion that the freights between here and the United Kingdom are too high ?—They are regulated by supply and demand. 264. Are the rates between Australia and the United Kingdom not lower than between here and the United Kingdom?—l am not quite prepared to say that. I know that charters on the other side are made at a lower rate than we can make them here. 265. We were told in Southland that in many instances New South Wales was made the dumping-ground for the surplus supply of oats, and they had to pay any price that was offered: have you had the same experience in this district ?—Speaking for my firm, we make it a rule not to consign, preferring to keep our oats rather than send them over to be sacrificed. 266. I notice there are considerable fluctuations in the values of flour, oats, and potatoes sent from Lyttelton : will those fluctuations arise because of the climatic changes ?—Yes. 267. Will they continue to fluctuate whether we federate or not?— Yes. 268. Prior to the duty on flour, was there much imported into New Zealand ?—I cannot say at present. I remember one season when very large quantities of flour came over, and the Government had to put on a duty in order to stop the importation because of the outcry there was. 269. Mr. Roberts.] You said that the Australian flour could be placed in the North Island at a rate cheaper to the consumer than to get it from Canterbury ? —Very frequently they can get freights from Sydney to Auckland lower than we have to pay between Lyttelton and Auckland ; and, inasmuch as the quality of the Australian flour is 10s. a ton better than ours, it stands to reason that unless Auckland people are loyal to us they,will give the preference to Australian flour. 270. Assuming that we were on all-fours, and an open market in the North Island, do you not 'think that wheat could be sent from here at a price to compete with the Australian wheat, and flour too ?—I do not. 271. And do you not think that the farmers here could compete with the Australian farmer? —They would have to compete, but at the disadvantage of 10s. per ton. 272. But do you not think that the difference in value of 10s. would be made up by the extra yield ? —lt all depends on the current market-value. You can only produce wheat down to a certain price; if it goes below that the farmer cannot produce it. 273. Can you at all improve the trade to South Africa ? —By direct steamers. I have shipped a good deal by direct steamers at a rate which paid my firm to do so. 274. That does not happen except in the slack parts of the year? —It has happened. At other times we have had to pay £3 plus 10 per cent, primage per ton for oats, and Victoria was taking oats at that time at £2 15s. and £2 16s. So much so that one of the charterers there offered to send a vessel round here and fill with New Zealand produce at our rates. 275. The rate from here is at present how much ?—£2 15s. for oats plus 10 per cent., equivalent to £3. 276. Can you tell me a fair average rate from Australia at the present time ?—I could not; it varies so much. 277. They are not much lower than here ?—They were in favour of Victoria. Sometimes they were and sometimes they were not. 278. You stated that labour was cheaper in Australia and the hours longer : can you tell us to what extent ?—I have not got any personal knowledge. I understand they work nine to ten hours a day there. David Thomas examined. (No. 54.) 279. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Thomas?—An auctioneer and general merchant at Ashburton. I have resided in New Zealand about twenty-six years, and in Australia for about the same time— twenty-six years. I am intimately acquainted with Victoria and New South Wales. 280. Has your attention been drawn to this question of establishing an Australian Commonwealth ?—lt has. It has given me a good deal of thought, and I have arrived at this conclusion : that at present it would not be well for New Zealand to federate with the other colonies. There are many reasons for this opinion on my part, and the one I would consider the most important would be the question of finance, and likewise the question of not knowing what you are going in for.
159
A.—4.
281. Please tell us, first of all, your views on the question of finance ?—From what I can see, the Commonwealth Government take one-fourth of our Customs duties, and have the right to take as much more as they want. I think, if they take away one-fourth of our revenue from Customs it would be more than New Zealand could conveniently stand ; nor do I think the benefits to be derived from losing that revenue would be commensurate with the loss. 282. How do you anticipate that the revenue so lost would be recouped to the State of New Zealand ? —lf they take away a portion of our Customs duties, of course that means direct taxation on the people to make it up. 283. And probably one form of direct taxation would be increase in the land- and income-tax, would it not ? —There are many ways by which it might be done, but I think that is the main one. 284. What would be the effect of that on producers ?—lt would mean a serious loss to the producers, as the inhabitants of New Zealand are now bearing as much taxation as they properly ought to. We are raising a race in New Zealand which is quite distinct from that in the Australian Colonies. The two races cannot be compared, and in fifty years from now that distinction will be much greater than it is to-day, and therefore their views and aims will not be the same as ours ; and if we go into partnership with the federated States of Australia we are running our heads, to my mind, into a noose out of which we cannot get. It will be like a married man who cannot get rid of a wife he cannot agree with. Possibly friction may arise, and if it does it will have to continue. Therefore I should prefer to defer the question for a number of years, and then if we have to pay ten times as much to go into the Federation as we have to now it will be the right thing to do, because we will then know our position, and we would be better able to pay it than we would by going into the Federation in a blind way to-day. 285. Have you any fear that the present powers of the State would be interfered with by the Federal Government in time to come ?—I think ib is very likely they would be. I think pressure would be brought to bear perhaps by three States together, which would prove inimical to the interests of New Zealand. 286. What do you think would be the effect on local manufactures if New Zealand federated with Australia ?—Some of our manufactures would suffer. Boots and shoes might suffer a little, possibly some classes of ironwork, but Ido not think it would touch the woollen industry. I think they can beat any in Australia, and more than hold their own. 287. How do you think we should be affected by New Zealand being separated by twelve hundred miles of sea from Australia ?—That would be against the interests of New Zealand. 288. Why ?—Distance, for one reason, and on account of the difference in the class of people who are now being raised in New Zealand. 289. Are there any other disadvantages which occur to you that would result from federating with Australia ?—I think it would be suicidal for us to hand ourselves over, bound neck and crop, to any body of associated States without knowing exactly how we were to be treated. 290. Can you conceive of any advantages which would accrue to New Zealand through her joining the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I do not see much. A reciprocity treaty would be very much more to the purpose. 291. Then, are you of opinion that it would be better for New Zealand to retain her political independence at present ?—Certainly. I would not object to an agreement being made that on a certain date we could come in on certain terms provided we were satisfied, but not otherwise. 292. Are you acquainted with Queensland ?—No, but I have been in it. 293. Have you any opinion as to whether it is possible or not for the sugar industry there to be continued without coloured labour ?—I have seen the labour working there, and I think that white men could do it, but they could not do it at the price. 294. Mr. Beauchamp.] You lived in Australia twenty-six years ?—Yes. 295. Do you consider, from your knowledge of the Australians, that their aims and aspirations are different from those of the New-Zealanders?—My opinion is that the people of New Zealand are quite a distinct class to the Australians, and as years go on that distinction will be more marked. 296. In what respect would you say they are distinct ?—First of all, in regard to their physique ; secondly, we are more energetic. You can see that in our own colony. You can do more business in the South in half an hour than you can in half a day in Auckland. We have different climatic conditions. 297. What do you say about the Australians intellectually as compared with our people ?—I think they are smart enough. I was only speaking about them physically. 298. Do you think the sugar industry could be carried on profitably by means of white labour ? —I think the whites could carry it on, but they could not do it as cheaply as the coloured labour. 299. As to finance, do you think that by surrendering the Customs duties and making up that sum by direct taxation it would be prejudical to the interests of this colony ?—Certainly. 300. Have you thought of the effect upon the industries of this colony by reason of the competition they would be subjected to through the removal of duties by intercolonial free-trade ?—I do not attach a great deal of weight to that argument. I think New-Zealanders can hold their own. They are more energetic than the Australians, and the climate is also in their favour. They can do better work under those circumstances, and I think they could hold their own against the Australians. 301. We are told that in the large cities of Sydney and Melbourne, owing to centralisation and specialisation in the direction of manufacturing certain goods, they can compete successfully against our own manufacturers : what is your opinion in that connection ? —They compete in this way : that they sell their goods in Victoria and New South Wales at good prices, so that they can then ship the balance to New Zealand, and can afford to take what they get for them.
A.—4
160
302. That is to say, that this is to be the dumping-ground for their surplus ?—I do not say New Zealand only, but elsewhere. 303. In that case our own manufacturers would suffer?— They would suffer to that extent; but I think the New-Zealanders would compete with them in their own markets to a certain extent. 304. You have had experience in the exportation of grain to Australia: which has been your chief market ? —Sydney and Queensland are the chief markets. Sydney is a free port, but Queensland is not. 305. By our refraining from entering the Commonwealth, do you think we should be shut out from their market ?—I do not think so, because when they want our produce they would have to take it, and pay the duty on the grain. The trouble during the last two years has been that Victoria and New South Wales have had good years on the seaboard, and they have produced nearly as much as they required, therefore their requirements from us have been small; but perhaps next year we shall have to supply them with what they require, and they will have to accept our supply, and, if they impose a duty, will have to pay the taxation on it. 306. As to the cost of production of grain, is it cheaper generally in Australia than here ?— We can produce grain much cheaper than they can. 307. You are very emphatic on that point?— Yes. I was twenty years in Victoria, and know something about that matter, and about what they can do. 308. Mr. Luke.] I think I gather from your remarks that under federation we would be placed at a great disadvantage because of our distance from the centres of population ? —That is one reason. 309. Is that not more or less illusory when we come to examine it ? For instance, our farmers produce along a close sea-coast, and the means of getting our produce to our ports is very much simpler than it is in Australia. For instance, your great grain-growing district of Canterbury could rail its wheat very cheaply and rapidly to Lyttelton ?—I doubt whether it is as cheap as they can do it in Australia, though. 310. But, still, it is comparatively cheap as compared with the Australian rates ?—No ; they will carry from five times the distance for a little more than we have to pay here. They will carry 100 miles at 4d. per bushel, and ours is 2Jd., and if they reduce it from 3Jd. to 2-Jd. they would be able to carry it cheaper than we can. 311. But you have got twelve hundred miles of sea-carriage, which, compared with the many hundreds of miles that the farmers in the Commonwealth would have to carry their produce to the big centres of Melbourne and Sydney, ought to be rather an advantage in favour of New Zealand, should it not?— But, you see, the sea-carriage is so little. What you mean to say is that we can deliver stuff from Ashburton to Sydney at cheaper rates than farmers can who live five hundred miles from Sydney —it would be six of one and half a dozen of the other. 312. Would not Australia then supply you with a very splendid market under the Commonwealth?—lt would probably supply me with a splendid market under reciprocity, not under the Commonwealth. 313. You think that there is no certainty of reciprocity?— No. If you say "under the Commonwealth," I must say No, because we have to pay a great deal more towards the Commonwealth than we can make by joining it—if we take all the profit and the Commonwealth takes none. 314. As to the matter of distance, and being represented in the Federal Parliament so as to bring our influence to bear upon the Federal Government, is there not something in that ?—I think that might be got over; but lam decidedly of the opinion that in ten or fifteen years from now we shall be further off and out of touch with the Federal Parliament than we are to-day. 315. Therefore it narrows itself down to the political aspect—that you think we have different political aims and aspirations to the Australians, and we can do better by remaining a separate people?—l think so. 316. Do you not think, that being the case, we would be at an advantage in this great Commonwealth, because we can produce a higher race, stronger physically, and having this great mass of the people to deal with in this great market?—No, I do not see it. 317. We are told very often that we are leading the whole civilised world : probably we would lead the Commonwealth ?—I do not think we would lead the Australians far; I know them too well. 318. You think we should preserve our political independence, and continue to work out our own destiny ? —I do. 319. And you have a very high estimation of that independence ?—Certainly. I would like to point out that our social condition is so much better than theirs, and we live upon a very much higher level. 320. Do you not think the tendency of legislation in that country is in the direction of elevating the social status of their people, and bringing it up to the level of our own ?—Let us hope so. 321. Would not we be an important factor in helping to lift them ?—We are only a handful compared to them. 322. If our race is so much stronger in all the elements that make for consideration in that respect, does it not appear that it would not be long before our people came to the fore ?—I should not like to grant much on that assumption. I object to entering into any partnership unless I know how we are going to get out of it. 323. As regards the sugar industry, do you think it is possible to develop that industry with white labour ?—I do not think white labour could do it at the price. 324. Do you think, under any circumstances, it could be carried on by white labour ?—I do, provided the British-speaking people were prepared to pay a little more for the sugar.
161
A.—4
325. Do you think the climate is so deadly to the stamina of white people as all that ?—There are white people working all round the sugar-plantations, and hundreds of miles further north. 326. We have been told that there will be, after one or two generations, a great deterioration, which will produce simply a weak and effeminate 'race of people in those regions ?—That is the contingency that will arise throughout Australia, more or less. 327. Eegarding the defence point of view, do you not think that under federation we should be under the same conditions as regards defence as Australia is ? —I do not think so. 328. We should be a able to exercise our voice more forcibly on the authorities at Home than we can as a mere section of the great British Empire ?—We certainly might have more weight, providing every one of us went together; but we are bound to have assistance from Britain's navy, and that would be the only assistance we would get; and, although it would be very much quicker to send a vessel from the Commonwealth to New Zealand, still, at the same time, I think we could do just as well in the way of defence from England as we can from the Commonwealth, because it all hinges again on the point, What is it going to cost us ? 329. We are told, and with a certain degree of force, that the big centres of Australia, owing to their cheaper freights, would actually beat New Zealand, and our manufactures, therefore, would be more or less destroyed: do you not think, considering the natural advantages we have in New Zealand, we could enlarge our capabilities and produce for the home market at a cheaper rate than we are now doing, and by shipping our surplus at bare cost we would be enabled to cheapen production for the home consumption—would not that be a great advantage to the industries of New Zealand ?—I have answered that question twice. I think the balance of trade would be in favour of New Zealand ultimately. 330. Then, it is a political objection more strongly than any other that you have got to federation ? —My objection is that we would be paying too high a price without knowing what we were buying. 331. Mr. Leys.] Prom your residence in Australia, do you think there is a community of interest between the Australians which does not exist between them and New Zealand ?—I think there is. 332. And that community of interest, you think, would influence the Federal Parliament in considering questions that came before it ? —lt might in one or two points which were of vital importance to New Zealand. 333. And that we really would be overreached by the strength of Australian influence ?—That is my view, and it is a disinterested one, as I have lived in both countries, and look upon Victoria as my home. 334. Do you think this Federal Government will continue to act as mere administrators for Customs duties and Post Offices, or do you think they will go in for large schemes for the development of the Australian Continent ?—They might do so, but we have no knowledge that they will. 335. Mr. Barton has already announced the trans-continental railway, and the development of the tropical districts : would those be of any advantage to New Zealand ? —Of course not. 336. But I take it that New Zealand would have to pay towards making them?— Well, that is another reason for not joining the Federation. 337. Mr. Barton stated recently that the continental railway scheme would be an advantage to New Zealand from a defence point of view : do you think it would ?—The benefits are too remote. 338. Coming to the question of agriculture, do you think the introduction of intercolonial free-trade would affect the food-producers of Canterbury by bringing Australian wheat into competition with them in the North Island ?—I certainly think it would, unless in seasons when they are short of it in Australia, and those are the seasons we would have to supply Australia. I would never go in for free-trade, but reciprocity. 339. Taking the general range of seasons, Australia is a large exporter of wheat, is it not ?— Yes, during the last year or eighteen months. 340. Do you know whether the prices of wheat in Sydney are much higher than the average price in New Zealand ?—Yes, about 3d. to 4d. per bushel, and there is that much difference in the value of the wheat. 341. Then we come to Australian flour : is Sydney flour of better quality than our own?— Sydney flour is not as good as Adelaide, but it is more valuable -than New Zealand. Adelaide flour is worth about 12s. 6d. a ton more. 342. Is it quoted usually much higher than Canterbury flour?—lt does not get in here, because we have got a duty on it; but it used to come here when there was no duty—into the North Island and Wellington. 343. You think it would become a very serious competitor with us under free-trade in an odd season ? —Yes. 344. Do you think the farmers here will suffer seriously from that competition?— During odd seasons they would suffer very severely; they would be compelled to lose the local market, and send it Home. 345. Do you know of any compensating advantages likely to arise from federation ? —I certainly do not. I think the conditions are the other way. If I thought there were compensating advantages I would be going for federation. 346. From a farmer's point of view?—l am a farmer's representative. 347. Hon. Major Steward.] What would be the effect of federation on the export trade of New Zealand to Australia in regard to such minor articles of produce as bacon, hams, onions, potatoes, peas, and butter? Do you think if we federated we should be shut out of that market for these articles ? —Partly; in bad years we shall not be shut out. I think I made it very clear that, whether the trade is free-trade or whether it is not, there are odd years in Australia that 21—A. 4.
A.—4
162
they would send to us for things, and when they had to do so, it does not matter what the duty is, they have to pay it, in addition to the cost of the article. 348. But supposing there was a shortage there, like there was in 1889, when New South Wales required to obtain from somewhere articles to the value of £220,000, could we always depend on having a market there which we could get at if at the same time Victoria is able to send in free of duty? —I should say that Victoria would beat us. 349. Is Victoria capable of producing these articles in sufficient quantities to meet the consumption of New South Wales in addition to her own requirements ?—lf they took as much trouble to cultivate the land in Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland as they do here, New Zealand would never send anything there at all. 350. Do you not think it probable, then, that if we federated the Victorians would lay themselves out to produce all that is required for all parts of the Commonwealth? —I think the Tasmanians will do the most of it. 351. If that is the case, do you not think, with the handicap of twelve hundred miles as against Victoria, and the very much longer distance as against Tasmania, that even if we were put on equal terms with them they would get the advantage against us ?—I do. 352. So that, although we might for the time being suffer somewhat as regards losing trade with New South Wales—and even supposing there were no federation—do you not think that the natural course of things would have brought about the development of those industries in Victoria and Tasmania to such an extent as would enable them to capture each part of the market?—l think it is exceedingly probable. 353. Hon. the Supposing there were intercolonial free-trade between this colony and Australia, how would that affect the commercial trade with the west coast of this Island ? Do you think any large portion of it would be done from Victoria?—-It is not so many years ago since the whole of it was done from Melbourne, and my opinion is that under free-trade it would revert back to the same place, excepting in seasons when they had a drought, when we might have to supply them. 354. I mean trade generally ? —lt would come from Melbourne. 355. What is your ground for saying that?—l do not know how it is, but at the initiation of the goldfields most of the people connected with Hokitika were Victorians, and they had small schooners running there, and a small steamer or two, and they kept them going, and the trade has not absolutely lapsed from Victoria yet. If there were free-trade with New Zealand they would gain that trade again. 356. What do you think would be the effect on the onion industry in New Zealand if we federated ? —I think it will not make very much difference to the onion trade. There are thousands of acres in Victoria, round about Geelong, where they could grow all the onions required in this Commonwealth, but the price is so fluctuating that they do not grow as many as they could and should, and so in odd times they rush to New Zealand for them. 357. You say you are a farmers' representative : are we to understand you are voicing their opinions ?—No; my own interests are identical with those of the farmers, with whom I do the 'whole of my business. 358. Are you a producer or a purchaser? —A purchaser. 359. And you say your interests are identical with those of the producers ?—Certainly. Edwaed William Bopeb, examined. (No. 55.) 360. Hon. the What are you, Mr. Eoper ?—I am a merchant in Christchurch. I have resided in -New Zealand for thirty-eight years, and in Australia a short time before I came here. I have also visited Australia very often. 361. I believe you have studied the question of federation very closely ?—I have given a great deal of time to it. 362. Is the result of your study of the matter favourable or unfavourable to New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia? —I am very strongly opposed to New Zealand federating with Australia under the terms of the Commonwealth Act. I know that Act fairly well. 363. Will you kindly state to the Commission the grounds upon which you base your conclusions ?—There are many. It appears to me that it is not altogether desirable for me to waste any of your time, and I propose, if you think right, to place my written opinions, that have already been published, in the hands of the Commissioners ; they are in print. I was appointed by the Canterbury Chamber to lead in the discussion on the question of federation, my side being against federation ; and at that time, when I first brought the matter before the Chamber, there was a report taken of my addresses, and they are now in print; and I also treated on the matter at the Congress of Chambers of Commerce the other day. I have gone fully into the question of the effect the Commonwealth Act would have on New Zealand, and I must say that I have, like many other people, waited for some revelation of the advantages which will accrue to New Zealand in the event of her joining the Commonwealth. I have heard but one or two arguments, and they can be summed up altogether in the direction of a slightly better market. Since hearing these opinions published I have looked into the statistics, with which I am sure the members of the Commission are better acquainted than I am, and I do not find that there is any probable advantage likely to accrue to New Zealand by federating, because we can only deliver or sell our surplus products, and naturally we seek the best market for that surplus. Some ten-elevenths of our surplus finds its only market in England. If we take the returns for 1899 we find that, roughly speaking, our exports amounted to something over eleven millions, while only one million and fifty-six thousand pounds' worth went to Australia. Therefore we have, in the first place, only to deal with the eleventh part of our exports; and, in looking at the direction in which
163
A.—4
these exports went, we find that some six hundred thousand pounds' worth went to the free port of Sydney, showing evidently that either the proximity of Sydney or the advantages of a free port attracted an extra quantity of our exports. But, as against that, we find that the imports to New Zealand from New South Wales largely exceeded Ehe imports from any other port of Australia; so that one is inclined to think that the position of the free port of New South Wales and speedy communication has something to do with it. We find that, as far as Victoria is concerned, during that particular year, notwithstanding the duty on butter, which I think is 2d. per pound, they took a larger quantity of butter than the free port of New South Wales. Also in sawn timber they took several thousand pounds' worth more than the free port of Sydney ; and therefore it does not appear to me that, if the duties were abolished throughout Australia, we could very greatly extend our exports there, for the simple reason that the best market for our main products, wool and mutton, which are the main portion of these products, would naturally still be in England. And supposing some small quantity of our exports were shut out by a duty being established in New South Wales, similar to the duties existing now in other colonies, I do not think the decrease in our exports would be very considerable, because I take it that the people of Australia only take certain perishable produce that we send them when they fail to produce it themselves ; and that would occur sometimes under federation. Therefore Ido not apprehend that there would be any great falling-off; but, even if there were a slight falling-off, it would simply mean that we would have to find some other market, and the loss would not be very great. Supposing we sent £200,000 less in consequence of the imposition of duty in Sydney, we could only look upon that as probably being a loss of 2 J per cent., or a matter of £5,000. If we consider that the Commonwealth may require us to forfeit £500,000 of our Customs revenue, on the basis of £2,000,000 which we have collected, and when we consider that in ten years the whole £2,000,000 a year may be forfeited, it seems to me that, even on a mere question of £ s. d., we do not quite view the matter with due respect to its importance. It does not seem to me that one can be set against, the other, but I think the matter of federation ought to be considered from a very much higher ground than the mere question of extending or lessening our Australian markets for certain products. Here is the address delivered by me at the Chamber of Commerce, and these are my views on federation :— Address delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Chamber of Commerce. " Although the question of Australian federation has long occupied the attention of our sister colonies, it was not until New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, and Tasmania had, by a plebiscite, converted the dreams of the Unionists into a concrete fact that New Zealand evinced any particular interest in federation as applied to herself. Truth to tell, with some people this interest was not evoked by any special desire for coalition, but rather from a dread lest the new Union might establish a tariff that would spoil a market for such of our products as had hitherto been shipped to the free port of Sydney. Another section of the community, actuated by purely patriotic motives, and accustomed to regard the word ' federation ' as the shibboleth of our race, at once concluded that the union of New Zealand and Australia would be an additional link in the chain of sympathy and mutual interest which binds together the widespread nations of which our Empire is composed. " As the people of New Zealand will eventually have to decide whether their country is to become an Australian State, or to retain its independence, it is essential that every issue of the question should be carefully considered by those to whom the subject is of such vital importance. Under these circumstances it is clearly the duty of associations like Chambers of Commerce to encourage their members to place their views at the disposal of the public. From the conflict of opinions among men, who, however much they may differ, have their country's good at heart, some assistance cannot fail to be rendered to those who are anxious to arrive at a sound conclusion. " To better judge the effect upon New Zealand of the suggested league, it will be advisable to review the terms of the Federal Bill under which we would have to become members of the Commonwealth, and then, if the conditions contained therein appear to be of a character that would debar their acceptance, to endeavour to seek a modus vivendi that will enable us to reap the many advantages of a closer alliance with our sister colonies. "The Federal Bill, framed, as stated in its preamble, for the purpose of establishing an indissoluble Commonwealth of Australia, although bestowing on New Zealand the right of admission, certainly does not, so far as its title is concerned, quite appear to provide for such a contingency. " The Constitution of the' Commonwealth is set out as follows : The permanent seat of government shall be in New South Wales, at a distance of at least one hundred miles from Sydney. There shall be a Governor-General, with a yearly salary of £10,000. The Parliament shall consist of a Senate or Upper House, composed of six members from each colony or State, and a House of Eepresentatives with slightly over twice the numerical strength of the Upper Chamber. The members of the Lower House are to be returned on a population basis. Every member of Parliament shall receive a salary of £400 per annum, besides which, £12,000 a year is to be available for those who hold portfolios. If the seven colonies of Australasia joined the Commonwealth, the Parliament would consist of forty-two Senators—viz., six for each colony or State—and about ninety members of the Lower House, or one for each 52,000 inhabitants. Thus New Zealand would be represented by six Senators and fifteen members of the Lower House. " The Federal Parliament is to have power to make laws with respect to commerce, taxation, borrowing money, posts and telegraphs, defence, currency, banking, insurance, bankruptcy, patents, marriage and divorce, old-age pensions, immigration and emigration, conciliation and arbitration, &c. The judicial powers of the Commonwealth are to be vested in a Federal Supreme Court, which shall practically supplant the Privy Council as an ultimate Court of Appeal.
A.—4
164
" The following departments of the public service in each colony or State are to be transferred to the Commonwealth, viz. : Customs and excise, posts, telegraphs, and telephones, naval and military defence, lighthouses, quarantine, &c. All moneys received by the Federal Parliament are to form one consolidated revenue fund, to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth, except that during the first ten years not more than one-fourth of the revenue derived from Customs and excise shall be retained by the Commonwealth. At the expiration of that period, the whole of the Customs and excise revenue will be at the disposal of the Federal Parliament. " Within two years uniform duties are to be imposed throughout the Union, but all trade and commerce among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall, so far as concerns Customs duty, be absolutely free. Each State is to be credited with the money contributed, and any balance that may remain after the expenses of the Commonwealth have been defrayed shall be refunded. " And now, having sketched the salient features of the Bill, the question naturally arises, How would New Zealand be affected if she became subject to this Constitution ? No sooner had the recent referendum placed the subject beyond the academic stage than a few of our aspiring politicians, possibly hoping for popularity, and certainly with little real knowledge of the subject, declared themselves in favour of this colony joining the new Union. Fortunately most of our public men, realising that the question was too important and difficult to be dealt with hastily, declined to commit themselves until they had had time to become familiar with the Bill, and to carefully estimate what the effect would be on New Zealand if she subscribed to its numerous clauses. Day by day the result of these deliberations are being communicated to the public, and, so far, not one statesman on either side of the House has declared himself in favour of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth. The reason for this unanimity among men who, as a rule, are only too glad to differ is not far to seek. The principles upon which the new league is established are not of a character likely to commend themselves to patriotic New-Zealanders, who, however much they may approve of federation on equitable terms, could never submit to the disabilities they would incur by joining the Australian Commonwealth. Considerable misapprehension has arisen through this union taking the form of a Commonwealth instead of being simply a federation for the purposes of inter-free-trade and mutual protection. New-Zealanders have for many years felt it would be to the general advantage of the British colonies in the South Pacific if some scheme could be formulated that, whilst assuring complete autonomy to each separate country would at the same time insure unity of action in all matters of common interest. The State partnership now being established in Australia is not an alliance upon these grounds, for its essential principles involve the sacrifice of autonomy on the part of individual States, and provide for the pooling in one consolidated fund of their principal revenues. Under such conditions New Zealand, however anxious she may be for a league on suitable terms, could never consent to become a member of the Commonwealth. She may yet federate with United Australia, but it must be as an ally and an equal, and without loss of self-control. "The absorption of New Zealand by Australia would mean our national effacement; and when this fact is realised no New-Zealander, unless he is prepared to ignore the interests of his country in the hope of self-advancement, will consent to the sacrifice. At present the vast majority of those who advocate federation in this country are unaware that acceptance of the terms of the Commonwealth involves the forfeiture of New Zealand's independence, and it has even been loudly urged that opposition to the Australian scheme denotes a parochial spirit on the part of the objectors. The fallacy of this contention is proved by the fact of those who oppose the terms of the Commonwealth being the strongest advocates of that larger or Imperial Federation which, of necessity, embraces and provides for all minor amalgamations. It is in cementing the bonds that bind us to the Mother-country, and through her to every spot on the globe claiming her dominion, that our desire for federation can find its best expression, and it by no means follows that we should strengthen those ties by irrevocably binding ourselves to Australia. It is conceivable that our very freedom from such a trammel might some day prove of immense value in maintaining the unity of the Empire. The retention of our national liberty will certainly not lessen our power to uphold British prestige in the Pacific; and, so far as concerns our own interests, much more importance will be attached to the views of an independent nation than to those of an Australian State. We, above all others, are concerned in the future of the South Pacific islands, and it is only an act of common prudence for us to retain the fullest freedom to take such steps in the future as may be deemed necessary to conserve our rights. " Distinct from what may be termed ' patriotic ' objections to the proposed union, and, of course, subsidiary to those objections, comes the question of cost. As members of the Commonwealth our taxation would be enormously increased. Not only would all local charges of administration remain as costly as ever, but there would be the ever-increasing expense of the Federal Government. The exact amount we should have to pay for the privilege of being merged in the Commonwealth it is, of course, impossible to say; yet some idea of the liability may be formed by noting the provisions of the Bill. Besides the £74,000 to be divided annually by the Governor-General, Executive, and 130 members, the thirty-nine departments of administration which are to be vested in the Federal Government, including, as we have seen, trade and commerce, Customs and excise, posts, telegraphs, telephones, &c, will require large permanent staffs at the Federal capital, and also travelling inspectors with their assistants. To provide suitable accommodation for the Governor-General, the Parliament, and its Ministers, and the swarms of departmental officers who will be employed, gigantic buildings will have to be erected ; in fact, as provided for in the Bill, a Federal capital will have to be established, and, of course, paid for. No doubt, under the new Administration, large appropriations will be made to erect fortifications, to purchase war-vessels, and to form an Australian army. The extent to which this colony would benefit by this class of
165
A.—4,
expenditure is problematical. There is no evidence to prove that our soldiers would be better controlled from Australia than from Wellington ; and as for our navy, if we had money to spend in that direction, it certainly should be given to the Mother-country, who is better able and more willing than any other Power can possibly be to protect us on the ocean. " The annual charge to New Zealand for Federal Administration has been roughly computed at £200,000, but this amount would probably not include the cost of the capital, or of a navy, or of the strategic trans-continental railways, for which the Australian public are already clamouring. Besides the actual cost of the Administration, there will be the inconvenience, if not the humiliation, of having our revenues collected by the Federal Government, and then, if any balance remains, having it allotted to us at the will of what will practically be an Australian Parliament. This loss of control over our revenue, and our liability to taxation at the will of men of whom the large majority would know little or nothing of our requirements, would certainly deprive us of all virility as a nation. " The ignorance of most Australians on matters connected with New Zealand is truly surprising. Australia itself presents throughout certain generic characteristics which enable its inhabitants to understand and to sympathize with each other's wants ; but, so far as concerns New Zealand, the average Australian knows scarcely anything of its area, population, or climate —in fact, he confounds it with the smaller islands of the Pacific. As a proof of this, only the other day a leading Australian journal, when discussing the question of New Zealand's admission to the Commonwealth, said it would be unwise for the continent to burden itself with the managemnt of such an uncivilised people. And yet, in spite of this crass ignorance of our true position, we are urged to relegate the conduct of our national affairs to an Australian Parliament. " Another and not unimportant phase of the suggested union would be the inconvenience that must necessarily result from living under the complicated rule of two Parliaments. It has long been held that New Zealand is overburdened with legislation. Year after year fresh statutes are framed for her control—and, in fact, so many new laws come into force that it is difficult for the most astute lawyer to comprehend their full significance. Federation would render our code still more complex, for, in addition to the enactments that emanate from our own two Houses, the Federal Parliament will devote many months each year to the congenial task of framing additional laws for the so-called benefit of the people. " At the present time, omitting party matters, the affairs of this colony are in a satisfactory condition. Would it not be wise to let well alone? A demand for a radical change of method in the administration of a nation's affairs can only be justifiable when the existing system has proved a failure. Looking at the record of New Zealand's rapid development, it cannot be urged that her Constitution has been a failure, norhas any evidence been brought forward to prove that the transfer of her control to an Australian Parliament would augment her commerce, develop her industries, increase her productiveness, accelerate her progress as a nation, or in the slightest degree increase the freedom or happiness of her people. Whilst the management of our affairs is vested in a local" Parliament, the members of the House of Representatives are directly responsible to the people. If a member does not give satisfaction he can be rejected at the next election. Unfortunately, if the Federal Parliament failed in its duty to New Zealand, there would practically be no remedy, because six-sevenths of the members would be returned by Australian constituencies, and therefore would be independent of New Zealand opinion. In the fierce struggle for recognition that will take place in the new Parliament, this colony must necessarily come off second best, for the simple reason that she is too far off and too isolated for her requirements to be understood, or her aspirations to be appreciated. If, as a member of the Commonwealth, she were placed in such .a position of neglect, and if it were felt that the only remedy was a return to independence, it must be remembered that no escape would be possible. Such a contingency as withdrawal is no way provided for by the Bill. " As we stand at present, New Zealand is not only capable of producing all that is necessary to supply directly or indirectly the wants of her people, but her productiveness has enabled her to accumulate wealth so rapidly that, even at this early stage of colonisation, she is, reckoning per head of population, one of the richest of nations. And what is the benefit offered to us in return for risking our present assured position ? It is practically neither more nor less than an open market for any of our products that may be required in Australia. Or, otherwise expressed, there is a covert threat that unless we join the Commonwealth a prohibitory tariff will be established to exclude our products. An examination of the returns of our trade with Australia conclusively proves that a high tariff would not shut us out, and that, if it could, Australia would have nothing to gain by imposing restrictions on her trade with this colony. " In consequence of gold and silver being included in the official returns of our exports to Australia, our sales to that country are made to appear of more importance than they should do. If we exclude the precious metals, which are saleable in every market, our exports to Australia for 1898 amounted to only £972,000, an increase of £76,000 on our exports in 1897. On the other hand, our imports from Australia for 1898 amounted to £1,140,000, or £143,000 more than during the previous year. As the value of Australia's exports to New Zealand were thus £168,000 more than her imports from that colony, there need be little dread that Australia will do anything to injure a trade that she is in every way interested in conserving. With regard to the volume of our yearly exports, the returns prove that they do not depend so much upon tariffs as upon the amount of the Australian rainfall. When, owing to drought, Australia is short of onions and potatoes, she will import those articles in spite of any duty that may be levied. For instance, last .year Victoria, with a duty of 2d. per pound, imported twenty-five thousand pounds' worth of New Zealand butter; whilst during the same period the free ports of New South Wales took but seventeen thousand pounds' worth. It must also be remembered that only 10 per cent, of our exports go to Australia, and if the imposition of duty in the sometime free port of Sydney should
A.—4
166
cause a shrinkage of one-fourth of our exports to the whole continent, and supposing no other market could be found for that fourth, the decrease would, after all, be only 2-J per cent, on our total exports. Surely it is beneath our dignity as a nation to allow the question of a 2-J-per-cent. increase or decrease in our exports to influence us in" deciding whether we shall retain or sacrifice our Constitution. " Australia's purchases from New Zealand are not the result of any sentimental desire to benefit this colony. The seeds, timber, potatoes, onions, flax, sulphur, pumice, &c, are bought from us because they contribute to the comfort or profit of the purchasers. As the duties levied on these articles must be paid by the buyers, it is not at all clear that a high tariff would meet with the approval of the Australian public, who, after all, must be the arbiters of the question. In all probability, the only State whose tariff will be seriously affected by the proposed change is New South Wales, who will have to forego her free-trade principles, although, doubtless, her members will struggle their hardest to have the general tariff kept as low as possible. In those States where the tariff is unaltered our trade will not be affected, and it may fairly be assumed that New South Wales will not cease to be a customer because her duties are made the same as those, for example, of Victoria, a colony that in 1898, in spite of her high tariff, imported, apart from gold, two hundred and sixty thousand pounds' worth of New Zealand products. " So little have some nervous people understood the basis and proportions of the trade between this colony and Australia, that fearing lest our whole commercial system should be wrecked, they have clamoured for our immediate entrance to the Commonwealth. They have warned us that unless we join at once we may be shut out, or, at any rate, lose the advantages that will be granted to originating States. Luckily, the gravity of the question at issue is now too well appreciated for such advice to be followed. As a matter of fact, there are no special privileges granted to those who first form the Union. Late-comers will enter upon mutually agreed terms, and, judging by the desire of all Federations to increase their power by the addition of new States, there need be no apprehension that Australia will place obstacles in the way of New Zealand should she ever desire to join the Commonwealth. By waiting a few years we shall have an opportunity to watch the results of federation in the other colonies, and with that experience to guide us we shall be better able to judge of the course we should pursue. When our people have had sufficient time to fully realise how their colony would be affected by federation, and not until then, should they be called upon to give their final decision. " Now, let us suppose New Zealand to have joined the Commonwealth with complete intercolonial free-trade : how would she then be affected ? We have seen by the Constitution that after a certain time each State is to be credited with the duties and excise collected within its borders, and that after all the Commonwealth expenses have been paid the balance is to be refunded. The amount of this most important balance will, in the first place, depend upon the duties collected, and, secondly, upon the amount absorbed by the Federal Government. As goods from Australia would no longer be dutiable, there would necessarily be a great shrinkage in our Customs returns; and no doubt, to make matters worse, large quantities of goods that had paid duty in Melbourne and Sydney would be poured into this market, and these duties would after the first five years probably be credited to the State in which they had been collected, and this colony would miss the refund. " And then, again, with regard to the abolition of intercolonial duties, what would become of our local industries that have hitherto had the advantage of a protective tariff? How would they fare when opposed to free and open competition with Australia ? There can be little doubt but that they would almost cease to exist. Melbourne and Sydney, with their cheap labour, and low freights from Europe, would become the distributing centres for New Zealand; most of our manufacturers would have to close their doors, and many of our direct importers would also find their occupations gone. Unfortunately, when forfeiting our revenue we should not be parting with our debts. They would still be with us, and the annual interest would have to be paid as regularly as ever. Our Parliament, although restricted in its powers, would still have to be maintained ; our roads, bridges, Courts, gaols, police, &c, would still have to be paid for. In fact, the ordinary expenses would go on as they do now, and added to these there would be the cost of the Federal Administration. But from what source would the moneys be drawn? Not from the Customs, for that easy method of collecting would have passed from our control. New forms of taxation would have to be devised, and all the present exemptions swept away. The prospect is so unpleasant that it is extremely unlikely that New Zealand will consent to forego her present prospects for the doubtful advantage of joining the Australian Commonwealth. " Unfavourable as the financial aspect of federation may appear for New Zealand, that consideration should not be sufficient in itself to prevent her joining the Commonwealth, if by doing so she could eventually attain that honourable position among nations to which she has every right to aspire. At the present time she is looked upon as one of the most vigorous and, certainly, in many respects, the most progressive of Britain's progeny. So far as intelligence and self-reliance are concerned, she is the equal of any other nation, however large or powerful. Content, as becomes a juvenile, to confine her energies to the development of her resources, she, nevertheless, looks forward with hope to the day when she may be regarded as the Britain of the South. So far, there is no evidence that she would attain the object of her ambition, or in any way add to her influence, by accepting the position of an over-the-sea State in the proposed Commonwealth. "The Australian Colonies being contiguous, and containing a large migratory population, it is both natural and expedient for them to demolish artificial barriers and form themselves into one great nation, with the ocean for its boundary. But what has New Zealand to do with this Union ? Geographically, she is divided from it —and her people, owing to climatic and other causes, already differ in type and temperament from the Australians. The eventual result of such differences may
167
A.—4
be foreseen by noting the difficulties that have arisen between Ireland and England —countries separated by a mere channel. " Australian politicians are no doubt actuated by kindly motives when they warn New Zealand of the pains and penalties she will incur by" refusing to enter the Commonwealth ; but, unfortunately, they give no explanation as to ways and means. They invite her to hand over her Customs and excise revenue, postal, telegraph, and telephone services, but they fail to say how, when these sources of income are gone, she is to pay nearly £2,000,000 a year interest on her debts. Nor do they prove by a single argument that she would be better governed if her affairs were in the hands of a Parliament of which a large majority would know little or nothing of New Zealand or her requirements. " If the seat of government were established in Australia, with a Parliament consisting of about six Australians to each New-Zealander, how much attention, under such circumstances, could possibly be given to the special needs of the far-away and little-known isles of New Zealand? Surely it would be a subversion of our avowed democratic principles to place the reins of government in the hands of men who possibly might not feel themselves under any obligation to serve us, but, on the contrary, might feel it incumbent upon them to advance the interests of that continent to which they must look for preferment. " Although the path to federation, so far as Australians are concerned, will be rendered easy for New Zealand, we have seen that, having once entered, we shall have no right to withdraw from what is termed ' The Indissoluble Commonwealth.' Any effort to re-establish our autonomy would be looked upon as an act of rebellion, and, as the Federal army and navy would be against us, any such attempt would probably fail. " If, as is extremely probable, New Zealand finds it inexpedient to join the Commonwealth— and her refusal to do so is presaged by the fact of her best statesmen having always rejected the scheme—surely there is some intermediate course that would confer upon her and Australia the benefits of combination, without the sacrifice to either side of self-control. We are, as members of the same Empire, already bound together by a higher union than one of mere expendiency; and it is clearly the duty of the Austral nations to assist each other in civil, commercial, military, and naval affairs. If Imperial federation is not sufficient for the purpose, let the legal gap be filled by binding treaties. We of New Zealand entertain for our Australian cousins a true family affection. We admire the patriotic spirit that is now inducing them to weld into one vast nation those colonies that have grown up shoulder to shoulder. Any attack upon their rights would at once be a call to arms throughout New Zealand. Were we living on that continent, our desire for the Commonwealth would be as great as theirs. Placed as we are, far from any other land, we believe that our desire to guide our own destinies will meet with the support and approbation of all true Britishers. " So far it must be held that no valid argument has been adduced that would justify New Zealand in risking so drastic a change as would be brought about by the proposed amalgamation. The advantages of such a union to this colony are, at the best, chimerical; for example, it has been suggested that the Commonwealth could, on the strength of its better credit, convert our stock and reduce the interest on our public debt. But we are not told upon what terms our debts would be taken over, nor is there any assurance that any profit the Commonwealth might make by such conversion would be allotted to New Zealand. On the other hand, the disadvantages of the proposed amalgamation are only too apparent. Our burden of taxation would be greatly, or possibly unbearably, increased. Our local industries would, judging by the opinion of the industrial associations, be irreparably injured ; and certainly our independence would be gone for ever. In fact, if one were to judge of the position by the evidence at present available, it would be within the mark to say that if New Zealand joined the Commonwealth she could scarcely be worse off if she were made subject to a conquering nation. Bereft of the control of her revenues, with scarcely a voice in the administration of her national affairs, and subject to the vagaries of men who know nothing of her needs, and who would have no sympathy with her ambitions, she would become of no more political importance than Samoa and the Fijis, with which she has been confounded. As a distant dependency of Australia, she would no doubt be valued for her productiveness; and she would, of course, still be admired for the beauty of her scenery; but as a nation she would be for ever ignored." Address delivered at the Conference of Chambers of Commerce. " The resolution I wish to bring before the Conference refers to the all-important subject of New Zealand's future relationship to the Australian Commonwealth. As there are many other matters to be brought before your notice, and as our time is limited, it will be quite impossible to devote anything like the amount of attention that might profitably be bestowed on a matter of such importance. " Having on previous occasions addressed the Christchurch Chamber on the kindred subject of Australian federation, and those addresses being still in print, I may, for the purpose of shortening my remarks, refer the members present to what I have previously said in support of this colony retaining its independence. " The recent imposing inaugural celebrations of the Australian Commonwealth have naturally awakened in the minds of New-Zealanders a renewed interest in the momentous problem of their future course of action with regard to United Australia. So far, New Zealand's position has been little discussed, either by the House or the Press. Sufficient, however, has been said to enable most people to discriminate between the present union of geographically connected States and that wider Imperial federation which all loyal Britishers regard as the ultimate bond that is destined to maintain the unity of our widely spread Empire. " To throw light upon the difficult question of colonial federation, the Government has appointed a strong Commission, whose duty it will be to report upon the probable advantages or
A.—4
168
otherwise of our joining the Commonwealth. In the face of such a Commission, it might at first blush appear inadvisable for any other body to discuss a matter that is, as it were, sub judice. A little reflection will, however, modify any such opinion, for, as the Commission must look in every direction for evidence upon which to base its ultimate report, it is essential that it should hear what business-men such as are here assembled have to say upon the subject. In fact, so far from the question being tabooed, it should be thrashed out by every intelligent member of the community, so that when the time arrives an intelligent and emphatic reply may be given to the proposition,' Are we to join the Australian Commonwealth, or are we to retain our independence?' If, as appears most probable, New Zealand decides in favour of the latter course, it will then become necessary for the two nations, being of the same blood, and belonging to the same Empire, to form such a modified union as will most effectively foster their respective resources, and enable them in times of emergency to afford combined, and therefore the most effective, aid to the Mothercountry. " At one time it was suggested by a few pessimists that our refusal to join the Commonwealth would raise such a feeling of unfriendliness in Australia that her statesmen would endeavour to revenge themselves on us by framing a tariff that would effectually close their markets to our products. Since these opinions were expressed, the Commonwealth has been established without New Zealand, and no stronger refutation could be given to this charge of pettiness than the enthusiastic reception accorded to New-Zealanders at the recent Sydney celebrations. So far from any complaint being made against us, on every side appreciation has been manifested at our frendliness to Australia, and it has been generally admitted that it would be unwise of this colony to jeopardize its future by entering into a hard-and-fast agreement to hand over, for all time, the control of its revenue and the administration of its own affairs. On the other hand, it is admitted that, except in matters of finance and self-government, there is no valid reason why the two countries should not be as effectually federated for all purposes of common weal as though we joined the Commonwealth, and it is urged that the basis of the union must be love for the Empire as a whole, and no mere sordid or petty motive. A union founded on that higher, national sentiment will last so long as the ties of kinship, hold good—in other words, so long as our race occupies its present high position among nations. " The suggestion that we should join the Commonwealth in" the mere hope of improving our market is unworthy of consideration. Apart from the never-to-be-forgotten principle that a nation's liberty is beyond price, it is not in the least likely that our products will ever be shut out of the Australian market by a prohibitory tariff. It is true that, whether we do or do not join the Commonwealth, Australia will only buy from us what she is unable to produce for herself. During her good seasons her requirements will be small. In times of drought they will be large. In other words, the Australian market is one upon which, for many of our products, we can never absolutely rely. When she requires our food she will buy it, and Australians themselves will refuse to pay too high a duty upon the necessaries of life. But, even if there were any Australian politicians who desired to shut the commercial door to New Zealand, not only would they be opposed by all true statesmen, but they would meet with most active opposition from all those who, as exporters to or importers from New Zealand, are interested in conserving and developing the intercolonial trade. " A glance at the official returns will show at once that, apart from our precious metals, which are saleable in every market, our exports to Australia are less than our imports from that country. For example, in 1899 our imports were valued at £1,338,828, and our exports, exclusive of gold and silver, only £1,061,553, or, in other words, our purchases from Australia during the year amounted to £275,275 more than our sales; and yet, in the face of these facts, some people have cried out that the Commonwealth will want to burke trade with New Zealand by framing an unfriendly tariff. Is it not ridiculous to suppose that enterprising Australians are likely to do aught but foster a trade which, all told, already amounts to £3,000,000 per annum? " The question that now really concerns New Zealand is the method by which, without forfeiting her independence, she can best strengthen the social, political, and commercial ties that should exist for all time between herself and her Australian cousins. The essential basis of such a union is, precisely, the kinship that exists between us; as people of the same blood, and as members of the same Empire, we are united by bonds that will resist all selfish assaults. In a short time the serious work of formulating the terms of our agreement must be set about. When that time arrives no cavilling spirit must be displayed. Each side must be prepared to make concessions for the common weal. It is probable that neither party will demand absolute freetrade for its products ; but, on the other hand, every encouragement must be given to intercolonial trade. " The findings of civil and criminal Courts will no doubt hold good in both countries. A common scheme of defence must be established, so that in times of emergency the two nations can act in concert. All laws in respect to posts, telegraphs, currency, banking, marriage and divorce, patents, bankruptcy, &c, should, as far as the exigencies of the case admit, be common to both sides. By a union such as this all the best objects of intercolonial federation may be achieved without the risk of those serious ills that would attend our becoming members of the Commonwealth. What those ills would be it might appear ungracious to dwell upon at the present juncture. No one can cavil at our being contented with our present Constitution. We, as dwellers in a land far separated from any other, desire to retain the control of our own affairs. As we are now placed, our public administrators are directly responsible to the people, and if they make a mistake can be quickly called to book. We have, in fact, that particular form of direct representative government for which our race has always struggled, to attain which it has again and again shed its best blood. To forfeit our self-control and to sacrifice our nationality would, to say the least of it, be a blunder, and one for which we should be justly held responsible by our
169
A.—4,
descendants. Fortunately there is no occasion for any such sacrifice. All that is desirable in the way of union with Australia can be achieved without tampering in any way with our present Constitution. We can, in fact, form an alliance without entering into partnership. " I have now much pleasure in moving the following resolution : ' That this Conference, whilst deprecating any sacrifice of New Zealand's autonomy, is strongly of opinion that an alliance with the Australian Commonwealth, based on the broad lines of legal, social, military, and commercial reciprocity, will be of advantage to both nations, and will be another step in the direction of consolidating our Empire.'" 364. Hon. the Chairman.'] I notice that in the first paper you read you took exception to the increase of the machinery of government caused by the creation of the Federal Parliament and the Federal services ?—Yes. 365. Have you given attention to any other addition to the administration—namely, the interState Commission ? —Not to that particular item. 366. Have you considered this clause : " There shall be an inter-State Commission, with such powers of adjudication and administration as the Parliament deems necessary for the execution and maintenance within the Commonwealth of the provisions of this Constitution relating to trade and commerce, and of all laws made thereunder"?—l have; but I think tlie £200,000 that has been suggested will be the first cost of the Federal administration, and includes that inter-State Commission. 367. It seems to be a permanent body?—l did not mean a first charge, I meant an annual charge. The cost of administration is supposed to begin at about £200,000 per annum. 368. I was putting it to you that, in addition to the extra administrative and legislative functions of the Federal Parliament, there would be this inter-State Commission : do you not think that that would tend very much to complicate the legislative machinery ?—I cannot help thinking that that Commission would be subject to the supreme power of the Federal Parliament. I think it says that the Commission will make recommendations. 369. It is not clear yet what the powers will be, but do you not think that looks as if it would be a complication of government ?—One does not like to take upon ones-self to predict what may be the effect of this clause. I cannot imagine that they would run counter to the laws passed by the Federal Parliament. 370. But would the functions of the State Commission not interfere with the administration in the particular States ?—That is possible. I recognise that as members of a Commonwealth we always run that risk. I see many forms in which New Zealand might suffer that I have not set out at all, because one has no right to impute anything. One has no right to suppose that injury will be done to us, unless we had evidence that it will occur. For example, I take it that the Civil Service will be filled from Bomballa, or Orange, or wherever the capital is, and it seems to me that the youth of New Zealand will be at a considerable disadvantage, because they cannot be there to apply for positions in the same way as the local men, and in that I see a great disadvantage. But they are minor questions, to my mind, compared with the losing of our independence. That is the dominating factor —the losing of our independence. I suppose it is quite natural that a neighbouring country like this should watch with deep interest the federating of a great continent like Australia, and, if invited to join, that we should give our best attention to it; but it appears to me that no single advantage has been suggested to us. There may be something—l have always been waiting to hear of something—but unless some corresponding advantage is given us we should decline. I have heard of nothing except the making of the ports open to us ; but, given that that is so, what would become of our duties eventually? I take it, the larger business houses of Australia would simply send their goods over here. The duties would be collected on the other side and sent here duty-paid, and each State will, after a few years, be credited with the duties collected in such particular State. That being so, we would have very little duty to collect at all in the way of Customs revenue. I am inclined to think that the Customs tariff will not be a high one. A mutual agreement would be arrived at, and we would be subject to that tariff, and the whole of our Customs revenue would be absorbed in administering the affairs of the Federal Parliament. I cannot tell what the position of New Zealand would be if they had to find more means. 371. Hon. Major Steivard.] Are you chairman of the Chamber of Commerce ? —Not now ; I was for a couple of years. 372. Where you Chairman when you read those papers? —No; it was the year after I was chairman. 373. Were they read before the chamber ?—One was ; the other was read before the conference of delegates of Chambers of Commerce. 374. You failed to tell us what was the result of moving that resolution with which one of the papers concludes ? —After discussing the matter for some time it seemed better to my mind to leave the matter without any absolute decision. We only wanted to have a discussion on the subject. Some one suggested that I should alter the resolution in the shape of merely favouring reciprocity, but still using the word " federation." This I declined to do for reasons similar to those set out in a letter I wrote a few days ago. I wrote : " The indiscriminate use of the word' federation ' has caused a considerable number of people to confound the Australian Commonwealth with that ideal union of the Empire about which so much has been spoken since the outbreak of the war in South Africa. As a matter of fact the founding of the Commonwealth has nothing whatever to do with Imperial federation. It is, of course, to be hoped that the union of the Australian Colonies will be a step towards the consolidation of our Empire, but it by no means follows that it will be so. It is possible that the newly awakened sentiment of patriotism for United Australia may in time supplant the old Home-love upon which Imperial federation depends. At any rate, the federation of the Empire, if ever formulated by Act of Parliament, will have to rely for its establishment upon 22—A. 4.
A.—4,
170
a widespread and deeply-rooted love for the Mother-country, a feeling that is in no way associated with the much-to-be-respected but purely local sentiment that has brought about the recent condition of the Australian Colonies." That is why I would not consent to the resolution being altered. We passed no resolution. 375. I understood your resolution to be one in favour not of entering the present Commonwealth, but of there being a federal alliance as between two separate nations ? —Yes. 376. Mr. Leys.] Do you conclude from your reading of the Constitution that the Federal Government will ultimately take the whole of the Customs duties for their own purposes ? —I have a strong dread in that direction. 377. Assuming that the Federal Government undertakes large schemes out of Federal revenue, will not the effect of that be to curtail the spending-power of the States ?—I think they would be deprived of their virility. We should have to go hat in hand to the Federal Government and ask for what we could get, and then have to make up the balance by fresh forms of taxation. 378. In such a state of things, do you think it is possible that there would be such a large development of the works in New Zealand ?—So far as my opinion goes, everything in that way would be burked. 379. Is it not a fact that the American Government seize the whole of the Customs revenue for Federal purposes? —Well, yes; but that is rather different. Ido not think you can compare the two cases, because so many of the American States have no seaboard, and therefore it is quite natural that portion of the revenue should be used for the administration of the country. It is different here. All the colonies have a seaboard, and they are all importing countries. All the States of the United States are not importing States. 380. But has not the effect of that been to seriously hamper the States in their finance ? — I should not like to say that. It would not be quite in accord with my experience in America, and I do not think it is on all-fours with the question of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth. Supposing we were Australians discussing the question of the federation of the Australian States, we might have to consider that. Ido not think any one could have had anything to do with the United States or have passed through the Union without having noticed the splendid effects the Union has had on the people of the States. There have been difficulties, but they have been overcome. When you take New Zealand as a contributing State you have a different position altogether. The Australians are one people, we are another people. That is the radical difference. 381. Should we, without that power over our own revenue, be able to borrow advantageously for State purposes ? —We would not be able to borrow well at all. It appears to me that, as far as the lenders are concerned, they lend money according to the security, and our security will be lessened, because we shall be contingently liable for the Federal debt. I think it must lessen our borrowing-power, looking at it from a business standpoint. .382. Mr. Luke.] The objections you have urged, Mr. Eoper, are largely political, are they not ?—I should like to call them patriotic. 383. You emphasize very strongly the necessity for working out our own destiny ? —I do. 384. You think it inadvisable for us to enter the Commonwealth at present ?—I am opposed altogether to New Zealand entering the Commonwealth under any conditions. As New-Zealanders, if we never were to do business with Australia at all unless we forfeited our independence, I say do not go there. Australians are our friends. They are interested in cultivating trade relations with us. The trade will continue, and we will be able to send almost as much of our surplus to Australia as now. I see no difficulty in the way at all. I do not see a single reason on such grounds for entertaining the proposal that we should forfeit our independence. 385. Nor the question of widening the door or improving the conditions under which we will be admitted ?—Not so far as I am concerned, if it means our joining the Commonwealth. 386. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you discussed the question with prominent Australians ?—I have discussed it with one or two of the very leading men of Australia. 387. As a result of those discussions, do you think there is a chance of their entertaining the idea of reciprocal treaties ?—I have no doubt they will enter into those arrangements that will suit their pockets best, and I am clear in my own mind that it is to Australia's advantage to cultivate New Zealand's trade. 388. In your paper you say that the charge of the Federal Administration may be roughly computed at £200,000 : had you any data to go on in computing that amount ? —I had a difficulty, but I took the opinion expressed in some of the papers by men taking a prominent part in the question in Australia. There is no attempt at precision in that. 389. In respect of the absence of unity of interest between New-Zealanders and Australians, do you suggest that through the want of unity of interest we would not receive the attention in the Federal Parliament and Senate that we should expect?—l think, in the first place, we would find it somewhat difficult to send our best men over to Australia as representatives. That would act as a drawback. They would probably have to live in Australia, and therefore almost cease to be New-Zealanders, and I do not think you will find many Australians who have any very clear ideas about New Zealand. So that, when you have a House made up of representatives of all the Australian States, and they are all men who care little and know less about New Zealand, I cannot help thinking that the struggle will be for Australian questions, and that mighty little attention will be paid to New Zealand, not through any desire to do an injustice to us, but simply through lack of interest. 390. The question of distance from the Federal capital in the case of several States does not apply with the same force as it does to New Zealand?— Distance is not so much the case as difference in knowledge. The Queenslander has not to go to New South Wales to find out the conditions of life there. The conditions are similar to his own. But the people of Australia have no knowledge of our political life and history, our climate, or our disposition.
171
A.—4
391. At the present time New Zealand suffers a certain amount of competition, especially in the boot trade, from America: will a moderate tariff exclude that competition?— Yes ; and as far as the boot trade is concerned, I do not think it_would interfere with our trade at all, for the reason that the Australian competition would wipe out our trade to begin with. 392. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] In the event of federation, would any large quantity of bankrupt goods be dumped down here in the colony at low prices ? —Undoubtedly; there would be no restriction, and nothing could stop it. 393. Hon. Captain Bussell.] You spoke of the national aspirations of the Australians forming one people : do you think that in the process of time—four or five generations—the New-Zealander will differentiate from the Australian ?—I think so very much. So great a difference will arise that in a very few generations we would be fighting to regain our independence. We are a resolute people, and if there was the slightest idea of a wrong being done our restless people would resent it, and it would cost us many lives. 394. Apart from the question of a possible sense of wrong, do you think there will be|a tendency to marked national characteristics which would cause us to differ materially ?—I do. 395. Pursuing the subject, and stating, as I shall, that two-thirds of Australia is tropical or semi-tropical, do you think the question of coloured races occupying the country is one to be considered ? —I think so. I listened to what previous witnesses said, and Ido not think from what I have seen in India that it is possible for white men to do the work on sugar-plantations. That work the blacks must do, and therefore we must always have the difficulty of the coloured question coming up there, and, of course, it would cause a great deal of trouble in the future, although I have no doubt it will be dealt with. There is trouble now in the United States on account of the increase of the coloured races, and there is no doubt there will be serious difficulties in the Commonwealth. 396. You think it will become not only a racial but a great political question, sooner or later, and one that the Commonwealth will have to deal with ?—I feel sure that if the northern part of Australia is to be developed it must be through the coloured races, and that means difficulty. 397. And then you say that, in your opinion, there would be a danger of these coloured people, in three hundred or four hundred years hence, affecting the political condition of Australia ? —I think it will be some time before it will become a factor in regard to having effect upon the ultimate result; but it already is a factor in Australian politics, so that Ido not think we shall have to wait three or four hundred years, but I dare say the trouble will be accentuated year by year. 398. You have travelled a great deal, Mr. Roper ?—Yes. • 399. Have you ever come across any tropical or semi-tropical country in which the Europeans have successfully built up colonies ?—lf you take any tropical country you will find the Europeans cannot colonise it; they can only occupy it. It is only a military occupation, because their progeny will not survive. 400. And the military occupation is only temporary, and being perpetually renewed by fresh blood ? —Yes; we are not like other animals. You take the finest racehorse bred in India, and you will find that his progeny is about 28 lb. below the form of imported horses. 401. Therefore if we were to federate with the Commonwealth there would be sooner or later the racial question to govern the political question?—l do not think that is a thing we need dread, because I take it the Federal Parliament will be a body of intelligent men, and would certainly have to discriminate and make such laws for northern Queensland that would not apply to Victoria, and certainly not to New Zealand; so that Ido not think we should have any trouble from that. It does not follow that a law passed by the Federal Parliament, unless there is something in the Act with regard to it, would be binding on all the States. I think they can grant to a State certain power to deal with the questions affecting that area; so that I think that difficulty would be got over. Of course, so far as the franchise is concerned, that is where the trouble would come in— whether the people living there should have the same right to vote as the white people. 402. Then, if tropical and sub-tropical Australia is to be occupied and populated by coloured people, would not there be millions of these coloured people at no very remote period?— There certainly would be if no restrictions were placed upon their immigration. 403. Then, if Europe wins over Japan and also China, is not that a consideration?—lt would have to be provided for, and I think it will cause an immense amount of trouble. 404. Is not that generally a reason against our federating?—l think it is another reason, and, to my mind, it is an important one ; but others overshadow it. Nations shed their blood for their independence, and I do not think we ought to give our independence up for nothing. 405. Hon. the Chairman.] Did I understand you to say that the merchants of Australia, in the event of our federating, would export their goods to New Zealand, and the Customs duties in respect to those goods would be collected in Australia and not in New Zealand ?—That is one of the difficulties I foresee. A refund is provided for in the Act for a certain time —only a limited time— and you might rely upon it that it will not be extended very much. 406. You have said also that New Zealand, if she joins as a Federal State, would still continue to have her own expense and parliamentary government. Well, is it not a fact that the Federal States of Australia have reduced the number of their representatives in their Federal Parliament ? —Yes; but I was not quite referring to that minor question of whether they had twenty members less in the House. I was referring more especially to the admininistration of the country, which would have to be paid for by the State. We should have all the offices in Wellington just the same, and we might reduce the number of members, but that would not be a very important matter. 407. Is there any other point to which you wish to direct the attention of the Commissioners ? —No.
172
A.—4
Geoege Thomas Booth examined. (No. 56.) 408. Hon. the Chairman.] "What are you, Mr. Booth?—A manufacturer of agricultural machinery. We employ about a hundred hands, and" our present factory has been running for eighteen years. 409. Have you resided in Australia ?—No ; but I have paid short visits. 410. Have you formed any opinion as to the advisability of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I have formed an opinion, and if you wish I will make a statement that, I think, will put my position clearly enough. 411. Yes, please do so?—I am in favour of federation on broad general principles, because, in the first place, I believe it to be a movement which is strictly in line with the natural and inevitable tendency from the incoherent to the coherent, from the unit to the community, from the atom to the organism. This is the natural order of things, which is inevitable and irresistible, and if we oppose it then we are opposing, in my opinion, what makes for progress and development. I suppose you will call that a philosophical and not a practical reason; and I do not advance it as a sufficient reason by itself for New Zealand joining this Federation. Then I look at history, and I see that we have numerous instances of similar movements being successfully carried out, and with satisfactory results, as, for instance, in the cases of the British Empire, and the United States, and Canada, to go no further. Then, again, I believe in Australasian federation, because it appears to me to be a step in the direction of Imperial federation—a federation of the British Empire—which I believe will be only a step in the direction of Anglo-Saxon federation, and probably of a wider federation than that. But I do not advance these general reasons as being sufficient to warrant us in advocating this particular federation between New Zealand and Australia. There may be good reasons to be urged against our joining the Australian Federation. I confess I have not come across any of these good reasons, so far as lam able to judge. I have read pretty well everything bearing on the subject, and I have seen a very great deal of self-contradiction, a considerable amount of disingenuousness, and where these have been absent there has been conspicuous weakness in the arguments against federation. Of course, that does not necessarily establish the other side of the question. My opinion is only worth but very little, because we are waiting for the labours of this Commission to be over to have the evidence before us, on which we shall be able to base a practical decision as to the advisability or otherwise of New Zealand joining. In the absence of such definite knowledge we are, of course, guided very largely by sentiment, by prejudice, by the environments of our lives, and so on. I think this very largely accounts for the fears which have been expressed that we are in danger of losing our political independence. I have read the Commonwealth Bill pretty carefully, and Ido not think there is the slightest fear that New Zealand will have to sacrifice her independence or will be prevented from working out her own salvation and destiny. Ido not think the fact of New Zealand joining with a neighbouring country in the management of affairs which can be better managed by the whole than by a number of States acting separately can be regarded as equivalent to the surrender of her independence, or the sacrifice of her political and national destiny. I think the Commonwealth Bill makes it very clear that the Federal Government only proposes to take over such functions as can be better administered by it than by any State independently. The exclusive powers of the Commonwealth Parliament comprise the collection of Customs, post, telegraphs and telephones, defence, lighthouses, quarantine, and matters relating to the seat of Government. There are no other exclusive powers given to the Commonwealth Parliament, so far as I can read the Commonwealth Bill; but there are other powers referred to in section 51, concerning which there might be doubt as to whether they are exclusive or not, and on that point Mr. Barton, who I imagine can speak with as much authority as anybody on the subject, has given this assurance through the newspapers : " And when I say that the powers which I have enumerated are not exclusively vested in the Federal Parliament, it will be seen that every care has been taken to preserve the legislative powers of the various States except so far as is necessary for the effective working of a Federal Constitution. The only effective powers of the Federal Parliament relate to —(a) Customs and excise duties and bounties from the time of the enactment of the Federal tariff; (b) matters relating to any public department transferred by the Constitution to the Government of the Commonwealth; (c) the seat of government of the Commonwealth and places acquired by the Commonwealth for public purposes." So that the power to deal with all matters referred to in section 51 of the Commonwealth Bill is not taken from the States and vested in the Commonwealth. Then, even if there were such a danger as that of the Commonwealth Parliament taking over certain of the functions of the individual States which we should be reluctant to relinquish, we should not be in such a helpless condition as some opponents of federation have tried to make out. It is true we are a comparatively small State, but for that very reason, and by virtue of the provisions of the Constitution, we have a better proportionate representation in the Senate and Lower House combined than even Victoria or New South Wales. The smaller States, in proportion to population, will have a better representation than the larger States. It is the large States which have the grievance, and the fact that the large States of Victoria and New South Wales have not resented what would appear to be a sacrifice of their independence has indicated, to my mind, that there is no sound reason why New Zealand or any of the small States should fear that they are going to have any of their independence sacrificed. We are going to be better represented in the Federal Parliament than even Victoria and New South Wales, as every State has the same number of members in the Senate—namely, six. 412. New Zealand will not have that, perhaps, as she is not an original State?—l am assuming, of course, that the movement in favour of Federation goes on, and that we shall seek admission on the footing of an original State. If it is a question of bargaining—as it evidently will be—we shall have to make the best bargain we can, and if we cannot make a bargain that will pay us we
173
A.—4
had better stay out. Then, I think, we should reap very great advantages in regard to our political and social life, as a nation, from the enlargement of the scope of politics. There is, through our geographical situation, a tendency for us to become narrow-minded and insular, and if we were lifted out of this condition of things antl made to take a hand in the government of a much larger people we would perhaps be saved from that danger. Nor do I think that in that case New Zealand will have anything to fear. I do not think we need fear that our public men will be unable to hold their own in the wider field they would have if we federated. I believe, as a body of colonists, we are quite as intelligent, quite as progressive, as any of the Australian Colonies, and that, as we have made our mark in the world in matters of progressiveness and enterprise, so also we should make our mark supposing we join the great Australian Federation, and that we should hold a very prominent place indeed in the councils of the Commonwealth. That embraces all I have to say on general grounds ; but, apart from these considerations altogether, there are trade considerations. They are sordid, perhaps, but all the same they have their value, and ought to be taken into account. I have been told that certain of the manufacturing trades of the colony will suffer through federation—the boot trade, for instance, flour-milling, and furniture-making. Ido not know sufficient of the details of these trades to pit my opinion against that of those who are more intimate with them, and you must take their evidence rather than my own in special cases. But, on the other hand, we have to consider what we have to gain, and I think New Zealand will have a great deal to gain by way of an increased trade, by reason of the fact, roughly speaking, we have the possibility of gaining 2,300,000 new customers, and good customers at that. New South Wales, with a population of a million and a half, took in 1899 our goods—this includes gold—to the extent of £1,118,000; the other Australian Colonies, with a combined population of three millions, took only £589,000. Assuming that an addition was made to the population of New South Wales sufficient to absorb this extra export trade at the rate at which she is already doing, and that the rest of Australia then came in on the same basis as New South Wales now is, it would mean that we should have what is equivalent to an addition of 2,300,000 persons to our customers in Australia. I said Australia was already a good customer, but, of course, as compared with the Old Country, our exports to Australia are comparatively small. They constitute but a small proportion of our total exports; but this is hardly a fair way of judging the comparative value of the two customers. I think you ought to take into account the population of the two countries, and if you do that you will find that our exports to Great Britain are, roughly, equal to about ss. per head of her population, while our exports to Australia represent 7s. 6d. per head of Australian population. I want you to note particularly the difference in the value of our export trade to the free-trade colony of New South Wales and to the four or five other colonies which are all more or less protected. Our exports to New South Wales in 1899 amounted to 16s. 6d. per head of New South Wales population, while our exports to the other colonies combined averaged only 4s. per head. I think this will show a little more clearly what I meant when I stated that there was a possibility of our adding 2,300,000 to our possible customers, at 16s. 6d. per head, which would mean, roughly speaking, a possible increase in our exports of £2,000,000. Of course, that is small as compared with our exports to Great Britain; but, then, we must remember that Australia is a young country, the population is increasing very rapidly, and will in the future go on increasing even more rapidly than in the past, whereas the population of Great Britain is comparatively stationary. Then, it has been said that Australia imports produce from New Zealand only when her own harvests fail, and that our trade with Australia depends a great deal more on the weather than on tariffs. I would just like to note, in passing, that the very persons who make use of this argument are those who profess to be anxious to establish reciprocal trade relations with Australia. Ido not know why we should want to tinker with the Australian tariffs at all if the weather is the only condition to be considered. But, as a matter of fact, it can be very clearly seen, if we look into the figures, that the weather has comparatively little to do with the trade between New Zealand and Australia, while the tariffs have a very great deal to do with it. Of course, seasons have had their effect; if they have had a very bad drought in Australia they naturally require more of our produce, and they have to buy it; but it is perfectly clear also that they will buy more if they can get it cheaply than if they have to pay a high price ; so that the tariff must have a very considerable effect. But, allowing for that, and allowing for bad seasons and good seasons, you will find that there is a remarkably steady flow of exports from New Zealand to Australia, and there has been for a number of years past. The following are the exports to Australia for five years past: 1895, £1,035,000; 1896, £1,286,000; 1897, £1,324,000; 1898, £1,474,000 ; 1899, £1,708,036. So you will see that, despite variations in the weather, and tariffs, there has been a remarkably steady flow of exports from this colony to the other colonies ; and if you look through the blue-books and find out the products that are comprised in these figures you will find a very long list recurring year after year. A great many of them—in fact, the bulk—are natural productions, either in their raw state or in a more or less manufactured condition. These include bacon, hams, bran, butter, chaff, cheese, fish (frozen), flour, barley, beans, peas, maize, oats, wheat, hops, malt, oatmeal, meats (potted), onions, phormium, potatoes. There are a few lines of partly manufactured goods, such as woollens, into which our own raw material enters ; but nearly all our exports are either the raw product of the farm, or those products in a manufactured condition. I would like you to observe that nearly all these products are those of small farms. Our trade with Great Britain consists almost entirely of wool and mutton, which are characteristic products of the larger estates, and involve comparatively little cultivation and labour; whereas butter, cheese, potatoes, linseed, oats, maize, hops, and so on are almost all the products of small-farming, under which intense cultivation has to be practised and considerable labour employed. Now, it appears to me to be very clear that it would pay us in the long run better to encourage the trade that comes from the small farms through the more intense cultivation and the expenditure of more labour than to let them suffer while we
A.-4
174
try and develop the export of products which do not require so much labour or call for such intense cultivation. Ido not think that our manufacturers are likely to develop a very large export trade with Australia. Some have tried it in the past with little success, and Ido not think there is very much to hope for from that. But I think that if we can, by encouraging the smaller farming, increase our population and employ it profitably, our manufacturers will then reap, indirectly, a great deal of advantage from federation. On general grounds, lam in favour of federation, but it is really more a sentiment than anything else, and I have given you some reasons that appeal to me as having some force in favour of federation; yet, while we may reap some advantage from federation, I wish it distinctly understood that I would not advocate New Zealand joining at this stage without further knowledge. I think we want to know our ground a good deal more thoroughly before we commit ourselves either one way or another, and we shall not have the necessary information before us to enable us to decide until this Commission has done its work. 413. Having studied the question closely, as you have, apparently, and being aware that New Zealand will have to sacrifice a considerable portion of her Customs revenue, how do you consider the amount so sacrificed would have to be made up ?—lt is not going to cost us as much as some people think. The collection of the Customs in New Zealand costs us a considerable proportion of the amount realised. This expense would be disbursed by the Federal Government and deducted from the amount collected. So that on this point we should stand as we are. The only extra cost we should have to bear would be our share of the head-office charges—the Commonwealth Executive expenses—which I do not imagine would be a very serious item. 414. Whatever the amount is, probably it would have to be raised by direct taxation ? —Yes. 415. Do you think New Zealand is in a position to stand that?—lt all depends whether we can make a profit in other respects. If, as I think is the case, we can increase our sales to Australia, we shall make a good deal more profit thereby than we shall lose by having to contribute to the Federal expenses. 416. Do you think Australia would progress under federation ?—There is no doubt of it. 417. And, if so, will it not become an attractive field for immigrants?— Yes, very likely. 418. Do you think that there will be any attraction for New Zealand people to emigrate to Australia ?—No ; Ido not think so. There is always a certain amount of fluctuation in the population, and when things are very good in Australia builders and shearers and others will go across from here, but I do not think that emigration from New Zealand will eventuate to such an extent as to do us any harm. 419. Are the implements you are engaged in manufacturing subject to duty ?—No. There was a duty of 5 per cent, on some of them, but they are free now. 420. Are you able to hold your own against Australian factories ? —Yes. We can compete with them on their own ground. We can sell our goods in Australia, and are selling them now, and if we had free ports in Australia, with a tariff against the world, it is possible that we might be able to develop that trade considerably. 421. Are yours colonially-manufactured goods ?—Yes. We also import, and the importation is rapidly increasing. 422. Are the goods which you say you are competing with them on their own ground in Australia your own manufactured goods, or are.they imported goods?— Our own goods; we have sent no imported goods there. But the trade is not increasing. We made a vigorous attempt a few years ago to develop it, and succeeded to a certain extent, but the local competition over there has grown more severe, and American competition has been still more severe; so that the market is almost closed against us. 423. You spoke of the history of similar movements, and I ask you whether you are aware of any case where a country separated by the distance we are from Australia has federated with another? —No ; I cannot say that I am. 424. You spoke of Canada as an instance: you are aware that Newfoundland stayed out of that federation?— Yes, and has regretted it ever since. Ido not regard our separation from Australia by so many miles of ocean as any serious objection. As a matter of fact, the ocean is the cheapest highway you can possibly have ? 425. For trade purposes ?-—For all kinds of communication. 426. Do you think that Tasmania will reap as much advantage from federation as the continential States ?-—Yes, I think it will probably pay Tasmania a good deal better that Victoria, because Tasmania wants to ship her produce into Victoria. 427. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Following up the question of federation, is it not the fact that although, as you say, the tendency is to federate, almost every federation in the world at the present time is straining at the leash ?■—l should not say from my own reading that that is quite a correct statement of the case; of course there may be dissatisfaction. 428. Is there not very great dissatisfaction in the eastern States of America ? Do not many Americans say openly that the day will come when the differences are likely to be settled by force ? ■ —I have come across that statement, but not as coming from a responsible American. 429. Take the case of Sweden and Norway : is there not almost a threatened disruption there ? —Very likely ; it is human nature to disagree, but I do not think any American would say that the United States would be better governed or administered if they were disunited again. 430. Take the Austrian Empire : if there are difficulties arising under conditions where the territories are coterminous, is it not very likely that in the future such difficulties would be more evident between New Zealand and a country so far off as Australia ?—I do not think that is a serious difficulty for the future; but, of course, difficulties will arise and will have to be adjusted. 431. You seem to think that New Zealand, if she entered the Commonwealth, would have a strong position, and that she would numerically have a power equal to that of the larger States of the Commonwealth in proportion to the respective populations.
175
A.—4
432. You know ihe number of Senators are equal, of course, for each colony?— Yes. The representation in our case is greater per head of population than for Victoria or New South Wales, taking the two Houses together. In New South Wales, with a population of a million and a half, they get six Senators, while we, with less than a million, have also got six Senators. 433. Then, in that case, have you realised that if there is a difference of opinion between the two Houses of Parliament —that is to say, between the members representing smaller States and those representing larger States—that there is ultimately a vote in common, but in that case the Lower House would effectually swamp the votes of the Senate ?—There is that possibility. 434. And that it is done by a bare majority, and therefore the larger States would gain the ultimate issue by having the balance of the voting-power ? Would that not tend to change your opinion about New Zealand having a great influence in the Parliament ?—I did not mean it to be implied that New Zealand would have a preponderating influence in the Houses of Legislature by reason of her representation. I was only replying to the criticism that New Zealand was sacrificing her independence, which was as good as saying she would have no representation at all, and which I think is an utterly wrong criticism. 435. Would there not be the danger that coterminous States would have a community of interest, and therefore might, on certain questions, be found supporting one another ?—-I suppose there is a possibility that they might if they found it to their interest to do so, but under the circumstances I do not regard that as a serious contingency. 436. Among those subjects which you mentioned as being reserved for legislation on the part of the Commonwealth, is it not a fact that under the Constitution Act if the Commonwealth legislation comes into collision with the legislation of a single State the Commonwealth Act takes precedence?— That is true. 437. And, as they may legislate on thirty-nine different subjects, is it not very probable that within the next fifty years the greater part of our legislative independence may be taken from us ? —It is rather difficult to foresee fifty years ; but, of course, if you assume this—that here is a nation, a people, who are very different from us, whose aim is going to be to crush New Zealand, and destroy her power in the Federation, to rob her of all political independence, and generally to treat her unjustly—there may be ground for the fear you express; but I do not think we are justified in assuming this, or in believing that any member of the Federation will be treated with systematic injustice. 438. Eemembering our own provincial days, was it not a fact that the outlying portions of the provinces felt aggrieved because their interests were not treated as identical with those of the central parts of the provinces ? Is not that sort of feeling possible under the Commonwealth ?— It is almost inevitable. We have the same thing in New Zealand here now, and it depends upon the men whom the constituency sends to Parliament to see that justice is done. 439. Taking the area of New Zealand.as identical with that of the United Kingdom, exclusive of Ireland, may we not hope to maintain an equally large population here in course of time ?—I do not think so. 440. Not half of that of the United Kingdom ?—Not for a very long time. England supports her population because she is a great manufacturing country, and she has the world for a market. We are not a great manufacturing country, and never will be. . 441. Why not?— Because the whole tendency of manufacturing is towards concentration— wherever a given class of goods can be made cheapest and best, that is where they are going to be made. 442. May we not have a population of fifteen to twenty millions in the future ?—I hope we shall. 443. Then shall we not then become a great manufacturing country ? 444. We may be a great manufacturing country in so far as supplying our own wants are concerned, but we shall never be a great manufacturing country for export. 445. We have great national resources —coal, iron, water-power available—are not these great factors in favour of our becoming a manufacturing country ?—I do not think we have any reason to look forward to New Zealand being a great manufacturing country in the sense of competing for the world's markets. 446. Shall we not, in course of time, be in a position to command the Australian market ?— Yes, if the conditions are favourable, if we have the right to enter into Australia on better terms than any other country. And I think we might develop an export trade in woollens, for instance, seeing we have the raw material for making up; but where we have to import the raw material we cannot expect to be able to manufacture. 447. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You spoke as if it were a matter of natural sequence that the federation of New Zealand with Australia must come in time?—l would be inclined to assent to that, although I did not exactly say that. 448. You quoted as an instance of that idea the United States and Canada?— Yes. 449. Of course, you are aware that the American States are absolutely sovereign States, independent, and that their revenues are distinct ?—Yes. 450. Well, that is not the case with this Commonwealth. We begin to see already that there will be a clashing of interests in the division of the Customs revenue. Do you not think there will be a prospect of friction in that arrangement through the States all dipping into the common purse, and through there not being separate sources of revenue for the two Governments—that of the State and that of the Commonwealth?—l think friction may be avoided. 451. You do not think much of the separation by water between the two countries? —When I said that I was thinking more of trade than of communication as between individuals, but the same thing applies, and I do not think we shall be any further away, politically, from the Federal capital than, for instance, Perth would be.
A.—4
176
452. You know one of the conditions of Perth coming in was that a railway would have to be made right through ?—That was made a necessity; but, of course, they cannot carry the goods across a railway as cheaply as they could across the ocean. 453. Do you know of any other federation in the world where there is such a large area of water between the countries forming part of that federation as there would be in the case of New Zealand and Australia federating ?—No, I do not. 454. Mr. Beauchamp.] With more intense settlement in Victoria, and the more active cultivation of the land there, or, rather, throughout Australia, do you think that the day is not far distant when Australia will be able to supply all her own wants ?—lf she erects a tariff wall against New Zealand she certainly will develop her productions, and it is possible she would be able to supply all she wanted. 455. But without that tariff you do not think she could?— Without that tariff New Zealand would be in a very good position to supply Victoria with oats, for instance. 456. We heard that oats are selling just as cheaply in Victoria as they are here to-day: is that correct ?—That does occur sometimes. 457. We understand that cultivation has been very much stimulated in Victoria by protection, and the result is that Victoria now not only supplies her own wants but exports considerably. With a more active cultivation of the land throughout Australia, may we not look forward to the day when Australia will be able to supply all her own requirements ?—New Zealand is practically shut out of most of the colonies now, and if this condition continues Australia will doubtless become less and less dependent upon us. 458. With regard to industries and manufactures that we hear are generally established in these large centres. That being the case in Australia, do you think that our industries would suffer from that fact under free-trade with Australia?— Possibly in some cases there may be some dislocation of our manufactures, but I do not think there will be any great suffering. We can manufacture agricultural implements here better than in Australia. We have no natural advantages in the sense of having cheap raw material, or cheap fuel, or anything of the kind. Possibly when we get the increased facility in regard to water-supply we will be able to compete better. 459. As to the taking over the Customs revenue, and as to the amount we should lose at the end of ten years, will not be less than £2,000,000 per annum on the present basis. The Act says, " All moneys received by the Federal Parliament to form one consolidated fund for the purpose of the Commonwealth, excepting that during the first ten years not more than 25 per cent, of the Customs and excise shall be applied annually by the Commonwealth towards this expenditure." Assuming that they do retain that two millions, we have got to make up the amount by some form of taxation— presumably direct taxation : which direction do you think it will take ?—I do not think the Commonwealth Bill justifies such an assumption. But we have not committed ourselves yet, and there is no reason why we should not bargain for our own protection. 460. But you do not recommend that our own treatment should be very considerably altered, particularly in regard to New Zealand not coming in as an original State ?—I should have preferred that the matter should be discussed from the point of view of an original State, but reservation might have been made as to special treatment in respect to certain matters. 461. Do you think it is at all likely that the older States of the Commonwealth would assent to any alteration in the Commonwealth, seeing that a referendum would be necessary ?—No. Wβ have to make a bargain with them now, and it is not likely we can make a bargain entirely favourable to ourselves. 462. In regard to legislation, during the last few years we have made very great progress in respect to social legislation. I understand that in Australia they have been actually engaged in promoting similar measures for the past ten years without having accomplished anything. Is it reasonable to suppose that the Commonwealth as a whole would continue to promote that legislation which is giving so much satisfaction in this colony ? —I do not think the Commonwealth would be disposed to legislate with regard to labour legislation. That would be for the States individually. 463. Mr. Luke.] How do you account for the fact that Lyttelton imported fifteen thousand pounds' worth of agricultural implements, and nothing was exported in the way of agricultural implements ?—I said that importation from America was increasing. 464. But this is from Australia ?—lt is transhipment. There was an attempt made by one New Zealand firm to introduce Victorian-made farming implements a couple of years ago. I dare say they might have brought in five hundred pounds' worth, but with that exception nothing has come from over there in that line for some years. 465. You have no market in Australia now, however? —Yes. 466. There is no item in the returns to show it ?—I do not know anything about the returns, but the stuff has gone. 467. If we have all the elements for export, how do you account for there being such a small export in the way of machinery ? —One reason is that the local competition has increased, but the principal reason is the severe competition of America. 468. How do you account for there being so little exportation to New South Wales of general goods—products of various kinds ?—lt is £1,186,000 out of a total of £1,780,000. 469. It is less than that if you take out specie, but in our exchange trade with them we import considerably more than they take from us? —If you look through the list, you will find that a very large proportion of our imports from Australia are not goods of Australian manufacture. 470. But excluding that, is it not a comparatively small market to us considering the advantages held out to us under federation ?—lt is a small market compared with the United Kingdom. 471. Would we not be paying too high a price for the indulgence of federation when the returns of trade are so small ?—That is for you to find out. I am not prepared to say it would pay New Zealand to go into federation, I am only prepared to support that on general grounds; and for certain reasons which I have given I believe we could make a profit out of it.
177
A.—4
472. You say you do not think New Zealand would ever become a great manufacturing country ? —No. 473. How do you account for the tremendous- expansion that has taken place in our manufacturing industries in the last five years ? Five years ago there were employed in the various factories twenty-eight thousand persons, whereas we are now employing forty-nine thousand ?— But you probably know enough about how the factory returns are made up to understand that. The law has been altered within the last two years, and establishments which five years ago were not reckoned factories at all are now reckoned as factories, so swelling the figures. There has been some actual increase. The dredging industry in New Zealand has given employment to many hundreds of hands which a few years ago were only very intermittently employed. 474. Has not the frozen-meat industry expanded very much in the last five years as regards the absorption of labour ?—I should say there are double the number of hands employed in the Canterbury freezing-factories to what there were five years ago. 475. Do you not think it is a matter of great importance to us, this dislocation of trade through federation? We have involved in plant, machinery, and so forth capital to the extent of seven or eight millions : do you not think one result of federation would be the dislocation of that trade?— Not to any serious extent. 476. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that the powers supposed to be taken over by the Federal Government can be better administered in New Zealand than we are now administering them ourselves?—No, Ido not think that; but, given federation, the Federal Government will take over the control of departments which it can manage better than the States. 477. Do you think that the departments which the Federal Government at present propose to take over —telegraphs, marine, post, and a number of other things of that kind, defence, &c. — will be better administered than now ?—I think, even under present conditions, if these departments are administered by agreement between the colonies, they will be better administered than now. 478. You think the postal wants will be better supplied by a Government sitting at Melbourne or Bombala than by a Government here ?—The Government sitting in Wellington does not control the postal arrangements in the remote districts of New Zealand. Supplies are voted by Parliament, but the local officers look after the details of administration. Under federation there will be local officers in every city and country town. 479. Is is not administered under Ministerial responsibility ?—Undoubtedly ; but it cannot make the slightest difference whether the Minister is five hundred or a thousand miles away. 480. Ho would be quite accessible to representation?— Yes. 481. Then, with regard to the protection which you think equal representation in the Senate gives, have you considered the clause in the Bill which provides that if one House passes a Bill by a majority, and the other House rejects it, that under certain conditions it shall be referred to the people by referendum, and if a majority of the electors indorse the measure it comes into force : is not the effect of that to get rid of the controlling-power of the Senate ?—I suppose it is to a certain extent, but it is for politicians to say whether that is an advantage or otherwise. 482. Does it not get rid of the check the Senate is supposed to exercise in the interests of the State ?—Yes, I suppose it does. 483. With regard to the apportionment of revenue, has it not to be assumed that all these Federal schemes for the development of Australia will be charges directly upon the revenues of the Federal Government, irrespective of where the moneys are collected ?—No, I do not think that that follows. I think it is quite reasonable for New Zealand to have certain privileges saved to herself. 484. But do you not think the result might be a continual struggle between New Zealand and Australia ?—lf you start out on the assumption that the Federal Parliament is to consist only of people desirous of robbing us of our rights you can conceive all sorts of difficulties. 485. But, without assuming that they are very wicked and very unjust people, is it to be supposed that the Federal Government is going to be restrained from carrying out great works for the benefit of Australia merely because New Zealand cannot profit by them ?—I would not suggest that for a moment; but what I say is that New Zealand would not be asked to pay for works that are not to her benefit, but are for the benefit of the rest of Australia. 486. Cannot you see a difficulty in assessing the amount which is to be taken ? —No; the amount will be assessed and distributed over the several States interested. 487. The Commonwealth will borrow for these works upon the security of all the States, including Now Zealand ?—I suppose that will be so. They would have to mortgage their income, and part of the income would be our share of the Customs. 488. Then, if the Commonwealth should exempt us, shall we not suffer in our power to borrow through the Commonwealth entering upon these great works, and making large demands on the money-market ? —I do not profess to be a financial authority, or to know how the finance of the Commonwealth will be conducted, but it does not appear to me that our credit will be affected. Our contribution to the Federal expenses will be too small to have any appreciable effect on our income, and hence on our credit. 489 There would be double administration ?—We have to pay our share of head-office expenses, but would not have to pay any more for Customs Department expenses than we are paying now. 490. When you speak of the tendency towards centralisation, has there not been an opposite tendency in many cases; for instance, was it not the case that Canada was on the verge of revolution before England enlarged the Constitution and gave Canada fuller self-government ?— Ido not think that the circumstances are analogous. Canada at that time had not got a Constitution similar to this. It was an enormous territory, ineffectively occupied, and with an alien race to be considered. 23—A. 4.
A.—4
178
491. Then, in the revolution of the was not that due to the distance of the Government and the want of appreciation by the distant Government of local circumstances? — It was due to the fact that the Home Government was.corrupt and incapable. 492. Can you conceive New Zealand becoming a sort of Ireland, with chronic grievances? —I can conceive it, but it is a straining of the case. 493. Have we not had a similar neglect in New Zealand, .and would that not be intensified in the case of Government so far away ?—lt was said here in New Zealand, when the provinces were abolished, that we were going to have all the evils of centralised Government, and all these ills which it is stated will come to us under federation. At the same time, Ido not think that many of us would like to go back to the provincial form of government. ■ 494. Hon. Major Steward.] You opened with a prior argument, which I would like to refer to : you said that on broad general principles you were in favour of federation, because the natural order of progress was from the atom of the organism. Is it not the natural order of things for the development of perfect organism from separate uncombined atoms to proceed on more or less divergent lines, each severally culminating in an organism, perfect of its kind, but differentiating in varying degrees from each other ?—Yes. 495. Is not the fruit the perfect development of the seed, and are there not many fruits differing in essential particulars, such as shape, colour, texture, and flavour, yeb each fruit perfect of its kind ?—Yes. 496. Do not similar conditions apply in the animal world?— Yes. 497. If so, perfection of development does not necessarily imply identity of development— development on the same lines?—l think not. 498. Then, would it be reasonable to argue that perfection is best attained in all cases by the wiping out of differentiation and aiming at unification or identity—namely, by producing one perfect animal, or one perfect fruit, capable of fulfilling the purposes of all kinds of animals and all kinds of fruits ?—No, it does not necessarily follow. 499. If not, is it philosophical to suppose that the unification of people is always the most perfect result? I say is it philosophical, if it does not apply in the animal and vegetable world, to suppose that it applies to people generally?— But I do not admit that it does not apply in the animal world and the vegetable world. 500. Is it not possible that the way to perfection may proceed for several nations upon more or less parallel, or more or less divergent, lines ?—Yes. 501. Is it reasonable, then, to suppose that it will not be possible for New Zealand to be equally well developed by following out its own line, than by going into federation and following out the lines of another ?—Are you not taking exceptions to the rule and laying them down as premises for a new conclusion ?
Tuesday, 19th Febeuary, 1901. Eobeet Allan examined. (No. 57.) 502. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your business, Mr. Allan ?—I am president of the Canterbury Industrial Association and a director of the firm of Skelton, Frostick, and Go. (Limited), bootmanufacturers, Christchurch. 503. How long have you been carrying on operations ?—ln its present form, about twelve years, and we employ about two hundred and fifty hands. 504. Will you tell the Commission your opinion as to how New Zealand federating with Australia would affect that particular industry ?—ln speaking I do not wish to commit the Industrial Association as a body, because they have not formally considered this matter. lam giving my own opinion. I am familiar with the views of many manufacturers who form that body, but the association have not formally discussed it. I am opposed to federation from every point of view. I am opposed to it from the manufacturers' point of view especially, and I believe that federation of Australia will lead to the concentration of large factories around Sydney and Melbourne, who will be able to centralise. That is a tendency of manufacturers all over the world, and we cannot hope in New Zealand, with our small scattered centres, to compete against that system ; and I have very little doubt in my own mind that if that took place you will see very large factories growing up around Melbourne and Sydney which will absorb the trade of New Zealand practically. 505. Do you think that other manufacturers besides the boot trade will be similarly affected ? —I am strongly of that opinion. Several industries will be swept out in a very few months. I think the soap and candle business will be one of the first to be affected ; the biscuit and confectionery trade, the furniture trade, and the printing and binding trade will also, I think, be very seriously affected. The remarks I made about concentration will apply very keenly, I think, to the boot and shoe trade. The only firms that I heard expressing an opinion at all in favour of federation have been the iron , people and some implement-makers. Nearly all the manufacturers are of opinion that federation will not be beneficial for us. 506. Are the range-makers in favour of federation or against it ?■—Those are the only people I have heard speak in favour of federation. 507. Are you at liberty to apeak as to what would be the effect of federation on the agricultural interest of the colony ?—I have given that a good deal of consideration, having been mixed up with commercial matters outside our own business for many years. I have looked very closely at the exports from New Zealand for the last year, and I find that out of £11,000,000 over £10,000,000 have no connection whatever with Australia. They are articles in which the Australians compete with us, and they include such items as butter, wheat, leather, and meat industries, tallow, and
179
A.—4
exports of that description. There are many items that I consider our exports are closely allied to theirs, and we cannot look to the Australians to do trade in. From a manufacturer's point of view there is no reason why we should federate. 508. Have you considered the financial aspecf of the question —as to how the finances of the colony would be affected ?—I think it will lead to increased taxation. I cannot see any economy in the thing. It can only mean additional government, which means increased taxation. 509. You are aware a considerable portion of the Customs-revenue will be required for Federal purposes ?—Yes. 510. And that will have to be made up by direct taxation ?—Yes. 511. Do you think the colony is in a position to stand that?—l do not. 512. Have you any other grounds to give in support of your opinion that federation is undesirable ?—I think that on social and political grounds it will be a great mistake for us to surrender our independence. And I take it that in a generation or two the population of Australia will be a very mixed one. I think that is irresistible from the nature of the country. 513. Have you any knowledge of the rates of wages obtaining in Australia?—l do not think the men earn very jnuch less than we do here per week, but I chink around Melbourne the factories are larger, and on a lower piecework they can earn, perhaps, better wages in consequence of the volume of their output, and that is the feature that will develop. 514. Are there any advantages which occur to you that would accrue to New Zealand from federating?—l confess Ido not see one, not even the sentimental one. My sentiment is to leave the independence of New Zealand as it is. 515. Do you think the mental condition of the people in New Zealand would be improved by federation with a larger body such as the inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Australia?—l do not, because I look to it that Australia would have a very mixed population in the course of a few years. 516. Mr. Roberts.] -You say that the industries of the colony could not compete with Australian industries? —That is my opinion. 517. That the exports of this colony of manufactured articles is altogether out of the question ? —I think so. 518. They, of course, must be produced at a higher cost of production here—in other words, higher wages ?—I think the smallness of our factories, together with the fact of their being spread over a number of small centres, is a great drawback to New Zealand manufacturers. Every factory turns out an enormous number of lines. 519. Do you not think that in the event of federation we would develop into large industries here ?—I do not think so. I think the large industries would grow larger around these centres of Melbourne and Sydney. 520. You do not think that climatically we would have a greater advantage ?—I do not attach any importance to that climatic effect. I think Melbourne has just as good a climate as we have, and equal to this from that point of view. 521. Mr. Millar.] Do you think this colony would be likely to develop as rapidly under an Australian Government as it has done under our own Government ?—I do not think it would. I have formed a great faith going on under ours. 522. Do you think there will be greater community of interest amongst ourselves than there is on the other side ?—I think so. 523. Did I understand you to say that the iron trade is in favour of federation?— Two or three ironworkers who are members of the Industrial Association are the only members one hears at all favourable to it, and one of the leading men in the town—a large ironfounder—told me he believed in the thing, but added that if federation takes place he will immediately go to Sydney and start a branch of his factory there. I thought this was the very thing that would occur. He did not mean it as a joke, but seriously. He said that he would at once open a branch in Sydney, and that he would find it to his interest to manufacture the goods there and distribute them from that point, because Australia possessed advantages which we did not. 524. And the probability is that he would take some of the best men away from here with him and so affect our population ?—I think so. 525. I suppose you are aware that the average wages paid in Victoria are not equal to the average wages paid here ? —I believe they are lower on the whole. In the boot trade I find the average wages in 1897 were £1 3s. 3d., and in 1898 £1 3s. 3d. That is lower than ours. 526. Mr. Beauchamp] It is more particularly in regard to the shoe industry that you think our men will suffer competition from Victoria and New South Wales ? —I think that is not the only one that would be affected very keenly. Ultimately I think that the woollen trades might be affected in addition to those I have already mentioned. I was a director of the Kaiapoi Company for many years, and I know of the efforts that were made by us to get a trade with Australia for our woollen materials. 527. With regard to the soap and candle industry, is there any competition in that industry from Australia through the reduction of the duty on candles ? —1 do not think there is, or, if it is, it is nothing very serious. 528. The duty last year was reduced from 2d. to Id. per pound. Do you consider that a sufficient protection for the candle industry at the present time ?—I think it takes them all their time to hold their own at that. 529. But if that duty were swept away altogether, do you think they would be wiped out ?—I think so. 530. When discussing this question of federation with any people in this city who appear to be favourable towards it, do those people express themselves as favourable to this colony joining under the present conditions of the Commonwealth Bill?—I think so. Any one expressing an opinion has given it in that direction.
A.—4
180
531. Last night we had a gentleman who said that, while generally favouring federation, the Bill would require to be modified to meet the condition of New Zealand: what is your opinion?—l have not studied it from that point of view. 532. Mr. Luke.] Is it a question of distance you fear, as regards manufacturing?—l think it is the widespread character of our factories, the smallness of them, and the limited nature of the tools turned out here. 533. Do you not think we could specialise some of these lines ?—You might in many years to come, but I do not think so under present conditions. 534. Do you not think we could enter into the trade outside the large centres of Australia?— It is possible, but I think that the Australians will look after these outlying parts very well. The advantages would all be with them. The importation of the raw material would handicap us. 535. You mentioned about their shipping their surplus here. Is that a common practice in big manufacturing ? —lt is undoubtedly. 536. What is the average wage paid in New Zealand for the boot trade ?—I am not in a position to tell you that. You will have Mr. Frostick, our expert, before you, and he is also the president of the Federated Bootmakers' Association, which represents all the factories in New Zealand, and he will give you every detail on that point. 537. You have had some experience in the woollen trade? —Yes, as a director of the Kaiapoi Company for some years. 538. Under federation, is there not a large trade looming in Australia for woollen goods ? — Ido not think so. I cannot see that we possess any advantages over them. Their raw material is as cheap as ours. They make splendid values in their woollen materials, and they make some varieties that we do not. We would have to alter our manufactory to enable us to compete with them. 539. But do you not think the climate enables our men to do better piecework in New Zealand ? —That applies to Queensland, and also the tropics, but not to Melbourne or Sydney. 540. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the industries which would be affected by Australian competition would give up without a struggle, or do you think the first tendency would be to reduce the wages here?—l do not suppose we should give up without a struggle, and I think the tendency undoubtedly would be to come down to the Australian level in wages. We could not pretend to pay a higher rate of wages than they pay. 541. Do you think it would be possible to maintain the present labour conditions generally that we have now under such competition ? —I do not think that it would be possible. Australia would have to follow our lead in that respect, or we should have to come down to their level. 542. Which is the more probable? —That we should have to follow the Australian lead, and come down. 543. Then, you think the immediate effect of federation would be to lower the social condition of the workers of this colony ?—That is my opinion. 544. Hon. Major Steward.] You are aware that our export trade to Australia, in round figures, is about £1,000,000, and that the largest proportion of that export is taken by New South Wales? —Yes. 545. Now, in the event of a moderately protective tariff being proposed by the Commonwealth —and it would apply to the whole of Australia—do you think we should lose any portion of our export trade with New South Wales ?—I do not think we should, because I think if you analyse these exports you will find that they are made up of things like timber, and they take the soft timbers from New Zealand irrespective of any tariff. They have to get them. And malt is another item that they take, also hops, potatoes, and oats. I take it that they are largely dependent upon their seasons. The export of onions is a very small thing. Only eight thousand pounds' worth went to Australia last year. 546. Then, you do'not think they obtain these articles in seasons when they are able to produce them themselves from any neighbouring colony, such as Victoria, in preference to us ? —Victoria might have a little advantage in that respect, but I think that anything like a moderate tariff would shut them out altogether. 547. Even if we were to join, do you think that that would be a sufficient factor in determining us, notwithstanding other advantages, to become a State of the Commonwealth ?—I think that if we were going to lose the whole of our apparent trade with them, it would still be a wise thing for us to stand out. 548. Do you anticipate, under the Commonwealth, that the duty would be a higher or a lower one than it is now ? —I believe it would be a lower one, but I have great faith in New Zealand, and think the population of Australia would be a very mixed one in the course of another generation. 549. Are the bootmakers subject to very keen competition at present from America ?—Very keen, and if the tariff were lowered that competition would be considerably aggravated. 550. You spoke of the export of onions to Australia: how do you think the producers of that article would be affected under the federation ?—The total quantity we sent them last year came to £8,000, and I suppose it would not be a very serious thing if we did not send them at all. William Chbystall examined. (No. 58.) 551. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a merchant in Christchurch, Mr. Chrystall ?—Yes. I have for twenty-three years resided in New Zealand. 552. Will you favour the Commission with your opinion as to whether or not New Zealand should federate with the Australian Commonwealth ?—I do not think it should federate. 553. On what grounds ?—There are various ground. I think it would hurt New Zealand in connection with its manufacturing industries, for one thing, as there would be a tendency for trade to centre in Sydney and Melbourne, judging by past experience.
181
A.—4
554. Can you tell me what is the largest number of hands employed by any industry in the Canterbury District? —I could not, but I know that one factory with which I am connected employs about three hundred ; but I am not aware that that is the largest number employed in any one place. That number is employed in a frozen-meat factory, v 555. But take ironworks?—l could not tell you. 556. Are you acquainted with Australia at all?—No, excepting through what I read and the business I am engaged in. 557. Are you aware that the factories there are very much larger than those in New Zealand? —Yes. 558. Do you think that the smaller factories in New Zealand could compete with those ?—I think they could not—at any rate, a number of them could not. 559. How do you think the matter of government would be affected by reason of the distance from Australia ?—I think it would be affected unfavourably. 560. Why?— Because we in New Zealand would be at the extremity of the Commonwealth area, and should receive a smaller share of attention. Then, there is another thing: Ido not think that in Australia they are nearly as far forward with the public works in proportion to the size of their country as we are in New Zealand, and I think it would be only fair to assume that for some time a larger proportion of money would be expended on public works in Australia than would be spent in New Zealand. Of course, we, as part of the Federation, would have to bear our share of the cost of borrowing that money, while we should not benefit through the expenditure. 561. ,Do you think the distance would in many ways prevent New Zealand being adequately represented?—l should think distance is a most serious factor in the situation. 562. Do you think there would be any difficulty, on account of distance, in New Zealand being properly and adequately represented in the Federal Parliament ? —1 think there would be a difficulty. 563. Why?— Because we aie too far away. Distance certainly in such a case must be a drawback. 564. Have you considered how the agricultural interests would be affected by federation— would they lose or gain by it? —I do not think the agricultural interests would suffer to a material extent. 565. Do you think there would be no greater advantage to the agricultural interest by federating ?—Very little. 566. As regards the financial aspect of the question, how do you think we should be affected in that way ?—I think that is a very serious objection as well. 567. Why? —According to the Bill, I understand they may take as much as 25 per cent, of our tariff, and that amount would necessarily have to be made up by direct taxation. 568. And do you think the colony is not able to bear that ?—lt would be very unwise to increase the burden of direct taxation we have now. 569. Are there any other disadvantages that occur to you as likely to accrue under federation ? —I think there is a serious disadvantage in the matter of our public finance. If we have to raise loans for the colony, while the Commonwealth has the control of our tariff, I think it would, to a certain extent, interfere with our ability to borrow to full advantage. 570. Are there any other advantages which occur to you that we would receive from federating ?—No. I cannot see that we could borrow to greater advantage under the Commonwealth than New Zealand could borrow by itself. The progress of New Zealand for the last five years has been considerably greater than the progress of any other of the colonies. One most satisfactory feature of our public finance is the fact that our exports are exceeding our imports to such a large extent as to prove to all that the money we have borrowed in the past is now producing profitable results. 571. Do you attribute that prosperity to the legislation of the colony, or to what other reason ? —I think it is chiefly attributable to the fact that our agricultural interests are now being developed very successfully, chiefly in the matter of frozen meat and butter. I think these two industries are the chief factors in our present prosperity. 572. How would federation affect those two products ? —I do not think it would affect them in the least degree, because we depend practically entirely upon markets apart from Australia for these two products. 573. I ask you again if you can tell us of any advantages which occur to you that New Zealand would receive from federating with Australia?—l must confess that I cannot see any substantial advantage that we should receive from it. There might be some minor advantages, but I think no one advantage would be considerable enough to warrant our joining the Commonwealth. 574. Or forfeiting our independence as a colony?—Oh, no ; certainly not. 575. Do you attach much importance to that being retained ?—Yes, the very highest importance. I think if we joined the Commonwealth we should lose a great deal in regard to the sentiment of nationality. There is, I think, a great deal in that. 576. Have you any opinion as to whether Mr. Barton will be able to realise his idea of having a white Australia ?—I do not see bow he is to do that and at the same time settle and satisfy Queensland, because they have a most important industry there which cannot be effectively carried on without Kanaka labour. 577. Then, I take it that your opinion is decidedly against federation?— Decidedly. 578. Mr. Leys.] Do you think, if we federated, New Zealand would carry on such schemes as the Land for Settlements Act, and so on, with the same advantage that it now can?— Yes; I do not see that federation would interfere with that, because it is a purely domestic concern. 579. Do you think we could borrow money for those purposes to the same advantage that we do now ?—We could not offer the same security.
A.—4
182
580. Do you think our finance would be elastic enough for borrowing to meet services of that kind ?—The whole question of what direction the policy of the Commonwealth will go in is so indefinite that one can hardly form a judgment on a matter of that kind. We discussed the Bill at the Chamber of Commerce, and found the proposals-so intangible that we were unable to come to any positive conclusion about them. One would naturally suppose that, if the Customs revenue of the individual States is controlled by the Commonwealth, we should not have the same security to offer. It might be that our resources otherwise would be good enough to make no difference, but I think that in times of general depression, and tightness of the money-market, we should be placed at a disadvantage if our Customs revenue were in the hands of the Commonwealth. 581. Prom your study of the Bill, do you conclude that the only contention is to appropriate the whole of the Customs revenue of the States for Federal purposes ?—We could not form any conclusion upon that point, and we gathered that the 25 per cent, was practically an experimental proposal, and that after a certain time a more definite course could be decided upon. 582. Do you think, from the terms of the Bill, that the Commonwealth contemplates taking over railways and other works of that kind ? —Yes, I concluded that. 583. Do you think that would be in the interest of New Zealand ?—No. 584. Do you think that the administration of the postal and telegraphs from Australia would be in the interest of New Zealand ? —I think the postal and telegraphic business would be very wisely put in the hands of the Commonwealth, because it is a matter of common interest. 585. Do you think the administration of that department by the Commonwealth would be an advantage to New Zealand in respect to its postal and telegraphic service ?—Not if they had the profits. I suppose they would have the profit on the working, and I do not think that would be therefore any advantage to New Zealand. 586. Do you think it would lead to improved efficiency ? —I do not think so. I think our Postal Department is conducted efficiently now. 587. Have you considered the question of appointments under the Federal Government: in the appointment of officials do you think there will be the same opportunities for New-Zea-landers in the Federal Civil Service if the appointments were made in Australia ?—I should hardly think so, seeing that we are so far away, and at the extremity of the Commonwealth here. I hardly think aspirants for office from here would have the same chance for appointment. 588. Mr. Beid.] As you are opposed to federation, have you considered the question of entering into reciprocal treaties ?—Yes; I think it would be most desirable. 589. Can you indicate to us the general line on which such treaty should be based ?—I think there ought to be a reciprocal understanding with regard to products that our country can produce to the greatest advantage. There was a proposal made some time ago that we should receive wines from Australia and that they should receive our exports, such as grain and potatoes, free of duty. 590. But you are aware that none of these treaties have yet taken effect, and when they have existed as between various Australian Colonies they have generally failed of effect ? —Yes. 591. Do you think it is possible, having regard to the present position of the Commonwealth to this colony, that it is likely that such a treaty could be effected ?—I think there would be some difficulty in it. I think they would place as many difficulties as they could in the way of its being accomplished, because they wish to get us into the Commonwealth. 592. Do you think that any one country would have a preponderance as against us in entering into such a treaty commercially ? —No. I think Tasmania would be more opposed to it than any one, because it is looking to Australia as a market for certain products; but, of course, their influence is not so great as other colonies. 593. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think the agricultural interest is a big interest in Australia, and will afford to New Zealand a larger market than it is possible for us to get if we keep apart'? —The Australians are large competitors now in respect to almost every article we produce, and the competition is increasing. 594. But if they raised a tariff wall what would be our prospect of competing?—l think when they require our produce in their bad seasons they would have to take it all the same. 595. As a matter of fact, you know that we only export one-eleventh of our produce to Australia ? —Yes. 596. Is not there in the future a large inducement held out of the prospect of an increased trade with Australia as compared with the London market ? —Some people who are in favour of federation profess to see the prospect of an increased trade with Australia, but I confess that I am not able to see how it could take place. 597. The London market would probably be more keenly competed for in the future than now, would it not ?—Yes. Frozen meat is our principal export to London. Australia, with a flock of eighty million sheep, has never been able to export more than 2 per cent., whereas New Zealand, with a flock of twenty million, exports 16 per cent. Then, again, the demand for our meat is increasing very fast in England, and I do not think, for many years to come, we shall suffer very much from Australia as a competitor. Practically, the frozen-meat industry has been going on for twenty years, and the time has been long enough to have afforded a very conclusive test of Australia's possibilities. 598. Shall we not have greater competition from Australia in the future, causing us to look to obtaining a market nearer home ?—Certainly, we shall have more competition as time goes on ; but we have had difficulties to contend with in the past which we have overcome, and there will still be an expanding market in England for our produce. Of course, we can never invade the Australian market with our frozen meat. They are larger exporters than we are in butter. 599. But that might not be in the future?—l do not see how it can be stopped ; unless the population increases very much they will not require much of our butter.
183
A.—4
600. But their population will rapidly increase, and we shall be advised to look for a market outside here'?—l think we will have a great market in Britain, also probably in Germany and United States, in the course of years. 601. Do you think the manufacturers here would be placed at a very great disadvantage, as compared with those under the Commonwealth, if we federated ?—-There is a tendency for manufactures to centre in the large cities, where undoubtedly there are greater advantages. They can get cheaper money and cheaper labour. There is also the tendency to specialise, and for specialists to gravitate towards the capitals. 602. Do you think they have cheaper money than we have?—We have at present cheaper money in New Zealand than Australia, but I think that is only temporary, and will not last. 603. Do you not think the workmen of New Zealand, with our climatic advantages and better social surroundings, can do better than the workmen in Australia ? —They can certainly do better here. I think our advantages of soil and climate, and also the geographical position of our cities, all tend to a more natural distribution of wealth. 604. Ido not mean that aspect: do you think the workmen of New Zealand would give a better return for a day's work than is possible in Australia, with their climate?—l think that is the case; but Ido not think it would compensate for the advantages they would have on the other side through working on a much larger scale. 605. Do you not think, in all probability, their rate of wages will be raised to our level, and their condition of living to our level ?—I do not think that will be the case. We shall more likely be brought down to theirs in point of wages. 606. Mr. Beauchamp.] One witness expressed the opinion yesterday that with inter-free-trade New Zealand would have to compete all round with the very large merchants and distributors in Australia :do you share that view ?—I do not apprehend any serious objection on that head. A much larger business, of course, would be done than now, for the reason that there would be no Customs duties, which is one obstacle to the distribution of goods from Melbourne. If goods could be sent from Sydney or Melbourne just as they are sent from Wellington to Lyttelton, without any duty or need for the intervention of Customs agents, I think the trade would be increased; but I do not see, as far as the distributing trade of the colony is concerned, that it would be much affected. In the trade lam engaged in we should probably suffer, but not to a very serious extent. We should suffer chiefly from the less prosperous condition of the colony, which would come about through federation. 607. With regard to the sugar industry, I understand you have had considerable experience? —Yes. 608. Are you decidedly of opinion that that industry could not be maintained without black labour?— That is what I have heard from people in Queensland who are engaged in the industry. 609. Have you any idea of the amount of capital embarked at the present time in that industry ?—ls it not something like £8,000,000, and £2,000,000, the value of exports ? 610. Do you think those figures are approximately correct ? —I cannot speak with certainty. I know the capital is very large. 611. So that you think these vested interests would be sufficient to compel Queenslanders to fight very hard for the maintenance of black labour ?—Yes. 612. As to the increased production of cereals and produce generally, do you think that in time Australia will be able to supply the whole of their own requirements without troubling New Zealand ?—I should not thing they would be able to do that year after year, but in normal years they wjll be able to supply all their requirements. 613. One witness stated that our export trade was a very small factor, as compared to the export trade of other colonies, in the products that Canterbury produces : in that case, are you of opinion that we can continue to expand our exports to the Old Country and still realise satisfactory prices? —Yes, I do. 614. You spoke about raising money: do you think that we, as a local State, will not relatively occupy about the same position that a local body in New Zealand occupies to the General Government as to the difference we would have to pay for our money as compared with what the Commonwealth would have to pay ?—Yes, I should think so ; but there would be this difference, that they would have the control of the Customs revenue. 615. Then, with respect to our legislation generally, it has been stated that Australia was practically ten years behind vs —that is, in respect to social legislation : are you of opinion that, in the event of our federating, progress in that respect would be retarded until Australia came into line with us?—l think so. 616. With respect to Customs and excise, the Federal Government have the right to take over the whole of the Customs and excise after ten years : do you think that that is a contingency that would arise at the end of that period, when they would exercise that right?— Again, there might be an alteration in the law before that time. I think the intention was to reconsider the whole position at the end of ten years. 617. As regards our entering into a treaty with the Commonwealth on reciprocal lines. As the term applies, there must be mutual advantages on either side: do you think this end could be obtained by the establishment of a treaty between the Commonwealth and New Zealand ?—I think it would be much more satisfactory for New Zealand to have a treaty of that kind. 618. And you think there would be mutual advantage generally both to Australia and New Zealand ? —I think so. 619. Mr. Boberts.] Have you considered what the probable effect on our frozen-meat industry would be by large accession to our own population ?—I do not know that that would affect it very much.
A.—4
184
620. Do you think that the production of surplus sheep would increase in the same ratio as the population increases ?—lt would depend upon whether the population was effectively settled upon the pastoral lands of the colony. 621. But, as a matter of fact, we have been exporting more than our surplus for the last two years ?—I know that. 622. Have you any idea of what the ratio of increase of population is in this country?— About 2 per cent, per annum. 623. If you look at the returns for 1899 you will see that our population was then 271,000 more than it was in 1880, but that we had five hundred less births : have you noticed those figures?— Yes; that is a very curious fact, and I do not think that our progress in that respect is at all satisfactory. 624. You said you thought Australia would be able to eventually supply all her own requirements ?—Yes, in the course of a few years, excepting in bad seasons. 625. Then there would be no very great loss in respect to their importation from New Zealand?—l do not think so. 626. Supposing there were, do you think there would be any difficulty in New Zealand finding other markets for her produce? —There might be soma difficulty, biit, on the whole, South Africa is an increasing market, and we have always the London market. 627. How do you think the re-establishment of the Vancouver service would affect New Zealand markets ?—I think we should do an increased trade with Canada ; but Canada is in the same boat as ourselves with regard to its products, and I do not think we will do a very large trade. 628. You spoke of there being a probable market in Germany : when ?—I think so, in the course of time. 629. Do you think there is any reasonable probability of the liners trading Eo Australia being induced to make New Zealand their terminal port instead of Australia?— Not at all. There is in Australia a much larger volume of trade, and I do not think the traders would come here. Their steamers are very large, and it would not pay them to come on to New Zealand on the present basis of our trade. 630. Do you deem it proper and prudent for the Government to subsidise them to induce them to come here?— Not at the present stage. 631. Mr. Leys.] You referred to the increase of trade by the Australian merchants with New Zealand. The amount now is about £1,300,000 : does that not include an amount of re-export?— Yes; but these figures are really very misleading. It is hardly possible to get accurate figures from Australia, for in many cases goods transhipped are sent from the east, the Straits Settlements, or India, and invoiced in Australia, and made to appear as if they were shipped from Australia. 632. At the end of five years New Zealand would lose the Customs revenue from those goods, would she not?— Yes. 633. The Customs revenue would be credited to the country from which they were transhipped, and not to the country consuming them ?—That is so. 634. If that trade increases, would that not very seriously disturb Now Zealand finance ?— Yes, I think so. 635. Have you observed that the amount of Customs duties collected in New Zealand is very much larger per head than the amount collected in the large colonies of Australia ?—Our tariff, I suppose, is higher. 636. In New South Wales the amount is given at £1 ss. 7d. per head; in even under its protective tariff, the amount is £1 19s. per head; and in New Zealand it is £2 18s. per head : would not the taking-over of the Customs duties by the Federal Government disturb our finance more than that of New South Wales?— Decidedly. 637. And put us to greater difficulty in rectifying it ?—Yes ; and in the same way our industries which were protected would suffer in a like proportion. Geoege Henky BiiACKWELL examined. (No. 59.) 638. Hon. the Chairman.] "What are you ?—Managing director of the Kaiapoi Woollen Company, woollen- and clothing-manufacturers. 639. How long has the industry been established in the colony?— The present company was formed about twenty-three years ago. 640. How many hands do the company employ ? —At the present time, I think, about 1,050. 641. Is the trade a growing one ?—Yes. 642. Do you export to Australia? —A little. 643. If New Zealand federated with Australia, how do you think your industry would be affected ?—lt would bo affected very badly. 644. Why do you think so ?—The rates of pay. are lower and the hours of labour longer in Australia than in New Zealand. 645. We have had evidence that in the event of federation there would be better opportunities for exporting goods of woollen manufacture to Australia : you do not agree with that ? — No. 646. Have you any opinion as to how other industries in New Zealand would be affected by federation ?—I think, generally, prejudicially, owing to the conditions that I have referred to in connection with the woollen industry. 647. When you say generally, are there any particular industries you think will be benefited? —I do not know of any. In conversation with a manufacturer in the iron trade he told me that he should strongly support federation. I expressed my surprise, and asked him what he would do with his industry, and he said, " Take it to Sydney."
185
A.—4
648. What effect do you think federation would have upon the settlement of the population of this colony : would it have any disturbing influence at all?—If that may be taken as one test, it would apparently draw the working-classes from here to Australia. The effect generally would be, I think, either that the rate of pay and social conditions of Australia would be raised very considerably—and that, I think, is very problematical —or else our rates of pay and conditions of labour would have to decline to the level of Australia. 649. How long have you resided in Canterbury yourself'? —Thirty-eight years. 650. Canterbury is a large agricultural and pastoral district?— Yes. 651. How do you think those interests would be affected by federation?—l do not think they would be benefited at all. 652. Do you not think it would give a better market for produce?—l do not think so. The climatic conditions will practically settle the demand for the greater part of those farm products to which you refer. I have had some experience as a shipper in former years, and I have found that the only time we had a good market in Australia was when they were suffering from drought; and I think, in all probability, the conditions in the future will remain much the same, and that we will only get a good market in times of drought, when they would be compelled to buy from us. - 653. Have you considered the matter from a strictly political aspect, as to whether New Zealand would be benefited by federation with Australia ?—I do not think it would. It appears to me, from what I have read of the Bill, that we should simply occupy the seventh place, and that practically means that there will be one for us and six against us. 654. But do you think the general expenditure of the colony would be increased or diminished by federation ?—I think it would be decreased. 655. I am speaking of the cost of government? —I do not think it would be decreased at all. Ido not see how it can be. If anything, it will be increased. 656. Can you conceive of any advantages which would accrue to New Zealand through federating with Australia?— None. 657. Mr. Boberts.] With reference to the general question of New Zealand's competition with Australian manufacturers, do you not think you take rather a gloomy view of it in considering that we cannot compete with the Australian manufacturers ?—Our-standards are altogether different from those in Australia. 658. In what particular respects ?—ln regard to the goods we turn out. There has always been a demand in Australia for certain lines of our goods; but, generally speaking, the consumption by the general public has been in line of lower quality than we produce in New Zealand. In the office I have a report from one of our representatives who has just returned, and he mentions two cases which have come under his own observation. In one case a Sydney merchant had placed an order for the manufacture of a thousand pairs of tweed trousers at per pair. That is, as far as I can estimate it, nearly 50 per cent, lower than our very lowest price in New Zealand. With regard to blankets, a contract was entered into with an Australian mill for 1,250 pairs of 11/4 91b. white blankets for 12s. 6d. per pair. It was analysed by a representative of one of the houses there, and found to contain 60 per cent, of cotton. We do not indulge in that class of trade at all. 659. Do you not think, in view of the very low prices, that it would pay to introduce cotton into your wear?—l have seen material in woollen-mills in Australia that would not be allowed into our mills here. 660. Do you not think we are inclined to coddle ourselves with the idea that we are making better tweeds than on the other side, when, as a matter of fact, we are making poor stuff ?—-There is poor stuff' made ; but, taking it all round, the general standard of our manufactures is higher than that of Australia. 661. What is the lowest price your factory ever charged for a suit?— J cannot tell you. 662. I have bought a suit for 18s. 6d.—there cannot be much workmanship in that?— Did you ascertain the loss made on the sale of it ? 663. You made reference to the fact that the rates of pay were lower and the hours of labour longer in Australia than here : to what extent does that obtain ?—The hours of labour there are fifty a week; but I cannot get an exact statement of the rates of pay in New South Wales, for the simple reason that they do not appear to have any log or standard rate on which they pay. 664. Have you ever endeavoured to do business in Australia to any extent ? —Yes. 665. And had you to withdraw?— Yes, it was not profitable. 666. The competition is so very keen on the other side that you had great difficulty in doing business in Australia ?—Yes. On the other hand, if the tariff was removed from New Zealand we should be inundated with cheaper lines of goods made up at cheaper rates. I dare say it will be in the memory of the Commissioners that when the tariff was 15 per cent, we used to have Victorian houses represented right through New Zealand, doing a large trade, and that when the tariff was raised to 25 per cent, that ceased. 667. Do you not think that the climatic conditions and greater energy of the New Zealand men would enable us to compete successfully with industries on the other side ?—I do not think so, because there is such a great difference in the rates of pay and hours worked. In some cases, at any rate, they have advantages that we have not. For instance, take the important item of coal, which enters very largely into all matters connected with the cost of manufactures. It is cheaper there than here. 668. Ido not suppose that coal is any dearer to you than to the Victorians. Victorians use Newcastle coal ?—lt is generally understood that they get their coal-supplies cheaper than we do. 669. Do you not think the trend of affairs brought about by the Conciliation and Arbitration Act will be towards the increase of the cost to the manufacturer there in the same way as it had effect here?—l do not know what definite object they have in that Bill —whether the object of the Bill is not simply to limit strikes or troubles to one particular State. '24—A. 4.
A.—4
186
670. In time they will make it a Federal matter, and, that being so, I think we have a perfect right, under the altered circumstances, in assuming that if federation accomplishes that effect we should compete successfully? —I base my opinion on the fact that at the time there was practically free-trade with New South Wales we could not compete. Of course, you will argue that, with free-trade applied to the world. 671. The handicap in the way of distance, then, amounts to nothing on the actual value of the goods?—l do not know that distance makes much difference to us. The mere fact of opening a large market would, I think, injure us very materially indeed. 672. Hon. Captain Russell] Will not these objections be rather of a temporary nature than the reverse ?—I do not think so. I think the tendency will be largely to centralise all manufacturing in the large centres of commerce in the colony—in, say, Melbourne and Sydney —and absorb the large proportion of the trade of New Zealand. 673. And you think, then, that protection is essential to the progress of New Zealand industries ? —I think so. 674. Do you know whether the population of Victoria is increasing more rapidly than that of New South Wales?— J cannot say that. 675. If it is a fact, is that not rather evidence that we should be afraid of free-trade? —It may be an argument that they have more room in New South Wales than Victoria. 676. If the number of hands is increasing rapidly in the New South Wales factories, whilst those in the protected State of Victoria are decreasing, does that not lead one to hope that we need not fear competition if we were a free-trade country ? —I do not know what are the returns under the heading of " Industries," or, to speak specially with regard to the woollen industry, I am not sure that the same remarks which apply to that particular industry would apply generally. 677. You speak as though the production of woollens in New Zealand was so good that they could not be dealt with practically outside of New Zealand ?—No ; the report to which I have referred is practically on those lines. The quality of our goods generally is of too high a standard. I have seen very cheap low-class goods being sold in Sydney, and it appears that the general public, at any rate, prefer something new and cheap, that will wear out in a very short time, and then get another suit. 678. Is it not alleged that the cause of the increase is due to the fact that they make what their customers require ?—I think it is caused largely by the fact of cheaper labour. I know that some years ago manufacturers from England took the whole of their plant into Germany, and established their works there, because of the cheaper labour obtainable there. 679. I was alluding to the allegation that the English manufacturer works on conservative lines, and will not study his customer. He says, " There are my goods. You must take or leave them " ?—I am quite prepared to say that the woollen-manufacturers of New Zealand are prepared to make what their customers want. 680. Is it not desirable, if New Zealand is to be a manufacturing country, that she should make a low-class material if it is wanted?—l think we should make a mistake if we entered into competition with the low-class productions of Yorkshire. 681. Why ?—Because they could at any time undersell us. We cannot get the supply of the low-class quality of shoddy that they use so largely at Home. We have not the density of population, and the material is not available for us. 682. I am trying to speak of the competition with Australia, and not England. On general principles you should try to make your manufactures suit requirements ?—The denser population there gives them a greater supply of low-class shoddy. The population is congested largely about Melbourne and Sydney, and the necessary materials are much more easily obtained than in New Zealand, where the population is more scattered. 683. Are not these difficulties of to-day, and not of any remote period ?— It is purely conjecture. If the population becomes denser, I have no doubt we shall, if we get the material as cheaply as at Home, be able to produce a much cheaper line of goods than we do at present. 684. Does Australia produce cheap lines of goods?— Some of them, but it has been the dumping-ground for both British and Continental manufacturers. 685. I am speaking of competition with other manufacturers ?—The woollen-mills of Australia have not done very well. Their experience has not been very satisfactory with the greater number of them. 686. You think we could not compete if there is free-trade with the Commonwealth ?—I do not think so. 687. Do you think that would be for ever, or for how many years? —Climatic conditions seem to favour the demand in Australia for light and cheap goods, and I suppose while the climate remains the same the demand will continue. 688. We could not make that class of goods ?—We have not attempted it up to the present. 689. Mr. Millar.] I suppose we can take these figures as being fairly correct in the Labour Eeport as to the wages paid in the tailoring trade in New Zealand?— They are assumed. I think they are correct. I saw in the report in the Year-book that the rates of pay are simply averaged. 690. Because I see that under the heading "Tailors and Tailoresses," in Dunedin, males receive £110s. to £3 3s. per week, timework?—Yes. 691. I notice that in New South Wales £1 10s. to £3 10s. is the wage for males per week ? —I should think the estimate for Dunedin is low. 692. As far as Christchurch is concerned, are you paying a higher average, do you think?— They are supposed to be working at the same rate in Dunedin, Christchurch, and Wellington. 693. Females in New South Wales receive 7s. 6d. to £1 155., whilst in Dunedin they receive 12s. 6d. to £2 2s. :do you think that is a fair average ?—I should think it was. It is very difficult to say, of course, under our system. You see, it is generally on piecework, and it depends entirely
187
A.—4
on the ability of the worker as to the amount paid. We have those working who would make double the money per week that others would make. 694. According to this, the average is greater for females on piecework, but no greater for men, because piecework rate is £1 10s. to £3 ?—I think in-most cases men are on timework. 695. The apprentices are paid higher in New Zealand than in New South Wales?— Yes; and in New Zealand the hours of labour are forty-five as against fifty ; in Victoria they are forty-eight; New South Wales is nominally forty-eight, but there is trouble in enforcing the large number of hours laid down in the Act. 696. Would you be surprised to learn that we are employing more hands in New Zealand than in Victoria and New South Wales in industries ?—No, I would not. 697. The figures for 1898 were : New South Wales, 31,617 ; Victoria, 45,844 ; New Zealand, 39,672. We are slightly under there ; but the latest statistics brings New Zealand up to 52,000, and Australia remains just as before. Can you give us any idea of what the wages are in Australia ? —No. The clothing-manufacturers have been unable to procure a log. I think there is no log in Sydney ac all. 698. The average wage of males in Victoria in the clothing trade is £1 19s. 6d., and the female employes £1 2s. 9d. That is considerably lower than here ?—Yes. 699. But we have not been able to export any clothing ?—Not any to Victoria, certainly. 700. To Australia at all ?—On very rare occasions we have exported a better class of rugs and blankets. To New South Wales there has been a small.export. 701. I suppose you are aware that Victoria is a large exporter of slop clothing now ?—I dare say they would be. 702. Do you think that if we federated the New Zealand market would be thrown open to the slop trade ?—Yes. 703. And your only alternative would be to come down to the same rates of labour or to go out ?—lt would follow, I think. 704. Mr. Bemichamp.] With protection under our tariff to the extent of 25 per cent., what is the condition of affairs in the woollen-factories of this colony at the present time ? —They are flourishing. 705. But they could not continue to flourish with free-trade?— They would be interfered with very largely by New Zealand being used as a dumping-ground for cheap woollens and slop clothing made and imported by Australian houses. 706. Apart from the Australian market, is there room for a considerable expansion in the industry in New Zealand?—We import a large proportion of woollens. 707. You think that in competing for that, and with the growth of population, there is ample room for the expansion of the manufacturing industries ? —Yes. 708. And that there is no present need to seek an outside market ?—I do not think so. 709. Do you think that in your own particular industry there is need for further protection ? — I think we are quite sufficiently protected now. I mean by that that the majority of woollenmills are able to pay a fair dividend, and pay their workers a fair remuneration ; and, that being the case, I do not think there is need for further protection. Robert Ewing McDougall examined. (No. 60.) 710. Hon. the Chairman.] You are vice-president of the Industrial Association here?— Yes. 7.11. How long have you resided in New Zealand? —About thirty-five years. 712. Are you acquainted with Australia at all?— Yes ; I have been over there half a dozen times. 713. Has your association, as a body, considered the matter of New Zealand federating with Australia?—No, not yet. 714. What are your own opinions on the subject?— Well, lam against federation. 715. Why? —I think it would be very prejudicial to our industries; and lam also of opinion that if we think we will gain a large market for our natural productions we will be disappointed, for the simple reason that they are growing all they require now. 716. There is an expori trade to some parts of Australia from New Zealand ?— Yea, but it is a diminishing trade. 717. You think it will not continue ?—1 have a few statistics of the produce of New South Wales last year ; and a number of lines mentioned here we shipped regularly to New South Wales only a few years ago, which seems to me to show that our markets will gradually be closed there, and we will not have a market for these natural products of our own. 718. Do you consider that the manufacturing industry will be prejudicially affected by federation ? —Yes; lam a manufacturer of biscuits and cocoa, and employ about 130 hands. The industries here are split up among the different towns, and are all on a small scale, and we have to go in for numerous lines if we wish to expand our business; whereas I think it will follow that big companies will be formed in Sydney and Melbourne, and they will simply flood this country with surplus products. 719. Are there any other disadvantages that you think will accrue from federation?—l have not gone into the question very deeply, but it seems to me that we will have to stand more taxation. 720. You have looked at it principally from the commercial side ?—-Yes. 721. And you think it is not to the interests of New Zealand to federate ?—No. 722. Mr. Boberts.] Do you look forward to New Zealand for ever manufacturing for its own purposes and nothing else ?—With close settlement, the land before many years will be taken up, and we must look to our industries if we are to prosper.
A.—4
188
723. You seem to contemplate the absolute impossibility of our manufactures here competing with the Australian Colonies, and that they must be confined to this colony alone?—We will not be able to compete against big combinations. 724. Do you not think big combinations can be- formed here as well as in Australia ?—lt is more difficult to do that where the population is spread than it is in Australia. 725. Have you not the same energy here ? —I think we have the same push and energy here, and can work longer, if necessary. .726. Do you look forward to the time when the conditions of labour will be the same here as in Australia ? —I think it is only natural that if we federate, and the wages here are 10 per cent, higher than in Australia, the men from outside would flood our market and lower wages. 727. Do you not think that the conciliation and arbitration law would make the wages the same, and that in a few years' time the wages will be on the same level as here? Why should you fear competition, then? —Simply because their output would be so much larger that they could produce goods cheaper. 728. But why not have large manufactories here, the same as in Australia: it seems to me to be rather a mean sort of thing to say that the trade is done, and that we cannot compete with anybody ? —We have to encourage our own population as much as possible. 729. But do you not think we could encourage our people in that way? —Our manufacturers have all the latest machinery, they have enterprise, and, I think, turn out their goods equally if not better than the goods turned out on the other side. I think it is not lack of enterprise on our part, but the output of the large factories of Australia, that would help to stop our industries. 730. But the enterprise of the industries here is confined to the wants of the population itself ?—Yes. 731. Do you think it is quite right that this country should for ever remain in that position ?— Our industries want to meet with more encouragement. They want to stop the imported articles coming in first before they look for the outside market. 732. Prom 1895 to 1900 the workers employed in the New Zealand factories increased by 19,000, between 1897 and 1899 those in New South Wales increased by 6,400, and during 1898-99 the Victorian factory employes decreased by 1,969 : do you not think that that points to the enterprise of New Zealand coming to the front ?—Yes. 733. Do you not think we should have a higher aim than merely manufacturing for our own people ?—lt would be a battle. 734. Do you not think we would survive it ?—Well, it is very hard to say, because the industries are just building themselves up. It was a tremendous battle to get our cocoa introduced, and it would be the same in New South Wales if we wished to operate there. It would be a battle for years before we got a name and the industry established. 735. But under federation it would open ports all round you ; you would be on a level, and the cost of production cheapening with the equalising of labour, surely you would be able to compete with the other side ? —Yes, if their output was not double durs, I certainly think we should. 736. Can you not double your output here ?—I think the population of Australia will increase more rapidly than here. 737. But their markets are open to you the same as to the Australian producer ?—Yes ; but still we would not have the extent of the factories. 738. Do you think New Zealand will ever become a big nation if it simply confines its efforts to the wants of the people ? —Yes, I think so. I would like to see us have a tariff like the McKinley tariff. 739. What has made England great—the great amount of the exports, is it not ?—Yes. 740. Mr. Millar."] Is it not a fact that the climate prevents the successful manufacture of cocoa on the other side ?—No; it might chocolate, but not cocoa. But they can overcome that by refrigerators. 741. Would that pay them ? —Certainly. 742. But I suppose you do send special lines into Australia now ?—No, we send nothing to Australia. My partner left me about ten years ago, and started in Australia, and he finds it a tremendous battle over there. 743. Supposing everything was on equal terms, do you think you would ever be able to compete with a firm like Swallow and Ariel? —Yes, I think we could now. 744. You would always have the disadvantage of a scattered population ?—Yes. In Melbourne they have local ground to work on, and here we have to spread it all round. 745. And could they not export their surplus cheaper than you manufacture?— Yes. 746. And it would be a long time before you could compete with them ? —Yes ; they would build large factories, and to keep those factories going they would send their surplus down here. 747. Would you have any prospect of sending your surplus there?— Yes, I think we would in time, the conditions being equal—the hours of labour and the rates of pay. 748. How much would you have to increase the present output before you would meet New Zealand requirements alone ?—Well, we would not have to increase it at all, for the simple reason that we have increased it, and cannot increase it to any further extent because of flooding the market here. 749. There are sufficient biscuits in the colony to meet the requirements of the people ?—Yes ; the output exceeds the requirements. 750. And even now, I suppose, the plants are not being worked to their fullest extent ?—Oh, yes, I think they are. 751. Supposing your plant is all being worked to its fullest extent to meet the local requirements, if you had federation to-morrow it would be of no use to you, because you could not supply the market ?—lt would not take long to increase the plant.
A.—4
189
752. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the event of- federation, I apprehend that your industry and kindred industries would be affected ? —Yes. 753. Is your business fairly well protected by the existing tariff ?—Yes. 754. And it is flourishing ? —Yes. 755. Are you increasing the number of hands you employ ?—Yes. 756. So, I suppose, you hardly want any more protection under the tariff?— No. 757. Do you think that would mean that there would be mere competition in this colony by more factories ?—No, I think not. 758. Do you think the Australian factories would make more by the larger domestic trade they would have at their doors ?—Yes. 759. And if you had the large factories here you would not have the same domestic trade out of which to make the profit and enable you to ship the surplus away ?—Yes, that is the position. 760. Mr. Luke.] You are afraid that under federation probably a large amount of capital would be invested iv Australia in manufactories, and therefore such a result would operate against the manufacturers in New Zealand : do you think there is really any difficulty in getting capital in New Zealand for manufacturing purposes ?—No ; I mean that there are numbers of industries that might be started well in New Zealand, but the people generally do not seem to care to embark their capital in any industries. 762. How do you account for that ? —I think the New-Zealanders seem to think we cannot manufacture here—that we have not got the brains; or they have not confidence in their own manufactures such as they would have in the British. 763. Do you not think that the ratio of capital employed in manufacturing in Australia is greater than in New Zealand? —I could not tell you. 764. Do you think the difficulty of getting capital is greater in Australia than here ?—I think not, but generally there is prejudice against putting capital into manufacturing pursuits. 765. You are afraid that under free-trade we should find the Australians such strong competitors that we could not cope with them in trade over there ?—I think their factories are so large that it would be hard for us to battle against them. 766. We have superior workmen in New Zealand, have we not ? —I am sure of it; but their extensive machinery is a greater factor. 767. But we could get the machines? —Certainly; but I do not think that even then we would be able to cope with their competition. 768. Mr. Leys.] Is the fact of the division of the population of New Zealand into small centres tending to keep our factories on a small scale? —I think so ; but what we find here is that the manufacturers established in Australia are able in main lines to pay the freight on the different parts of the material they require, bring it over here, and start against vs —at least, that is what would happen under intercolonial free-trade. They would start a factory the same as ours in Auckland, Wellington, or Napier, and we should have to pay the freights on these different parts to enable us to compete against them. 769. Have you found that even within the colony each centre pretty well manufactures for itself? —It is growing that way more every day. 770. Do you not think that distance is a very serious factor in any attempt to compete in Australia in respect to your industry ?—I do not think so, because it is a matter of freight, and the freight from Sydney to Wellington is just as cheap as it is from Lyttelton to Wellington. It may be slightly lower, but it used to be in both cases 10s. a ton. 771. I judge from your evidence that you conclude that the existence of a large population in the immediate vicinity of a factory will tend to build up great manufactures ?—I do. 772. And that our having to pay the freights will prevent us shipping against them, and so counteracting that tendency? —I think so. 773. Do you think the expansion of that population would also tend to keep down wages owing to the competition of labour ?—I think it would. 774. Do you feel assured that in Australia the aggregation of the population in the big centres would prevent the raising of wages to the scale now existing in New Zealand ?—I think so. I think the wages here would fall to correspond with the Australian wages. 775. You think the first effect of federation would be to force down wages?—l think it would reduce the spending-power of the people by reducing the wages. 776. Under those conditions, do you think it is probable that, even if a Conciliation and Arbitration Act were passed in Australia, the Court would fix as high a scale of wages and as short a scale of hours as now exist in New Zealand?—l could not say that. 777. Do you think the fact that they begin there on a lower level than we do would influence them ?—I have no definite data to go on with regard to wages. It is simply what my former partner told me —that the workmen to be got in Sydney are not such good workmen as the New Zealand workmen by a long way, and that he pays them less wages. 778. Hon. Major Steward.] Supposing that the wages in Australia were levelled up to the standard of the wages in New Zealand, and the hours of labour were made the same, would our people then be able to compete successfully against them ? —I think so. We could easily compete, supposing our output was on a level. 779. There would still remain the handicap of their being able to turn out a very much larger quantity than we could turn out relatively at a lower price : is not that so ?—That is it. 780. Is it not a very difficult thing to establish a market, say, for biscuits or any other manufacture when the manufacturer's name is not well known in the market ? —Very difficult. While that process is going on a manufacturer in New Zealand would have to accept anything he could get for his article, while the manufacturer in Australia whose articles were known would command a fairly steady price for his surplus.
A.—4
190
781. So that as between the two there would be a difference and a considerable loss before you could attain the same position ?—Yes. 782. Would you or any other manufacturer be disposed to throw away money for a certain number of years through going into that risky business - ?— Certainly not. 783. And that is the real difficulty which stands in the way of competition with these larger centres?— That is it. 784. Suppose the manufacturers in New South Wales and Victoria are manufacturing more than is required for local consumption, and they have to export the surplus, and supposing that the New Zealand manufacturer in the same line did the same thing, and had to export a surplus, would it not follow that one or both of them must send their surplus to some other market than Australia or New Zealand ?—Yes, or shut down part of their machinery. 785. Hon. the Chairman.] I understood you to say, in answer to Mr. Roberts, that New Zealand had no hope of establishing an export trade in manufactures ?—Yes ; certainly not until they have wiped out the imported article which we can make here. That applies to manufacturers generally. 786. Are there not a large quantity of manufactured goods exported from New Zealand now? —I do not know that there was a large quantity. William Wood examined. (No. 61.) 787. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the chairman of the Chamber of Commerce in Christchurch, Mr. Wood ? —Yes. 788. What are you yourself in business ?—I am an exporter of frozen meat, hemp, arid tallow. I have also a tannery interest, which is a manufacturing interest, but these goods are also exported to the Old Country, and are not sold here. 789. Has the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia been considered by the Chamber of Commerce in this city ? —Yes, on more than one occasion, very fully ; but we have come to no vote on the subject, because the opinions of our members are so diverse, and their interests are so different, that we would merely discuss it as a matter of education, more than to give any opinion on the subject. 790. Do I understand that there is a diversity of opinion amongst the members ? —A great diversity. 791. What is your own opinion?— Against federation. 792. Why?—l first of all object to giving preference to Australian-manufactured goods over British-manufactured goods. 793. Would that be the case if we joined in the Federation?— Great Britain is the largest consumer of our produce; some figures given by Mr. Paterson, of Dunedin, at a meeting of the Chambers of Commerce, point to the fact that Great Britain consumes 92 per cent, of our produce. I think it would be absolutely unbusinesslike to penalise the British manufacturers in favour of the Australians, as might be the case in the event of Australia adopting a heavy protective tariff. Then, the British goods would be excluded to the same extent, probably, as the United States excludes British goods at the present time. And not only is Great Britain our largest consumer of our produce, but she is our largest creditor. She is also the one we depend upon to protect our commerce on the seas. In the event of joining any other Power or federating with any other Power, it is not at all likely that the same pleasant relations would always continue with other countries that continue now, and we must look to it that it is to our own interest that the British manufacturer is to a certain extent protected —if anybody is to be protected. If the British consumer and labourer is not treated well by us we cannot expect that the exchange of trade we have now will continue. We also know what an advantage it is that all produce which we cannot consume in this country is marketable at a price in Great Britain. I think we should cultivate our trade with all nations that deal with us, instead of, so to speak, treating one nation specially which to a certain extent consumes our goods, when it is evident that nation is doing its very best to grow its own supplies, and to maintain itself. We have a trade, to a certain amount, with Germany and the United States. These goods pass through Great Britain, as it were, and are treated as transhipments —exports to and imports from. A great many of them are merely entered in Great Britain, and go across. As business-people, our endeavour should be to encourage trade with all nations, instead of trying to encourage it with a country that is in very much the same latitude and longitude as ourselves, and that can grow produce the same as we can, and also compete with our produce in Europe. 794. Do you agree with the evidence given by Mr. Chrystall—that in a short time Australia would be able to supply her own requirements ? —That is my opinion, certainly. 795. Then, New Zealand would have to look elsewhere for a market for her exports ?—Yes. 796. What is your opinion as to the effect federation would have on the manufacturing interest ? —I do not think they could compete against the manufacturing interest of Victoria and New South Wales. The New South Wales people, as far as I can gather, were anxious to federate, because they felt they had cheap coal, cheap freights, and were in a position to become the manufacturers of Australasia. Several large firms, so I gathered on coming that way from the Old Country not long ago, are opening there on the spot, because they feel there are large facilities for manufacturing. 797. Why do you think they would have an advantage over New Zealand manufacturers?— Because they would have a better buying-power, inasmuch as they can buy the raw material in large quantities. They have infinitely cheaper freights, more lines of steamers, and from the largeness of their manufactures they would be able to do the work cheaper. 798. What do you think would be the effect of federation upon the agricultural interests of the colony ?—I do not think it will affect them one way or the other. The heavy lands about
191
A.-4
Canterbury can grow other things than potatoes, and the settlers can go in for butter and cheese instead of cereals, and they can even grow mutton on Canterbury land to far better advantage than potatoes : it will pay them better. 799. Do you see any advantage to be gained from federation on the political side ?—As a native I strongly object to it. I hope we shall maintain our autonomy, and that nothing will induce us to federate. 800. You would not sacrifice our independence? —No. 801. Beyond sacrificing that independence, are there any other disadvantages which occur to you that would follow through New Zealand federating with Australia ?—lt is almost impossible from the data laid before us to form a correct opinion on the matter. 802. It is tolerably plain that under federation our Customs revenue will be devoted to Federal purposes. We had evidence from a number of witnesses that they considered that would have to be made up by direct taxation : how do you think that would affect us ? —lt will certainly increase our taxation if we belong to the Federation. 803. Then, your opinion is strongly against federation ? —Very strongly. 804. Were there many members of the Chamber of Commerce in favour of federation ?— There were several in favour of it, but we had not a very big meeting on that occasion. 805. Probably you would have no objection to supplying us with the names of some of the members who were in favour of it ? —Amongst those in favour were Messrs. Booth, Beaven, and, 1 think, Mr. Kaye. 806. Hon. Captain Russell.] Did I understand you to suggest that the federation of Australasia might stand in the way of Imperial federation ?—Yes, I think it is against the idea of Imperial federation. 807. In other words, that if there is a protective policy in Australasia against the world, it will tend to a condition of things similar to that existing in America?— That is my idea. 808. Mr. Roberts.] Are you very strong on the idea that the manufacturers of this colony cannot compete with the manufacturers in Australia?—l can only give an opinion as one sees it. I cannot give such a good opinion as Mr. Allan, of the Industrial Association, or Mr. McDougall could give, because lam not in their position as regards the business of manufacturing; but it stands to reason that where you have large manufacturing concerns near a port like Sydney or Melbourne the manufacturers there would be able to buy their raw material very cheaply, owing to the bulk they would buy, and to the cheaper freights. They would be in a better position to supply Auckland, Wellington, and Napier from Sydney than the Christchurch people, and the Melbourne people would be able to supply Dunedin and the Bluff, and probably Christchurch, more cheaply than the North Island manufacturers could. 809. That, of course, means that the industries of this country could not stand up against the industries of Australia ?—That is so. 810. Do you not think, that the wages and hours of labour being equalised, the manufacturers here could produce equally as well as those in Australia ?—I think it is very probable that, if federation came about, some of our manufacturers would leave us, and start manufacturing in Sydney and Melbourne. 811. Do you not think that the woollen industry can survive against the competition of Australia if we are put on all-fours ? —I think the woollen-manufacturers on the other side would have a better advantage than they have now. Their freights are better. 812. How much does the mere matter of freight between Australia and New Zealand come to in proportion to the cost of the article?—lt is small; but is it not a fact that the woollenpeople in Australia have very much longer terms for buying their wool than we have here ? 813. If they get longer terms there is no doubt they pay for it; there is no advantage in that respect. If we agree to federate, you do not look forward to the time when we shall become a great manufacturing country?— No. I think we are at the wrong end of the world for a manufacturing country. We must have cheap freights to become that. 814. Do you not think it is a sad sign of want of pluck ?—No; our coal is very dear. 815. Do you not think it ought to be the ambition of an enterprising nation to extend its manufactures into all sorts of markets ?—I think our country has advanced extremely well under present arrangements, and no amount of change in respect to its management will make us more prosperous. We have absolutely no cause to grumble at the progress'of New Zealand or its prosperity, and for that reason I would not change the captain of a ship when everything is going well. 816. You are quite content with what we have got here, and quite content to remain so?— The country has advanced, and will continue to advance. 817. I mean as far as manufactures are concerned? —I think our own -local markets will grow. 818. And we shall have enough to supply them?—-Quite enough. 818 a. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you considered the question of finance at all, bearing in mind that if we federated the Federal Government will take over certain revenues, such as Customs and excise ?—I have considered that aspect of the question, but it is almost impossible to gauge anything from the very vague quantities or amounts that come before one. We cannot tell what they will require. They may take all we have got. 819. But in opposing further direct taxation, particularly in respect to land- and income-tax, do you think the farmers would be affected adversely, and such further taxation would be a counterpoise to the benefits they would derive through having free markets in Australia ?—I maintain that there will not be any advantage in respect to our trade by having free markets, but, on the other hand, I think we shall lose several markets in one way or another. 820. Is it your opinion that this country is sufficiently able to stand on its legs without allying itself with Australia?—lt is not a matter of policy to do so. We require to be friendly
A 4 lit TX
192
with Great Britain, France, and Germany, and we do not require to give one country an advantage over another. 821. You are of opinion that a policy of exclusiveness would be detrimental to our trading interests with Great Britain and other countries ?—Yes. 822. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think these Home markets would be more hotly contested for than we have experienced hitherto—that the competition will be an increasing quantity rather than a diminishing one ? —No'; I think every year shows that our exports have increased. 823. Do you think that in the great race we shall be at a disadvantage?—We have met all the competition that has come against us, and we shall still do so. 824. But the cost of land in these countries is very much higher than in the others I referred to, and will not that be a big factor in the matter of production ?—The price of land has advanced, but the value of exports also has advanced. 825. Do you not think the price has reached a point now almost beyond that at which we can profitably cultivate and export as well ?—I certainly think not. 826. Do you think there is a possibility of land decreasing in value ?—That depends on the value of our produce. 827. But the price of produce is rather diminishing than increasing, is it not'?—Certainly not; our meat is half as high again as it was. 828. I mean spreading it over a few years?— Certainly not. 829. Then, wool is very much cheaper than it was?—On a basis of years, I do not think so. 830. With regard to natural manufactures, do you not think we have a lot of profitable raw material for manufacturing ?—Yes, we have ; but we find it more advantageous to export the raw material to a certain extent than to manufacture it here in many lines. We export the pelt of the sheep in salt or as leather, and it goes right into the United States, is cut into boots, and some of it comes back here. 831. Would it not be better to make these hides up into boots and shoes, and exploit the Australian market ?—There is no chance whatever of our doing that. 832. What about the raw material for manufacturing metal goods?— They have in Australia their raw material closer to their coal than we have. 833. But at Parapara we have coal in the immediate vicinity of the natural fluxes : do you not think there is a possibility of an enormous trade springing up within a hundred years with the natural advantages we have there in respect to the raw materials ?—lt is impossible to look forward with any certainty to what might happen by that time, but if we could build up a trade now we can build up a trade then. 834. But the door is now open to us to enter into the Federation, and we may not always be able to take advantage of the conditions that exist now ? —I think we shall arrive at our end in a more businesslike way by keeping clear of federation, and by supplying the customers we have now, than by trying to build up and bolster up a trade. 835. Do you think that distance is any great disadvantage?—l think it is a very great advantage to us. It is an argument in favour of keeping apart. 836. Is not that distance very much reduced by the introduction of faster steamers, and are we not within easier reach of the Federal Parliament than some of the remote portions of the Commonwealth itself ?—We should not be in such a good position as they to send our very best men there. The local people always have an advantage in sending their men to Parliament. They could send their very best men, and those men could attend to their own business and parliamentary business at the same time ; but our men could not, as they would be entirely cut off from their business in this colony. 837. But many parts of Australia would be as far away from the Federal Parliament as we shall be, and in many cases their men would take longer to reach it than we should ?—I think in that case we should be played the " odd man out." 838. You think they would conspire against our interests ?—Certainly. 839. But we have the right to expect better things than that ? —I do not think so. Our interests would not be looked after to the same advantage as theirs would be. 840. Then, you do not think our country, being a very prolific one, would be anxious to develop our industries here ?—'Not any more than they could do aa a matter of business. 841. Mr. Leys.] You spoke of giving preference to English manufacturers :do you not think that federation would facilitate the formation of a commercial zollverein for the Empire?—No, sir. I had the honour to be present at the meeting of the Chambers of Commerce of the Empire last year, and Canada made out probably the strongest case she has ever made out for the establishment of a zollverein, and we all recognised how extremely difficult a thing it is to do it. 842. But Canada still perseveres in the same direction ?—She has been doing that for the last eight years. She made a strong effort, and she gives a great preference to British goods now. 843. Is it not likely that the Australian Commonwealth will follow in the wake of Canada, and that their combined influence will make some impression upon the Imperial Government ?— Then, if that is so, and New Zealand remains a separate State, and not in the Commonwealth, she will certainly have a bigger say than if she were in it, because we shall be a third party to it instead of a secondary party. 844. You spoke of the probable competition of Australia in the trade with the North Island particularly : do you think the competition in flour in the North Island would seriously affect the farmers of Canterbury ?—I think, very likely it would do so; but lam not as well able to give an opinion on that matter as my brother, who will , come before you to-day. 845. I judge from your evidence that you think New Zealand has large resources within itself, and that the work of her colonists for a great many years will be to develop these resources ? —Certainly I do, and that we should continue on the lines we have been going on.
193
A.—4
846. Hon. the Chairman.~\ You stated, in reply to Mr. Roberts, that you did not think New Zealand, owing to its geographical situation, would be likely to become a rich manufacturing country : what do you think will become the largest interest in New Zealand ?—The agricultural and pastoral. The manufacturing interest will grow as the population grows, and we shall provide for our own people more than we have done. 847. Is there anything you wish to add to your evidence? —It is, I consider, a very important matter that, as we have to look to Great Britain to protect our commerce, we cannot build up a protective tariff against her manufacturers. The idea is absolutely against all reason. 848. Have you given any consideration to the question of defence ? —Only sufficient to come to this conclusion : that we are quite able to defend ourselves, and that in the event of any scheme being formed by the Commonwealth we should probably have to pay the cost of our defence ourselves, and therefore we might just as well arrange our defence in our own way as leave it to people on the other side to attempt to defend us. 849. Recognising, probably, that our most important line of defence is from the fleet?— That it is in ourselves on shore, and for our commerce from the British fleet. Heney Wood examined. (No. 62.) 850. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A flour-miller in Christchurch. 851. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Forty years. I was born here. 852. Have you visited Australia at all ?—I have on several occasions. 853. Recently ? —Not within the last five years. 854. Are your operations in the flour-milling business large?— Yes ; I think as large as any in New Zealand. 855. What effect do you think New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia would have on flour-milling in New Zealand ? —I think it will have a prejudicial effect, for this reason :it will certainly affect the trade so far as the South Island is concerned. The North Island freights, I suppose, from Australia will be quite as low if not lower than those from the South to the North Island. 856. Am I to understand that at present the South Island does a considerable trade with the North Island?—A considerable trade is done by the South Island throughout the whole of the North Island. 857. You think that will be interfered with by competition from Australia ?—Yes; the milling trade is in a particularly bad state at the present time, and to have any other competition coming in would be decidedly a bad thing for the trade. *i 858. Would the oatmeal industry be affected ?—I should not think so, not adversely. lam not in the oatmeal trade myself. 859. Have you formed any opinion as to how much the manufacturing industries in New Zealand will be affected in the event of federation ?—No, I cannot judge very well myself. I can only speak as far as our own trade or industry is concerned. I am not conversant with other businesses. 860. Do any other disadvantages occur to you as likely to arise from federating ?—I am only speaking from a trade point of view. 861. Have you not considered the political side of the situation ?—No. 862. You confine your evidence, then, completely to the trade, and your own in particular? —Yes. 863. Mr. Leys.] Is there any chance of New Zealand wheat or flour going into Australia ? —Not much at present, only in seasons of drought in Australia ; that is about the only time we can get any export of New Zealand wheat or New Zealand flour to Australia. 864. But do you think that under intercolonial free-trade exports would increase to Australia ? No, it would be rather the other way. Exports of wheat and flour would come in from Australia to New Zealand, and not from New Zealand to Australia, except in years of drought. 865. Do you think the effect of that would be injurious to the agricultural interest?—Oh, yes, naturally. It would, of course, prevent the consumption of a certain amount of flour manufactured from wheat grown in the colony. 866. Do you think the local market is of great advantage to the farmer ?—Certainly it is. Of course, the wheat-market is practically ruled by the English market; but, of course, generally speaking, millers give rather a little over than below the prices to be obtained by export. 867. Do you think the effect would be so serious as to affect the amount of wheat in cultivation in Canterbury ? —lt might not decrease to any great extent the amount of wheat that is grown in New Zealand, for wheat will always find its value in the London market; but it will certainly affect the milling trade, and so affect the number of hands employed. Of course, if the mills could not work properly they would have to shut down, and the hands be thrown out of work. 868. Do I understand that the quality of Australian wheat is better for market than New Zealand wheat, being drier?— Yes. 869. And that the flour also will produce a greater amount of bread, weight for weight ?—Yes; it will absorb more moisture. 870. That gives the Australian market an advantage ?—Yes. Of course, you have to take into consideration the local price they would get for bran and pollard in Australia, which would be considerably higher than we can get in New Zealand. There is so much more natural feed in New Zealand than in Australia that there is a much bigger demand for bran and pollard over there than here. We have to export much of our stuff at present out of the country to New South Wales. 871. You think, then, that the Australian wheat-growers and merchants would be inclined to send to the North Island market a lot of the wheat they now export to England ?—I do not think 25—A. 4.
A.—4
194
they would send any wheat, except, perhaps, when we have a wet season, but it would come in principally in the shape of flour. 872. Are the Australian flour-mills well developed? —It is a very large industry, and at present I suppose it is in much about the same state as it is h«re. There is great competition in the trade over there. 873. You have no advantage in the freights in supplying the North Island over your competitors in Sydney ?—At the present time there is scarcely anything comes over from Sydney, but no doubt the steamship companies would be very glad to get return freights from Australia. 874. The time is not materially different between Lyttelton and Auckland and Sydney and Auckland ? —No. 875. The freight would not be any higher, then ?—No, not higher. 876. In Auckland, would the flour-milling industry suffer, and the farmers also suffer, through the local market being decreased ? —Yes. 877. Mr. Beauohamp.] Are you of opinion that the present duty on flour shuts out the importation from Australia?— Yes, I should say so, decidedly. 878. And that without duty considerable quantities of flour would be imported into New Zealand ?—Yes. 879. What is the present rate of freight from Lyttelton to Auckland and Wellington respectively ?—I think, 7s. or Bs. to Wellington, and about 9s. to Auckland. 880. Do you think that equal rates would be quoted from Sydney ?—Yes. 881. In that case, with an abolition of duty, the Australian millers would be in as good a position to compete for the North Island trade as the New Zealand merchants ?—Yes. 882. Is it a fact that flour in Australia generally is cheaper than in New Zealand?— Well, I think it is cheaper in proportion. 883. Taking the extra quantity of loaves you could produce from a ton of flour?— Yes, and taking into consideration the prices they get for their bran and pollard. 884. We have heard a statement about the quantity of loaves made from a ton of flour: can you give us an approximation of what the difference is?—l cannot say very well. A certain amount of Manitoba flour comes over to Australia: It was introduced during a very dry season that they had a few years back. It took on so that the bakers there very much desired this flour, and now cannot very well do without it. The present price of Manitoba flour is £11 a ton, whereas the local article is somewhere about £6 a ton. I only mention that to show you how much flour would vary in price. You might from New Zealand wheat have one brand of flour which would give you a very good return. 885. Manitoba flour is better than Australian flour, then ?—Yes. 886. Do I understand you to say that the milling industry is not in a very flourishing condition here ?—Yes; there are more mills in the colony than are required. 887. So that, if subjected to competition from Australia, your opinion is that these mills will suffer ?—Yes. 888. Can you give us any idea of the quantity of New Zealand wheat manufactured into flour by the mills in New Zealand ?—About 5,000,000 bushels. 889. Mr. Roberts.] What is the present price of wheat in Sydney?—2s. 7d. to 2s. Bd., I think. 890. What is the present price in New Zealand, delivered at the mills ? —The present price is 2s. 4sd. 891. Are you quite sure of the quotations of Sydney wheat? —It is only from memory—from what I have seen in the papers. 892. Have you any idea of the total number of employes in the flour-mills in the colony ?— No 893. I can tell you—3B9. That is only a comparatively small amount of labour ?—That may be, but there is a large amount of capital in the mills. 894. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] I understand that it is the importation of flour, and not of wheat, that you are afraid of?— Yes. 895. Hon. the Chairman.] In 1899, I notice the total exports for the colony were £10,299: is the export trade increasing or decreasing?— There is not much export trade from New Zealand. Australia will take a certain amount of flour from us when they actually require it. When we can manufacture it as cheap as they can it will perhaps increase, but we cannot do so at the present time. 896. In the event of New Zealand not federating with Australia, would that market be lost to New Zealand—our exports to New South Wales ? —lf it was only that amount of export that was to be considered it would not matter very much whether it was lost or not. Of course, if they put on a preferential duty on flour into New South Wales I suppose that would be lost, but it would not be a matter of great importance. 897. Victoria exports largely?— Yes, to South Africa. 898. Do you think the milling industry in New Zealand will be an increasing one ?—No. I do not see how it could be an increasing one in New Zealand if we federated with Australia. I consider it would be the reverse. 899. But could you not find other markets ? —lf we could find other markets, the question of federation would not come in at all. We are doing our best now to find outside narkets, and we have exported a small amount of flour to South Africa ourselves, and are endeavouring to further develop that market. 900. Do you think there would be an export trade from New Zealand of flour, whether we federated or not?— Yes. The question of federation with Australia will not affect any other market outside of Australia. 901. Do you think that if the Australian market is closed to you you would be able to find other markets ?—There are very few markets open to New Zealand flour at all. It takes a great
195
A.—4
time to introduce a new article into the market. The article is unknown, and there is a great prejudice against unknown brands or articles, and you have to incur a certain amount of loss before you get yourself established in any other market. 902. Do you think the geographical position "of New Zealand has any prejudicial effect on this export trade?— Yes; it is too far away from all the markets. Henby Francis Wigeam examined. (No. 63.) 903. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ? —A maltster. 904. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Sixteen years. 905. Are your operations in malting extensive? —The largest in the colony. 906. Do you do any export trade ?—To Australia. 907. If New Zealand federated with Australia, would that trade be interfered with?—lt would be beneficially interfered with if we federated. 908. And if New Zealand does not federate? —It will be considerably damaged. It might be stopped altogether. 909. Do you fear the protective duty against you ?—I presume there would be some sort of duty. 910. What part of Australia do you export to ?—Principally New South Wales. 911. Any to Queensland? —I have exported there, but only in small quantities. 912. Are they not malting in Queensland now ?—There are some malting-works, but the great bulk of the malt comes from England. 913. Are you not aware that New Zealand maltsters have proceeded to Queensland, and have established malting-works there ?—Yes, one did, I read—Mr. Eedwood. 914. Has not Mr. Lintott gone there, too? —He has gone to New South Wales, and is managing a company there. 915. Are you aware whether these two are prospering ?—I do not know anything about Mr. Eedwood, but I have seen the balance-sheet of Mr. Lintott's company, and there was no profit on the first year. 916. Have you considered what the effect of federation would be upon the other industries of the colony?—I am only speaking of my own business. 917. Have you considered the matter?—lt is too broad a question, and I do not wish to express an opinion. 918. Have you given the question some consideration ?—Certainly I have; but it is a very broad question, and there is a great deal to be said on both sides. 919. Do I take it that you are serious in saying that you have not considered this question so far as it will affect other industries ? —I have considered it, but Ido not think lam qualified to form an opinion. 920. Have you considered the political aspect of the question, so far as it affects this country financially ?—I have, but Ido not feel qualified to express an opinion. 921. Assuming, as you do, that federation with Australia would be beneficial to the particular industry in which you are engaged, do you think that would be sufficient justification for New Zealand parting with her independence as a colony?— Not by itself, certainly ; but a number of sticks gathered together make a large bundle, and I take it you are gathering sticks now. 922. Can you give me any other sticks?—-I am only concerned with my own stick. 923. Can you state to me any other advantages which would be gained by New Zealand federating with Australia beyond what you have mentioned ?—I think there are a great many advantages; but at the same time I do not feel competent to argue them, and I think it is better to let them come from those who understand the subject better than I do. 924. Mr. Roberts.} The value of the exports in the malting trade in 1899 was £41,000?— I should say about that. 925. Have they increased materially during the past year?—No; they are steadily increasing, allowing for the fact that we have different seasons, and would be increasing if we had free-trade in the various colonies. At present a duty of 4s. 6d. per bushel is against us in Victoria—that is, 100 per cent, on the value of malt. It is the same in Queensland and in South Australia, and 3s. per bushel in Western Australia, and, I think, Is. in Tasmania ; so that practically we are shut out of the Australian market, except New South Wales. 926. If federation is not gone into, would you think it necessary, in the interests of your business, to shift your business to Australia?—l should be unable to malt here properly, but I do not know that I would shift to Australia. 927. Can you give any idea of what proportion of the £41,000 represents labour expended in this colony? —About one-fourth would be labour. 928. Mr. Millar.] I take it you look at this from a purely personal point of view, as it affects your own industry?— Yes, lam giving evidence from that point of view. 929. What is the total value of the Australian market to New Zealand for all products ?—I cannot say. 930. You are aware that the Western Australian market remains as at present for four years ? —I understand that is so. 931. How long do you expect a market to be found in Australia for malt ?—I think, for all time we would have an increasing market there. It is not a place for the manufacture of it. 932. Mr. Lintott's firm imported all their barley from New Zealand last year?— Yes, I think so. 933. How many hands are employed in the colony at malting ?—That I have not looked up. It is not a large number. I employ about forty hands myself in the busy season. Those hands I keep working through the winter, and they are available for harvest in the summer-time.
A.—4
196
934. Mr. Beauchamp.] Looking at it from a national point of view, you would not favour federation unless the advantages greatly exceeded the disadvantages ? —I put the advantages and disadvantages in the balance, and whichever was greater should weigh. 935. How much do you expect the increase in your malt export would be under federation?— I should think, more than double. 936. From a national point of view, you will agree that unless there is going to be a great commercial advantage to the colony we should not federate—you think this should be paramount ? —No. 937. Taking the broadest possible view, the balance should be in favour of federation before we decided to federate ? —Yes. 938. You have been established for sixteen years in Chrischurch as maltster ? —For fifteen years. 939. And your business is steadily increasing?—lt has been increasing. Some seasons we have done very little, though. 940. What proportion do the exports to Australia bear to the total amount of malt manufactured? —Fully 90 per cent. 941. That is the usual proportion of exports to Australia?— Barring bad seasons, it is. 942. But you are not so much affected by climatic conditions prevailing on the other side ? — In good seasons in Victoria we export less. 943. In which State in Australia is barley chiefly grown? —In Victoria. 944. How does that barley compare with ours ?—The best New Zealand barley is better. 945. Federation or no federation, we would find a market for barley owing to its superior quality?—lt all depends on the duty. People use rubbish if they get it cheap enough. 946. English malt is imported into Australia?— Yes, but it is a lessening quantity. 947. How does your malt compare with the English ?—lt is not as good. 948. What is the difference in value? —About 6d. per bushel. 949. You view this question of federation simply from a trade standpoint ?—I am giving evidence simply from a trade standpoint. 950. Mr. Luke.] About what amount of capital is involved in the production of malt in this colony ?—I have no idea. 951. The returns show a falling-off of about four thousand pounds' worth of malt exported from Lyttelton ? —I think the Customs returns are wrong. I noticed there was a discrepancy. 952. The chief port of exportation of malt is Lyttelton ?—Yes. 953. You think it is a matter of some importance to you to have an open door in the Australian Colonies ?— Yes. 954. Mr. Leys.] I presume there is a large consumption of malt in the colony ?—-Yes; but most of the brewers make their own malt. 955. Are there a large number of maltsters carrying on an independent trade of that kind ? — Very few. 956. Say, half a dozen ?—About half a dozen. 957. Do you find there is no local market for your malt?— For only about 10 per cent, of it. 958. I notice there is a considerable export of barley —50,000 bushels —to the protected colonies of Australia, excluding New South Wales, in 1899 ?—Quite so. 959. That trade is not likely to be interfered with by federation ? —I think it will be interfered with. I think that if makings are established on a large scale on the other side they will grow their own barley; they are doing it now. Only a few years ago malting was established in Queensland, and they now grow a considerable proportion of the barley they require for their maltings. 960. Do you not think that will take place in any case with such large land areas as are to be found on the Australian Continent, and such a dry climate ?—I think that New Zealand, with freetrade, can beat them, both in growing barley and in malting. The Queensland climate is not favourable to malting, and they only malt there because they are protected to the extent of 4s. 6d. per bushel. 961. Is it not a fact that in the growth of wheat our yield is as much larger than the Australian average yield as it is in barley, but still they grow wheat and export it ?—There is a greater difference in the quality of barley than in wheat, and the quality of our barley is much better than anything they could grow in Queensland. 962. You think, then, that our market for barley would be closed ultimately without federation?—l would not say closed, but we should do a large business if we do federate, and a small one if we do not. 963. Do you assume that the Federal tariff will be as high as the Victorian ? —No; but I judge, to a certain extent, from the tariffs as I find them. 964. Do you think it will be a mean between the free-trade of New South Wales and the protective tariff of Victoria?—l should imagine on malt it would not be as high as that. 965. Well, seeing that in 1899 we exported 12,744 bushels of barley to Victoria, notwithstanding this prohibitive tariff, do you not think that under a more moderate tariff we should be able to increase our export of barley to all the colonies?—ln 1899 there was a severe drought in Victoria, and that may occur once in ten years. If it is worth while to grow barley for the chance of exporting it once in ten years, then it will be worth while, 966. Do you think our present export of barley to Australia is likely to decrease under a medium tariff ?—Yes, I do. 967. Hon. Major Steivard.] I see by the returns of 1899 that the value of malt exported to New South Wales is £40,486; to Queensland, £208; to Western Australia, £569; Victoria, nil: total, £41,253. Practically, the whole goes to New South Wales : can you tell us why it is that
197
A.—4
New South Wales imports our malt at all ? —Because the climate is very bad there for maltmaking. 968. That is a condition that will always remain, irrespective of any tariff ?—Yes. 969. If New South Wales cannot make her own malt?— She can make her malt, but it will not be as good malt as ours. That is by the pneumatic process. 970. The question of climate is not of so large importance as it might be in some other countries ?—lt is a disadvantage that can be got over under pressure. 971. Would not the climatic influence be felt as largely in Queensland as in New South Wales ? —ln both places climatic influence can be got over by the pneumatic process. 972. Now, supposing that under federation we split the difference between free-trade and protection, and supposing over the whole of the Commonwealth a tariff equal to about half the tariff that now exists in Queensland and Victoria —seeing that that duty of 2s. a bushel would be a duty to apply not only to New South Wales, but also to Queensland, where it was 4s. 6d., and also to Victoria, where it was 4s. 6d.—would you not, under those circumstances, be able to command a larger custom than you do now ?—No ; we should be shut out of it altogether. 973. What would be a prohibitive duty ?—I think Is. would make it very hard for us to send anything over. 974. Under the best circumstances, the result will be that the Commonwealth tariff will be higher than that?— One would think so. 975. Therefore the effect of the new Commonwealth tariff will be to destroy your industry, unless we could go in and get free-trade ?—Yes. 976. If they have discovered a process in New South Wales to overcome the climatic difficulties in manufacturing malt, have you no reason to suppose that they will be able to manufacture sufficient for their requirements in the future?—l am quite certain they can, as far as actual manufacture is concerned. The new process does not, however, produce malt equal to the old process. I have seen it in America ten years ago. It is not liked at Home, and would not find favour anywhere where the other was obtainable. 977. Do you think they would take New Zealand malt in preference to their malt made locally ? —They would not make it locally if they could get ours at the same price. Our trade would increase, and theirs would stand still. Joseph Gould examined. (No. 64.) 978. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A merchant in Christchurch. 979. A general merchant ?—My business is more particularly with farmers and squatters. 980. Will you give the Commission the opinion which you have arrived at as to how the agricultural and pastoral interests of this colony would be affected by New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia? —In my opinion, the farm industry would be greatly benefited. I cannot help recalling some twenty-five years ago, when I was actively engaged in the shipping business in Lyttelton, that every steamer that left for Victoria carried generally hundreds of tons of potatoes, oats, wheat, onions, and general farm produce, and that as soon as the very heavy protective duties were put on in Victoria and South Australia that export practically ceased. Ido not mean to say that in certain years the export has not been again resumed, but, as an ordinary matter of business, the export has practically died away since the duty was put on. 981. Do you think that that export ceasing was due to the duty imposed, or to Victoria being able to produce sufficient for her own requirements ?—I think it was entirely owing to the imposition of the duty. 982. Have you any other reasons to put forward why the agricultural interests will be prejudicially affected if we do not federate ? —I think it applies also to South Australia, with which we would do a large trade. If we had free-trade with those colonies, I think our farmers could always, on account of the more favourable climatic conditions, produce all the principal articles more cheaply than they can produce them in Australia, and that we should get the benefit of those markets. 9b3, Can you name the articles to which you refer?— Principally oats, barley, and potatoes. There is a large area of land in the immediate neighbourhood of Christchurch which exports a large portion. It depends almost entirely upon what you might term " vegetable-gardening." They grow large quantities of potatoes, onions, carrots, cabbages, and similar things, and even cabbages are sometimes exported from districts around Christchurch to New South Wales in very dry seasons over there. So far as onions and potatoes are concerned, if that market were closed there is no doubt that an enormous number of small settlers around Christchurch would be ruined. 984. If New Zealand federated with Australia, New Zealand would have to make a considerable contribution to the expenses of the Federal Government?— Yes. 985. What would the amount be? —I have not gone closely into the figures. 986. It would be one-fourth of the Customs revenue, at all events ? —Yes. 987. How would that loss of the revenue have to be made up? Would it not have to be made up through direct taxation? —Yes, I suppose that would be how it would be got. 988. Which would be the greater disadvantage to the small growers and market-gardeners you have referred to —to be deprived of their market in Australia, or to add the imposition of direct taxation to their other grievances ?— So far as these people are concerned, I think the loss of market would be the more serious. 989. Are there any other advantages that you think would accrue to New Zealand through federating with Australia?—l presume that the voice of the Federation in the affairs of the Empire would have far more weight than the voice of a small individual colony that was isolated from its great colonial neighbour. 990. Do you not think the voice of New Zealand now is regarded in the affairs of the Empire? —Only to a very small extent, I should imagine.
A.—4
198
991. And do you think the voice of one large political body, such as the Commonwealth of Australia, would be greater than the voice of the Commonwealth and that of New Zealand being pronounced separately ?—I do not think that it would be; but I rather meant to infer that if any conflict of interest between New Zealand and the Federation took place the voice of the Federation would entirely outweigh that of New Zealand. 992. Have you considered the question as to how federation would affect the manufacturing interests of New Zealand ?—I have not. I have not got sufficient technical knowledge to enable me to express a very confident opinion on the subject, but I see no reason to suppose it would affect our manufacturers adversely. 993. Do you think New Zealand would be as well governed from a centre twelve hundred miles distant as she would be from a local centre, such as Wellington?—l think that probably a Government which was good enough for five millions of Englishmen in Australia would be fairly satisfactory for our small community here. 994. But do you not think we should be prejudiced by the fact of the distance ?—I do not see that it naturally follows we should be. 995. Have you ever heard of a community federating with others separated by a distance of twelve hundred miles of water ?—I do not think of one at the moment. 996. Are there any disadvantages which occur to you which would arise through New Zealand federating with Australia ?—Yes; there are the disadvantages that our legislators would have to travel a very considerable distance, and that anybody who wanted to get at the Government would have to travel further to see them. 997. Do you think there would be any difficulty in New Zealand being adequately and properly represented in the Federal Parliament owing to the distance?—No, I do not see that we should not be as well represented as Adelaide or Western Australia. 998. Have you studied the Commonwealth Bill?—I have not. 999. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I presume, Mr. Gould, that a heavy duty would be put on New Zealand produce if we were not federated?—l assume there would be, probably ; but, of course, it is only an assumption—l have no grounds for making such an assertion. I presume it would be very probable that the duties would be slightly lowered in regard to the most heavily protected items, but there certainly would be more or less duty, especially in New South Wales, which is now our best customer. 1000. Have you not considered the question of reciprocity by means of a treaty with the Federation, supposing federation with New Zealand were rejected?—l suppose we should come in under the " favoured-nation clause," which seems to be the generally adopted phrase. 1001. A reciprocity treaty would mean an arrangement which would be satisfactory to both parties : do you think that there would be commerce between the two countries sufficient to make it satisfactory to both parties to come to an arrangement on a certain basis ?—I think it is quite likely something of the kind might be arranged, because I know that Australian statesmen are very strong in their desire to obtain something in the nature of reciprocity throughout the British Empire. A reciprocity treaty already exists between Australia and Canada, under which Canadian produce gets in at an exceedingly favourable rate, and in return Canada admits goods from Australia on more favourable terms than she does from New Zealand. In Vancouver, some years ago, I tried to introduce New Zealand frozen meat, and I found we should have to pay 15 per cent, more on frozen meat going into Vancouver than on meat going in from New South Wales under their reciprocity treaty. Therefore, if they are willing to make reciprocity treaties with one colony, I do not see why they should not with another. 1002. Which do you think more preferable—absolute federation and the colonies being amalgamated, or a reciprocity treaty if we possibly could manage it ?—I think that probably the reciprocity treaty would not be of any great value, and I think that if we decided to stay outside the Federation the reciprocity treaty would be of such a nature that it would tax our produce pretty freely, and to a large extent destroy our market. 1003. You think there is nothing that they would like to have on their part under this reciprocity treaty —that there is not sufficient give-and-take between the two countries ?—Hardly. I think our products are of too similar a character. 1004. Mr. Roberts.] I understand that your opinion is that, while you are not prepared to express any opinion as to the effect of federation on our manufactures, you are prepared to say that, so far as our occupiers of the soil are concerned, they have nothing to fear from Australian occupiers ?i—l certainly think not. 1005. Mr. Millar.] I believe you said that federation would be good for the agricultural industries ? —Yes. 1006. I see that last year the export of oats amounted to £22,745 from Lyttelton. Can you give us any idea of the value that would be proportionately to the farmer: how much of that would the farmer get for himself?—Do you mean as net profit? 1007. Yes ?—I think, roughly speaking, about 25 per cent. 1008. So that the value of these oats to him would be £5,500. Then, I find that from Lyttelton potatoes, which is one of the articles you mentioned just now, were also shipped : was last year a remarkably good year for potatoes here, or was there a shortage in Australia ? —No, I think there was not any shortage in Australia, and I do not think it was a very profitable year here. I know, myself, that in the business I happen to be connected with my tenants at Marshlands had very short crops of potatoes last year. 1009. Was 1898 a phenomenally good year for potatoes ?—I cannot say. I was in England. 1010. Because I see that for the year 1897 the total value of potatoes exported from Lyttelton was £16,911, while in 1898 it jumped up to £120,647. I presume that that must have meant that there was some abnormal condition prevailing in Australia to cause that phenomenal increase ? —You are probably fully aware that the export of all these things to Australia depends upon the
199
A.—4
Australian season. If the season is a bad one there and only a moderate one here, prices are very high in Australia ; but it escaped my memory for a moment that the very high figures you have given are really the result of potatoes running up to £4 or £5 a ton. Two years ago there was a shortage on the other side, which meant an increase- in the bulk of our export; but at the same time the exports that were entered at the Customs were twice as much as they had been hitherto. 1011. As a matter of fact, I suppose we shall be largely dependent on the seasons on the other side as to the value of the market we shall find there under free-trade : a drought would mean a good season for us, whereas a good season on the other side would probably lead to a low price and decrease of demand?— That would take place under any condition. 1012. Have you any idea what the cost to this colony is going to be by our having to give onefourth of our revenue to the Federal Parliament ? —Something over a million a year. 1013. Do I understand you believe that federation would be of great importance to the agricultural interest ? —Yes, I do. 1014. Do you think, likewise, that federation would be an advantage to the manufacturing industries of this colony ?—I am not sufficiently acquainted with the different manufactures to be able to say whether the profit that is entailed would admit of the export of goods or not. 1015. As a matter of fact, you are aware that none of our manufactured articles go to London, excepting frozen meat ? —I look upon that as an agricultural product. 1016. That is a manufactured article ?—I do not look upon it as a manufactured article. I was considering boots, shoes, farm implements, &c. 1017. So far as our manufactures are concerned, we export little or nothing: is that not so? What I wish to point out is that, seeing that the only benefit, or probable benefit, under federation was going to accrue to the agricultural interest, the loss of taxation which would come about by the sacrifice of the Customs revenue would have to be met in the form of a land-tax?— Yes. 1018. Are you aware of the total amount of land-tax received last year in the colony ?—No. 1019. It was £293,627; and to produce another £527,000, where the tax is Id., you will have to make it 3d. to make up the deficiency : do you think the profit on the export of one million to the Australian Colonies is going to compensate the landholder for the increase in the land-tax— double that which he pays at the present time ?—Probably not; but Ido not see any reason to limit our exports to Australia to a million. 1020. Presuming you limit it to three millions, do you think the profit on three millions of exports would be worth to farmers an increase in the land-tax of treble the present amount ? — Yes ; although I do not consider it would be necessary to do so. 1021. What are oats selling at now? —They are only quoted now at about Is. 6d. to Is. 7d., and I personally sold oats on behalf of a farmer yesterday at Is. s^-d. 1022. But there is railage and everything else to come out of that? —It depends, of course; it is purely a matter of bargain. 1023. Can you give us a general idea of what the farmer would get for oats at his own siding ? —That, of course, would depend absolutely on how far his siding is from the port. The particular oats I was speaking of were sold, delivered in Christchurch, and were close to ; but, of course, if a man had to send them by rail fifty or sixty miles it would put 1-J-d. a bushel on to them. 1024. Are oats a profitable crop to grow ? —Yes, practically they cost nothing. 1025. Despite that fact, you think, if the Australian market were open to you, that the profit which would result in the agricultural interest would more than compensate for their having to pay £527,000 in indirect taxation on account of the increased land-tax ?—I think that ultimately it probably would. 1026. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is the falling-off in our exports of produce in Victoria due, in your opinion, entirely to the imposition of duty, or to greater production in Victoria?—-I think it is mainly due to the imposition of duty having raised the price of the articles in the Australian market to such an extent as to induce people to grow them more freely. I think they grow them under less advantageous circumstances than our farmers grow them. 1027. But is it not a fact that to-day the price of oats in Victoria is lower than the price ruling in New Zealand ?—I think not. I think the price of ordinary white oats to-day in Victoria is Is. lid. to 2s. per bushel, whereas in Christchurch it is Is. sd.»to Is. 6d. 1028. But how do our oats compare with the Victorian-grown oats ?—As a rule, the average quality, I understand, is higher than the Victorian. 1029. Is this oat, onion, and potato industry of great importance to the District of Canterbury?—We grow a large quantity. I fancy the estimated yield this year is something like 6,000,000 bushels ; and, while the potato and onion industry is not a very extensive one, it is one which a very large number of people are engaged in, especially in the immediate neighbourhood of Christchurch. If you go north from Christchurch for six or seven miles you will find that some of the lands are broken up into 10-, 15-, and 20-acre blocks, and are each supporting a family. 1030. Have you any idea of the extent of the export of onions from Lyttelton to Australia? — It is a very varying export. Onions vary in price from a minimum of £1 10s. a ton, which is the lowest they can possibly be produced at here, to as high as £16 or £17 a ton in New South Wales. That is the price which has been obtained during a drought in New South Wales. 1031. It is an article in which the price fluctuates very considerably ?—Enormously. 1032. As a business-man, have you given any serious consideration to the possible effect upon the finances of this colony by our surrendering at least 25 per cent, of our Customs and excise for ten years, and being compelled to contribute to. such great works as the great trans-continental railway ?—I take it that the contribution to the construction of such a railway would not be charged upon the revenues, but probably provided for out of loan-money. 1033. Mr. Barton, as I believe, said that we would receive benefit from a defence point of view by the construction of that railway, and that that would be one reason why New Zealand should
A.—4
200
be called upon to contribute her quota of the cost: can you see how we would obtain any advantage from it? —I do not think we would receive any benefit. 1034. Have you read the Commonwealth Bill very closely?— No. 1035. I want to know if, under present conditions" you think we would be justified in federating with Australia ?—My opinion, on general grounds, is that it would be an advantage to the colony. 1036. Mr. Luke.] You would consider Australia a growing market for our produce ?—Yes, largely so. 1037. How do you account for the big falling-off in the last two or three years? —The export would always be an exceedingly varying one as regards money-value. 1038. You do not think it is due to the growing producing-power—that is to say, a larger area put under cultivation in Australia, and their being better able to meet their own requirements ?— No doubt they could when they have a favourable season. 1039. But I mean apart from that —a normal state of things?—No ; I fancy that, so long as normal seasons prevail, we should have a growing market for our produce there. 1040. You said just now that our products are similar to the products of Australia : is that not rather a disadvantage in the case of federation, because we would be competing with the same goods in the same market ? —Not altogether, because I fancy the articles they can produce we, as a general rule, produce more cheaply than they can. 1041. How do you account for this particular district of Canterbury, which is renowned for the production of agricultural implements, which are looked upon as the very best implements made, importing into this colony implements to the value of £1,500, whereas you have not exported an implement the last year or two —at least, there are no returns to show it ?—We might very likely have exported none, but the main implements imported here are specialties. 1042. You do not produce specialties that you could export to Australia ?—I have heard from time to time of implements going over to Australia. I think Mr. Booth told me once he sent a very considerable number of windmills over. 1043. But one would have thought, with a free port like Sydney, if there were any advantages under federation, that already we could see to what extent these advantages are likely to grow, and that is one item, I think, concerning the products of the soil that would be materially affected ? —I gather that our implements are made probably to suit one class of agriculture, and might not be so suitable for the soil and conditions over there. 1044. Apart from agriculture and the expenditure of public money by the Federal Parliament, do you think we would suffer any disadvantage by reason of the distance we are from the seat of government in bringing our influence to bear for a fair and equal distribution of the expenditure on public works ? —I presume that our representatives in the Federal Parliament would see that we got our fair proportion of what was going. 1045. We would have fifteen members in the House -out of ninety members : what prospect would there be of our getting a fair and equitable share of the expenditure of public money ? —I think there would be just the same chance as there is now for any one province in New Zealand. 1046. Do you think there would be any difficulty in sending what might be termed our best public men to attend the Federal Parliament?—l do not think it would make much difference whether they went over there for three or four months in the year, or went to Wellington for three or four months. 1047. Mr. Leys.] I notice you laid great stress on the small industries, such as vegetables and onion-growing : would you be surpised to learn that the total amount of vegetables in 1899 was only £104 exported from all New Zealand ? —I only mentioned incidentally that in times of extreme drought cabbages have been exported, but I did not lay any stress on that fact. 1048. With regard to onions, are you aware the total export of the colony in onions in 1899 was only £8,089, and that in the same year we imported onions to the amount of £2,698 ?—I was not aware of that fact. 1049. Are you aware that we imported 2,000 cwt. of onions from Victoria in 1899, and that we do import onions from Australia ? —I think, from time to time, to a small extent. 1050. Are you aware that we* imported 3,940 cwt. of onions from the United States ?—I was not. 1051. Looking at these figures, do you not think this onion trade is really an exchange trade —they are perishable goods, and we send them onions, and they send us onions? —Yes; I think the onions which we imported from the United States went to Auckland. 1052. Now, seeing that we imported onions to the value of £2,698, and paid £1 a ton duty on them, do you not think, if that duty were abolished, we should have a good many more onions coming into the place? —I do not. I think we ought to hold our own easily against Australia in the matter of onions. 1053. Looking at the figures of the amount imported—£B,ooo—do you think it is going to be a very serious item in this great question we are considering?— No. 1054. With regard to the other exports, do you anticipate we could export wheat to Australia ? —That, again, entirely depends upon the season. Australia made the price of wheat in New Zealand for about three consecutive years, but the last two years they have had fine crops in Australia, and we have had to fall back on the old resource —the London market. 1055. But, taking year in and year out, is there not always a large surplus for export from Australia? —Certainly not. 1056. It is only exceptional ?—Very frequently it is; but I think in 1895, 1896, and 1897 there was no exporting surplus, and New South Wales gave us as much for our wheat in Sydney as it was worth in London.
201
A.—4
1057. Not the figures for 1897; and the total export of wheat from Lyttelton to Australia is given at £11,000. In 1898 it was only £83 in value ; and in 1899 we exported nine thousand pounds' worth from Lyttelton, which is really a grain-exporting place : have you noticed these figures?— But those were two years when they had good seasons in Australia; 1895, 1896, and 1897 were the seasons I referred to. 1058. Do you think, in view of the fact that Australia has got so much advantage in respect to the development of its wheat-fields, that we could really hope for any settled market for wheat, whether we federated or not ? —I do not. 1059. Then, with regard to butter, I suppose you are aware that New South Wales now is a large exporter of butter?— Certainly. 1060. Do you think that we can rely upon a permanent market for butter in Australia? —Not a permanent market. 1061. We have got rid of butter, wheat, and similar products?— You ask for a permanent market. I think we can export only from time to time, and get hold of a very good market in Australia in years of drought for large quantities. For instance, a few years ago large quantities of butter were exported from New Plymouth to Australia, and butter was brought back, I think, from England that had been shipped from Australia to England. 1062. So will they not be obliged to take our products, federation or no federation, in years of drought : could they go anywhere else ?—There is no doubt that by making a strong Federal tariff they would raise the price, and so stimulate the production over there, in the same way as they have done in respect of oats. They have in that way a special advantage. 1063. Even in years of drought?—To a much smaller extent. 1064. Seeing that Australia now sends to New Zealand a larger amount of goods in value than we send to Australia, is it at all likely that they will wish to boycott New Zealand trade, or will they wish to develop it in a fair way, as countries usually do ? —I think they will go in for developing it in a fair way; but at the same time I presume they will put on a revenue tariff, and that we should have to face that tariff, which to that extent would act detrimentally on our exports. 1065. Do you think a fair revenue tariff would exclude us from the Australian markets ?—I think, under some conditions, it would make a great deal of difference. 1066. Do you not think that under a fair revenue tariff we would send more into Australian markets than we do now? —That is a very difficult question, and one which, to a certain extent, is a question of degree. For instance, in the case of oats a very small protective tariff would undoubtedly keep us out. 1067. We had evidence in Invercargill that they exported oats to Victoria under a tariff of 9d. per bushel, and it was only when the tariff was raised to Is. 3d. per bushel that the export ceased ?—Yes. 1068. Do you think it is at all likely that the rest of Australia will accept such a prohibitive tariff as Is. 3d. ?—I do not. 1069. But under a moderate tariff do you think we could still do a fair business with Australia? —We might do some. The difference in the price of oats now between the two places is something under 6d. per bushel. 1070. It is a fact, is it not, that Australia is exporting oats to other countries ?—-I believe they have exported some this year to South Africa. 1071. Does not that imply that they are making oats pay, as well as supplying themselves ?— It implies that they have got more than they require. 1072. And they find it profitable to cultivate at that rate ?—I think there is no doubt that with oats at 2s. per bushel they pay very well indeed. 1073. That being so, they go on cultivating oats? —If the tariff were lowered—l think the statistics show we are expecting 15,000,000 or 16,000,000 bushels this year—we would very soon reduce the value in Victoria below 25., and it would pay New Zealand to grow oats, but would not pay Australia. 1074. Do you think we could not find a more profitable market, say, in South Australia, or elsewhere ?—I do not think so. 1075. You think it would pay us better to come down to the Victorian price rather than to find other markets ?—I do, or else go into some other line. 1076. Do you not think there is an identity of interest in Australia between the various States of Australia that does not exist in New Zealand, and that we should be largely outside the Federation when great questions are being considered ? —I do not see any reason to suppose that we should be boycotted, as you have used the word, if we are in the Federation, any more than we should be if we were out of it. Ido not assume that we should be boycotted on this particular question. 1077. But do you think that Australia would be deterred from going into such Federal works as the trans-continental railway, irrigation wells, and the development of the tropical territories, because New Zealand could not benefit by them ?—No, I do not suppose, if any great national work came up which was considered by the Federation to be necessary, that we could stop them doing it. 1078. Is it not natural that they would do these works if they considered they were for the benefit of Australia, notwithstanding that New Zealand would receive no benefit from them ?—-I think so. 1079. Could they construct these works excepting with money borrowed upon the security of all the federated colonies ?—I do not suppose they could. 1080. If the Federation goes in for large borrowing schemes for these works, do not you think that that would affect our power to borrow separately as a State for such requirements as we might have ? —No, Ido not think it would materially affect us. I think the credit of the Commonwealth will always be fully equal to their borrowing requirements. 1081. I suppose you know that this provision for the return of three-fourths of the Customs revenue to the States is limited to ten years ?—Yes. 1082. Would not these large borrowing schemes involve the necessity for more revenue for Federal purposes ?—I suppose if the money were spent on unproductive works it would ; but is 26—A. 4.
A.—4
202
there to be no scheme under which the revenue from the works created by the borrowing could be devoted to providing the interest on the loans ? 1083. Is it not extremely probable that such schemes as these, and large defence schemes, will absorb the whole of the Customs revenue at no distant date ?—I should hardly think so. 1084. Suppose it does not absorb the whole of the revenue, do you think it would absorb so much of the Customs revenue as to diminish our security seriously for State loans?—No, I should hardly think so. I should imagine that with the expenditure of large sums on great public works, and so on, the Customs revenue would prove elastic, and would increase, and therefore the proportion that would be available for the Federal service would meet its requirements. 1085. You mean if they should still continue to hand back the three-fourths? —Yes. 1086. You do not think that the fact of our having no control over the Customs revenue would be regarded as a serious drawback by the financiers in England? —I do not think so. Ido not think, as a rule, people at Home go very closely into these details. I think that the fact of our being in the Commonwealth would rather tend to increase our credit than to decrease it for State purposes. 1087. Hon. Major Steward.'] You look at this matter from a commercial point of view ?—Yes. 1088. And prefer to confine yourself to that point. Taking it on that ground, now, is it a good commercial business to give Is. in return for lid. ?—I would hardly call it profitable. 1089. So far as the agricultural interest is at stake, I think you have mentioned the following items : Oats, barley, potatoes, and onions. The figures for 1899 show the total export was about half a million of money ?—Yes. 1090. You are aware that the Customs revenue for this colony is now two millions, and that if we go into the Commonwealth one-fourth of this is impounded practically for Commonwealth purposes. Supposing we lose the Australian markets, the items I have mentioned, which come to less than half a million of money, could they be sold in some other market, such as England?— Some of them could, undoubtedly. 1091. And is it conceivable that you would not get half the amount in London that you would get in Victoria and New South Wales for them ?—For a good many of them they would get enormously less, very likely not more than half. 1092. Even supposing you get half, you Would absolutely lose nothing—even supposing you lost the whole market in the Federation with the items I have named, and you had to send them to another market and sell them for what they would fetch, then you would not lose more than you would have to contribute in the first instance towards the Commonwealth Government. If that is so, is that not giving Is. for lid. ? —I hardly fancy you are putting the matter quite fairly, because you are putting what our export to Australia is under adverse circumstances as regards several of the colonies, all but one having a prohibitive duty against us ; but if we were to federate those duties would be relieved, and we should increase our exports to Australia enormously. 1093. Is it not a fact that Victoria, instead of being an importer of oats, is becoming an exporter ?—lt is just now. 1094. Is there not reason to suppose, therefore, that under any circumstances whatever we could command a market there for that item of produce ?—Yes, I think we could, because our yield is greater than theirs. 1095. But if it should be found on striking the balance that the amount we have to contribute absolutely to the Constitution of the Federal Government is larger than the amount we should lose by having to change our market for certain items, under those circumstances would it be a good commercial bargain to federate ?—Of course, I have no doubt we should show a bad balance if we take out ail-the exports as they exist at the present time; but, in my opinion, these exports would largely increase, and the future exports would show a credit balance. 1096. But even-if that is within the range of probability, even allowing for a doubling of the exports to Australia, if it then be found that you have lost money, would you think it a wise thing to run the risk of going into a transaction which you cannot get out of for all time?—No, perhaps it does not look very enticing. 1097. As a commercial man, would you go into an undertaking that would bind you to a partnership for all time, which could not be got out of excepting by force of arms, unless you saw there was a distinct and clear commercial advantage?—No, I should not. 1098. You said that the united voice of the Federation would have far greater power in bringing matters before the Home Government than the voice of New Zealand singly would have if she stayed outside the Federation ? —Yes. 1099. Undoubtedly that is the case; but I want to put another position to you. It is this : Do you think that the voice of New Zealand as one entity, and taking the voice of the Commonwealth as another, would be less than the voice of the Commonwealth itself, supposing it embraced New Zealand?— Yes, I certainly think it would. 1100. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think the advantages of the agricultural interest by federating, to which you have referred, are sufficient to justify this colony joining the Federation and forfeiting its independence ?-—Yes, I do. I think the general advantages we should gain are sufficient to justify that. George Humphreys examined. (No. 65.) 1101. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a merchant residing in Ghristchurch ?—Yes. 1102. How long have you lived in New Zealand?— Thirty-one years. 1103. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I have. 1104. Will you kindly state the conclusion you have arrived at?—l am decidedly opposed to federation. 1105. Upon what grounds ?—A variety of grounds. First of all, from the commercial aspect, the most important point that strikes me is this : that our productions and exports are much the same as they are in Australia ; and I feel that the big markets of the world—in London probably—
203
A.— 4.
will rule prices. As an instance, I might mention some years ago there was a scarcity of wheat in Australia, and the New Zealand shippers were shipping wheat over there at higher prices, and making a capital thing out of it; but it was only for. a short time, because, to their great surprise, California suddenly rushed in shipments of wheat from San Francisco, and brought down the price in London. Another point I might mention is that the produce Australia chiefly takes from us is of a perishable nature. I refer to the produce apart from oats. She takes oats simply in seasons of scarcity, which probably happens once in three or four years. At such times it has been my impression that the existing duties form no barrier to their taking our products. 1106. You heard the evidence of Mr. Booth, the last witness ? —Yes. 1107. You heard him state that he thought federation would be an advantage to New Zealand as providing a market for agricultural products?— Yes. 1108. You do not agree with that ? —I do not —not any permanent or growing market. On the commercial side, I may say that I am certainly convinced that two such large cities as Sydney and Melbourne, with the capital they have, would have a continuous advantage over New Zealand in the matter of manufactures as compared with the small centres of activity here. I think the two countries, differing as they do physically and climatically, would after a time produce races with distinct characteristics, baying different aspirations, sentiments, and material requirements. Australia being a continent, her great requirements will be extensive railway communication in every direction, and she will get all she wants, in defiance of the isolated small voice of New Zealand in objection to expenditure in which she has no share. On the other hand, the distinctly maritime character of New Zealand will cause her special wants to be in the direction of harbour facilities and steam-service. I say, will she be likely to obtain these special wants against the common voice of the continent ? I think it is very doubtful. I think the great ocean distance between the two countries must eternally be a great barrier, and inimical to the two peoples becoming one. In support of this view, I would mention an idea that struck me. The Irish Channel separates by sixty miles Ireland from England, and it has been sufficient for centuries to keep alive the distinct feelings of the two countries. How can we, then, expect New Zealand and Australia to work together with twelve hundred miles of ocean rolling between them? Under federation politics in New Zealand would become mainly, if not entirely, local, and our national aspirations would be crushed. 1109. Mr. Beauchamp.] With regard to trade, do you think that with intercolonial free-trade our merchants would suffer by the greater competition arising from the Australian houses ?—I think so, decidedly. 1110. How would the industries of this colony be affected? —I think I have already stated that, on broad principles, industries do not start in small centres, but in large centres. Melbourne and Sydney are ten times bigger than the largest city in New Zealand, and accordingly they must have the advantage. 1111. In addition to being a general merchant, Mr. Humphreys, you manufacture cider?— Yes. 1112. Have you any market for that in Australia, so far?— Yes, I have sent it over to Australia, but there is very little trade in consequence of the duties. 1113. With a free market you would have a better opening ?—Yes. 1114. So, speaking from a selfish point of view, you would favour federation ?—Yes. 1115. But on patriotic grounds you oppose it?— Yes. 1116. Mr. Boberts.] You mentioned that the freight facilities in Australia enabled manufacturers to get raw materials cheaper than here : to what do you refer ?—Take the shipping of pigiron. It is their raw material. I know that frequently pig-iron used to be put on board ships at Home almost for'nothing, as ballast, and carried for almost no freight at all. 1117. We have it in evidence elsewhere that pig-iron, to a large extent, costs about the same in this colony as Victoria, taking one freight with another: are we misinformed ?—Big Australian ports have so much more shipping that they very often fill up. 1118. I suppose the same thing happens with steamers coming out here: there are larger exports than imports, so that we have the same opportunities of getting cheap freights as Australia? —Our exports consist of meat principally, for which special space is made. 1119. That space has to be filled up coming out? —There are some services already established, such as the French and German line to Melbourne and Sydney, and probably that will go on increasing, for the reason that they have only one large port in each province. 1120. I suppose you know that frequently steamers lie up in London two or three months, waiting for the season ?—Yes ; there is two or three times the regular steam-service to Australian ports that there is to New Zealand. 1121. Are there any facilities offered to the Australians that we have not got here ?—I should say eastern produce. 1122. In what article?— Well, Ido not know that I could mention what article. 1123. You said that the industries were fostered by the shipping: you have mentioned pigiron ?—Suppose we are using eastern raw material, it can only come down here by transhipment from Australia. 1124. We get all our grain-sacks straight out ? —They come only two or three times a year. 1125. In reference to the manufactures, you say that the larger centres of capital on the other side would seriously handicap the manufacturing industries of this colony ?—Yes. 1126. Have you any idea of the number of workers in the different colonies ?—No. 1127. I will give you them: In New South Wales in 1898 there were 31,617; in Victoria, 45,844; in New Zealand, 39,672; so that New Zealand, taken as per population, has a larger percentage of workers than any other colony ?—Yes. 1128. Do you think we will be wiped out ?—No. 1129. You said we would be handicapped ?—Yes. 1130. Here we have 8,000 more workers than New South Wales? —What character of workers are they ? 1131. Industrial pursuits?— Surely a great many in these industrial pursuits are people with probably only a year's training.
A.—4
204
1132. We know from the returns that these figures are correct. [There are 8,000 more workers in manufactories here than in New South Wales? —New Zealand is distributed over four or five centres, whereas those in New South Wales are concentrated in Sydney. 1133. During the last four years New South Wales has only increased its workers by 4,500 ; between 1895 and 1900 New Zealand workers increased by 13,000: do you mean to say that, in face of that, we are likely to be wiped out by federation ? —Yes. When things were depressed you would find the opposite state of things. 1134. I think it is accounted for by the greater prosperity of this colony. It has not passed through the crisis that Australia did seven or eight years ago. You think that, if the hours of labour were equal, the New Zealand factories could not continue to compete against Australia? —Not in view of the fact that the larger States have greater power of manufacturing. 1135. Why should we not have larger industries here ? —I think the cities are too small. They are too divided up. 1136. You do require a large centre of population to have a large factory ?—lt very much favours it. 1137. Mr. Beauchamp.] In regard to that great increase in the number of employes in the New Zealand factories, it has been suggested to me that it might be in consequence of the alteration of the system of the Government in collecting the information as regards the employes in these various factories ? —lt is quite possible there may be a looseness in the gathering of statistics. The population of the various colonies does not differ very greatly; it only amounts to 800,000 against 1,100,000. Geoegb Seegbant Jakins examined. (No. 66.) 1138. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—A produce exporter in Christchurch. 1139. How long have you resided in New Zealand ? —Since 1859. I have been for forty years engaged in commerce, exporting and importing all the main articles of commerce. 1140. Have you resided in Australia at all ?—I have. 1141. For how long?—ln 1899 I was in Australia, and I know Australia as well as I know Christchurch. I put in four or five months every year in Australia. 1142. Have you given attention to the federation question? —Yes. 1143. And as to New Zealand standing out of that federation ? —I have. 1144. What conclusion have you arrived at ? —That it will be ruination if New Zealand stands out, as far as the agricultural interests are concerned. 1145. Then, you are in favour of New Zealand federating? —Certainly. 1146. So far as the agricultural industries are concerned? —Yes. 1147. Will you state to the Commission your reasons for that conclusion?—l find that in 3,899 we exported to Australia goods to the value of £1,708,000, of which New South Wales took considerably over one million pounds' worth—that is, inclusive of specie. New South Wales is our only free port. Although Victoria is put down at £412,000, the bulk of that export is practically transhipment. None of our oats, our oatmeal, or manufactured articles, or any products in the way of agricultural produce, go into Victoria or South Australia. Both these colonies were large customers of ours up to the sixties or seventies, but with the protective tariff of Victoria and South Australia we were practically shut out of the market in those places. I have prepared here a list, taken from the blue-book, which I think might be of advantage to go through. I have only taken the principal items. We export about fifty-three items to Australia, but I have taken a number of the main ones, as follows :—
Some of the Exports to Australia, 1899.
Ne Wa S les th Victorian Duties. Victoria. South Australia. Australia. Queensland. Tasmania. Total. Agricultural implements Bacon and hams £ 751 9,434 11,428 29,651 43,825 4,357 8,160 3,663 10,079 3,764 19,512 96,774 27,584 14,518 12,676 6,751 7,740 40,486 7,188 2,986 2,030 6,389 14,065 188 4,164 32,572 1,460 6,262 24,182 78,928 1,329 4,524 20 per cent. 2a. per lb. £5 per ton 2d. per lb. 2d. per lb. £ 71 76 258 11,907 3,984 8,572 108 £ 99 £ 1,329 1,874 5,162 7,516 £ 300 £ 45 149 £ 1,176 11,087 13,617 57,508 57,985 12,929 8,268 3,663 16,919 4,975 24,917 180,732 37,046 26,762 25,374 14,647 9,165 41,253 76,922 24,120 9,336 6,874 28,524 902 4,393 36,887 2,384 15,634 25,989 178,299 3,524 6,981 Bran Butter Cheese Frozen fish Flour Fungus Barley Beans and peas 503 544 57 816 10,285 1,300 £5 per ton Is. 6d. per bushel Is. 6d. per bushel Is. 6d. per bushel Is. 2d. per bushel 2s. lid. per cent. 1,782 294 598 129 69 4,709 211 5,405 12,037 7,961 134 3,760 2,099 527 208 652 96 194 260 304 218 39 Maize Oats Wheat Hides Hops Leather Machinery Malt Oatmeal Potted meats Milk (preserved) Onions Flax Tow.. Pollard Potatoes Rugn Seedn Tallow Timber Twine Woollens 42,712 850 28,359 1,501 7,680 6,698 4,484 165 1,652 2,240 1,313 2,'778 8d. per lb. 9s. per owt. 333 10,373 97 64 11,458 689 5,966 2,036 153 56 559 2,783 6,811 4,525 161 677 1,818 2,337 2s. per lb. £1 per ton 2,422 275 25 £5 per ton £1 per ton 323 393 8,215 1,807 87,106 217 144 142 215 1,655 114 126 14 2,120 273 75 814 4,103 1,395 6^059 708 2,195 56 1,265 191 24 921
205
A.—4
Total exports— £ New South Wales ... ... ... ... ... ... 1,118,699 Victoria .. ... ... ... ... ... ... 412,822 Queensland ... ... ... - ... ... ... 52,644 South Australia ... ... ... ... ... ... 25,751 Western Australia ... ... ... ... ... .. 66,321 Tasmania ... ... ... ... ... .. ... 31,799 £1,708,036 1148. That is speaking on the commercial side, and you think we ought to federate ?—Yes. 1149. How about the manufacturing industries—how would they be affected?—l think, if the time ever comes for New Zealand to approach Australia, that we should be able to get for New Zealand the same treatment as Western Australia has got —that we keep our duties on for five years, less one-fifth every year. I think if we get the same clause for New Zealand none of our bootfactories need fear one jot. 1150. Would they not be interfered with from Australia?—l do not think so. 1151. If the protective duty on boots was allowed to remain for five years, do you think that at the end of that time we would be able to compete with America ?—American boots would not come in free. There is no doubt that the Commonwealth will keep out American goods. 1152. Do you imagine that the Federal tariff will be as highly protective as the present New Zealand tariff ?—I think the duty on boots and shoes and woollens in Victoria is more highly protective than ours. I think it is nearly 33 per cent., if I remember aright. 1153. Are there other advantages you think would arise from federation ?—Commercially, I do not think so. 1154. Are there any disadvantages that occur to you ? —I do not know of any. I think it better to be one of a large nation, and I am quite satisfied that we can hold our own against Australia. 1155. Mr. Millar.'] What articles did you say will be particularly affected if we do not join the Federation? Timber will not be affected one way or the other?—lt will be affected. 1156. In what way?—By duty. 1157. Why do they take it now?— Because of its superior quality. But we shall have to come into open competition with Baltic timber. 1158. Is the reason that white-pine goes in free not that it is the best-known timber for butterboxes ? —Yes. 1159. For that reason, will it not go in free?— Yes, for butter-boxes. 1160. That is the chief purpose that it is used for?—No; it is more used for making packingboxes. 1161. You said that the only time that butter goes into Australia is during their winter ?— Practically that is so. 1162. That is while they cannot produce it themselves?—-No ;itis a question of price. Last year I think it was about 10d. we got. 1163. Was noc Victoria entering the New South Wales market at that time ? —They were competing in a small way, but they do not put in much, because, as a rule, they can only supply themselves. 1164. If Victoria only produces for itself now, and cannot find a market in New South Wales, then you can, simply because no one else can supply her ?—The duty will be put on against us. 1165. As a matter of fact, you are dependent on the seasons as to the value of the market?— No; I have been in the Sydney trade for a very long time, and I have always been able to send something in in pretty large figures. 1166. Take Lyttelton, for instance :In 1897 the shipments of potatoes were £16,911; in 1898 they were £120,000 ?—That is easily accounted for. We got as high as £7 a ton. 1167. It was entirely owing to the failure of the crops on the other side that that occurred?— Yes. 1168. Will you not always be ruled in the same way ? —No ; we send 20,000 tons, in round numbers. 1169. Where would Australians get potatoes from, supposing we were out of the Federation, and they had to get them ?—lt would be an inducement to the Victorian farmers to increase their area of potatoes. 1170. Have they not had an area all the time ? —No; they are increasing their area all the time in Tasmania. 1171. How many potatoes can Tasmania grow altogether ? Sufficient for the Australian wants ?—For the whole of the continent easily. 1172. How is it that under federation you believe this trade would double ?—We would be able to put in oats, barley, malt, and all those things, to Victoria and South Australia. 1173. What share of that would come to the farmer ? What would be the profit to the farmer on a trade of two millions ? —I think, if you take off sor 10 per cent, for the merchants' profits, the farmer has the rest, except-the cost of freight and handling. 1174. We had it given to us that 25 per cent, was the cost to the farmer ?—lt is pure guesswork. 1175. I want to get at how it will benefit the farmer? —If shut out of the Australian market, the small farmer would have to close up. 1176. Does not the small farmer do all-round work? —No, only cropping. 1177. Does he not run sheep ?—You cannot run sheep on 30 acres. 1178. How can he crop?— Many of them do. They grow potatoes and onions.
A.—4
206
1179. I want to take the farmer all round, small and large combined?— General cropping farmers will feel a great loss in losing the Australian market. 1180. Can you tell me from what source it is proposed to get the revenue which will be drawn from New Zealand for the Federal Government expenses?—l think, unless for emergencies, such as war, the expenses would be very light. 1181. You are aware that at the end of ten years the Federal Government have the power to take away all the Customs revenue ?—I suppose they will give us a quid pro quo. 1182. What quid pro quo would you expect ?—I imagine, in the case of war, there might be a heavy drain on the Customs, perhaps—perhaps to one-fourth—but, as I read the Act, one-fourth is given as the maximum. The actual cost of the Federal Government is very light. 1183. What about the Parliament ?—I suppose, if we sent our members we would expect to pay for them indirectly. 1184. Have you formed any idea as to what the maximum expenses of the Federal Parliament will be ? —No ; I do not think any one can yet. 1185. Do you expect it will be a steadily increasing amount?—Of course, if they had their full portfolios, it would be £3,600 a year more than it was for January. 1186. Yes; but I suppose you know that the Federal capital is to be established yet, and all the buildings necessary to it ?—Yes; and the expense will be borne by the entire Commonwealth. 1187. Will there be any new departments created ?—I doubt it. 1188. You are aware that the Federal Parliament could take over the whole of the Customs from end to end? —They do, I suppose, nominally take them over. 1189. Absolutely take them over? —I suppose they do. They would be under the control of the Federal Parliament. 1190. Do not you think a new department will be created at the Federal centre ?—I do not think so. There may be a department for land. 1191. That would cost a certain amount, would it not? —Yes ; the figures I put down do not represent the actual amount. Before very long we should not require an Imperial LieutenantGovernor. I hope to see the Lieutenant-Governor elected from our own people, at a salary of £2,000 a year. 1192. Whatever portion is required to be drawn from New Zealand for the purposes of the Federal Government: how do you propose to make up that amount to New Zealand?—l think it might be taken out of the general revenue without being felt. 1193. I think that you assume that a State Parliament will be reduced in size as in power ?— Yes, I think you will find that in the States over in Australia. 1194. I suppose you know they can take over the posts and telegraphs any time ?—Yes ; the whole of the money collected in each State is to be returned to the State, less the expenses of the Federal Government. 1195. That only applies to the Customs and excise?—lt also says the entire revenue. Ido not think there is need for alarm or fear that we are not dealing with honest men. We have a ■voice equal to Tasmania and South Australia combined. 1196. That is only the Customs you refer to, but it does not refer to the postal revenue, which becomes absolutely the property of the Federal Government when they proclaim it ? —lt does not even specify the land-tax, which is more than the other. Ido not know how postal is going to be fixed, but still they are not likely to rob us of revenue without giving us a quid pro quo. Tasmania will be as anxious to protect her revenue as New Zealand. 1197. Despite the fact that under the Act the Federal Parliament have power to take £527,000, plus the whole of the postal revenue, you maintain that what they take can be paid out of the ordinary revenue without extra taxation ?—Up to 25 per cent. 1198. The Bill gives them power to do certain things. If they like to exercise that power they can take Customs revenue to the amount of £527,000, p1us the postal and telegraphic revenue? —They have power, and to give us a quid pro quo they must not exceed that. Ido not assume they will get within one-fourth of it. 1199. You will admit that there is a contingent liability of our forfeiting £527,000, plus the postal and telegraph revenue ? —Yes. 1200. What provision do you make for that ? —The first provision I should make would be that before giving that money there should be a quid pro quo. 1201. Would you expect fifteen men to override seventy-five?—l do not think it will require any overriding. Tasmania, South Australia, and Queensland are just as likely to side with New Zealand as New South Wales. 1202. Do not you know that combined New South Wales and Victoria are greater than all the other States, including New Zealand?— Yes; but in the Senate they only have twelve against thirty-six from the other States. 1203. Then, what takes place in the case of a deadlock ?—I do not think there would be a deadlock if the Senate has that majority. 1204. You know, perhaps, the mode under the Bill re a deadlock between the two Houses? —I see it is mentioned. 1205. You will see by that that the medium of protection which exists in the Senate does not exist in reality at all ?—I do not see why you should think that New South Wales and Victoria would work together. Up to now they have been rather antagonistic. 1206. Do you think that that money could be got from any source except by an increase of the land-tax, or a reduction in the exemptions ? —I think the money could be easily got in the case of an emergency, and I consider that no extra taxation will require to be made. 1207. You would sacrifice that amount of revenue ?—Not sacrifice. They have not taken it, and it does not say they will take it; but it is laid down as a maximum, so that we can know what can be taken. They must return three-fourths of the revenue.
207
A,—4
1208. Even if it was decided to take that, you still maintain that the ordinary revenue of the country would supply all our wants without increase of taxation ?—lf they had to take all that amount, I think we would have to increase some taxation, or put on some other tax. But it would only be in the case of an emergency. 1209. Why should the income-tax be increased, when you say it affects only the small farmers ? —I say it affects all agricultural produce; all sorts of farmers, and people who deal with farmers. 1210. You would not admit that it applied to general farmers ?—I say it does not apply to sheep-farmers, but all who have areas too small for sheep-farming. 20,000 tons of potatoes means £5,000 for digging, £5,000 for the railways, and 9d. a ton to lumpers to put them on the steamers. 1211. Do you say the lumpers get 9d. a ton?— The Union Company reckon that it costs them that for stowing a vessel and lumping. Is. 3d. a ton would be quite what it would cost to ship and discharge. 1212. How long is it since New South Wales took off these duties?—l cannot remember that. 1213. How long is it since the increased duties were put on in Victoria?—'A long way back. In 1893 some of the Australian duties were doubled. 1214. If you look at the figures from that date, Mr. Jakins, you will find, I think, that the trade of New Zealand has gradually been increasing, with the exception of one year?— You have got to consider the foreign trade, and also consider transhipment. 1215. Do you think this colony is likely to be so well developed under federation as understate Government ? —I think it is likely to be better developed. We are likely to get English manufactures started in New Zealand, the same as in New South Wales. I believe one English soap company is spending £30,000 in New South Wales. I think you will find lots of factories in England will open up in a colony which has cheap coal and cheap labour like New South Wales, and the same may apply in several instances to manufactures for this country. Ido not see why we should not supply cheap woollen goods for the Australian people. The general complaint is that our woollen goods are too good. 1216. The evidence we have from the woollen-manufacturers is pretty well opposed to what you say, and I suppose they watch their market as you watch yours ?—I have done business in woollens, and watch that trade pretty closely. 1217. Do you approve of federating with the Commonwealth independent of what we may sacrifice, and what it may cost us ?—Yes. 1218. Mr. Beauchamp.] I have taken about eighteen lines of exports from New Zealand to Victoria in 1899, and up to £184,225 sterling. In addition, we exported specie to the value of £179,660, or a total of £363,885. There are other small lines not included, but amongst these lines I find we exported butter to Victoria to the value of £11,907. That represents about 25 per cent, of the total quantity of butter in that year: are you of opinion that that butter was for transshipment ?—Every bit of it. 1219. The same remark would apply to oats ?—Entirely. 1220. Hides ?—Hides go into Melbourne free ; very likely that might be used there. 1221. Hops, 6,698 ? —Part of that will be for shipment, part would go in for consumption. 1222. As regards timber, is there any advantage in having all Puget Sound, or is ours required for special purposes ?—I think, for general building Baltic and Puget Sound timber is used for the flooring. Ido not think much tongued-and-grooved kauri goes into Australia ; it is manufactured there. 1223. We would still find a market in Australia for our timber ? —Yes, I think so. How far the duty on rough timber would affect the timber industry Ido not know. I think it would be a good thing if we could not send quite so much timber away. 1224. I say that the balance of trade is distinctly in favour of New Zealand; at the present it is about £300,000 : in the face of that, do you think they will set up a wall against us ?—Yes ; these figures are very erroneous. If you take the imports of natural products of Australia to New Zealand, they will go down by more than half. The other part is made up of transhipments. 1225. Without federation, you think we would be compelled to import New South Wales goods, whilst they would exclude ours?— Yes; we put a duty upon everything but bonedust and coal. I think they would argue that we could not tax them more than now, and that we must have certain articles which they have for export, and it would not make any difference. We could not do without their ha.rdwood for piles. If we put ss. on coal we must pay it. 1226. The same remark applies to all produce that the Australians have to import from New Zealand —that is, the consumer pays the duty?—No, it is not quite the same, for if the duties they put on are anything like those now obtaining in Victoria they would enable the farmer there to grow oats. 1227. I understood you to say yesterday that in the event of our not federating with Australia there will be large areas of Victoria and New South Wales brought into cultivation, which will enable them to supply all the other States ? —Yes. 1228. Well, do you not think that, federation or no federation, this land will be brought into cultivation ?—No. It will be brought into cultivation, but not for cropping. 1229. You personally think that we have no chance of a reciprocal treaty ?—Not the remotest. If you can get a reciprocal treaty, get it by all means. I would vote for it as against federation. 1230. Seeing that England would still be our largest customer, should we set up a wall against her by federating with Australia?—l do not think there is any question about setting up a wall against her. The United Kingdom wants all the meat we can send her, and that is our chief export. 1231. Cannot trade be cultivated better on a reciprocal basis?—l hope in time that we shall have Imperial federation, and I think that will be brought about very speedily.
A.— .
1232. You think that an Imperial zollverein will be hastened by our federating with Australia? —Yes. 1233. Mr. Barton has indicated that the Commonwealth as a whole will contribute towards the construction of the trans-continental railway, the opening of northern Australia for settlement, and the prosecuting of artesian wells ?—lf Australia considers that a railway of that description is necessary for the benefit of the States in Australia, no doubt this construction would be made out of the moneys collected by those States—the States that get the benefit of the railway would be the States that had to contribute towards this cost. 1234. Mr. Barton says that in the matter of defence New Zealand would benefit by the construction of that railway ?—lf it is a matter of war, circumstances might alter cases ; but I do not think for the mere fact that they want a railway to Perth that any outside funds, especially funds from New Zealand, would be taken. 1235. Supposing I am right in stating that they have power to make New Zealand contribute towards the cost of such works, would you be inclined to accept the Bill on those conditions?— Yes; I think in twenty-five years New Zealand would be better for federating with the Commonwealth than as an isolated colony. 1236. You have viewed this subject from all sides?— Yes. 1237. You do not place any importance on the suggestion that we would surrender our independence by federating with Australia ? —No; I think it is better to be part of a big nation than a small place. 1238. Mr. Luke.] You think the proceeds of the posts and telegraphs should be spent for the benefit of the whole community in the Commonwealth —that the development of these public services, cost, interest, upkeep, &c, should cost the people a minimum, and not go to provide a surplus, and, if a surplus is provided, that it should go towards a sinking fund for the purpose of wiping out the capital account ? —Yes, I think so. 1239.«1 think you will agree that under the Commonwealth New Zealand will have equal and fair treatment with the other States?— That is laid down. 1240. You believe that in the distribution of public money for the enlarging of this public service we should get a fair and equitable expenditure as compared with the other States? —Yes, certainly. 1241. Do you think our natural manufactures, such as woollens, will develop under the Commonwealth, and open up a profitable market in the Commonwealth?—l think so. 1242. I understand you to say that we have all the natural elements here for manufacturing— coal and other things : is it not possible under the Commonwealth to develop these resources ?— I think there will be industries started here within the next ten years in which we shall find Australia a good customer. Take, for instance, the twine trade :If we had the whole of Australia open to us, we could, instead of sending in the flax, send in the twine. 1243. Do you think the workmen in New Zealand turn out more work in a day than the workmen in Australia ?—No, I do not think so. 1244. You think the climatic influence is not very great? —They get acclimatised. 1245. You do not fear there will be any dislocation in our manufacturing industries under the Commonwealth? We have now involved some seven millions of money in manufacture pure and simple, and the volume of trade is thirteen millions a year. The amount of trade we do in Australia is small compared with those interests, but you do not think we jeopardize the interests of those manufacturers by federating?—No, not at all. No woollen-mills over there will be able to hold a candle to ours. 1246. You do not think we should suffer materially because of the distance we are from the Federal Government ?—I am quite sure of that. 1247. You do not think that New Zealand will suffer because of the influence that will be brought to bear upon the Federal Government by the democracies and the various States in Australia with a view of having moneys expended on particular works ?—I do not think we should. It has got to be borne in mind that there are six States in the Commonwealth, and it is hardly likely these six States will combine against New Zealand to do anything unfair. 1248. Do you think that in the general distribution of goods we may suffer for the great area of the continent ?—I do not think we shall suffer. Freights are enormously high because there is no opposition. We pay more on freights going to Auckland than we do from here to Sydney vid Auckland, but with intercolonial rates the freights would drop 25 per cent. 1249. Mr. Leys.] You seem very confident that the Federal Government will not take more than a portion of the Customs : how do you account for Mr. Barton saying that from eight to eight and a half millions would be required for the expenditure of the Federal Government, whilst the import and excise duties for 1899-1900 in all the States of the Commonwealth was only £7,629,027 ?—That does not take in the two millions of land revenue of New South Wales. 1250. That is the State revenue: I meant the Federal revenue? —Taking that amount at £8,000,000, £400,000 more will be required. 1251. Does not that imply that there will be a larger expenditure under the Commonwealth? —Of course, there will be from what existed last year. It was an electioneering speech, and they are not very reliable. He may find that he will only require seven millions and a half. It is only a statement thrown out. 1252. It implies that we must have more i*evenue? —Yes. 1253. Does not that assume that he will take the full revenue, and will require more?—No ; I think it points the other way. It looks to me as if he expects £400,000 will be the Commonwealth expenses. If he asks for £8",000,000, and now gets £7,600,000, it means that he wants £400,000 in excess of that already levied. Trie Federal expenses for January, as contributed by the six States, amounted to £1,337.
208
209
A.—4.
Wednesday, 20th Febeuaey, 1901. Geokge Seegeant Jakins, examination continued. 1254. Mr. Leys.] Are you aware that New Zealand has leaned more upon the Customs than any other State ?—She has not a land revenue. 1255. Seeing that our Customs revenue is £2-18s. per head, as against only £1 ss. 7d. in New South Wales, do you not see that it will put the State in great financial difficulty to lose control over its own Customs ?—I do not think so. 1256. Supposing you take the Customs tariff of the Commonwealth at the average for the whole of the protected and non-protected States, we get £2 3s. 10d. for all Australasia; that means a loss of 17s. per head of our taxation: how are we going to make it up ?—I presume, if we federated, that our taxation would be the same as it is over the other side. 1257. Yes ; but we have to cover our State liabilities, and how are we to make up this 17s. Id. a head, assuming the Customs tariff for Australia is the present average, excluding New Zealand, of £2 3s. 10d. ?—lf we save it in the Customs we can afford to pay a little more on the income-tax and the land-tax. 1258. You admit that we shall want a little more indirect taxation?— Yes, I admit it, because I am a great believer in indirect taxation instead of direct taxation. 1259. Hon. Major Steward.] You know that in round figures we export to Australia, under present circumstances, about a million pounds' worth of products : of that million, is it not a fact that something like £600,000 is taken by New South Wales ?—Yes ; a little over. 1260. That port admits free of duty ? —At present. 1261. You fear that if we remain outside the Commonwealth a duty will be imposed by the Commonwealth as against our products, which will apply to New South Wales as to all other States in the Commonwealth : under these circumstances, you think we shall lose our trade?— The whole of it, or very nearly all, within a year or two. 1262. If the value of the goods sent to New South Wales was £600,000, it follows that the amount of £400,000 goes to the other States at present ? —Yes. 1263. Now, that amount of £400,000 goes to States which impose a duty upon our products ?— Only for transhipment. Victoria does not take anything worth speaking of, except such things as seeds and hides. 1264. Do you contemplate that if a duty be imposed upon these articles which we are now exporting, that that duty would be, taking it all round, higher than the duties which are imposed by the countries which now impose duties on our produce ?—I do not think it would be higher than Victoria ; I think it would be less than Victoria. 1265. Then, if the duty imposed by the Commonwealth is not higher, shall we, on account of the duties, lose such trade as we now have with the colonies outside New South Wales?— Yes; I should think we shall lose it as far as Victoria is concerned, because if they reduce their duties 25 per cent, we could not put oats into Victoria, because at Is. 9d. they will pay the Victorian farmer well, and a duty of lid. per bushel will leave us about 10d., which, with freight-charges, would be " blue " ruin. 1266. When the Commonwealth is imposing its tariff, New South Wales presumably will be in favour of free-trade?—l should think it will. 1267. Then, also, the influence of the Free-traders in Victoria would also be in favour of freetrade ?—Yes. 1268. And the influence of those persons who require those products which are admitted on favourable terms will go and maintain the present state of things?—l think Victoria will be returned protected. 1269. Adding these things together, do you think it is probable that duties will be imposed on those articles which now, in the face of a heavy protective tariff in Victoria, are admitted by New South Wales free ?—I think you forget that there are five States out of the six which are at present protected, and it is hard to believe that the elections for the first year or two will go otherwise than protected in those States as against the one free-trade State. 1270. Quite admitted; but do you contemplate that it is at all possible in framing the tariff, with all these influences brought to bear, that there will be a more unfavourable tariff as regards these protective colonies than thei'e is now?—l think the tariff will be very much less. 1271. If less, is it going to operate against us more powerfully than it does now ?—Yes. Take, for instance, such things as malt. The Victorian duty is 4s. 6d.; if it were one-half, it would close our malt industries up. 1272. Supposing we lose £600,000 out of a million, do you think that would be a fair estimate? —I think we should lose all but the raw materials, which ought to be made up in New Zealand, such as flax. 1273. Supposing we lose £800,000, does it not cost something to produce those articles which represent that amount? —Unquestionably. 1274. Would it be fair to assume that the producers of those articles make much more than 25 per cent, of profit, after making a living?— The small farmer does not make much more than his living. 1275. But it is out of the profit he lives ?—He is getting a living, but I do not know that it is necessarily out of the profit. 1276. Would it not be a liberal estimate to say that his profit on these productions is 25 per cent. ?—I think it is more than that, if he charges himself a moderate rate of wages ; but, if not, and you include his own time—if he throws that in and he gets nothing for it—his profit should be very much higher than 25 per cent. Yes, after his living he gets 25 per cent^ 1277. Supposing these articles were not produced or exported at all, the net loss to the colony would be £200,000. In going into the Commonwealth you are aware that this happens : 27—A. 4,
A.—4.
210
In the first instance, the Commonwealth Government takes one-fourth their Customs revenue ?— No, Ido not admit that; they may take it. That is the maximum. 1278. During the first ten years, supposing we assume that they only require to expend onehalf of that, and return us the other half ?—I do not think they will require one-quarter of it. 1279. Supposing they take £250,000, and we lose this profit on our exports, it would be a losing bargain for us ? —Yes. 1280. Supposing they took £200,000, we should be where we are so far as the actual cash is concerned?— Yes. 1281. But supposing we trebled our exports during the next three years?— Exactly. 1282. Supposing we could not sell these articles in Australia at all, could they not be sold at some time in London ?—Yes, but at a ruinous price. 1283. Supposing you realised 33 per cent, less in London than in Australia—that is, on produce amounting to £1,000,000 —and you had to contribute anything like £300,000 towards the cost of the government of Australia, you would still be on the same footing as regards your balancesheet at the end of the year, would you not ?—But you must remember that if we were shut out of the Australian market, and had to send all our products to England, it would be such a loss to the community that agriculture for export purposes would have to be stopped in New Zealand. If we lose our Australian market we have to take Great Britain, which is the dumping-ground for all nations. We have to take prices which will not pay, as shown by the fact that there are 53,000 acres less in wheat this year than last year. If we lose our agriculture the railway revenue must suffer. The small farmers would have to take up the dairy industry, for which the labour required will be very much less than it is now. 1284. But, on the other hand, does it not follow that if we lose the Australian market for these items we shall not obtain a market elsewhere than in London ?—I know of no other market, excepting the one made through the war. Our exports to anywhere else were nil until the war began, but we can hardly count on the war affording a market for us for more than two or three years, and South Africa will not come to New Zealand excepting for the one item of oats. Melbourne and Sydney will do the Cape trade, because they have steamers running once a week. 1285. Supposing it were possible to establish railway communication by means of frequent vessels, do you not think it would be possible for us to compete in that market ?—I believe that for three years we might have a Cape trade, provided we had weekly or fortnightly communication calling at the Cape and going on to London; but if we had to fill up tramp steamers to the brim we should glut the markets we are seeking to open. If we had a regular line, such as they have from Victoria, we could, with a vessel of, say, 2,000 tons, give her 500 tons of cargo to Durban, where she could finish her loading for London. Then, I think, for two or three years we might have a market to the Cape, but not after the devastation caused by the war is rectified. 1286. Have you not seen it stated on pretty good authority that the country is so devastated that they will probably be unable for something like ten years to produce as much as will be required for their own consumption ?—As far as agriculture is concerned, it will not take more than three years, but as regards their cattle it may take ten to stock the country again. Sir John Hall, K.C.M.G., examined. (No. 67.) 1287. Hon. the Chairman.'] How long have you resided in New Zealand, Sir John?— Since 1852. 1288. And you have ever since you commenced your residence in New Zealand been closely associated with .the political government of the colony?— Until within the last few years. 1289. You have been Premier of the colony, and a member of each House of Legislature ?— Yes. I was for nearly forty years a member of Parliament in one or the other House. 1290. And you have taken an active interest in the local government of the colony ?—Yes. I was instrumental in building the hall you are now sitting in—the Provincial Council Chamber. 1291. You were a member of the Federal Convention of 1890 ? —Yes; with Captain Russell. It was held in Melbourne. 1292. Who were your colleagues from New Zealand on that occasion?— Captain Russell. 1293. Do you remember whether the Constitution then proposed for the Commonwealth was in any way similar to the present Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth ? — I do not think that any draft Constitution was then proposed, but merely resolutions affirming the desirability of federating, and recommending steps to be taken to bring that about. The draft Constitution was drawn up chiefly by the present Chief Justice of Queensland, Sir Samuel Griffiths, at a subsequent meeting in Sydney. 1294. You are acquainted with the present Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia ?— I have read it several times. 1295. And at the time of the Convention at which you attended were you in favour of or against New Zealand federating with Australia ? —I think both Captain Russell and myself agreed that, however desirable federation would be for Australia, the distance of New Zealand from Australia, and the consequent difficulty of communication, was a considerable obstacle. I think I mentioned that the intervening sea constituted twelve hundred reasons against New Zealand joining. 1296. Have you had any reason to alter that opinion ? —Upon the whole, I have not. 1297. Were there any other reasons beyond the mere matter of distance which induced you to come to that conclusion?— The present Constitution was not drawn up,. and therefore the reasons arising out of the existing Constitution of the Commonwealth were not before us. 1298. Having studied the Constitution now, what is your opinion on the matter ? —Perhaps I might be allowed to quote some of the material points from an interview which was given by me to a local newspaper. First of all, with regard to the effect on agriculture, the great bulk of the
211
A.—4
agriculture of New Zealand would not be affected by it at all. I think the produce raised in the suburban districts of Christchurch, and perhaps of other places, such as potatoes, onions, and small crops, which are now sent to New South Wales, would be placed at a very serious disadvantage, but the bulk of the agricultural crops produced in New Zealand would still go where it does now. It does not go to Australia, and therefore would not be affected by a possibly more protective tariff than exists at the present time. 1299. With regard to manufactures, what is your opinion with reference to the effect federation would have on them ?—I do not profess to be a competent judge on that subject. lam not an expert, but I find it difficult to understand why, with the superior climate and other natural advantages of this colony, and the superior physical character of our population, we should not be able to compete successfully with any industries in Australia. It is said that the wages are considerably higher in New Zealand than they are in Australia, which I believe is correct. But I cannot help thinking that that difference would only be a temporary one, and that wages in Australia will eventually be levelled up to those prevailing in this colony. However, I am not an expert on that subject, and therefore my opinion is really of little value. It is suggested that the disadvantage I have mentioned might be got over by a reciprocity treaty. When Captain Bussell and myself were at the Conference in 1890, and it became evident that New Zealand was not likely to form part of a Federation, we interviewed the Prime Minister of Victoria (Mr. Gillies) and Mr. Deakin, the Colonial Treasurer, in order to ask what possibility they thought there was of a reciprocal treaty being arranged with New Zealand. Although they spoke very pleasantly on the subject, they very decidedly said th%t, excepting as part of federation, they did not think there was any probability of the Parliament of Victoria agreeing to anything of the kind. I cannot see what there is that New Zealand could give in the way of reciprocity. The agricultural interest of Australia would oppose it, because, owing to the more favoured climate and soil of New Zealand, we can raise agricultural produce at a cheaper rate than the Australian Colonies, and the farmers there naturally object to being exposed to a competition which would bring down the price of their produce, and for which we could only offer them a concession of no importance in return for the free admission of our produce. We admit coal free of duty, because cheap fuel is necessary for our industries and people. The Australians know that we would never dream of imposing a duty on coal. . Then, again, the present duty on fruit does not include oranges and tropical fruits, which we cannot grow, and the Australians know that we are not likely to exclude so valuable and favourite a food of our people by an increased duty. Then, the Australians may want wine relieved of the present duty, but this is too small a matter to be a serious makeweight in a reciprocity treaty. The expressions of opinion obtained from Australia show decisively that we are very unlikely to retain the New South Wales market for our small-farm produce through any concessions we could offer by way of a reciprocity treaty. What, however, I venture to suggest is that it is very desirable that some treaty or arrangement should be made about the island trade, because, federation once being accomplished, I think it is very possible that there is a danger to New Zealand of the island trade being absorbed by Australia in spite of anything which our statesmen might do. We should endeavour to make some arrangement with Australia by which the island trade could be open to both without any interference. Upon the question of defence, Ido not see that federation would help us much. The principal defence of the colonies must always be the British navy. The idea of an Australian or Australasian navy is, I think, perfectly out of the question. The daily improvements in regard to naval warfare that are being made are so great that an Australian Government could not keep its navy up to the advanced standard of a European nation. It would be very desirable, I think, if some combined arrangement with regard to defence could be made. The Dominion of Canada has a military college at which they train their militia officers, and I think if we could join with the Commonwealth in establishing a military college for the purpose of training our Volunteer and Militia officers without sending them all the way to Europe it would be a great advantage. In that respect I think a treaty would be very advantageous. With regard to our legislative independence, that, of course, would by federation be surrendered on several matters; but, short of this, I think it is very desirable that we should have, if not uniform legislation, at any rate some harmony with Australia in legislation with regard to several of the thirty-nine subjects upon which the Commonwealth will legislate. I refer to the census, currency and coinage, banking, and weights and measures, bills of exchange, naturalisation of aliens, mortgages, and uniform service of processes of State Courts throughout the Commonwealth, and legislation for the prevention of the influx of criminals and some others. It would prove, very advantageous if an arrangemement could be made throughout the Federation for something like uniformity or, at any rate, harmonious legislation upon these subjects. With regard to the Federal Constitution, one of the chief difficulties and dangers to be apprehended appears to me to be the concurrent jurisdiction of the Commonwealth and the States upon a large number of subjects —thirty-nine—and, still more, the fact that both Governments will be dipping into one purse, for after a time they will practically be doing that. If our own judgment did not lead us to anticipate trouble from this overlapping authority, the history of New Zealand should certainly do so. It was, as we all know, the history of a constant conflict between General and Provincial Governments, until the abolition of the latter; and where you have concurrent jurisdiction upon thirty-nine subjects, with an overriding power to the Commonwealth Parliament, I cannot help thinking that there will be great conflict—a very long conflict, probably —and in the end the Commonwealth will absorb the greater part of authority, as was done in New Zealand. That would tell very heavily upon an outlying portion of the Commonwealth like New Zealand. In the abstract, I might prefer to be a member of a much larger community, because I sympathize with the idea of a federated Australia of which New Zealand would form a part. I would rather be a citizen of a large and powerful State than of a small and
A.—4
212
weak one. The larger the State the larger and broader the considerations and ideas by which its policy is likely to be influenced, and the less liable is its legislation and administration to be at the mercy of narrow tyrannical views and mere personal ambitions, or perhaps the power of one remarkably vigorous personality, that often exercises a dominating influence in small communities. That is in the abstract quite true; but in our own case the objections are so serious as greatly to outweigh, to my mind, these considerations. I think it would be a very great mistake for us to join the Commonwealth. If we do not join it now we may do so at a future time; but if we do join it, and we find the proceeding turns out disadvantageously to New Zealand, the-mistake would be irreparable. For these reasons I am, although preferring to be a member of a;large State, against federation. I have great faith in the future of New Zealand, and I certainly should not wish to see it join the Federation. 1300. You are acquainted with the mode of altering the Constitution ?—Yes. 1301. Have you anything to say to us in reference to that, Sir John ?—No; I do not know that it would be any good if I had, because that is settled. 1302. Do you think it is desirable that New Zealand should go into such a Constitution—one that is liable to alteration in that manner? —Do you mean whether the case of the small States is sufficiently protected? 1303. Yes?—l believe a combination of Victoria and New South Wales would override the small States, and it would be to their disadvantage including New Zealand. 1304. You are aware, of course, that New Zealand could not now, except as an act of grace, join as an original State ?—Quite so. It would have to be, I believe, on terms to be agreed on. Perhaps when the Commission has completed its work we may have some information as to what those terms would be. 1305. The small States are presumed to be protected by reason of having equality of representation in the Senate ?—Yes. 1306. But you are aware that under section 7 it is provided that there shall be six Senators for each original State, but that the Parliament can make laws increasing or diminishing the number of Senators in each State ? —That might make a small number in proportion to the Senators for the larger States, and that is a source of danger to the small States. 1307. They cannot alter the original States ?—No, but they might increase the representation of the large estates. 1308. The equal representation of the original States must be maintained in the Senate ? —I see that is so. 1309. You see that under section 121 the Commonwealth has the power to admit us to the Commonwealth or to establish new States. That is something similar to the power which existed in New Zealand to establish new provinces ?—Yes. 1310. Can you say what the effect of that is likely to be ? May there not be in northern Australia, for instance, a number of new States created think it is very likely that the northern portion of Queensland will eventually be made into a new State, although the older portion will fight against it very strongly. 1311. Will that, in your opinion, in any way affect the interests of New Zealand ?—lt would add to the influence of the smaller States in the Commonwealth Parliament by having the representatives of another small State in the Parliament. 1312. It would increase the influence of Australia as against that of New Zealand ?—Yes; but I should imagine that the small States would possibly hang together. No doubt the proportional representation of New Zealand in the Senate would be diminished. 1313. You spoke of the matter of defence : will you kindly look at section 114 ? Assuming that New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, she could not raise or maintain any naval or military Force without the consent of the Commonwealth Parliament ?—No. 1314. Do you think it is a desirable position for New Zealand to be placed in?—l do not think that it would be of much importance, because the military Force raised in New Zealand would be for the defence of New Zealand, and I think it is most unlikely that the Parliament of the Commonwealth would interfere to throw any difficulties in the way of New Zealand forming a Defence Force. 1315. What is your opinion in reference to the constitution of the High Court of Australia?— lam very sorry that the appeal to the Privy Council in England was ever interfered with. It has been interfered with to a small extent. I may add that I think there might advantageously be a provision for appeals from New Zealand, under certain circumstances, being carried to the High Court of Australia for an impartial judgment when required. 1316. Do you think that this is any inducement to New Zealand to join the Federation ?—lt would be an inducement to endeavour to make some arrangement between the two which would enable appeals from New Zealand to be heard in Australia, and possibly a New Zealand member appointed for the time to the Australian Appeal Court. 1317. You spoke of the legislative independence of New Zealand : you think that the tendency of the Federal Parliament would be to take to itself the power of legislating upon these thirty-nine matters referred to in section 51 ? —Yes. I think we might almost come to that conclusion from one's knowledge of what took place in New Zealand. Any persons, sir, who have, like yourself and myself, been in the Parliament of New Zealand will know that that has been the result. To use an expressive term used by the late Mr. Sewell, " The General Assembly covered the ground "; and so I believe will the Commonwealth Parliament by degrees cover the ground and squeeze out the State Legislatures. It may take some time, and some States in Australia are so powerful that the struggle will be a very hard one, but I quite believe that in the long-run, in the absence of any clear division of authority as there is in the United States, the Central Parliament will gradually absorb all legislative authority.
213
A.—4
1318. What is your opinion as to the probable increase of the cost to the Federal Parliament and Government?—l shall be able to give a better answer to that when this Commission has reported. I remember, however, going into it at the time I had the matter before me. Ido not think that the absolutely new expenditure would be anything very serious. It would include the Governor, his staff, the Administration, the Parliament, and the High Court. Of course, the cost of the Post Office and several other departments will be taken over, but then the various States will be relieved of the cost of these departments. The additional expenditure will be the cost of the Central Government itself, and I do not think that will be for so large a territory anything of importance. 1319. What do you think would probably be the contribution from this colony towards the cost of Federal Government? —I have not gone into that matter sufficiently to enable me an opinion. Do you mean for what I call the new expenditure ? 1320. Yes. What amount would be likely to be deducted from our Customs revenue for new Federal expenditure ? —I do not think it would be anything serious. It is not there that our finances will be hit; but when the uniform tariff comes into force it will then be found, in all probability, not to be so high as the New Zealand tariff, and if we are subjected to it it will reduce our revenue very largely. I have seen calculations, which appear to be perfectly trustworthy, showing that it will diminish our revenue by over half a million of money. Our debt is higher, I think, in proportion to our population than any other colony. It requires a very large revenue to, pay interest on it, and we have to raise it by means of heavy Customs duties. The revenue would be largely diminished by a reduced tariff. We should have to impose heavier taxation upon the community by other means, which they would consider to be very objectionable. 1321. That, of course, would have to be direct taxation?— Yes, probably. 1322. I suppose the community would have to stand it ? —No doubt they would. 1323. As you put it, Sir John, it would be very objectionable ?—Yes. 1324. Whatever the result, do I understand that the conclusion you have arrived at is that it is better for New Zealand to maintain its independence ? —Yes; we had certainly better wait, and see how the new Commonwealth Constitution works. lam open to conviction, but my present feeling is that it would be a very dangerous proceeding for New Zealand to join. We might illustrate the old proverb of marrying in haste and repenting at leisure. «. 1325. Of course, it is a matter with which we have nothing to do, but do you think the future path of the States of the Commonwealth will be an easier one under the new Constitution than it was under the late order of things ?—I think there is bound to be a great deal of friction, especially with regard to the subject of a common purse. 1326. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the control of the Customs revenue will be a lever by which the Federal Parliament could squeeze the States into surrendering the rights they now exercise ?— No. I think the concurrent power of legislating on thirty-nine different subjects will be the lever by which the Commonwealth will absorb the larger part of the administrative and legislative power. 1327. You think the Federal Government may not starve the States by absorbing more and 'more of the Customs revenue until they are compelled to surrender certain rights that they now possess ?—I think it is quite possible, but Ido not think it would be a case of surrendering all their rights in the thirty-nine subjects, because the Commonwealth could take them. They have concurrent power on thirty-nine different subjects, including most important ones, and when they legislate on an any one of these subjects their authority overrides that of the States. 1328. There is the control of railways, for instance, and the development of lands : do you think that the. want of control on the part of the States over the Customs revenue will interfere materially with their development-work, such as the purchase of land for settlement, and the construction of railways ?—I think it is very possible, but would not like to go further than that. 1329. Do you think the fact that the Federal Parliament has the first shai'e of the Customs revenue will affect our power to borrow for State purposes ?—No ; I think London financiers are pretty well satisfied now that we shall always pay interest on our debt, at whatever sacrifice of taxation to us. One inducement which has been held out for the colonies to federate is the argument that we could raise loans upon better terms than the several States individually. I do not think there is much in that argument. If you look at the quotations of the Canadian loans, which are those of a very large Commonwealth, you will find that they are pretty well on a par with the quotations of the securities of the several Australian Colonies. People in London now are pretty well satisfied that their interests are safe, and we can borrow money at 3J per cent., when formerly we had to pay 5 and 6 per cent. 1329 a. You do not think it probable that the States will be reduced to the same level as boroughs and municipalities in regard to their borrowing operations., seeing that they depend on direct taxation ? —Not in my lifetime. 1330. With regard to admissions to the Civil Service, which is a matter you have had great experience on, do you think our young men, who reasonably seek for appointment in the public service, will find greater difficulties in their way when they are controlled from Australia than they would if this service were controlled by ourselves ?—To some extent they might, but I do not think it would follow to any great extent. You mean Government sitting in Sydney would favour their own friends. 1331. They would be more amenable to local pressure?— There might be something in that, but I do not think very much. 1332. Generally speaking, you believe that the tendency will be to gradually increase the power of the Central Government, and to decrease the power and importance of the States ?— Yes; to decrease and eventually to absorb the larger proportion of the public revenue by the Central Government, and leave less for the States.
A.—4.
214
1333. Do you believe that that will tend to improve the administration, or the reverse ?—That is a very large question. Perhaps in Australia the Central Government might be improved, but I do not think it would improve the administration of New Zealand. 1334. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think it passible that the Commonwealth will go in for a moderate tariff instead of a highly protective tariff? —I really have no information on that point which would justify me in giving an opinion. 1335. But, in the event of a moderate tariff, what you fear to New Zealand would be the great loss we should derive in respect to the Customs, in addition to the greater competition of oversea manufacturers ?—As I said before, so long as wages continue to be much less in Australia, as we are told they are, than they are in New Zealand, our local manufacturers would suffer ; but I cannot help thinking that the wages in Australia will eventually be levelled up to the level of the New Zealand wages. 1336. But with a moderate tariff with free-trade our industries would suffer practically a double blow ?—No doubt. 1337. Then, as to the terms on which New Zealand would be admitted, do you think we would get better terms by waiting than by entering into negotiations now?—l do not know how that may be, but we should not be taking a step in the dark as we are now if we wait and see how the new system works out in Australia. 1338. We should wait, even if we pay more later on ?—Yes. I do not say we would have to pay more. 1339. Did I understand you to say that in the course of time you think it possible that the wholejof the State Governments will be wiped away, and that we will have one Central Government ?—I do not go so far as that. I think the legislative power would be absorbed to a greater and greater extent by the Central Government; but the State Governments have got so strong a hold in Australia that I think it will be a very long time before they are entirely swept away. 1340. With regard to the clause providing for disagreement between the Houses, do you approve of the methods there set out ?—I do not altogether like it, but 1 do not see what better could be done. 1341. It takes away the safeguards that are supposed to exist in the minds of some regarding our representation in the Senate ?—Yes. 1342. And the small States might suffer?— Yes. 1343. Mr. Millar.] Have you given any attention to the effect of black labour in tropical Australia? —I do not see how it would affect New Zealand. We would never want it here. 1344. Do you think it possible to draw a hard-and-fast line over which line black labour could not go in Australia? —I do not see why you should not. 1345. Have you ever known it done in any place ? —I have not known of its being done. 1346. Are you of opinion that tropical Queensland and the Northern Territory could be worked by white labour? —My opinion is worth very little on the subject. I think it will be impossible to work by white labour from what I have heard. 1347. If not worked by black labour that territory will be waste? —It will be desert. 1348. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Have you considered the subject of the feasibility of tariff treaties that would suit both sides ?—I said I do not see what New Zealand has got to offer to Australia. We must take their coal, and our people would never tolerate a duty being placed upon fruit. The only thing we could offer to them would be a low duty on their wines. That is a small matter, and would be no inducement to them to admit our produce free, or at low rates of duty, Akthue Wabd Bbavbn examined. (No. 68.) 1349. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—An agricultural engineer. 1350. How long have you resided in New Zealand?— Twenty-three years. 1351. Are you acquainted with Australia?— Yes; I have had some considerable experience. We have done a large trade with Australia for the last fourteen years, and I have paid a number of visits there, ranging from four to eleven months' stay at a time. I was a delegate of New Zealand at the meeting of the Chambers of Manufacturers in Melbourne, and, owing to that, was through nearly all the manufactories in Melbourne, and a large number of those in Adelaide and Sydney. 1352. In the event of New Zealand federating with Australia, how do you think the industry in which you are concerned would be affected ?—We already do a considerable business with Australia, but it is in high-priced machinery, which occupies a considerable amount of bulk, so-that the handicap of those would undoubtedly affect us if we do not federate. 1353. Are your machines patent machines ?—No, not at the present time in Australia. 1354. Are you in favour of New Zealand federating with Australia ? —Yes; I think, on the whole, we would gain more than we would lose. 1355. Will you give us your reasons for that conclusion ?—Well, from the industrial point of view, I think New Zealand has many advantages over Australia. Our climate is decidedly better for manufacturing, and I think that, with an equal wage, men would prefer to work in New Zealand rather than in Australia. Whenever I have been in Australia, workmen have expressed the opinion to me that they would sooner work at an equal wage than in Australia. Then, the inhabitants of New Zealand are, as a whole, more active, inventive, and persevering than in Australia. I think the proof of that is that in nearly every place of business you go into in Australia you will find New Zealand born or brought-up men well up in all the offices and manufactories, and even the Civil Service. And, of course, if you federated there would be very much greater opportunities for New-Zealand-born men than there are now. 1356. Do you think, in the event of federation, that the manufacturers here would remove their establishments to Australia?—No, Ido not think so. The advantages that I have already
215
A.—4
stated would prevent that. I think we can rely on a better lot of men than in Australia. In Melbourne the supply of water is an expensive item. I think New Zealand presents a greater attraction for manufacturers than Australia. 1357. You think that the headquarters of these manufactures will be carried on in New Zealand?—l do. • 1358. Without branches in Australia?— Certainly. I think there is as great possibility of manufactories being removed to Australia if we do not get federation as there is if we do get federation. 1359. You have spoken with reference to agricultural implements : how do you think the other branches of manufactures would be affected ?—I cannot speak authoritatively on any other branch, but there are some that would be injuriously affected; but I think they are very small and comparatively unimportant. I may say here that it is not the amount of trade which we do immediately with Australia that tends to make the matter of our federating important, but rather the amount of home trade that we would lose if we do not federate. 1360. Are you prepared to express an opinion as to how the agricultural and pastoral interests would be affected ?—Oh, yes. We will take the case of Southland, for instance. It seems to me that the whole of the farming interest in Southland would receive a knock that it would be almost impossible to recover from. I know Tasmania well —I have spent several months there. At the present time there is a duty of 10d. a bushel on wheat going in there. The consequence is that the farmers grow considerable quantities of wheat, although Tasmania is not as well adapted for wheat as Victoria and New South Wales. Then, there is a duty of Is. 4d. a bushel on oats going into Victoria, and consequently very few oats go in there. Under federation, Tasmania would certainly give up growing wheat, and grow oats instead. The consequence is that our Southland farmers will be shut out of Victoria and the rest of Australia for the particular kind of oats which they grow, and which they cannot grow in Australia. And I think the English market cannot absorb the whole quantity of the really superior oats that Southland grows. They would consequently have to put their eggs into other baskets, which will not be so well able to hold them. 1361. Where do Southland oats go to now?—l suppose the proportion is—first, to Sydney; second, to Melbourne ; third, to England. 1362. You say they go to Melbourne: is that for transhipment, or not?—A large portion would probably be for transhipment, I suppose ; but I cannot express an opinion on it. In Melbourne, I notice that whatever oatmeal is made is made from New Zealand oats; but it may be made in bond, and therefore is to be reckoned as transhipment. I think I may clear up something that occurred yesterday afternoon. Victoria exports oats early in the season, before the New Zealand oats get into the market; but late in the season, when all her own are exported, and she has got the best prices, then she imports feed and milling oats from New Zealand. 1363. Can you speak of any other advantage to New Zealand from federating with Australia? —Yes ;it appears to me that if we do not federate we throw up entirely the advantage which we have over the rest of Australia, and practically the rest of the world, in the matter of our climate and our extra yield. At the present time, I think it would be fair to say that we in New Zealand have a yield, at any rate, of 20 per cent, over that of Australia—that is to say, reckoning the extra yield we get in New Zealand, minus the extra cost of cultivation and harvesting. At the present time we do a large trade with New South Wales, and if you compare the figures of New South Wales, taking it as a typical free-trade colony, and Victoria as a typical protectionist colony, you will see that we can, under favourable conditions, practically supply the demands of the free-trade colony. Well, with the tariff put up against us under federation, if we are out of it, we shall lose the whole value of the extra yield which our climate gives us. At the present time in certain directions we can supply the Australian trade ; but if the handicap is against us we will lose that advantage, and all the advantage of climate, on which our land-values are based, is thrown away. 1364. Have you'considered the loss that New Zealand would be subjected to from free-trade with Australia in the matter of our Customs duties ? —Yes. 1365. How much do you anticipate that will be ?—I make it that our imports from Australia in 1898 amounted to £1,158,000. Of that I assume the goods of Australian origin amounted to £602,000, on which a duty was paid of, roughly, £97,000. The foreign transhipments I estimate at £353,000, on which a duty of £84,000 was paid. That leaves smaller lines of goods, which lam not very well able to assess, to the extent of £203,000, paying a duty of £46,000. If you take the half of that and divide it between the other two lines you will find that the imports from Australia of lines of Australian origin amounted to £703,000, paying a duty of £120,000, so that that will be the total loss of Customs duty to New Zealand. 1366. What do you estimate will be our proportion towards the cost of the Federal Government ?—That will be very hard to estimate, but I imagine it will be quite a fraction of our total Customs revenue. Of that £120,000 duty which we pay on Australian stuff, it would be a great concession to many of our manufacturers and to the populace at large if it was remitted, so that what the nation loses individuals would gain. 1367. But, of course, the imports to this colony are not wholly from Australia?— The imports of these special lines are almost wholly from Australia. 1368. But are there not dutiable goods imported from elsewhere that come through Australia, and on which there would be a total loss of Customs revenue to New Zealand, provided a low tariff was put on by the Commonwealth?—-It has been my business to get information from Australians as to what the duty on agricultural implements in Australia is likely to be, and those whom I can trust say it is not likely to be less then or 15 per cent. The tariff for federated Australia, I think, will be a protective one, and I think they are quite as likely to put on protective duties on agricultural products to the same extent as on to manufactured products. 1369. You do not look forward to New Zealand losing Customs revenue much beyond what you have stated ?—No; there are many lines on which protection is higher in Australia than in New Zealand.
A.—4,
216
1370. What is your opinion on New Zealand giving up her independence as a colony ?—I have perused these thirty-seven articles, and I think that ninety people out of every hundred would say that it would be advantageous for a great many of these lines to be included in a larger scope. For instance, in the matter of patents, we Have to take out eight patents in Australia, whereas, if federated, we would only have to take out one at a cost, of, say, £10 as against £150. Criminal and bankruptcy matters would, I think, be better legislated for under one Parliament. Then, with regard to the matter of aliens, I think they are quite as anxious to keep Chinamen out of Australia as we are to keep them out of New Zealand. 1371. My question was relative to the colony losing its independence? —Under the Constitution no colony loses its independence. 1372. Hon. Captain Bussell.] In what year was the free-trade tariff introduced into New South Wales? —I would like to give you some figures in respect to that. In 1889 our exports to New South Wales under free-trade tariff were £1,069,000; in 1890, £885,000; in 1891, £817,000. On the 2nd December, 1891, the protection tariff came in, and our exports to New South Wales dropped to £700,000 ; the next year they dropped to £679,000 ; the next year to £506,000. In 1895 they got up again to £626,000. On the Ist January, 1896, the free-trade tariff again came in, and our exports slightly increased to £641,000 ; the next year they went up to £736,000; the next year to £810,000; and last year they went up to £1,119,000 —that is, including gold. 1373. Surely that is Australia, and not New South Wales ?—No, it is New South Wales alone. If you take the figures for Victoria they tell the same tale. But I do not think we have only to look to what we have to lose. The gains are very much. Let me put it in this way: New South Wales with a million and a half people takes something over a million of our produce, and the colonies take something over £600,000. If the four millions and a half people of Australia took at the same rate as free-trade New South Wales they would take our goods to the value of nearly £3,500,000, which would mean an additional £2,000,0000 spent among our small farmers. It seems to me that this is a small farmers' question very largely, and the land policy of the Government hinges very largely upon it. 1374. Do you not think the natural advantages of New Zealand will compel them to take our goods whether they impose a duty or not ? —No ; Tasmania can supply all the milling oats and produce for Australia if she gives up growing wheat, as she will be compelled to do under freetrade. 1375. The official figures seem to point to the fact that, though the exports in the last years, with the taxation unaltered, vary enormously from the years immediately preceding, they do not vary much from the general average ?—That is so. 1376. May we not fairly draw an inference from that that the operations of trade are not governable by mere revenue or protective tariff? —No, I cannot agree with you there. I think the fact that we export to New South Wales twice as much as we export to Victoria proves that tariff has an influence. 1377. Do not the figures show that a deferential tariff in one colony or the other does not affect the general export of a particular class of goods ?—1 should say that it would depend upon the yield and the amount of land under cultivation. 1378. You consider that taxation does it ? —Yes. If a farmer knew that he had a big demand in Australia for oats he would grow oats. If he did not think he had a demand he would not grow oats. The amount of land in oats in the last few years has enormously increased because of the probable demand for oats in South Africa, and also in Australia. And every year the Australian farmers grow less oats and more wheat. 1379. You think that taxation can interfere with the natural products of a country ?—Undoubtedly. 1380. I suppose you would argue that, as we have a more vigorous climate here, federation would afford opportunities for our young men? —Undoubtedly, a large number of them go there now. 1381. Those who go now are the pick of our men, are they not ? They are above the average ? —I would not like to say that. It is rather the other way. I know that during the time of the depression in New Zealand, and when Australia was flourishing, many men who were out of employment went to Australia, and men out of employment are not likely to be the best men. 1382. But immigrants into a country are, as a rule, vigorous in mind and body?— Quite so. 1383. You look upon the fact of Australia presenting an opening for our young men as a reason why we should federate ?—I think so. 1384. You attach comparatively no importance to the question of Chinese labour ?—I think the whole of the Australian Colonies are quite alive to the danger of that. 1385. Does it not affect us in the matter of federation ?—I think we may safely leave the whole matter of the introduction of coloured labour to the common-sense of the Australasian Colonies. They are quite open to the danger, and will take measures to protect themselves. Of course, I quite see that tropical Australia will probably have to be developed by coloured labour, but effectual barriers can be raised to their overrunning the rest of Australia. I think, as long as the white race is dominant in Australia, they will, as far as possible, keep the other races out. 1386. Do you not think the law of nature is stronger than the law of man ?—No, not as long as certain men are in the majority. 1387. But with Japan, which is wide awake, and with China, which.is distinctly rubbing her eyes, is it not possible that there will be an exodus of population somewhere ?—lt might be a bad job for New Zealand if she stood alone. 1388. , You think there is more likelihood of their coming to New Zealand if we stand out than if we go in ?—I do not think Australia will ever allow any large importation of alien labour. The feeling in Australia is even more acute than it is in New Zealand —probably because the danger is greater.
217
A.—4
1389. The Huns, who overran Europe, came from somewhere in the vicinity of China ?— I think so. 1390. You think history will not repeat itself ? —lf it should repeat itself, then it is very necessary that the whole of the population of wnite Australasia should be in one rank to resist them. 1391. You think they are not more likely to settle in a country adapted for them than in a country not adapted for them ?—lf I was a Chinaman I would think New Zealand a better place to inhabit than Australia. One of my arguments in favour of federation—it is a remote one —is that of defence. If it ever came about that we had to defend our position it should be with Australia at our back rather than with her as a rival. 1392. Do you not think it would be better to have the Imperal authorities at our back in such a contingency ? —We will have the Imperial authorities at the back of the Commonwealth. 1393. But generally you attach little importance to the question of the coloured races coming into tropical Australia ? —I think the Australians can be safely trusted to safeguard that. 1394. Mr. Boberts.] You say that New Zealand manufactures would be able, on the whole, to survive the competition ?—I think so. 1395. You do not think that the witnesses who have come here with a very gloomy story were quite justified in the conclusions they have arrived at ? —No, not on the whole ; and I think I have had a fair experience of Victorian manufactures. New Zealand manufacturers are not in a bit worse position than are the South Australian, and if South Australia is not afraid of Melbourne I do not see why New Zealand should be. 1396. Mr. Millar.] Your particular industry has no protection, has it ?—No. 1397. If we federated with Australia, and therefore came under a federal tariff of 12J per cent, against machinery, you would have that advantage in the home market ?—Yes. 1398. Would that amount of duty tend to increase the amount of your manufactures ? Would it enable you to compete with the agricultural machinery which is imported, amounting to £80,000 ? —No; I do not think 12J- per cent, would allow binders to be made in New Zealand, and binders form a very large bulk of the imports. 1399. It would not mean any increase in the amount of work to our workers in the colony ?— Oh, yes; it would shut out drills, ploughs, and other things which are coming in in increasing numbers. 1400. Coming to the question of the actual cash loss, you said that in Customs revenue we would lose £120,000 ?—Yes. 1401. Have you looked at the fact that by handing over the postal and telegraph revenue we would be handing over another £100,000 clear profit'?— Mr. Ward said he would be prepared to lose £80,000 this year. 1402. Even so ; but he was giving it away to the public ?—Yes. 1403. You recognise that the postal surplus will go under the Commonwealth Act ? —I imagine other colonies have a surplus too. 1404. But that department is to be taken over by the Commonwealth and administered by the Government, and the profit we have got will be profit to the Commonwealth ?—No. 1405. In view of the evident loss of revenue to the extent of at least £300,000, how do you propose that that should be made up ? —I do not see that there will be that loss of revenue. 1406. You have admitted that there will be a loss of revenue of £120,000 ? —Yes, but that is not £300,000. 1407. Well, how do you propose that that £120,000 will be made up?— The public will get the whole of that—it will be paid back in other things. 1408. In what way?— The Federal tariff will probably provide for it. 1409. Did you hear Sir John Hall state that, in his opinion, the Federal Government would gradually spread over the whole of the ground ?—I do not agree with him. 1410. Do you think the Federal Government, having power to legislate on so many subjects, will not use that power?—l think it will be decidedly for the benefit of the colonies that they should legislate on a large number of those subjects. 1411. Do you think they will exercise their powers of spending money?—l think we may trust Australia in that matter. 1412. Do you think Australia is as well developed in proportion to her size as New Zealand is in the matter of public works, roads, and bridges ?—I should say that Victoria was better developed. 1413. But Victoria is the smallest part of Australia?— Yes. Their development is on different lines to ours. Their mining development is immensely superior to ours, and so is their irrigation development. I think, on the whole, Australia is as well developed as New Zealand. 1414. In proportion to its size ? —No; in proportion to its population. 1415. You think they will simply legislate to such an extent that each State will pay for the work in its own district ?—I think so. 1416. Mr. Beauchamp.] If Australia is shut out to the Southland farmers in the matter of the exportation of oats, I understand you to say it means ruin to many of the Southland farmers ? —Yes. 1417. Do you consider that the Southland farmers are wholly and solely dependent on Australia for their market for oats ?—At the present time they are. 1418. Is it not probable that our trade with South Africa will continue for some years after the close of the war ?—No doubt it will last for a year or two, but oats can be grown in six months. Besides, in South Africa we meet with competition from America on level terms, whilst oats are not grown on level terms to ours in Argentina. 1419. Is it not possible that the Southland farmers will go in for the dairying industry?—A large portion of Southland is not suited for dairying. 28—A. 4.
A.—4
218
1420. In view of the present high price for sheep, would it not pay some of the farmers, for the purpose of improving their land, to feed their sheep on oats ?—No, Ido nob think so. Farmers in Southland talk about feeding their sheep on oats when they go down to 9d.; but it does not pay to grow at that price, even to put it into mutton. 1421. With your experience of New Zealand workmen, do you think they are capable of doing more work than an Australian workman ? —I do not think so. It appears to me that there is no more difference between an Auckland man and a New South Wales man, or between a Tasmanian and a New-Zealander, than there is between an Englishman and a Scotchman. 1422. You do not think the difference in climate will produce a different type of men?— The range of climate in Australia is not sufficient for that. 1423. In your opinion, speaking generally, the industries of New Zealand would increase rather than decrease under federation ? —Yes ; the more the farmers would benefit the more the industries would benefit. Speaking for my own business, I do not fear the effect of federation on the business we do there so much as on our New Zealand business, and our business with Southland is worth as much as our Australian business. 1424. How many hands do you employ?— Thirty-three. 1425. Is the business an increasing one? —Yes. 1426. Would you advocate federation on the terms of the present Bill, or do you suggest any modification to meet the particular requirements of this colony ?—Seeing that our Customs-tariff bulks so largely, I should ask for the same consideration as Western Australia. 1427. On the present terms you would not advocate federation ?—That is rather a hard question to ask any one. I should say, looking at all the advantages the farmers would gain, and through the farmers the whole of the people of New Zealand, it would be better to federate under the present circumstances. 1428. Than ask for modifications?— Certainly, ask for modifications. 1429. But, failing modifications, accept the Bill as at present drafted?— Yes. 1430. Mr. Luke.] You confine yourself at present to manufacturing ? —Almost entirely. 1431. How do you account for so little being exported from New Zealand? —Because they can be made so cheaply in America. But we do export implements into New South Wales. The return that you have is wrong. Our trade in that respect is increasing. In 1895 it was £3,000, in 1896 it was £5,000, in 1897 it was £9,000, and in 1898 it was £10,000. 1432. Do you speak more particularly from a producers' point of view in favour of federation, or jointly from a producers' and manufacturers' ?—Jointly. 1433. Then, from your point of view, the Australian Commonwealth market would open up opportunities for manufacture that do not exist now ?—Ultimately. I think New Zealand, on the whole, is better able to be a manufacturing country than Australia, and therefore in time a large number of manufacturers will be established in New Zealand in preference to Australia. 1434. How do you account for the agricultural-implement industry being a waning one ? — This last year it may have been, but until this year it was increasing. 1435. But is it not a fact that a large number of implements are now imported that used to be manufactured here ? —Certainly. 1436. That the manufacturing of tools is really a diminishing quantity ?—Oh, no. We are all employing a great many more hands now than ever we did, which means that the result of the good times has gone largely into the pockets of the foreigners rather than into the pockets of the manufacturers. The expansion of trade has been met by a larger importation. 1437. But is it not a fact that some of the manufacturers are relinquishing the manufacturing and importingin preference?— That is so. 1438. How do you account for it ?—There are two main reasons, but I cannot explain them clearly. Ten years ago the farmers made a principle of buying the locally made article, and the tariff has been rearranged. 1439. Do you not think there is a danger, if we federated, of the whole of our implementmaking industry dying out and being supplanted by importations pure and simple ?—I do not think that would make any difference. 1440. Mr. Leys.] Do you think it is reasonable to suppose that a country having such an enormous area of agricultural land, such a variety of climate, and such a vast population will not supply its own wants in respect to all agricultural products ?—No, because we can produce them so much better. Our yield is heavier than theirs. As an instance, take the South Australian yield of 6 bushels to the acre as against our 28. 1441. But is not the South Australian yield of wheat, a still lower average—4 - 90—and yet South Australia goes on producing wheat for exportation to England ? —Decidedly, because South Australia grows exceptionally good wheat. 1442. But if the average yield of Australia is 4-90 as against New Zealand's average of 31-81, would you say that on that account South Australia is bound to be extinguished and could not produce wheat ?—lf you remember, I said that the increase yield was sometimes discounted by the increased expenditure on the yield. South Australia raises its wheat cheaper than any other colony. 1443. Was not New South Wales a large importer of wheat some years ago?—lt was. 1444. Although its average yield is only 13-13, it is now becoming self-supporting under freetrade? —I think it has only been self-supporting for one or two years. 1445. Take the latest figures, 1899-1900 : the wheat yield' of New South Wales is estimated at 13,600,000 bushels, and the wheat yield of New Zealand is only estimated at 8,500,000 bushels ?—I do not presume to say that New Zealand would supply Australia with wheat, because Ido not consider that wheat is a small farmers' crop. The things I think New Zealand could supply Australia with are malt, oats, potatoes, onions, agricultural implements, maize, bindertwine, woollen goods, and chaff.
219
A.—4
1446. Do yon think that Australia is not likely to support itself in potatoes ? Has it not exported potatoes here in some years? —I do not think, so. It might send in a few tons of early potatoes, hut it has never, to my knowledge, exported any considerable quantity. 1447. But are there not large areas of land in Australia well adapted for growing potatoes ?— Decidedly ; but their yield is so much less than ours that we, under equal circumstances, could undersell them, and return some profit to our farmers. 1448. Looking at the experience with respect to wheat, is it a safe thing to assume that our superior average would help us to dominate the Australian markets ?—I think so in certain things, but Ido not consider wheat one of them. In many lines of produce, such as small-farm produce, I think New Zealand, under equal circumstances, could always dominate the Australian market. 1449. Is not Victoria a country of small settlers largely? —In certain sections only. 1450. Will not these small settlers devote themselves to these particular products ? —They cannot grow potatoes north of the dividing-range. There is only a small section of land in Victoria which is capable of growing potatoes. 1451. Is Victoria self-supporting now in regard to potatoes?— Yes, and exports to other colonies. 1452. Is not New South Wales a large producer of potatoes ? —She does not supply herself, or anything like it, or else she would not want so much from Tasmania and New Zealand. 1453. Looking at the exports to Australia now, we have, excluding gold, goods to the value of £652,000 sent to New South Wales: do you suppose that that amount would be increased by federation ?—Very largely. 1454. Why, seeing that free-trade is in force there now ?—lf more produce were sent we should get cheaper freights, but I do not say we could increase our exports to New South Wales very largely. I said we could hope to send to the other colonies as much in proportion as we now send to New South Wales, which would increase our total export to Australia by two millions per annum. 1455. How do you arrive at those figures, seeing that we only send, including gold, £400,000 of products from this colony to the other colonies that have protective tariffs—that is, excluding New South Wales ? That, surely, is not likely to be interfered with by any Federal tariff to any great extent ?—The protection in Tasmania and Queensland is not as great as in the other colonies. 1456. Have you any reason to suppose that the Federal tariff will impose a higher protection than the present tariffs ? —I really have no information about it. 1457. But you seem to assume that we shall lose the whole of our Australian trade under federation, whereas, as a matter of fact, we already send to those protective colonies goods to the value of £412,000 every year ? —I do not think so. Nearly the whole of the amount that is credited to Victoria, we are told by those competent to judge, is made up of transhipments. You must deduct all that. 1458. Why deduct that?— Because it does not go to Victoria. 1459. Does not this portion, whether it is transhipped from Victoria or not, form part of this million we are dealing with ? Why deduct ? —A chief portion of it has gone to South Africa this year. 1460. But still it is all part of this million which you are reckoning is going to be multiplied? —From that point of view, undoubtedly. ■1461. And with regard to this £652,000 which goes to New South Wales, is not a very large portion of that transhipped to other countries, such as South Africa and Manila?—l think I have heard that none has been transhipped from Sydney to South Africa. 1462. I know, as a matter of fact, that there were buyers from Sydney in Auckland buying potatoes which were shipped from Sydney to Manila? —If you say so, I am not prepared to deny it. 1463. Do you assume that Victoria is the only country which exports to South Africa ?—What I think I said was that, if the whole of Australia took from New Zealand in the same proportion as New South Wales does, we might safely reckon that the whole of Australia would take over three millions of our produce, which is an additional two millions to what she takes now, and consequently our small farmers would benefit to that extent. 1464. I understand you to say that the Australian market would be completely cut off from us, and the small farmer would be ruined, if federation took place ? —I said that if we kept out of the Federation, and a tariff wall were erected against us, we should not send to any part of Australia anything like the quantity we send now. 1464 a. You think, then, we should not retain a large proportion of this million ?—I do not. 1465. Should not we retain the £412,000 that goes to the protective colonies?—No, because it would come in from other colonies. Tasmania is an instance. She now pays duty, but if Victoria took off her duties Tasmania would send produce to Melbourne instead of ourselves. 1466. But you have just stated that a large proportion of it was for transhipment—if it were for transhipment the duty could not affect it ?—The whole of our trade with Western Australia is done through Victoria, and I say it is not fair to credit that amount to Victoria, because she does not take anything like the amount that is credited to her. 1467. Coming to the question of the Southland farmers, is not their main market for oats the New Zealand market ?—There is a large market in New Zealand. 1468. Then, they would still have the Zealand market?— Undoubtedly. 1469. And, being so well adapted for oat-growing, I suppose they would monopolize that market pretty well ? —Yes; but it would be at a price which would not pay them. 1470. Is it fair to assume that ? —Decidedly. 1471. Do you know of any case where the people are systematically producing at a loss?—I
A.—4
220
think I pointed out that Southland was better adapted for growing oats than anything else, and there are large parts of Southland that probably could not produce other things so advantageously as it now produces oats. 1472. But if Southland can produce oats very much more advantageously than the rest of New Zealand, would not ultimately the whole of the New Zealand trade be monopolized by the Southland farmers?— Yes, to the detriment of farmers in other places. 1473. You said you were not so much afraid of losing the Australian market for agricultural implements as of the effect that federation would have on the home market : how do you explain that ? Would not you still supply the home market ?—Yes ; but the farmer would not be in a position to buy machinery through the loss of trade with Australia. 1474. You do not contemplate that Southland would go out of cultivation through federation ? —-The thing has happened in England, where cultivation has decreased very much. I would like to point out that the exports of New Zealand to Australia represent farmers' wages as well as farmers' profits. 1475. And you think the demand for agricultural implements will be lessened to that extent, and that it would be serious ? —I think so. 1476. What about the loss of Customs revenue ? Do you refer to the loss arising on Australian productions shipped to New Zealand, or is it the loss upon the whole of the shipments from Australia to New Zealand ?—The loss on such items as brandy, sugar, wine, tobacco, and fruit. 1477. There were goods to the value of £1,300,000 shipped—l suppose, chiefly outside of manufacturers from Australia to New Zealand : do you refer to the loss we should sustain on all that? —The loss on the purely local produce—Australian stuff. 1478. Would you include brandy in that ? —That includes the whole of the sugar imported into New Zealand, including, I think, Fiji sugar. 1479. That is a very large item ? —Whatever came from Fiji would have to be deducted from the £120,000. 1480. But should not we lose the duty under the Commonwealth Act, and at the expiration of five years the whole duty on all kinds of goods exported from Australia? —Oh, no ; I think the Commonwealth tariff provides that the duty is to be credited-to the colony in which the goods are consumed. 1481. For five years?— No. 1482. Look at clause 94? —It strikes me that the duty would be credited to the colony in which the goods where consumed. That is evidently implied in that clause. 1483. Do you not think it would be under a perfectly free exchange, a rather hard thing to assess? —Most of these things are shipped from bond, and so are easily ascertained. 1484. But you would not ship anything under bond if the duties were paid in New South Wales ?—lt is done in Victoria every day. 1485. Then, you assume that the £120,000 would be the only disturbance to our State finance ? —Yes ; and that £120,000 is reduced by whatever duty is collected on Fijian sugar. 1486. Have you considered that, if the Victorian tariff were adopted for Federal purposes, it would only yield £1 19s. per head of population, while the New Zealand tariff yields £2 18s. Id. per head, so that that would mean a loss to the New Zealand Customs of 19s. Id. per head, or over £700,000 a year?— Yes; Ido not think the* Victorian tariff would be taken as the basis of a Federal tariff. The Victorian tariff, of course, was made to suit the demand of Victoria, but it will not certainly suit the whole of Australia. 1487. If they adopted the New South Wales tariff the loss would be considerably more than that ?—Yes. 1488. And if we adopted the South Australian tariff' the loss also would be more ?—Yes ; but I should imagine that these tariffs are entered into to suit the particular business of those colonies. The tariff might very easily be made to suit the whole Federation well, and yet gaia as much revenue. 1489. Is it not rather assuming things to suggest that the Commonwealth is going to impose a very high tariff if it is to preserve the revenue of New Zealand as it stands now ?—I think the producers and the workmen and the manufacturers throughout Australia are just as alive to the necessities of a tariff as are the farmers and producers of Victoria or New Zealand. 1490. But have you considered that New Zealand has leaned more upon its Customs duties than most of the Australian Colonies? Now, supposing you took as a mean the average of all the Australian tariffs, you would get £2 Is. per head, and that would still leave 17s. per head deficiency to be made up from somewhere : how would you propose to do it?—l do not think it will suit the Australian Colonies as a whole to lose by the Customs tariff. 1491. But they would not lose. I say, take their average tariff, and it is £2 Is. per head of population, while the New Zealand tariff has been £2 18s. Id. That would leave us about 17s. per head of loss ?—But did we not lose that during last session ? 1492. Nothing like it. Can you suggest how that amount of loss would be made up except by largely increasing the direct taxation ?—I do not think the loss would be anything important. 1493. You do not think New Zealand industries would suffer from the more largely developed industries of Australia?—On the whole, I do not think they will. 1494. You think the opinion of those mannfacturers who expressed that idea is altogether wide of the mark ?—Oh, no. Boot-manufacturers are honourable men, and know their own business. They may lose, but what the boot-manufacturers lose other manufacturers may not. I was looking at the thing from a wide standpoint. Some industries would gain immensely if these two millions were circulated amongst the small farmers. Mr. Leys : Yes, if that two millions is a reality.
221
A.—4
John Scott Myees examined. (No. 69.) 1495. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you, Mr. Myers? —A farmer, residing at Marshlands, in this district. I have resided in New Zealand for twenty years. lam not a large farmer, and am now occupying about 5 or 6 acres in our district; where the land is expensive. 1496. What is your opinion upon the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ? —I do not think it would pay the onion-growers of this district to federate. We grow more onions than any other part of New Zealand. During the first year I grew a crop of onions, in 1889, the price in Christchurch averaged £17 a ton. Of course, at that price it paid so well that a lot of people started to grow onions, and in the following year I only sold 1 ton out of 40 for £1 10s. I have exported onions to Australia. 1497. Do you agree with the' opinion that has been expressed here that if New Zealand federated with Australia the onion-growing industry would be ruined ?—I do not. 1498. Have you considered the question having regard to other produce ? —Yes ; I have grown potatoes and cabbages, and I consider the small settlers, of which I am one, would not be benefited by federation. 1499. Do you think there are any advantages which would be likely to accrue to New Zealand from federation?— From what I have read, I understand that Australia only takes our produce when she wants it, when there is a scarcity over there. It is just a matter of seasons. Victoria can grow a much better article than we can. 1500. Mr. Millar.] Are these the general opinions held by the small farmers on this matter? —Yes. I have got the highest price per ton for onions in this district. In 1898 onions were scarce, and I sold them in Dunedin for £15 a ton, and none under £10. In 1899 I shipped to Sydney, and got very little. The year after that I shipped eighty-five sacks, and got Is. 9d. return, without reckoning the expenses. 1501. What crop do you raise to the acre? —I have raised 14 tons, but the average is 8 or 9 tons. 1502. Do you think that men in the same position could continue to grow onions without federation ?—The benefits only go to the merchants when the price is down. It does not benefit the small farmer. When the price is low the merchant will not ship excepting on your account, and the chances are that you will get no return, but be in debt to the merchant. The year I got £15 in Dunedin the Ohristchurch merchants would not give any more than £10. They closed their books against me, so I sent them to Sydney, and they returned me £14 per ton. That was in 1898, when onions were dear. 1503. Are there any other reasons you have against federation ?—Yes. The Chinese labour would prove a great nuisance to us. We have a number living here now, and they act the part of middlemen. Last year I grew an acre of cabbages, and the man who bought them made £16 out of the transaction. He gave me £20, and netted himself £16; but a Chinaman does more than that, because they give fd. each for them, and sell them sometimes at 2d. each. 1504. Mr. Beauchamp.] Are they mostly small holders in your district ? —Yes, on 4-, 5-, or 6-acre blocks. 1505. Has the question of federation been discussed amongst yourselves?— Yes. 1506. And the opinion is general that it would not be to your benefit to federate ?—lt is not general with a lot of them, because we have a lot of foreigners up there—Germans and Poles. 1507. Have you any Chinese ?—No; there are about thirty-six at St. Albans. 1508. Do the white people grow vegetables there ?—Chinese only grow the summer vegetables, but the people in my district grow the winter vegetables, and onions in a dry season do well. In a wet season we get no crop at all. John Alexandee McCullough examined. (No. 70.) 1509. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A tinsmith by trade ; but I am the president of the Canterbury Trades and Labour Council, which includes something like forty-five representatives of unions, representing a total membership of about 2,500. 1510. Has this question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia been considered by the Trades and Labour Council ? —Yes ; it has been discussed at a special meeting, and the decision is embodied in the following resolution : " That, in the opinion of this Council, it is not desirable for New Zealand to federate with Australia, the reasons being—(l.) That it will be detrimental to the development of local industries, whose commodities are easily interchangeable : it would be impossible for New Zealand to maintain its improved conditions under the Federation. (2.) New Zealand would be dominated by and give advantages to the colonies in the Federation whose conditions are least favourable to the workers. (3.) It would tend to the centralisation of wealth and industry, thus preventing the community from improving their condition. (4.) New Zealand would practically lose its identity without gaining any advantage whatever. (5.) The worst possible evil that could result would be the finding of a market for 15 per cent, of our produce, and it cannot be suggested that Australia purchases this amount from an entirely philanthropic motive." This question was fully discussed the whole of one evening, and the resolution was carried with only one dissentient. 1511. What are your own views on the matter?— They are exactly similar to those expressed in the resolution. 1512. What about your own particular trade : do you think that would be prejudicially affected ?—Yes, seriously affected. 1513. How many trades are represented in your association ?—There are twenty-four separate organizations represented on the council. 1514. Mr. Leys.] Do you know anything about the labour conditions in Australia ? Are they lower or higher than in New Zealand ?—I have taken the trouble to look up the average rates of
A.—4
222
wages and hours of labour in the various colonies, and I am certainly of opinion that the conditions in that respect are not as prosperous as they are here in regard to ours, and wages are lower in very many industries. 1515. Do you think that that condition would enable the Australian manufacturers to compete successfully against our local industries ?—I think that the concentration of capital, which is the tendency in large centres, must materially affect the workers in the various trades. 1516. Do you think there is any probability under federation of labour in Australia being raised to -the New Zealand level in the future ? —Undoubtedly there is a probability. Wages are going up all over the world, but I think it will take some considerable time before they go up. In the meantime the tendency will be for us to come down, and the first effect of federation, in my opinion, will be to force down wages here. 1517. Then, you think that if they adopted a Conciliation and Arbitration Act similar to ours it would be difficult to establish as good a standard as we have already established in New Zealand ? —Where there are more men in the unions than there are in New Zealand, I am satisfied it will be more difficult. 1518. Mr. Beauchamp.] To enable us to successfully compete with these large industries in Sydney and Melbourne, do you think it will be necessary to reduce wages here and to lengthen the hours of labour ?—ln order to successfully compete, that would be the tendency. In the boot trade in Sydney they work fifty to fifty-four hours, consequently it would be an impossibility for the bootmakers here to compete against them without reducing wages and lengthening the hours. 1519. With equal conditions with regard to wages and hours, would the tendency, in your opinion, be for our men to go to the larger centres ?—I think so, as men will always gravitate to where work is to be procured. 1520. And in these larger centres do you think men can live more cheaply than in New Zealand ?—lt is twenty years since I worked in Sydney, and, as far as the cost of living is concerned, I think the two places are just about equal. 1521. Mr. Millar.] I suppose you mix pretty well with that section of workers that is not directly affiliated with the Trades and Labour Council ?—Yes. 1522. What is the general impression you can gather from those men as to their views with regard to federation ? —The general expression is that they are opposed to federation. 1523. Do you think that with federation the social conditions of the workers of this colony would be as well looked after as it is at present ?—No. I think the disorganization which is always to be seen among large communities would tend to keep down the wages. The organization in Australia is not perfect enough to enable them to keep up the wages. 1524. You are of opinion that a large number of workmen would have to leave here owing to the large number of industries in work on the other side, and to their greater capacity swamping the same industries here—that is, if we federate ?—I think the tendency of the day is to concentrate men in large factories, and our men would have, to go after the work. 1525. Mr. Boberts.] Have you any idea of the number of workers in Australia as compared with the number here ? —No. 1526. In 1898, in Melbourne there were 45,844 ; in New Zealand, 39,872 ; in New South Wales, 31,000 ; so that, as a matter of fact, our manufacturing industries in 1898 were more important than those in New South Wales : do you fear under that condition a competition on the other side?—l fear competition of capital where it is thoroughly organized, as it is in Australia. 1527. Do you not think that capital must do equally as well for the workers here as it does in New South Wales—we have more employes ? —I do not think there are any factories in New Zealand of the same charactei as exists in Sydney. lam speaking of twenty years ago. 1528. Of what sort ? —Of my own trade. There are no factories in New Zealand that employ anything like the number of hands employed in Sydney. 1529. If the trades are not as well organized on the other side as here, do you not think the fact that we have 8,000 more employes than there are in New South Wales tends to show that our industries must be on a more extensive scale ?—Those figures are very striking, but they are not always reliable. 1530. Those are from the Government labour returns, and we have no reason to suppose that they are incorrect ? —45,000 men ought to do more than 39,000. 1531. In proportion to the size of our population, the number of our workers is a great deal higher than it is on the other side, so that under those circumstances have you anything to fear ? —There is a fear, to my mind : it is the fear engendered by absolute knowledge of the conditions prevailing on the other side. 1532. Do you think that your council was in a position to offer a correct opinion as to how federation would operate against the manufacturing trades here, or that it had any very correct information on the subject, because we naturally wish to obtain information from each side as we go along?—l understand this Commission has been set up for the purpose of eliciting information ; but you also want an expression of opinion, and we have expressed one. 1533. Do you think your council is in possession of sufficient information to enable it to form a correct opinion as to what the effect would be ?—No ; perhaps upon receiving the report of the Commission we might alter our opinion. 1534. Then, all your information is quite incomplete at present?— But there are obvious objections in the Commonwealth Bill. 1535. What are they ? —I take exception to the Federation providing an old-age pension. I think the tendency in that respect would be to rather injure what we have done for our old people. 1536. Why not extend the benefits you have here to the other side?—l fear it would reduce the benefits we have already conferred on our own colony.
223
A.—4
1537. I am sure you need not fear but that the bulk of the people of this colony would prefer to extend to the other colonies the benefits which they have got at the present time?— There is a possibility of doing that. 1538. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you not think that in the course of a generation or two we should be strong enough to hold our own against any Australians ?—Yes. 1539. Viewing the question of federation from the standpoint of natural importance, should not we, having the advantages of a more temperate climate, be able to compete more favourably then with Australia?—lf I might venture an opinion, I think we are a better type of men than they have on the other side. 1540. Does not that tell rather in favour of federation ?—No ; I think, quite the other way. I think if we want to show Australia what the workers of this country can do we had better remain as we are—namely, an integral part of the Empire, without affiliating ourselves with Australia. 1541. Have you considered the subject at all in regard to the settlement of Northern Queensland by coloured people ?—No, not as a council As a member of the union, I see there is a great danger of a big influx of coloured labour coming here. 1542. But, if there were a large settlement of coloured people in Northern Queensland, would that not affect the whole of the manufacturing industries of the colony ?—I should say it would affect it prejudicially. 1543. Your council has not considered that aspect of the question ?—Not beyond expressing an opinion that there would be danger to the white population by an influx of coloured population. 1544. And do you think that New Zealand, by remaining outside the Federation, would be more or less affected by the coloured population? —We would be much less likely to be affected. 1545. Would not the inevitable tendency be to bring the hours of labour to the same level ?— The tendency of federation would be in that direction. 1546. Then, if New-Zealanders are a better type of men than Australians, would we not have an advantage over Australians ? If everything was equal, would not we, man for man, be able to produce more than they do? —Yes; but there is the tendency for capital to find investment. We may produce more work, but the capitalist plays a very important part in the industries of a country. 1547. You do not think that all labour will relatively come to the same value in the countries ? —No, Ido not think they will come to the same value. The tendency is for wages to be lower in some than in other places. 1548. Is there a possibility, if we exclude all manufactures from outside, of our becoming dwarfed in our manufacturing-power ?—No, I think our manufactures will grow. 1549. You think that lack of competition will not act injuriously on our own industries in course of time ? —I am not inclined to think so. I think we will still find a market for some of our manufactures in Australia. 1550. In the face of the cheaper labour in Australia ?—I think we could do that. 1551. Are there any other objections to the Bill that your council have beyond the one you have mentioned ? —Yes ; I know my council objects to the restrictions that would be placed on New Zealand establishing a national bank. There is one other objection that my council take serious exception to—that is, the exclusion of the Maori race from participation in the supposed benefits of federation. 1552. Are there any advantages which would accrue to New Zealand through federation, in your opinion ?—No, I cannot imagine any. 1553. Is there anything you wish to say that you have not been questioned upon ?—With reference to the figures mentioned regarding the numbers employed in the industries of the colony, I have some figures placed before me as being official. They are for 1899 : Victoria, 60,000; New South Wales, 55,000; Queensland, 27,000; West Australia, 7,000; New Zealand, 45,000. I think you will find there is a material difference from the figures mentioned before. 1554. Hon. Major Steward.] Are you aware whether the basis of calculation for the other colonies is exactly the same as in New Zealand ? The definition of a factory in New Zealand is a place where two people are employed ?—Yes. 1555. Is that the case in New South Wales?—No, I think not. 1556. Then, if not, a comparison cannot be made on those figures, for the reason that all those below the minimum elsewhere would have to be included in the calculation?— Yes. 1557. Then, it does not follow that there were 8,000 more workmen in the factories of New Zealand than New South Wales?— No. 1558. Can you tell me what is the basis of comparison in New South Wales—what constitutes a factory there?—l do not know. lam quite sure that our Factories Act has much wider scope than any Factories Act in Australia. 1559. Then, you think the comparison is of no use whatever?—l do not see the force of them myself, either one way or another. 1560. Then, I understand from your remark that you lay considerable stress on the fact that the factories in New South Wales and Victoria were on a larger scale than those of New Zealand? —That is so. 1561. And it is a fact that when on a larger scale they can specialise their work and turn out greater quantities at less per article ? —That is so. 1562. That is the competition you are afraid of?— Yes, that is what is going to injure us. 1563. And you cannot compete with it until the population here is brought up to the level of the chief towns of the other side ?—That is so. 1564. And we are not likely to overtake Melbourne or Sydney for some time to come ?—Not for some years.
A.—4
224
James Young examined. (No. 71.) 1565. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A bootmaker. 1566. Are you a member of the Trades and Labour Council of Christchurch ?—Yes. 1567. Mr. McCullough has given us the opinion of the Trades and Labour Council: what is your opinion on the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—My opinion is practically the same as that expressed by Mr. McCullough. I think the conditions in Australia are all in favour of it becoming a centre of industry. One feature over there is that steamers carrying the raw material necessary for manufacturing would call at the nearest port, and that enables that product to be produced cheaper than in any other part of Australia or New Zealand. Then, there is the centralisation of industry, which will have the effect of nullifying the legislation passed in New Zealand for the good of the workers during the last ten or fifteen years. 1568. Are there any other disadvantages you can mention ?—New Zealand would lose its identity without gaining any advantage whatever. It is my opinion that New Zealand has all the characteristics of a great nation within herself without joining the Commonwealth of Australia. I thmk there are certain industries in New Zealand which are now protected in a measure, but which would entirely disappear if we fedetated with Australia, through the centralisation in the various centres of Australia. That being so, it would denude this country of the workers in those particular industries, thereby making a loss in the consumption of the produce grown in New Zealand, and rendering it necessary for a market to be found for that produce in other countries. It would also depreciate the value of property in New Zealand considerably if workers had to go where work was for them, as they would have to do. 1569. Do you mean that the workers would be attracted to the large centres in Australia ? —I think, undoubtedly that would be the case. The question of defence has been raised as a reason for New Zealand joining the Commonwealth. Ido not think there is much force in that. It has been on record that England has been at war with all the nations at various times, and sometimes with all of them at one time, and I have no recollection of having heard that any of her colonies have ever been attacked in the past, and I do not think we need have any fear of it in the future. 1570. How do you think the boot trade would be affected ?—I have no doubt that the bootmakers would sell whatever properties they have and shift to Victoria. That would be the centre of the boot-manufacturing industry in the Commonwealth. As a matter of fact, even now, with the duty on boots, it is a hard matter to compete with Victoria, and it will be more difficult in the future, through the introduction of more machinery and the greater quantities of work that can be turned out in the same time. 1571. Have you had any opportunity of ascertaining generally the opinions of the workers of Christchurch upon this question?— Yes, more especially in my own trade, and I have met no one, with the exception of the one mentioned by Mr. McCullough, who has expressed himself in favour of federation from any point of view. 1572. Hon. Captain Russell.] Has improved machinery a tendency to raise wages, or otherwise? —I think the tendency is to raise them. 1573. What is the principal centre of the boot industry in England?— Leicester. 1574. More so than Northamptonshire ?— I think so. The population of England is so vast that it does not matter much whether the town is large or small in which the industry is carried on. 1575. Is it not possible that we could have a boot industry here large enough to supply Australia?—l do not. see how it is possible to do it under existing conditions. There is no large aggregation of capital in New Zealand like there is in Australia, and they have large factories there at present, whilst we have not. 1576. Would the raising of the present per cent, duty on boots improve the condition of the bootmakers? —No, not in New Zealand, owing to the vast improvement there has been in machinery. 1577. Is there not a danger, if we fence ourselves round, that it will make the conditions of the workers worse than now? —I think it is desirable that any industry which has to work against competition from the outside should have that measure of protection to enable its workers to maintain their position, and improve it if possible. 1578. You told us that raising the duty has rather injured the position of bootmakers—or that the trade has not improved, at any rate ?—The imposition of the duty, I said. Prior to theputtingon of the present duty of 22J per cent., it was a duty of so-much per pair, I think. Now it is somuch on the value, so that five pairs of boots can come in for 22-J- per cent., whereas before they had to pay on the value of each pair. Thus, if the value of the boots was 4s. they paid 10 per cent, on that value, and there was no increase on the inferior class of work. 1579. If the increase in the duty has not improved the position of trade, if we shut ourselves off now and say we will not deal with Australia, will not our industries get smaller, and be unable to buy good machinery, and so have a tendency to diminish wages ?—I think not. Our manufacturers are getting new machinery, and their methods are improving, and it is only a matter of time when the operatives will get so skilled that they will be able to reduce the price of goods, and be able to compete with the duty they now have on. Again, we have no guarantee that the Federal duty will be greater, or as great, than we have here. If it is not as great, the American article will cut out Australia. To get eight millions of revenue does not look like a protective duty. 1580. Is there not a necessity to increase the output if you are to improve the condition of the worker ? —You can only increase the output by increasing the duty, so that the imported article cannot come in. 1581. You think that under no circumstances can we compete with Australia? —No. 1582. Mr. Beauehamp.] Does the increase in the sale of American boots apply to all classes or to any particular quality of boot ? —The better class is the class mostly sold in New Zealand.
225
A.—4
1583. So that it is very serious competition that you are meeting from America?— Undoubtedly, it is most serious. 1584. And has not that competition increased yery largely within the last twelve months ?— Yes; we did not feel it so much before. 1585. You had before that competition with England?— Yes. 1586. You are not feeling that competition so much now ?—No. The English boots have decreased in proportion to the importation of American goods. 1587. We are told that the boot trade is in a somewhat languishing condition : can you tell me anything that will improve that condition ?—I do not know how they can tell that until the census is taken. 1588. Despite the competition, manufactures in New Zealand ought to be in a very flourishing condition ? —I say lam of opinion as years go on we will be increasingly able to compete with the imported article. 1589. Provided, I understand, we were not subject to inter-free-trade with Australia ?—That is so. 1590. Mr. Luke.] Is the trade of New Zealand too small to warrant the importation of this superior machinery ? —There are so many factories in New Zealand, and all get a share of the work; whereas in America and Australia they specialise, and where they specialise they turn out a superior article. 1591. Is there any one able to improve their machinery and cope with the American trade?— There are several with the most up-to-date machinery. 1592. They work longer hours in America ?—They work fifty-nine hours in America. 1593. It is a question of hours as well as a question of improved machinery?— Yes. It is not a question of wages in America. Wages there are on a par with those in New Zealand. 1594. You think the Australian manufacturers, by enlarging their machinery, could cope with America there and keep out the American goods ? —Supposing the tariff is high enough. 1595. I mean under the Federal tariff?—lf it is as high as that of New Zealand, they would be able to shut out everybody from outside the Commonwealth. 1596. Is there still room for considerable expansion in the supply of the home market?— Most undoubtedly, if they could come down in price so as to compete with the American article, and in a measure compete with the Australian article as well. 1597. Roughly, there were goods to value of about £150,000 imported : do you think that under the tariff that will be steadily reduced, or do you think that more protection would be wanted ?—I am inclined to think the value will be reduced in a few years. In connection with the tariff, France and other countries have to be considered in the matter of leathers. Some of the materials used in the making of boots are subjected to a duty of 40 per cent. All the best leathers are subject to a duty which makes the duty, from a protection point, of view less than 22-J- per cent. 1598. Hon. Major Steward.] I think I understood you to say that one of the reasons why New Zealand bootmakers found it so difficult to compete with the American manufacturers was the fact that the workers in America work fifty-nine hours as against forty-eight hours here ?— I did not make that assertion ; but I showed that the wages in America were practically the same as here. 1599. Is not the chief reason of the difficulty of competing with the American manufacturers the fact that they have such an immense output that they are able to specialise their manufactures ?—Yes. 1600. And they are able to supply the surplus at any price above cost ? —They act somewhat similarly to the German sugar bounty: they make for themselves for nine months, and for the foreign trade for the other three months, and these goods they sell outside at a cheaper rate than they can be sold in America. 1601. You cannot cope with that competition ?—Excepting on a duty. 1602. Captain Eussell put it to you that there had been an increase of duty to 22-J per cent., and asked you whether that increase of duty had really tended to increase your business in New Zealand, and you replied in the negative. I think you endeavoured to explain that. I would like you to explain it more clearly. Is it not a fact that that duty, as a protection, was more apparent than real ? —Yes. 1603. That, while the protection was increased nominally, when you came to compare it with the duty previously at per dozen pairs of boots it was found that a large class of boots were less protected at 22f per cent, than under the lower duty ? —That is so. There is another point: At the time the tariff was altered there was a duty of 2d. per pound upon all imported leathers which are absolutely necessary to be imported for the manufacture of boots, therefore further reducing the duty to the boot trade. 1604. The effect, then, of the rearrangement of the duty on boots was not really to increase the duty ?—That is so. 1605. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any other matter upon which you would like to speak that you have not been questioned on ?—I would only desire to emphasize the fact that under a Federal Parliament the Maori population will not be considered at all. I think that is a serious blot. We have endeavoured to make them equal to us in every respect in this colony. Arthur Edgar Gravenor Rhodes examined. (No. 72.) 1606. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a barrister and solicitor ?—Yes. 1607. Practising in Christchurch ? —Yes. 1608. How long have you resided in New Zealand ? —Since 1859, with occasional visits away. 1609. Are you acquainted with Australia? —I have been there. 29—A. 4.
226
A.—4
1610. And have you studied the Commonwealth Bill ?—Not for some little time. 1611. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating or not with the Commonwealth of Australia?—l was waiting for the conclusion of your labours to study it properly. I have not studied it sufficiently yet. 1612. Have you any opinion on the subject ?—lf we do not have federation it will injure the export of produce from this province. 1613. What class of produce do you refer to?— Oats and root-crops. 1614. Including onions ?—Yes. 1615. We have had the evidence of one witness this afternoon who says he does not think it would interfere with the onion-crops?— That is his opinion, not mine. 1616. Are you an onion-grower ?—No. 1617. What do you base your opinion on? —Through watching the state of the trade to a certain extent. 1618. Are you interested in the trade in any way?— Not personally. We own country in which onions are grown to some extent. 1619. To any large extent ?—The majority of our tenants have now bought their freehold. A very large proportion of the onions grown was grown on the property owned by us, and from which I acquired my knowledge of the trade. 1620. Why do you say their industry would be injured ? —I think if a large duty was put on in Sydney it would affect it. 1621. Is not the export of onions largely affected by the seasons in Australia?—ln certain seasons we would send them there, but in other years I think the export would be stopped. 1622. Have you considered what the effect of federation would be upon the agricultural interests of the colony generally ? —I think it would affect the South Island more than the North if the New South Wales market was closed to us. But I am not a merchant; that is only my own opinion. lam not speaking as an exporter myself. 1623. Mr. Leys.] The chief interest to the Canterbury people is wheat, is it not?—No; I should say frozen mutton. 1624. The chief agricultural industry?— Wheat and oats. 1625. I see the oats exported from Lyttelton in 1898 only amounted to £272, and in 1899 to £22,745? —I am not speaking now for certain, but I think Timaru is a bigger exporter of grain even than Lyttelton for the last two years. 1626. The oats exported from Timaru in 1898 amounted to £158, and in 1899 £4,351. We have had evidence from some Canterbury merchants and mill-owners that the flour-milling industry would be very seriously injured by intercolonial free-trade: do you think that will be the case ? —I think flour-milling would be interfered with. As a matter of fact, I own a mill, but do not work it myself. 1627. You think that Australian flour would come into the North Island and injure the industry here ?—Yes. 1628. To what extent would that counterbalance any loss we might sustain on laws through not federating? —I am not prepared to give an opinion. 1629. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do I understand you to say that the exportation of frozen mutton is of greater value than the exportation of wheat ? —Yes, I think so. The wheat export sometimes is very little. 1630. Whereas until this last year the exportation of meat was steadily increasing?— Yes. 1631. Would not our federating with Australia open a wider field for the rising young barristers of New Zealand" ?—I think I have a right to practise there myself by reason of being a barrister of the English bar. 1632. Very few, however, of the profession here have that privilege ?—I think, only members of the English bar. Walter Newton examined. (No. 73.) 1633. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—An upholsterer. 1634. How long have you lived in New Zealand ?—Twenty-four years. 1635. Are you a member of the Trades and Labour Council ? —Yes. 1636. Were you at the meeting to which Mr. McCullough referred ?—Yes. 1637. What is your opinion of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia? —Speaking personally, my opinion is that it would be detrimental to the interests of New Zealand as a whole —detrimental to social and industrial legislation. 1638. Upon what do you base that opinion ?—At the present time we occupy an advanced position in comparison with the Commonwealth, and I think the tendency of federation would be to bring down New Zealand to their level, seeing that they are the larger community, and that the influence we would have with fifteen or sixteen members in a House of eighty or ninety members is so small that we could not hope to effect an improvement in the affairs of Australia. 1639. What do you think would be the effect upon the manufacturing industries of this colony? —I think it would be to deplete our shores of its industrial population. 1640. Why do you think that ? —Owing to the reasons that have already been advanced— centralisation of work and consequent cheapening of production. 1641. Have you considered the question as to how it would affect agricultural interests of this country ?—I have not any experience with regard to that matter; but, seeing that the export of our agricultural products to Australia only amounts to about 15 per cent, of the whole, I am of opinion that even if we lost the whole of that our standing out of federation will not be very prejudicial to New Zealand. 1642. In order to secure that 15 per cent, of our export trade, do you think New Zealand would be justified in sacrificing her independence as a colony?— Certainly not. I think they will
227
A.—4
take our produce when they require it, as they have done in the past. There are seasons when products such as onions and potatoes have been practically given away in Christchurch, owing to their having had good seasons over there. 1643. Have you had opportunities of discussing this matter with your co-workers?—l have, especially with those in the furniture trade. 1644. Can you tell what opinion generally they hold on the matter? —They are practically unanimous against federation—that it would be detrimental to their trade. In Sydney and Melbourne furniture can be produced 200 per cent, cheaper than in New Zealand. New Zealand timbers are cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand. 1645. Is that on account of the wages being cheaper, or the hours being longer, or because of the materials used in the manufacture of furniture ? —Both have an effect, but principally it is owing to the longer hours worked and the low wages paid. In Sydney furniture is made by the Chinese. They work about seventy hours a week for £1 55., and, of course, it is an impossibility for white men to compete under these conditions and live. 1646. Mr. Roberts.] Under existing conditions of manufacture in this colony, is it possible to profitably export products of our own manufacturing industries ?—1 do not think so. 1647. You cannot export at the present time?— Only in the better class of goods. 1648. Do you look forward to the time when New Zealand will become a manufacturing country and be able to export largely ? —I do, but not if New Zealand joined the Federation now. Our industries would go to pieces if we joined at the present juncture. 1649. You think labour would, need to be cheapened so as to enable you to export ?—No. 1650. How, then, would you be able to develop into an exporting country ?—I think the tendency will be that other countries will improve their conditions. 1651. They will rise to our level?—l think so, in time. 1652. That will enable New Zealand to be an exporting country?—On equal conditions, I think we could compete with them. 1653. With a duty of 10 or 20 per cent, in Australia, do you conceive that we will be able to export to Australia ?—We could not export to Australia at the present time if there was no duty, and less still if there was an import duty over there. Not under conditions that are at present prevailing. 1654. You said you looked forward to the time when you can export there?— Yes. 1655. But, unless under federation, we could not take our goods there without duty?—l understand that is so. 1656. Could we pay that duty ?—No. 1657. For all time, then, our manufacturers would be confined to New Zealand consumption? —That does not follow. 1658. Where do you expect to export to, conditions being equal—conditions being equal in labour, you would still be subject to an export duty ?—We may be; it is practically only in its infancy. 1659. And will be until you produce at a cheaper rate with cheaper labour?— There are other things in production besides labour. 1660. Labour is essential ?—lt is the chief essential; but there are other things—efficiency and machinery is also a factor. 1661. If all branches of labour on the other side are protected by a duty of 15 per cent, our manufactures could not enter the Australian Colonies ? —I should not think so. 1662. Mr. Millar.] Can you tell what the average wage paid in your trade in New Zealand is ?—About 9s. 6d. per day. The minimum wage is lower than that. It is Bs. 6d. in Dunedin and Christchurch, and 9s. in Wellington ; but the majority of the men receive higher wages than the minimum—between 9s. and 10s. a day. 1663. I have before me here a report on the furniture trade of Victoria. I find that the average weekly wage there was £1 9s. 7d. in 1896, and it had risen to £1 16s. in 1898 : do you think we could possibly compete if we continued to pay 9s. per day against £1 16s. per week ?— Certainly not. 1664. That is white labour, and they find that they are gradually being cut out by the Chinese ?—That is so. 1665. Do you think it is possible, under any circumstances, to compete against the Chinese furniture trade of Melbourne ?—Not under any circumstances. 1666. Can you see anything to prevent these Chinese coming over here ?—Not under federation. I take it that if we federated there would be free interchange of the population, the same as there would be with regard to commodities. We would be at the mercy of the Chinese population of Australasia. That would be detrimental to the workers here. I have a list of prices before me now, and they are 200 per cent, cheaper than we could produce furniture here at. 1667. Do you think it advisable to have a class of people in this community of whom an official document distinctly states that the law is absolutely powerless to deal with ?—I think it would be a crime to allow them to come here, even if paid higher wages than the Europeans. Chinese are bad for the community. 1668. I suppose you could not give us any information as to whether the exports of furniture from Victoria are mostly of Chinese workmanship or European? -No; I think there is a good deal of European stuff sent here, from Victoria especially. 1669. Mr. Bea'iichamp.] Is there any quantity of that Australian furniture imported into Christchurch which you say can be produced 200 per cent, cheaper in Victoria than in New Zealand, and furniture made of New Zealand wood ?—What information I have is that a traveller who introduced the samples produced sold two hundred suites between the Bluff and Christchurch. 1670. Can you give us any idea of what the same kind of suites made in Christchurch would cost ?—That would be rather hard, because they are a cheap and shoddy make, and really ought not to be on the market here. We do not make that class of goods.
A.—4
228
1671. Assuming we did make them, what could we produce them for as compared with the price at which they were sold here ?—Oh, I should say an average of 200 per cent, more —100 per cent., at any rate. 1672. Even after paying a duty and transit-charges they would be about 100 per cent, cheaper than if manufactured here ?■ —Yes. 1673. Mr. Luke.] Have they in Australia timber as suitable for cabinetmaking as we have here ? —I think not. 1674. Under federation, would not that be an element in your favour? — Hardly, seeing that New Zealand timber is now cheaper there than here. 1675. Do you think that will always exist ? —I think so, under the circumstances. They take larger shipments of it, and they have larger markets, and consequently it is cheaper there than here. 1676. Can you conceive of a condition of things occurring such as the concentration of manufactures in a centre, that becoming the centre for the distribution of all classes of goods, and that centre being in New Zealand?—l can conceive of there being such a centre, but not of its being in New Zealand. 1677. Have you any idea of the cost of such a suite as you have mentioned landing in Lyttleton ?—There is a suit here that cost £3 on the Sydney wharf, and the duty here would be 25' per cent. 1678. Then, a suite I saw in Wellington, covered with beautiful velvet, offered at £6 is perfectly correct?— Yes; that same suite in Genoa velvet and plush is £7 ; in tapestry and plush, £4 ss. 1679. Does that include duty ?—No; those are the prices on the Sydney wharf. There is duty to be added. 1680. Mr. Leys.] Is labour as well organized in New South Wales and Victoria as it is here ? —They find a difficulty under the Minimum Wage Bill to deal with the Chinese workers, who evade the conditions. 1681. Is there not a very strong organization of labour in Victoria?— Yes. 1682. How do you account for these conditions existing which you describe, in the face of that well-organized labour ? —ln large centres it has already been pointed out that it is very hard to effect an impression upon a trade ; and the Minimum Wage Bill is, I understand, evaded by the Chinamen, and also Europeans, by a number combining and running a factory, and so defeating the object of that measure. 1683. But this is European work I refer to, not Chinese work?—lt is not all Chinese work. The firm who supplied the goods are not manufacturers, but they supply the goods, and there is a profit made on them before they come into their hands. 1684. Do you not think that if New Zealand went into the Federation there would be a tendency to correct all that?—l think, on account of the small representation we should have, we would be unable to do that. 1685. Do you think it would be like a good man marrying a bad wife with a view to reforming her ?—I think we should have a bad time. 1686. Hon. Major Steward.] Do you know the number of bands employed in the furnituremaking industry in New Zealand ? —I could not say. 1687. The last return was for the census of 1895, and the total is given at 562, with a total wages of £27,000, and an approximate value of output of £100,000: do you know whether there has been any large increase upon these figures within the last five or six years ?—I think there are later figures in the labour reports. I know the number is advancing rapidly. Air. Millar: The last return shows 1,264 hands and 57 females. 1688. Hon.'the Chairman.] Is there anything you would like to add that you have not been questioned upon ? —Amongst my objections to the Federation are the difficulties of administering our Post and Telegraph Department and the railways from a distance. There is also the question of the amount that is to be deducted from the Customs towards the cost of Federal administration. I think we are already taxed high enough, and we are managing fairly well. Therefore I see no reason to add two more Houses of Parliament to those we already possess. I think federation would be detrimental to the interests of our community. Further, the election of the Senate for six years is not a democratic principle. 1689. We cannot interfere with that ?—But that is a reason why we should not join. 1690. Our own Legislative Council is seven years?— And some of us entirely object to that. John Lbe Scott examined. (No. 74.) 1691. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your occupation, Mr. Scott?—An engineer, and a manufacturing engineer. 1692. How long have you resided in New Zealand?— About thirty years. 1693. The transactions in your trade are considerable ?—Fairly so. We employ about 160 hands. 1694. How do you think your trade would be affected if New Zealand joined the Australian Commonwealth ? —Well, Ido not know that there would be any immediate result of any kin<l; but I am very largely of opinion that the ultimate results must be beneficial. 1695. On what ground do you base that opinion ?—I think that New Zealand is destined to become a large manufacturing country. It has every element which goes to make up a satisfactory and prosperous manufacturing country. We have a fine climate, large and valuable mineral deposits, and in contiguity to our manufacturing centres large natural motive- or water-powers. Christcburch is just now considering the bringing-in of water-power in the form of electric current for manufacturing purposes, and if we do that —and I think we shall do it within two years from now—we shall have our power in Christchurch very much more cheaply produced than it can be produced anywhere else in Australia.
229
A.—4
1696. And you think that would compensate you for the higher rate of wages paid in New Zealand?—l think that the increased output would be quite sufficient to compensate for that. We find the New Zealand workman is very much superior to the Australian workman, and his output is much higher than the output of the Australian workman. I have had some experience of them, and am quite competent to form an opinion. 1697. Is there any duty in the Australian Colonies against your manufactures?— Yes; in some colonies, but not in New South Wales. 1698. Do you export largely to New South Wales?— No. We have had overtures on several occasions from New South Wales to export cooking-ranges, which is one of our manufactures; and only to-day an Australian merchant asked us to give him prices, and allow him to sell. 1699. Then, you do not fear much competition from the large centres of population in Australia?—l do not think the large centres of Australia have anything whatever to do with it. It seems to me that the large centres of population are formed by the manufacturing industries, and not the manufacturing industries by the large centres of population. We have an instance of that in Kaiapoi, which has not a very large population, but which is a town which is kept in existence by its manufacturing industry. 1700. If New Zealand federated with Australia, do you think there would be sufficient inducement to you to open up a branch in any of the Australian capitals ?—I think it is very likely that we shall open a branch in Sydney. If we federated it wilLbe a branch for sale ; if we do not federate it will be a branch for manufacture. 1701. Do you think others in the same line of business would be induced to open there whether New Zealand federated or not ?—I am not in a position to say, but we do not need to mind anybody. 1702. How do you think it would affect other manufactures than your own?—l cannot speak intimately of others, but I cannot think it would detrimentally affect them. There may be such cases, as, for instance, those trades at which the Chinese are working long hours at ridiculously low wages; but, so far as I know—and I do know something about the work turned out by the Chinese in the furniture trade —their work is of a class that is not turned out here. 1703. Have you considered the matter of what contribution New Zealand would have to make towards the cost of the Federal Government ?—I know we are liable to have to pay 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue, but it is not at all likely that we shall.have to pay anything like that amount. 1704. But, supposing there is a lower protective tariff put on, is not New Zealand likely to lose a considerable portion of her Customs revenue ?—I suppose she can gain that revenue in some other form. It is all taken out of the people, and I do not see that it matters very much how it comes out of them. If the incidence of taxation has to be changed in consequence of a fall in revenue, ijj will all be in favour of the working-classes, because the Customs revenue is taken very largely from those classes, and any alteration in the taxation must fall on the wealthy classes. The most likely form would be to raise the land- and income-tax. lam in favour of federation. I have talked this matter over with other manufacturers. Our productions are very largely complemental to those of Australia, and it must benefit a country like New Zealand to have a wider market than its own narrow sphere. I look at the matter from a broad point of view, without going into particulars relating to the produce of the country, which I must confess I am not competent to do. 1705. You do not regard with any concern the fact of New Zealand parting with her independence as a colony ? —So far as that is concerned, it seems to me that there can only be one objection to it, and that is the objection that the Dutch have to our exercising any rule in South Africa—that is, that British politicians are not to be trusted. 1706. But it would not be a case of British politicians?—l am taking the colonial politician as being a counterpart of the British politician. 1707. That would apply equally to ourselves in New Zealand?— Equally. It seems to me that to make any objection of that kind means that we are to believe that the Australian politician is not to be trusted. Now, I have a very different opinion, and I think we, being the smaller country, are more likely to be treated magnanimously than otherwise. 1708. Mr. Leys.] Have the Australian industries any advantage in respect to cheaper iron and cheaper coal than the New Zealand ones ? —I do not think, at the point at which the manufactures are carried on, that they have any advantages; so far as iron is concerned, they have no advantages. We buy pig-iron here as cheaply as they can. lam weekly in receipt of quotations for pig-iron, and I cannot buy pig-iron either in Melbourne or Sydney. 1709. Is it at all likely, from your own knowledge, that large manufactories will be established near the coal of New South Wales ? —lt is no more likely than near the coal in New Zealand. Of course, wherever there are natural facilities, industries must arise, if industries are to arise at all. 1710. Under present conditions are these natural facilities as valuable, say, in Christchurch as they are in Sydney ?—I think I pointed out one very large natural facility we had here, and one which we hoped to avail ourselves very largely of in the immediate future : it is water-power, and we shall then be quite independent of fuel. 1711. That is a possibility?—lt is not a possibility, but an absolute certainty, so far as Christchurch is concerned. 1712. Can you mention any New Zealand manufacture that is exported to New South Wales under its free-trade tariff?—ln our own line of business I know there are agricultural implements, especially chaff-cutters. Hitherto we have only been able to satisfy local demands. 1713. Are they satisfied now, and are you seeking an export trade?—l think we are pretty well up to local requirements, and New Zealand manufacturers in our own line have just now
A.—4
230
reached the point at which they satisfy the local requirements. If we can increase the product of particular lines of manufacture we can afford to sell very much more cheaply, and that is one reason why I look forward to the possibility of exporting to Australia. 1714. Do you not think that would operate more in favour of the large centres of population ? — I do not think so, because their conditions are not as satisfactory as ours. 1715. Have you had any personal experience of labour in Victoria or New South Wales?—No ; only of the men who have come over here. I think they work the same number of hours, and the wages are about the same—if anything, a little higher there than here in my own particular line. 1716. The Government invited tenders for some railway-trucks some time ago, and it has been stated that the lowest tender was from Australia: can you explain that ?—The New Zealand engineers are full up of dredging machinery, and were not wanting work. I think we could do those trucks as cheaply as anybody, and it is just the sort of thing we like to have, but we did not tender because we were too busy. 1717. As an old colonist, do you think New Zealand would be more prosperous under the Commonwealth than it is under its own management ?—There has been a special reason to account for the exceedingly flourishing condition of the engineering trade during the past twelve months —that is, the tremendous number of dredging claims taken up. 1718. Do you think it would be likely to be more prosperous under a Commonwealth Government ? —1 certainly think it would, because we have all the advantages of climate, and with the prospect of a wider scope we must increase our prosperity. 1719. Do you know of any other colony in Australia which has been so prosperous during the last five years as New Zealand ?—I do not think that any of them have been so prosperous. 1720. How do you explain our exceptional prosperity ?■—l suppose good seasons and prices, and generally everything has been in our favour. 1721. Do you not think that the development of the farming industry and the liberal landlaws have tended to induce a stream of semi-prosperity in the colony ?—They have had something to do with it. The subdivision of the large estates has had something to do with it in Canterbury, and one thing I fear is that unless we go into federation we are going to lose very largely the benefit of this subdivision. After growing the things they need in Australia, we are going to shut the market against the small farmers we are now creating. 1722. You do not think there is any risk of injuring our prosperity by transferring a large part of the legislative power to a distant territory over which New Zealand can exercise very little influence ? —There is very little fear of that. My opinion is we are more likely to be treated magnanimously, and, looking at the legislation from a social point of view, I think it is pretty well known that my tendencies are rather in that direction than otherwise. I have always been in favour of the legislation of the present Government, but I think we are taking a selfish view of matters when we say that we wish to stand outside altogether, and allow Australians'to run their own course, rather than that we should go in with them and help to leaven the whole lump. 1723. If you say we shall be treated generously, have you found, in your New Zealand ex- , perience, that when the interests of one part of the colony have been involved as against the interests of another part of the colony the representatives who have represented that part of the colony will waive their advantages in favour of a more distant place ?—Not their advantages; but that they will not allow others to have equal rights is, I think, scarcely fair to assume, even in New Zealand—bad as we are. 1724. But is there not a continual struggle for these advantages between different parts of the colony?— And always will be. 1725. That being so, is it not likely that we, being outweighed, all but purely Australian interests will suffer—without attributing to the Australian politicians any very great depravity ? — I do not think so. 1726. Mr. Luke.] With reference to the levelling process with regard to hours of labour and rates of pay, do you think the levelling will be up or down?— The leaven has begun on the other side, and the majority of the people there are already leavened. They are forcing their leaders up at the present time, and the levelling seems to be up and not down. 1727. When you speak of being quite independent of fuel, when you have harnessed the Wailnakariri, do you wish to lead the Commission to suppose that you will be able to do without fuel ? —I mean for power purposes. 1728. Does it not often happen that in Melbourne and Sydney they get cheaper stuff for raw material than we do in New Zealand ? Do not large quantities of pig-iron come out from England as stiffening at a nominal freight, or no freight at all ?—I have bought pig-iron in New Zealand at £2 10s. a ton. We are in the habit of bringing out pig-iron regularly, and if ships do not bring pig-iron they must bring something else as stiffening, usually cement. 1729. We were told in Dunedin that the reverse was the case, and, having such a quantity of light freight to the large centres, vessels very frequently had to bring out pig-iron at no freight at all: is that so ? —I have never yet been able to buy pig-iron in Australia, and the freight is only 10s. a ton. 1730. I notice now it is £1 a ton? —I was given a price f.o.b. at 10s. ; but the price there will not permit of our buying it. 1731. You are aware of the mineral deposits at Parapara, and of the natural fluxes in the immediate vicinity : do you think there is a prospect, in view of those deposits, of developing the iron industry in New Zealand, and of Australia becoming a good market for it? — I am most decidedly of opinion that some day the wealthiest part of New Zealand will be the north-west corner of, this Island. I do not say in the immediate future, because I cannot look upon the iron industry with the optimistic eyes some people can. Pig-iron is produced so very cheaply in England, America, and Scotland that we cannot hope to produce it here and compete with those countries at their price.
231
A.—4
1732. Do you think, with the lower wages paid in Great Britain and the higher wages paid here, that it is within a reasonable scope to expect that we should be able to manufacture iron in this colony?— Not for some years, but we shall do it, no doubt. 1733. Did I understand you to say that the average Australian workman is as good as a New Zealand workman ?—He is not as good as the average New-Zealander. 1734. Mr. Beauchamp.] Has trade in your own line of business been rapidly increasing during the past few years ?—We have kept outside this dredging boom, and, so far as we are concerned in respect to general engineering, business has not been rapidly but steadily increasing. 1735. Not sufficiently rapid to warrant increasing the works to such an extent as to provide for the orders from the Government ?—We have been confined for want of ground, and that is one reason we had not taken any extra work. 1736. In going round we have found the same condition of affairs existing—all the engineers too full of orders to take all the business offering?— That has been so. 1737. Do you think many other manufacturers would follow your lead in establishing works in Sydney in the event of the colony federating?—We might expect that the boom will be over in the course of twelve months or two years, and it is a boom there is no doubt. 1738. It is business that has not come to stay ? —No ; not, I believe, to the extent it is being carried on at the present. I believe dredging has come to stay, but, so far as the manufacture of dredges is concerned, it has not come to stay to the extent that it is being engaged in at present. 1739. From your knowledge of New Zealand workmen, and their capacity to do their work, is it not likely that you would take some of your men over to Australia ?—Yes. 1740. So that in entering into that trade we should suffer by the transfer of our best men probably ?—We cannot go on manufacturing workmen for Australia ; our factories are not large enough. 1741. I understood you to say the factories created population, and not population factories ? —I said large centres of population. 1742. That being so, why should you think of establishing yourself near those large centres ?— One only thinks of Sydney when you speak of New South Wales, but if we go over there we might not establish ourselves in Sydney. I was thinking of New South Wales, and not particularly of Sydney. 1743. Mr. Millar.] I understand you to say that the local factories can compete with the demands ?—As far as general trade is concerned, the ironworks of the colony are equal to local demands. 1744. In respect to agricultural machinery, there is an importation to New Zealand exceeding £100,000 in value : how do you account for that ?—Those are things that cannot be manufactured here unless we have an import duty. 1745. What import duty do you think would be necessary to enable the bulk of this machinery to be manufactured in this colony ?—My views on protection are somewhat moderate. I believe in protective duties, but Ido not believe in anything like 33-J- or 40 per cent. I think our duties are very fair now. They are from 20 to 25 per. cent., and they give a slight advantage to the manufacturer, and give him the market, assuming that he does the work for about the same price. 1746. But, so far as your industry is concerned, there are only two items that come to about 25 per cent. ?—We do not touch agricultural implements. We are fairly well protected. 1747. If we had a protective duty here of 15 per cent., do you think the bulk of this £100,000 which is sent out of the colony could be retained in it ? —-A good deal of it could, and would, no doubt. 1748. And the shops are quite able to do the work, I presume ?—lf they were not able at once, they would very soon be. 1749. You think federation would be injurious to the farmers on account of the loss of their market: do you think that Australia is the only market that can be found for our produce, excluding London ?—lt appears to me that it is the proper market. It is the market which is contiguous, and it is the market we should look to. We ought to nurse it. 1750. You know by the Constitution there that the Federal Parliament retain very great powers to themselves in the way of legislation and finance ; you have been some years in the colony, and may have had experience of the old provincial days in Canterbury?— Yes. 1751. Do you think it is possible that within a few years, when the Federal Government have used up the powers granted to them, there will not be a tendency to abolish the States altogether, having first reduced them to practically the position of Eoad Boards ?—That is a matter we may have very different opinions upon. As I said at first, I can trust the Australian politician very much more readily than some people can. 1 may be looking upon them a little too favourably. 1752. It would not.altogether be a question of the politicians alone, it would have to be done by the people principally ?—Yes ; but the people very largely allow the politician in such circumstances to do as he likes. 1753. Do you think the people would feel inclined to pay all the cost of keeping up the State Parliament and State. Government without having the time to legislate upon any question of importance, or would you think it better to abolish all the States and have one Central Government ?—lt would very largely depend on what the Central Government was doing. If they could trust the Central Government, it would; but it would not suit New Zealand unless the Central Government happened to be doing what pleased the bulk of the people. 1754. In the event of such a thing taking place, do you think it would be possible for New Zealand to be looked after by Civil servants alone ?—No ; and it would not be wise that it should be. 1755. That would be the position ?—I cannot conceive such a contingency. 1756. Does not your experience show that the Government take advantage of every power they have ?—They do,
A.—4
232
1757. And I do not suppose the Federal Government would be any different ?—I do not know. 1758. But you would not consider that that would be in the interests of the colony ?—1 do not think it would. 1759. Looking at the matter all round, I understand you to think the advantages would be in favour of federation ?—I do. 1760. Mr. Boberts.] You are not at all afraid, Mr. Scott, of the competition of the Australian Colonies, assuming federation is carried out ? —Not at all. 1761. You think your own industry would be able to survive?—l am quite sure it would. 1762. Have you any general knowledge of the other industries of the colony?— Yes. 1763. Assuming that federation were not gone into, do you think it is possible for the industries of this colony to export to Australia?—l do not think it would. 1764. Would it be quite hopeless? —I think so. 1765. So that if there were no federation it would not be very long before the manufactures of New Zealand would be confined entirely to New Zealand?— That must of necessity be the case. Geokgb H. Whitcombe examined. (No. 75.) 1766. Hon. the Chairman.} What are you?— Managing director of Whitcombe and Tombs (Limited). 1767. What is their business? —Printers, publishers, manufacturing stationers, and fancy-box makers. 1768. They are in a large way of business in New Zealand?— Yes. 1769. Employing how many hands ? —Two hundred and fifty altogether in the service. 1770. How long have you resided in New Zealand yourself ? —Thirty years. 1771. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth ? —Yes, I have given it a certain amount of consideration. 1772. What is the conclusion you have arrived at? —I do not think it would be of any advantage to New Zealand at the present time, as far as I can see. It is a very difficult and complex question. 1773. Is your business protected in any way by the tariff?— Yes ; the manufacturing portion of it is to the extent of 25 per cent. 1774. What do you think the effect of intercolonial free-trade would be on it and similar business ?—The direct effect on our business would be that we would have to publish in the commercial capital —Sydney. I may say that we publish a very large number of school-books, and we at present supply some parts of Australia. We supply more particularly Victoria with some of our publications, and 1 think it would be incumbent upon us to have our printing-works in the commercial centre. 1775. Why? —Because we would be in a very much better position. 1776. What do you think the effect would be upon the printing and publishing trade generally ? —Oh, I do not think it would affect the printing trade purely one way or another, unless by concentrating the business to one centre. I suppose that would have an effect upon the general printing trade. At the present time there are machines being used in Sydney and Melbourne which it would not pay us to put down here, for the simple reason that we could not keep them going. There is a machine now being worked in both Melbourne and Sydney which will print eight to ten thousand envelopes an hour. Well, there are very few houses here that can give us an order for -25,000 envelopes and it would not pay us to work the machine unless we had orders of that dimension. Melbourne and Sydney can keep them going, and supply them at much less rates than we could. 1777. Are there any other disadvantages that would accrue? —The greatest disadvantage, I take it, is that in Sydney you have cheap freights and cheap coal, and you have a large population to work upon, and the conditions of labour are better than in this colony. 1778. Australia would have the advantage over New Zealand ?—I think there is no question about it. 1779. Have you formed any opinion as to what the effect would be upon other industries in the colony if New Zealand federated ?—I should think that, so far as the manufacturing industries are concerned, it must have a bad effect, for the reason that they could manufacture to better advantage it) the commercial capital. The same thing obtains at Home. So far as our trade is concerned, the publishers in Britain must be in London, although they send some of their printing and binding to Edinburgh; it pays them to do that. 1780. But other branches of industry outside of printing and publishing ?—I cannot say as to that. 1781. Are there any advantages that you think would be derived from federation?—l do not know that I can say there would be any advantages, on the whole. 1782. Have you considered the matter in any other light than as affecting your trade and industry?— Well, socially, I think it would be an advantage not to federate, for the simple reason that you will upset the present conditions under which we are working, which I think are the most favourable to the colony. 1783. You think they are satisfactory ?—I do, and I think it is better to leave well alone. 1784. The condition of the colony is fairly prosperous?—l consider that it is at the present time. 1785. Have you considered the political side of the question?— No. 1786. Mr. Roberts.] You mentioned that the cost of labour was cheaper in New South Wales than here: to what extent is that so?—I should think 15 per cent. 1787. Are the hours of labour longer there?— Yes ; nine hours to our eight here.
233
A.—4
1788. Mr. Millar.] I take it that you consider, owing to the larger factories in Australia, it would tend to draw the business there ?—Yes. 1789. Is there any printing-house in New Zealand now that would undertake the compiling of a directory ? —Yes. 1790. They are sufficiently equipped now to do it ?—Yes. 1791. Directories generally go Home to be printed?— No. The last one was printed at the Otago Daily Times office. The linotype has done away with the great cost. 1792. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is there much stationery imported from England?— Not as much as there used to be. 1793. There is a falling-off ?—We have two large bank contracts that used to be done entirely in England. The protection allowed us to compete with the English market successfully. 1794. I notice that some of the large insurance companies still get a quantity of their work over from Australia?— That is because the head offices are in Australia, and they work off so-much for the branches. 1795. The extra quantity enables them to get the stuff cheaper than if paying the duty here? —That is so. 1796. Mr. Luke.] Do you employ any great amount of juvenile labour?—A fairly large proportion—not so many boys as girls. 1797. Is there a larger proportion employed in Australia, do you think?—l went through some factories in Melbourne twelve months ago, and I was surprised to see the amount of juvenile labour employed in these establishments. 1798. Do you fear the centralisation in these large centres of Australia, and the employing of a larger percentage of juvenile labour than we do ? —I suppose improved machinery would be imported which would have the result of minimising to a great extent the manual labour employed. 1799. Developments are more likely to take place in the matter of machinery than in the condition they are labouring under? —Yes. 1800. Would that not give you as good a position as Melbourne and Sydney, seeing it is a question of machinery?—lt would not pay us to run the machines. 1801. I mean, and compete with Australia from here ?—=No ; the conditions are different. The rates are higher, and we have to import the raw material. 1802. Is there no prospect of developing the paper-making industry ? —When we double our population. 1803. Do the questions of distance and wages operate against federation, in your opinion ? —Yes. 1804. Mr. Leys.] Do you not think wages will be equalised?—l cannot say ; I think wages are on the upward grade now all over the world. 1805. Do you think the labour laws have caused the price of labour to be raised to too high a rate ?—No doubt they have raised the price of labour, and the conditions we work under are to some extent unsatisfactory ; but I think if the population were largely increased it would not materially affect our trade. 1806. Hon. the Chairman.] In the event of federation, do you think the tendency would be to attract population from New Zealand to Australia, or from Australia to New Zealand ? —I think the tendency would be for the population to go from New Zealand to Australia. James Arthur Feostick examined. (No. 76.) 1807. Hon. the Chairman.] You are president of the Boot-manufacturers' Association of New Zealand ?—Yes. 1808. Is that a large association? —I think it employs about 85 or 90 per cent, of the bootmakers of the country. 1809. Have they met to consider the question of federation in any way ?—No; but I have the opinion of the members individually. The members are resident in all parts of the colony, from Auckland to the Bluff. At our last meeting we did not discuss the question of federation, but I have been in correspondence with the members on the subject. 1810. Is the opinion an unanimous one ? —I do not remember one member expressing himself in favour of federation. 1811. What is the opinion? —Decidedly against it. 1812. Do you concur in that opinion yourself?—l do. 1813. On what grounds ?—That federation would mean to our trade practically annihilation. 1814. Why ? —Because it would absolutely be impossible for us to conform to the conditions of trade under which we work and compete with such centres of manufacture as Melbourne and Sydney. 1815. What advantages have they ?—They have great advantages now in the matter of wages, and also in the matter of specialisation of work, which is a very important thing. 1816. Could you tell me, roughly, the number employed in the bootmaking trade throughout New Zealand ?—I believe, about three thousand. 1817. Are they satisfied with the present state of affairs in New Zealand?—l never knew bootmakers to be satisfied. 1818. They are not satisfied ? —No. 1819. Is that because the trade is a declining one, or are they dissatisfied with the conditions under which they are working? —I think it would be better for the workmen themselves to answer that question. All I can say is that, from my knowledge of the trade, our conditions of work are better and the wages higher than in any country on earth. 1820. We have been told in another place that men are leaving the boot trade: is that so y I believe it is true; and I take it that one reason for that is the enormous increase in 30—A. 4.
234
A.—4
the importation of foreign-made boots and shoes. The increase of importation, to my mind, is alarming. 1821. Whe re are they principally from ?—The greatest competition we have to fear is from America, although the returns quoted by the Customs show the quantities to be higher on them from England. That is partly due to transhipment. 1822. Is the duty heavy?—22-J- per cent, ad valorem. 1823. In the event of federation, do you think that protection will be higher or lower than now ?—I should say lower. 1824. Then, competition from outside would be increased?— Certainly. The world would compete against us as well as Australia. I may say that the importations from Australia have increased, I think, about double in the last year or two. I know that a number of firms are directly represented and are doing business in New Zealand notwithstanding the ad valorem duty, which is 25 per cent, actually. New Zealand has imported during the last six years over four million and a half pairs of boots, and she has only a population of 750,000 people ; and I think that justifies me in saying that the position is alarming. 1825. Have you considered its effect on trade generally ? What about the tanning industry? —That is a kindred industry, and must suffer in respect to the lessened demand of the local factories. We are large consumers of New Zealand leather. 1826. Have you any opinion to offer as to how the manufactures would be affected in New Zealand—that is, other than the bootmaking industry ? —I feel I can speak authoritatively on the boot trade, but beyond that my views would only be a matter of opinion. I should think that the soap and candle and woollen industries would suffer materially from federation; but experts would be able to give a better opinion on that question. 1827. What do you think the effect of federation would be on the population of the colony ?— I think the industrial part of the population would be undoubtedly attracted to the large centres of manufacture in Australia, whereas some of the agricultural people from Australia might be drawn here. The tendency of federation would be to make New Zealand an agricultural country, not a manufacturing country. 1828. Mr. Leys.] Would not the destruction of our manufactures react adversely on the agricultural community : the country would grow less oats than now ; generally the market for produce would be lessened ?—The home market would undoubtedly be lessened. I think, in the interests of agriculturists as well as manufacturers, we should not federate. 1829. How do you account for" Australia being able to compete with New Zealand and pay their 25-per-cent. duty? —The greatest economy in manufacturing is to be obtained by specialisation. Our country is so small that we cannot specialise. We have in our factory only about 250 hands all told, and make 850 varieties of goods. I have in my , mind a factory in America that I visited where there were 1,400 hands employed, and they only turned out thirty varieties of articles in their trade. Where the work is specialised in that way the strictest economy can be observed. In certain classes of goods Victorian manufacturers do successfully compete with the New South Wales manufacturers, and I feel perfectly sure, from my knowledge of the trade, that with intercolonial free-trade the lower class of goods of New South Wales manufacture will be able to successfully compete with the lower class of goods made in Victoria, and that Victoria will export the better class of goods to New South Wales. New Zealand could not compete against Australia because of the scattered nature of our country. 1830. Generally, does each centre of population in New Zealand supply its own centre ? — No ; but each centre supplies its particular grade to a certain extent, but nothing to compare with the specialisation of Australia. The better class of goods are supplied by American and English manufacturers. I think that could be proved if the members of the Commission would visit the principal retail boot establishments. They would find that probably 75 per cent, of the stock in these shops was imported, and not of local manufacture. 1831. Do you think it desirable to increase the protection in order to shut out that trade ? — No ; not in the interests of the general community. I think we could maintain what we have by improved systems, and by the co-operation of the workmen, and should endeavour to make the 25 per cent, that we have answer all purposes. 1832. Do you think there is still room for expansion locally ?—With a population of 756,000, we imported 874,000 pairs of boots. I think that proves there is room for considerable expansion. I notice we imported into this country last year 118,000 pairs of boots in excess of one pair per head of the population. 1833. You think that specialising has more to do with Australia's competition than low wages ? —That has something to do with it; but it is an older country than ours in manufacturing, and I think it cannot be denied that the Australians have succeeded in producing a greater number of articles for a given price than we do at present. We should be able to do better under the protection the Customs tariff gives than we do at present. 1834. You think the Australian manufacturers are so much better developed that at the start our industry will be destroyed ?—Yes ; and I think we could not regain it. On my way to England eighteen months ago the largest bootmaker in Australia told me, in the course of a conversation, that in eighteen months, under free-trade, they would be able to wipe out every bootmaker in New Zealand. 1835. Supposing a large proportion of these three thousand bootmakers who are employed in New Zealand were thrown out of work by federation, do you think they would find employment in other lines of life ?—I do not think so. 1836. You think it is more likely they will drift over to Australia, where their work would be ? —Yes. 1837. New Zealand towns, you think, would decline under federation?— Yes; I think the manufacturing towns would.
235
A.—4
1838. Mr. Luke.] I understand that the bulk of the boots and shoes you refer to are infants' and small sizes ? —No ; small sizes and infants' are excluded. 1839. You say that, notwithstanding the diminishing manufacturing trade, the present duty is quite sufficient? —Yes, provided that we are permitted to adopt the most modern system. 1840. Is it not a fact that many manufacturers are more interested in importations than in manufacturing ?—That is due to circumstances. 1841. Is it due to the tastes of the people changing?—lt is due to the taste for boots at a certain price, and if we—that is, the manufacturers—do not supply them some one else will. 1842. Do you think that when the people are better acquainted with the wear of these boots and shoes they will come back to the local article ?—No; price for price, American goods are better than ours. 1843. Do you think that the leather put into these shoes is better than ours? —Yes ; we have not got the bark. We have nothing but wattle to depend'upon. That has a very quick tannage, and necessarily is not so good. 1844. Do you agree with the statement made in Dunedin that we stood on an equal footing, as far as tanning was concerned, with any other part of the world? —No. Wattle-bark-tanned leather is not so good as oak-tanned, and we have no oak-bark here. 1845. Mr. Beauchamp.] Oak-bark has to be imported ?—That is very bulky stuff. 1846. As to wages in the boot trade, they have been steadily increasing in the last few years, and the hours of labour have been shortening ?—No ; there has been all the time a tendency to advance the wages, but, as a matter of fact, the wages have not increased to any appreciable extent within the last few years. But our log, which is the basis of our operations, I think, taking an average, is about 40 to 50 per cent, higher than the Victoria or New South Wales log. Our minimum wage is 2s. less, but there is a tendency always to accommodate the amount of work performed to the value of the work based on the log prices. That is why I say a larger number of articles are produced in other places to a given price. 1847. Would lower remuneration enable us to compete with the Australian trade ?—I want the men to adapt themselves to the most modern ideas. We do not ask that the remuneration should be reduced. 1848. With regard to these American boots, could we not manufacture after the American fashion, so as to meet the popular taste ?—9O per cent, of the lasts we use are made in America, or the moulds are made in America, which is the same thing. 1849. You mentioned the candle industry : have you any knowledge of that trade ?—I am a director in the local candle company. 1850. Federation would have a serious effect upon that industry ?—I think it would. 1851. Has your business suffered appreciably by the last reduction in duty?—No, I think not. 1852. And with the present duty you could keep on ?—Yes, I think so. 1853. Mr. Millar.] Your competition from Victoria is not severe ?—You will find it has been increasing for the last few years. They never dreamt of sending boots to New Zealand five years ago from Victoria. 1854. New South Wales is a bigger competitor ? —They are competitors ; but I think the New South Wales exports are very largely transhipments principally on account of a firm of merchants in Sydney who do a large New Zealand business. 1855. The average wage of the bootmaker in New Zealand is higher than in Victoria, is it not ? —No ; but the greater number of articles produced makes the cost of production cheaper there than it is here. We do not ask that there should be an alteration in wages. 1856. Is there as much work put into the Victorian article as into the New Zealand?— Quite. 1857. You think it would be injurious to the trade if we federated ?—I have no hesitation in saying that. 1858. Have you any idea as to which is the largest factory in Victoria? —I should say that Marshall's is about the largest. There are several very large ones over there. 1859. Do you think that during the year 1900 the importation of American goods has increased to any extent ?—I am sure it has. 1860. Are you aware that the importations from the United Kingdom increased likewise ?— There can be no comparison between the importations from the two places, because a very large number of the American goods go across the Atlantic, and are forwarded here from London, and would be therefore considered as English exports. We do an indent trade in addition to the manufacturing, and I think I am well within the mark in saying that we have sold 90 per cent, of American women's boots to 10 per cent, of English. Now, quite a number of these come across the Atlantic. 1861. Under existing conditions you might be able to compete against the American trade, but if you threw this market open to the Australians you could not do it ?—That is so. 1862. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You say that modern methods would improve trade: what means do you suggest for adopting these modern methods ? —I think, a process of training the workmen. They have been trained under old English methods, which are costly, and the workmen do not take kindly to the new ideas. Quite a number of representative men have begun to see that there can be economy of production without sweating or taking less money as wages. 1863. These men will come in by degrees ? —'Yes ; but I think we would always be at a disadvantage with Melbourne and Sydney on account of specialisation. 1864. About tanning-bark : is there any bark in this country equal to oak ?—Not that I am aware of. 1865. Is wattle not a good bark ?—lt is a good bark. It is very astringent, and does not produce the same quality of leather as oak. As far as the boot industry is concerned, we have to import a large part of the leather from which boots are manufactured. 1866. Wattle grows very freely on poor land ? —-I know, from my knowledge of the trade, that wattle-tanned leathers are not as good as those tanned by oak-bark. 1867. Is there no local tanning-bark ? —Birch is a tanning-bark, but it is a very slow process.
236
A.—4,
1868. Do you know what proportion of wattle-bark is grown in New Zealand, and what is imported ? —I should think that probably 75 per cent, of the wattle-bark is imported. 1869. I suppose we may assume that tanning by any process is not what may be called an indigenous industry to New Zealand ?—We can produce certain leathers to advantage. In the classes for which birch-tanned and wattle-tanned curried leathers are used we practically have a monoply. 1870. Have you any return showing the proportion of imported boots to local-manufactured boots ? —No ; there are returns published from year to year as to the quantity of boots manufactured in the colony, but I have no idea how these returns are obtained, for we do not give them. 1871. We may assume that the manufactures and importations are about the same ?—Probably ; I do not think that is far out. 1872. By increasing the duty could you increase the local output ?—I do not think it is fair to the general public that the duty should be increased. I think the duty and transit-charges should be sufficient. 1873. You think you could not compete against Australia under any circumstances under federation ?—I feel perfectly sure of it. 1874. Then, is the boot industry of any value to New Zealand ?—There are three thousand persons employed at it. 1875. If you cannot compete against Australia under any circumstances, does it not show that it is an industry not suited to the country ?—I do not think so. 1876. I want you to view it from the general standpoint, and not from the standpoint of to-day: in the future shall we be able to compete ?—I do not think so. 1877. Never? —Not under anything approaching existing circumstances. 1878. Do you not think the equalising of the wage would enable you to compete ? —The risk would be very much too great to take. It would be a leap in the dark when taken under the assumption that the Australians would raise themselves up to our level. That is a ve.ry doubtful assumption. 1879. What size of a centre would enable you to manufacture ?—I think we would have to increase the population of this country fully three times. 1880. That, in the history of the Federation, would be only a short time ?—ln the meantime our industries would die. 1881. Does it not go to show that the industry is not natural if it cannot be maintained except under a heavy prohibitive tariff?—l do not think, under present conditions, the present protection is prohibitive. We have to take into consideration the hours of labour and wages in the Old Country. I think the protection should be sufficient to meet the difference between the conditions of labour here and the conditions of labour in the Old World. 1882. You say that the men are as good, and that the wages are not too high : surely, if the capitalists have a little bit of pluck they could get the machinery and compete ?—1 say that the men in New Zealand do not produce the same number of articles at a given price as they do in Australia. It is a well-known fact that when one's trade is lost it is very difficult to regain it. If federation became an accomplished fact, my firm would determine one of two things—close our factories and dispose of our plant, or take the plant over to Sydney. 1883. You think that high wages and better climate and shorter hours will not attract people to New Zealand to put up large factories, and enable you to compete ? —I do not think climate has anything to do with it. 1884. You think, then, that this never can be a great manufacturing country ?—Not under federation. 1885. Mr. Leys.] When you spoke of never having known bootmakers to be satisfied, did you refer to bootmakers as a class all the world over ?—Yes; I have been thirty odd years in the trade, and it is the same all over the world. 1886. It was no reflection, especially on New Zealand ?—Not a bit. 1887. Mr. Millar.] You have, I understand, prepared a table showing the importation of boots and shoes into New Zealand from 1888, the first year of the ad valorem duties, to March, 1900 ?—Yes ; the return is made upon the basis of population of the colony, exclusive of Natives, allowing one pair of dutiable goods per annum for each person, the increase or decrease being upon that basis. This is the table :—
Year. Dozens. D Pairs. Dutiable. hitiabl ile. Value. 'air. Population. Increase. Decrease. 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 45,285 37,705 47,127 57,812 57,069 59,999 52,450 55,975 62,173 69,445 63,224 72,883 543,420 452,460 565,524 693,744 684,828 719,988 629,400 671,700 746,076 833,340 758,688 874,596 £ 142,246 108,731 119,800 138,852 134,312 133,093 128,391 115,205 119,611 121,733 122,371 144,717 s. d. 5 3 4 9f 4 4 4 0 3 11 3 10£ 4 Of 3 5i 3 2i 2 llf 3 2£ 3 3f 607,380 616,052 625,508 634,058 650,433 672,265 686,128 698,706 714,162 729,056 743,463 756,506 59,686 34,395 47,723 63,960 163,592 59,984 56,728 27,006 31,914 104,284 15,225 118,090
237
A.—4.
4,513,800 pairs of dutiable goods were imported during the past six years, being an average of 752,300 as against an average population of 721,337, last year's importations being an increase on the average of the previous five years of 146,756 pairs. Hunky Overton examined. (No. 77.) 1889. Hon. the Chairman.) What are you, Mr. Overton ? —A farmer, residing near Christchurch. 1890. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—About forty-five years. lam farming a good deal of land. 1891. Have you given attention to the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ? —I have from a farmer's point of view. 1892. What is your opinion on the matter?— When I went Home two years ago I was struck, in going through Sydney and Melbourne, with the importance of this question, for I found that the stock in Victoria was in a good many cases starving for the want of food, which we could supply, but which the people there could not obtain owing to the heavy import duties in Victoria. I thought then that federation would be a grand thing for New Zealand, because our produce would go in free, and supply them with what they wanted. 1893. Are you still of that opinion?— Yes. I feel sure that these large cities, which are within a few hundred miles of us, would give us a splendid outlet for our products of many kinds ; and, speaking from a farmer's point of view, we could supply oats as well as root-crops with very great benefit. At present I look upon our suburban lands as comparatively worthless, for the reason that we have no market for the stuff those lands could produce. Such products as Swede turnips could be sent over to Australia with splendid results. One of the first developments of federation would be the establishment of a really good steam-service between here and Australia. We should then encourage a trade which cannot be touched under present circumstances. 1894. Are you aware whether Victoria supplies sufficient oats for her own requirements?— She takes a great many from New Zealand now. 1895. We have heard that the bulk of the oats shipped to Victoria are for transhipment: is that so ? —1 think so ; but they would take more for mixing purposes if there were no duty. 1896. But, if they are merely for transhipment, are not these markets open to New Zealand without federation ? Do you thmk, then, that there would be an increased market for agricultural produce in Australia if we federated?—l do, with the establishment of a better steam-service. As to other advantages, I think the time is not far distant when we shall be drawing very heavily on the splendid merino flocks of Australia to provide ourselves with ewes to breed the lambs which are so acceptable in London, and which no other country in the world can supply like we can, provided we get the ewes. The time will come when we can afford to breed the ewe that is required, seeing that the lamb is so valuable. 1897. How do you think manufacturers would be affected by federation am not qualified to speak on that point. 1898. What other advantages would federation give us ?—With the establishment of a steam.service such as I have mentioned, our climate and scenery would prove so attractive to the wealthy Australians that our tourist traffic would become as much to us as the American and foreign tourist traffic is to Great Britain and Ireland. 1899. How do you think we should be affected in the matter of government?—l am sorry to say, Mr. Chairman, that I do not feel qualified to speak on the matter further than that I notice we should lose the control of our posts, telegraphs, and railways. I think, as far as the railways are concerned, we should not lose anything, because I believe the Commonwealth would manage our railways better than we do ourselves. 1900. It is questionable whether we should lose our railways without our own consent ?—I believe the Commonwealth would study the producer more than the New Zealand Government does. 1901. Are there any other matters you would like to mention ? —Objection has been taken to federation on the grounds of our loss of social standing. I have had a great deal of experience of the Australian people, and I think it is a very great mistake for us to run away with the idea that we New-Zealanders are in any way superior to the Australians, for as a people we might feel proud of them ; and, in fact, many of our best business-men throughout New Zealand are Australians. Then, again, they have shown the same loyalty and have received the same amount of praise on the battlefield as our own people, so I think there would be nothing to fear from our federating with them. 1902. Mr. Roberts.'] You have spoken in favour of importing merino ewes from Australia: do you not think the cost would b& too great ?—No, not with such a steam-service as I anticipate would be started. Some farmers have endeavoured to import them this year, but with the present steam-service they found it impracticable. 1903. Do you know what the charge from Wellington to Lyttelton is at present for sheep ?— About 3s. per head, including a good deal of railage. 1904. What could you reasonably expect the freight to be from Sydney ?—Of course, the inland freight would be the most serious thing. Ido not think it would be very much more than from Wellington here. 1905. Could you not reasonably expect it to be double, which would be a sufficient handicap against importing anything in the shape of merino ewes ? —Some of our people have been trying it this year, but under present circumstances could not succeed. 1906. Mr. Millar.] You said that most of our suburban lands were worthless : what do you include in that ?—I mean the lands really have become too high-priced to enable us to produce marketable goods, such as fat lambs and wool.
A.—4
238
1907. Is it not a fact that the bulk of that land now is fully employed?—No; a lot of it is lying comparatively idle through there being no market for the goods. 1908. That may be round Christchurch ?—lt is so in a great many other places throughout New Zealand. 1909. What sort of steam-service do you expect we would get under federation ?—A good deal better and more roomy one than we have at present, and a more frequent service than a weekly one, for the trade would necessitate it. 1910. Why do you think it would necessitate a better trade, seeing that you have got a freetrade market in Sydney all the time ?—Melbourne is shut against us, and the trade to Sydney alone does not warrant a more frequent service. 1911. But, granted all the markets were open to-morrow, you would not ship to Sydney and tranship from Sydney to Melbourne ? —No. 1912. Then, if we have now a service which meets our own requirements with Sydney, how do you anticipate you would require a better service ? — Because under federation we would also have Melbourne and other ports open. 1913. That would require a separate service ?—Perhaps. 1914. Are you aware that there is such a thing as a shipowners' federation, and they do not go into one anothers , trade ? —I know that. 1915. You have a weekly service pretty well to Melbourne now, but very little trade there : do you not think that, seeing that the present class of boats had kept your market open under freetrade, the same class of boats would do ?—I do not disparage the present class of boats, or say they would not do; but we want cheaper freights in spite of the federation of shipping companies, and we want a faster service. 1916. Do you think the Victorian market, if open, would be a larger market than New South Wales?— Melbourne is a marvellous place. It is a second London, and we can hardly realise what it would mean to us. 1917. Seeing that New South Wales, with a larger population and free-trade, has a service which has met all our requirements, it does not look as if you would require a better service for Victoria? —While it has in a way met our requirements, it has not encouraged trade as one would wish, and at times we have had great difficulties in getting our stuff across. It has actually been shut out even at the price they chose to charge. 1918. But has not that been the result t>f a big drought on the other side, which has caused high prices for produce, and caused large quantities to be shipped?—No; I have known stock shut out in ordinary times, and also agricultural machinery. 1919. But your conception of a better steam-service is that the Commonwealth Parliament would take up the question of running vessels of their own ?—I was not anticipating that. I think the business alone would prove an incentive to private owners. 1920. Do you anticipate any greater incentive so far as New South Wales is concerned, seeing that you have had nothing in the road there at all ?-'-If Victoria were thrown open it would be a very great incentive. 1921. You would have to ship direct to Victoria? —We might do that. 1922. .How much lower freight do you think it would be possible to carry to Australia at?— I am not qualified to answer that question. 1923. Touching the tourist traffic, you said you anticipated a large increase in that traffic?— Yes. 1924. What does it cost a Victorian to come down to New Zealand now : is it not about £8 ?—-It is very little; but that is not the point. They have to put up with a great deal of discomfort on the present line of steamers, and people complain most bitterly of it. lam not blaming the Union Company. 1925. What is the inconvenience from ?—Overcrowding. 1926. Does it often happen that a boat from Melbourne is overcrowded?—lt is from Sydney. 1927. Then, it is not a question of expense at all that prevents tourists coming here ?—Not so much tha,t as the matter of time and convenience. 1928. The cheapening of freights would be no benefit so far as Victoria is concerned, because you would admit that the number of Victorians who could afford to come over to New Zealand would be very limited ?—I could not admit that. I think we in New Zealand have little idea of the wealth of the Australians. 1929. Is the wealth as well distributed in Australia as it is in New Zealand ?—We have, as in all cases, a good deal of poverty in such cities as Melbourne and Sydney, but the pastoral people of Australia are very wealthy and very high-class people. 1930. You said you thought the Federal Government would run the railways more in the interests of producers than New Zealand is doing at present ?—I said I did not think we should lose very much, because I have the impression that the present railways in Australia are run more to the advantage of the producers than the New Zealand railways. 1931. Have you ever compared the rates?— Yes. 1932. How do the Australian rates compare with New Zealand rates ?—Very favourably, especially with regard to frozen meat, which is the backbone of this colony. 1933. Are you aware that some two years ago there was a concession of nearly £80,000, as far as freights were concerned, on our railways, and I suppose you know of the announced intention of the Government that all over 3 per cent, earned by the railways is to be given back to the users of the railways ? —I did hear something of that, but it is only in the wind. 1934. Do you think the Federal Government would do more than that ?—I really think the Federal Government would run them more to the advantage of the producer, and develop the country more than we do.
239
A.—4
1935. They are only earning £3 Bs. now ? —I know that. I believe a good deal in what Sir Julius Vogel did with reference to our railways—namely, that we should use them more for the development of the country than to get a high rate.of interest out of them. 1936. I presume you would admit that the railways should earn at least 3 per cent, to enable them to pay the interest ?—I should like them to do so. 1937. So that, owing to the increase of trade, we find ourselves greatly improving our position, and giving that surplus back to the consumers, so that the earnings should not exceed 3 per cent. ? —That would be very nice. 1938. I do not suppose you expect the Federal Parliament to do any more ?—We have not got the refund yet. 1939. Yes ; last year you got £80,000. If the railways were run to earn less than 3 per cent., how would you propose to make up loss of revenue ? —I have not looked into this matter from a political point of view. I leave that for our politicians. I think the development of trade would overcome any deficiencies in the revenue. 1940. Mr. Beauchamp.] With a view to developing the trade of our railways, is it not a fact that for some years past the rates of goods and passengers have been steadily decreasing?— That is so. 1941. And would you look to a still further concession in the future under the Federal Government than under the present condition of things?—l think we might reasonably expect further concessions of incentives to the development of trade. 1942. You have travelled a good deal?— Yes. 1943. You would be able to compare the steamers of the Huddart-Parker and the Union Company with the passenger-boats in other parts of the world : how do they compare ? —I am a proud admirer of the Union steam-service. I consider it a very excellent service, and it compares favourably with anything I have seen. 1944. And under the Federal Government you would expect a swifter service?— Yes; and more boats like their best ones. 1945. To have a swifter service, of course, would cost more? —We should have an increase of trade to pay for it. 1946. Do you think we should get as much passenger traffic as would warrant the company lowering the present rates for produce ?—I think so. 1947. Our experience with regard to the trade between here and the Home-country has been slightly different, because the steamers which are now trading between New Zealand and England are, if anything, slower than they were some two years ago, but the rates on produce are cheaper. The tendency seems to be to provide slower boats and cheaper rates for the carriage of produce ? —That is so ; but while they are doing that they are loosing the passenger traffic. 1948. That may be; but I think they are conferring a greater benefit on the farmer by quoting cheaper rates for the carriage of produce ? —That is my view of it. I think we should get larger steamers between here and Australia, and increase the speed. Larger steamers would enable them to carry goods at a lower rate. 1949. So far as the steam-service between here and the United Kingdom is concerned, as a witness of it, are you satisfied with that service ?—For carrying frozen meat, yes ; but I do not think it is liked as a passenger service. 1950. Are you of opinion that our rates between here and Great Britain are lower or higher than those between Australia and Great Britain ?—Ours are considerably higher. 1951. Do you speak from your own knowledge, because a little while ago I saw that the rate on wool from Australia to the United Kingdom was -Jd., while we were quoting fd, ?—As a rule, our rates have been considerably higher. 1952. Of your own knowledge, can you say that the rates on frozen mutton and wool, generally speaking, are lower from Australia than from New Zealand to the United Kingdom ?—I know that at times wool has been sent from here to Australia to be shipped Home, and it has been shipped at an appreciable saving. 1953. For shipment" by steamer or sailing-vessel?— Both. 1954. You referred to the high quality of the merino sheep in Australia, and of the product of the merino ewes: is it not a fact that our Canterbury lamb realises a higher figure in London than the Australian lamb?— Undoubtedly it does. 1955. But the product of the ewe in Australia does not compare with the product of the same ewe in New Zealand ?—lt is a question of money—if we could get that ewe here at a reasonable rate she would produce a lamb which would be the very thing we want. 1956. With regard to the suburban lands, we were told yesterday by a small farmer, whom you would describe, I think, as a " cockatoo," that there are many suburban lands realising £200 to £250 per acre : under present conditions surely these suburban lands must be highly profitable to crop?—l am sorry to say that my opinion is that they are not, and that they are lying, speaking for Christchurch, comparatively waste. 1957. Have you any experience of the North Island?— Yes. 1958. Some suburban lands in the North Island I know of are realising £30 per acre for dairy farms, and the farmers are doing extremely well off the land at that figure : are not the dairy farmers in this district doing equally well ?—For dairy purposes you can do fairly well at £30 per acre, but it is getting pretty high. Mr. Beauchamp : I should not like it to go into evidence that our suburban lands are, as you describe, worthless. That is why I put these questions. 1959. Mr. Luke.] Have you considered the question of the extra cost of government under federation ?—No. 1960. Do you think the extra cost of government would be a considerable amount, and that if we federated we should not be paying too much for it ? —I do not think so.
A.—4
240
1961. One of the first acts of the first meeting of the Federal Cabinet is to double the salary of Lord Hopetoun : is not that rather an indication that the cost of government would be very costly? —No; I take it as an indication that they are determined to have the best man, and the best man you can get is cheap at his price. 1962. But, generally speaking, we are fairly economical, I think, in New Zealand ? —I cannot agree with you. 1963. You think the tendency would not be, under federation, to build up a costly and expensive form of government ?—I do not think so. 1964. Is not the cost of government in all the colonies on the up-grade ?—Certainly it is in New Zealand. 1965. Is there not a tendency on the part of the Government to take over functions and increase administration?—l think there is. In small places like this the tendency seems even more to increase these functions than probably it would be if we were drawn into the Federation. 1966. Mr. Leys.] Do you think we could export fruit to Australia?—l do not think so. I think we might do more to London. 1967. Fruit is an industry suited to the small farmers?— Yes. 1968. At present we are importing from Australia fruit to the value of £15,000, paying on it Id. and per pound : if these duties were removed, would not our small holders suffer very seriously from further Australian importation ?—I do not think so; but it is one of the scandals in New Zealand that the fruit industry is so much neglected. But if we had a market for the root-crops that could be grown in connection with fruit, people would be encouraged to go into this industry more than they can do for fruit alone. 1969. Would not the removal of the protection on Australian fruit prove injurious to our fruitgrowers ? —I think not, unless perhaps on some fruits which might be grown in certain parts of the North Island. 1970. You express an opinion that federation would benefit the small settlers, and that is one item in which they would get no benefit, but might suffer loss?— Fruit cannot be grown alone, and I noticed in the best orchards in the Old Country that they go in for a thorough system of growing other things in connection with fruit, which we cannot afford to grow here for want of a market. 1971. Do you think the steam-service to Australia cannot be improved without federation ?— Well, without federation, I take it that Australia will become a dead-letter to us. 1972. Do you consider that under federation we should ship a larger amount to Australia than Australia is likely to ship back to New Zealand ? —I think so. We should be very heavy exporters of produce, especially barley and feeding-stuffs, but I am not qualified to speak with regard to manufactures. 1973. As a farmer of experience, is the local market of more value to the farmers than any distant market ? —The market at the farmer's door is the most desirable one. 1974. If previous witnesses have stated that if the industrial population of this colony were driven to Australia the small farmers and the large farmers would suffer, what would be your opinion ?—I do not imagine they would be driven to Australia. There is no danger of that, if we get cheaper means of communication, and cheaper power, as we anticipate, from electricity. If we get those, our manufacturers would be able to stand in spite of competition, and probably grow. 1975. But if the manufacturers are right, and you are mistaken, would the colony gain or suffer?—lt would not matter so long as we had a market; and if London, with its six millions of inhabitants, were at our doors, as Australia would be under federation, our small farmers would not suffer seriously.. 1976. Then, if the Australian market were closed against you, you would still have some other market open to you?—We have London to fall back upon. 1977. What is your best market for wheat—New Zealand to an outside market ?--That is a very difficult question, because we really have no market, either in New Zealand or at Home. We do not know what to do with it. 1978. If there were intercolonial free-trade, do you think it likely that the Australian flour would come in and supply the North Island markets to the detriment of Canterbury wheat and flour ? —I would not like to say to the detriment of our flour, but there is no doubt it would come in and supply the North Island. That would be better than Canterbury growing wheat at less than it costs to produce. With a plentiful supply of breeding-stock, we could turn our attention more to frozen meat, which is more profitable than wheat-growing. 1979. Assuming your statement to be correct, you would get no market for frozen meat in Australia ?—We have no reason to expect that. 1980. Then, it comes to this : that your best market is in England?—-At present. 1981. Well, in that case the loss of this Australian market would not be very serious?—lt would not affect the frozen-meat trade. 1982. You mentioned vegetables as a possible export: do you know that we only exported vegetables to the value of £104 in a year, and we import about as much as that from Australia ?— I can quite understand that, for the same reason that there is no encouragement given to the trade. Swede turnips are sold in Sydney at such enormous prices that I would not dare to quote them. We could export many things of that kind. 1983. Why not export them now? —We have not the facilities for doing so. If you were to ship you would soon find how many difficulties there are in the way. 1984. You want better steamers for the carriage of vegetables ? —I want a better service of steamers, which will be good enough for both passengers and produce. 1985. With regard to railways, you think they would be managed more in the interests of the farmers under the Federal Government: do you know the New South Wales railways are earning 3-62 per cent., while our Government are returning to the farmer all over 3 per cent. ?—I do not care what they are earning. It is what inducement is given to the farmer to use them.
241
A.—4
1986. Does not our policy of returning all over 3 per cent, to users look as if our Government were less liberal than the New South Wales Government ?—lt is a fact that the New South Wales Government is meeting the producer more liberally than we are. 1987. I have no knowledge of that, have you?—l am thinking now of the frozen-meat trade, which is our chief stay, and the backbone of the colony. I have also compared the rates charged on the two railways, and I do not think it matters what rate of interest the railways are paying so long as they answer the ends of their construction; but, in spite of the concessions the Government have made here, we cannot be blind to the fact that they do not encourage traffic in any shape or form. 1988. Hon. Major Steward.} Do you think that the faster steam-services you contemplated would be established between the two countries if we federated would be established by the companies now running between here and Australia or by the Commonwealth Government? —I think it would be estabished by the enterprising company we have at present —the Union Company. 1989. If that is so, do you think that the moment New Zealand went into the Commonwealth the existing company would be so strongly impressed with your view of the case that they would immediately alter their time-tables and class of vessels with a view to reaping advantages that would follow ?—They would directly they felt justified in doing so. 1990. Then, until the trade increased sufficiently to justify them going in for further expenditure, you do not think they would contemplate going into it ?—I have no doubt they would contemplate it at once, but they are not going to rush headlong into building a number of steamers until they feel their way. In the meantime they might ask for a subsidy. 1991. Would the mere fact of New Zealand becoming part of the Commonwealth induce more people to travel between Australia and New Zealand ?—I think it would have the tendency for the Australians to travel a little more. 1992. Supposing a man wants to see the scenery in New Zealand, would he be induced to come more by the fact that we were in the Federation than otherwise ?—I think it would help him a little. 1993. Do you not think that what would more likely happen is that, whether we go into the Federation or not, if there is any prospect of its paying to put on more steamers the companies will carry out that policy ?—Without federation I cannot see that there is any inducement to do so. 1994. The difference you have mentioned in regard to the frozen meat from New Zealand and from Australia : does it not arise from the fact that the meat-factories in Australia are a long way from the port, whereas ours are near to the ports ?—Yes. Chaeles Aethue Lees examined. (No. 78.) 1995. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—A grain merchant in Christchurch. 1996. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Thirty-five years. 1997. Are you acquainted with Australia?—l have lived there, and been there frequently. 1998. Have you studied the federation question?— Yes, a good deal. 1999. Will you favour the Commission with your opinions in the matter?—ln the first place, I believe in free-trade, and I look on federation as the nearest approach we can get to free-trade in the meantime. Being connected with the agricultural pursuits of the colony, I have naturally been led to consider what would be the results to the farmers of New Zealand if New Zealand does not federate, and we have had a very forcible example as to what may happen to the grain-growing farmers in New Zealand in the history of Victoria. When Victoria put on its heavy duties it made such a crisis amongst the farming community of Otago and Southland—which I dare say Mr. Roberts will be able to tell you more about than I can —that they were all in a very bad way there after the duties for Victoria were put on. Previous to that duty being put on in Victoria, I do not remember a single instance where oats were sold by a farmer at less than Is. 6d. per bushel delivered at the station, equal to Is. 9d. and Is. 10d. f.0.b.; and barley from 3s. to 3s. 6d. Since the duty has been put on in Victoria oats have very often been sold at 10d. per bushel, and barley at Is. 9d. to 2s. It has been said by several witnesses, both in their evidence and cross-examination, that if Australia did shut us out we would have just as good markets outside. Well, there is no market so good to the farmer as his nearest market. He can, if he likes, take his whole business into his own hands, and be independent of the middleman altogether, and realise it altogether direct to the consumer. But when the farmer has to contend with a market at the other side of the globe—eight, ten, or thirteen thousand miles away—his produce must necessarily go through several hands, with the result that he does not get the same amount for the produce as if he was dealing with the market near at hand. You had given to you by a late witness a good many figures as regards the produce exported to Australia. I do not need to refer to them all, but I would add what I have to say to his, and say that, were we to be federated with Australia, and have the free market for all our produce, the farmers here would naturally turn their attention to things we could grow better than they could in Australia. Australia, it is admitted, could grow better wheat— that is to say, the flour from that wheat will make more loaves per sack than the same weight of flour made from New Zealand wheat, and therefore is worth more money. Naturally, we would grow a certain amount of wheat here, but the Australian flour would have a certain sale in New Zealand. But that would be more than counterbalanced by us being able to export those things which we, by our moister and more productive climate, can grow at very much less cost than they can there. In Victoria there is a duty of 3s. per cental on oats, that is equal to Is. 3d. per bushel. Oats are worth only the amount of meal that a bushel will go. In London oats are sold at so-much per quarter, according to the weight of the quarter —that is to say, if it is a high class a higher price will be given for it than for a low class. Australia, owing to its climate, cannot grow tljese good oats, and the large millers of Victoria have to import from New Zealand heavy 31—A. 4.
A.—4
242
oats to make their oatmeal. It is made in bond and distributed. That industry will come to New Zealand if we federated and had free-trade with Australia. It is cheaper to export oatmeal than to export oats. The bulk of the oats grown in Victoria now they had to search pretty well all over the world for to suit their climate. It is thick-skinned, and does not give a large quantity of meal. We would have the whole of that trade. lam quite sure that within two years of federation being accomplished New Zealand would do the oat-growing of Victoria, and, except in isolated places, it would be a thing of the past. As has been already said, wheat-growing in New Zealand has not been a great success financially, and the farmers would naturally grow oats, if they could find a profitable market, in the place of wheat. As regards the frozen-meat question, it is a well-known fact amongst growers of Canterbury lambs that they cannot get these to perfection without proper crop rotation—that is to say, they must have young grass for these lambs in order to come to a state of excellence, and the farmer repays himself for his labour in turning up and ploughing grass lands, and taking a crop out of it, and sowing it down again to grass. He pays himself by the price he gets for his oats. If he were only able to export his oats to the United Kingdom, that would be a very large handicap on the cost of producing his lambs. I think, from this point of view of the frozen-meat question, that it would pay New Zealand to federate with the other States of Australia. Of course, I am aware that a great many of the manufacturers of New Zealand are against it. Well am I aware that if anything fresh has been suggested to the manufacturers in New Zealand they always object to it. When the Government set up the Conciliation Board they were up in arms against it, and now they are quite satisfied with it. I have heard some of the evidence, and have read other parts of it, and I do not think, myself, that the industries of New Zealand would suffer very much. But we want to look at federation not from one point of view only, but from the view of the greater good to the majority. I understand that the factory-hands in New Zealand amount to something under forty thousand workers. Well, when you deduct from those the very large numbers that are employed in the frozen-meat factories, in the dairy factories, in the factories that would not in any way be affected by federation, you bring down the number probably to something like twenty-five thousand people. Now, the question is, Is New Zealand to put aside her possible good—and, in my opinion, most probable good—by joining the States for the sake of a slight inconvenience that might be experienced by some twenty-five thousand workers and their families ? I hold that New Zealand has everything to gain and, in my opinion, very little to lose by joining the Commonwealth. 2000. What colonies do you think New Zealand would find a market for for her produce ?— Every one of the colonies. I get occasional orders from Western Australia for oats, for hams and bacon, cheese and butter. These would increase very much if we had not to pay the duty. It is a well-recognised fact that cereals which grow luxuriously in temperate climates, and products from the food of these cereals, can be exported to any country having a semi-tropical climate. With South Australia there used to be a large business done. I can remember loading vessel after vessel when in Dunedin with barley for South Australia,' but the duty completely stopped that trade. The same in oats and in a larger degree was the case with Victoria. I have loaded ■vessels for Victoria before the duty was put on, some seven or eight cargoes of nothing else but oats in a month. 2001. Is it not a fact that Victoria now produces all she requires agriculturally ?—-I do not think so. 2002. Is not Victoria an exporter of oats and agricultural produce?— She exported oats because of the high price, owing to the South African War; but the Southland farmers and a great many Canterbury, farmers can grow oats and put them on the market at Is. sd. per bushel delivered at the port. It costs 2d. per bushel when sent in one vessel—that is, they are landed in Melbourne at Is. 7d. per bushel. Their lowest price of oats—and it is a very low price for Victoria —is Is. BJd. a bushel; and they are oats—hungry-looking oats. Well, if we could supply our oats at Melbourne at Is. Bd. we would supply all their requirements in that line. 2003. Do you think that growing wheat in New Zealand is profitable to farmers ?—Growing wheat is to a certain extent a speculation. Farmers grow it for two or three years in succession, hoping to get a decent price out of it; then they give it up and go in for something they can find a market for, or feed for their sheep. 2004. Where is barley exported to ?—There is not much barley exported. There have been occasional shipments during the last year—some to Queensland, and lately one to Victoria. 2005. Can they not grow barley, then, in Queensland or Victoria?— Not in Queensland, except up in the mountains, at an altitude of 5,000 ft., and in Victoria not sufficient to supply requirements. 2006. Have you considered the evidence we have had as to what the loss of revenue to New Zealand would be in the event of federation being brought about ?—Well, Ido not know. Nobody knows that. I understand that the Federal Government would have a right to collect a maximum of 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue; but it would not require anything like that sum. 2007. What do you think the loss of revenue to the colony through intercolonial free-trade would be ?—I cannot say that I have given great attention to that point. 2008. Sir John Hall said he had seen figures estimating it to be £500,000 loss in revenue to this colony through federation ?—I should doubt it. 2009. Supposing the amount was £250,000 ? —I think it would be made up three times over by the enhanced prosperity of the farming community. 2010. Is there any other portion of the community you think would prosper besides the farmer?—We all live by the land ; and if New Zealand at the present time is maintaining an industrial population of 120,000 they are living, and their customers are living, by those who live on the land, or by the results of the land ; and if the land-workers are in a prosperous state, then the manufacturers and shopkeepers all benefit by it.
243
A.—4
2011. Are there any other advantages which you think would accrue from federation?—l was listening to Mr. Overton's address about steam-services. He did not make the point quite clear. In the case of a steamer or a sailing-vessel the owners arrange their freight on what it costs to take the vessel to a certain point and bring it hack again. At the present moment, when our steamers go across to Sydney and Melbourne, they have nothing to bring back again except coal and sugar, &c. ; but, were our vessels filled with oats and other products of a temperate climate, going over to those places and coming back with freights of flour, and fruits which we cannot grow —such as grapes, pines, &c.—and which we are unable to get here apart from any duty, naturally there would be a more frequent service, and at the same time, by reason of there being return freights, the freights would be cheaper. 2012. Are there disadvantages which occur to you as being likely to arise through federation ? —I thmk a great many people look at it from a sentimental point of view. They would not like to lose their identity and the kudos of being an independent country by becoming part of Australia. I think New Zealand, by reason of its configuration and its climate, ranging from semi-tropical down to low temperate, will always take a leading part in the history of the Australasian Colonies. 2013. Mr. Leys.] You contemplate there would be a large importation of flour and fruits?— Yes. 2014. You are assuming that the farmers lose the local market to a large extent in flour and fruit ?—They would not lose it in fruit, because these are fruits which we do not grow. 2015. If it comes in it will displace some other fruit, because the people will only eat a certain amount of fruit ? —That is not so ; the cheaper fruit is the more fruit people will eat. 2016. Assuming that flour and fruits are brought in from Australia, displacing or adding to the expenditure of this country on those items, and we in return send a larger amount of oats and potatoes, in what way would the farming-people be enriched ?—Because the preponderance exported would be in favour of New Zealand. 2017. Is that a mere assumption?—l have not gone into the matter and taken out the actual figures, but I know from what we used to do, and the tremendous quantities of feeding-stuffs that used to come into Australia. It was not a question of a few tons of flour going in. Ido not say that if New Zealand was to lose all its flour trade and all its wheat trade it would be nothing, but what I say is that a certain amount of Australian flour would come in for mixing. 2018. I suppose, for the North Island it would be as cheap to import from Sydney as from Lyttelton ?—I do not think that we shall find New South Wales much of a wheat-producer for long. 2018 a. This year they produced 13,000,000 bushels of wheat as against 8,000,000 in New Zealand. It look's like a wheat-producing country ?—But the people in Sydney—managers of large agricultural firms there —tell me that the farmers there are not wedded to it, as it is too risky because of the droughts. 2019. Is it not a fact that the farmers in New Zealand have to study the domestic market for something like 5,000,000 bushels of wheat ?—Yes, that is so, I believe. 2020. Would not the farmers suffer if that domestic market is interfered with not only by the loss through the flour coming in, but by the extra competition forcing down their prices ?—No ; we can grow wheat cheaper than they can in Australia. We can grow 30 to 60 bushels to the acre, and we need not fear. 2021. You think the prices will be regulated by the Home market ? —Yes. 2022. You consider that the flour-millers would be more affected than the farmers ?—The flour-millers in the extreme North Island would feel the competition more than they would anywhere else, because a vessel coming round from Victoria, via Sydney, to Auckland would naturally bring flour there. There would always be a certain amount of New Zealand flour used. 2023. If the North Island consumes Victorian flour to the detriment of the flour made from Southland wheat, would not the Southland men be at a disadvantage?— The millers would, because the farmers would grow more oats. 2024. With regard to the Australian market, do you not think that the growth of Southland in dairy production has had quite as much to do with the falling-off in our exports as the duty ? — Certainly not. 2025. Is not our average for wheat as much higher per acre as our average yield of oats per acre is higher than the Victorian yield ? —With the difference, I suppose, that Victoria does not seem to be able to grow the oat that is required for food purposes. They grow an oat that has no body in it. 2026. Is not Tasmania as good an oat-growing country as New Zealand?—l should say that some parts of Tasmania would grow oats as well as New Zealand. 2027. You do not think that New Zealand would have a monopoly of the oat business ?—No; I know Tasmania at the present moment competes with us in the oat trade, and with New South Wales, but our oats are preferred, and we can generally put them in a little cheaper. 2028. If you fear so much as you appear to do the loss of this Australian market to New Zealand, how do you account for the fact that we sent in 1899 produce to the value of £412,000 to Victoria and the other protected colonies ?—The bulk of that to Victoria was oats for transhipment to the Cape and other places. Something like half a million sacks of oats ordered by the War Office went into Victoria simply for freight purposes. 2029. Would that trade be interfered with in any way by our not federating? —No; but I do not reckon that the South African grain trade would be worth anything in three years' time. They will be able to grow their own oats and wheat there. 2030. You have nothing to indicate that this trade amounting to £412,000 would be interfered with ?—-No; it is nearly all transhipment.
244
A.—4
2031. Have you any knowledge of the export business of our produce per New South Wales? Have you any idea of what they ship to Manila and South Africa and other countries of this produce which we send to them ?—A good deal. 2032. Of the amount which goes into New South Wales (£652,000), you think a very large portion of it is transhipment? —Not a large portion. 2033. Do you think as much is transhipped as Victoria tranships? —No, nothing like it. 2034. You think that Sydney, with all her free-trade facilities, is not as much an exporting country as Victoria ? —I believe, and others say, Melbourne is a better distributing centre than Sydney. 2035. Is it not a fact that there are lines running out to Manila now, and that there is a large output for the American troops in the Philippines?— There are considerable quantities sent there. I have had a little knowledge of this by doing business with the army contractor for the United States in Sydney, and know his requirements per month, and we would not consider it a big order to run after. It is a decent order, but nothing startling. 2036. Would it be fair to assume that we should send into New" South Wales as much under a Federal tariff as we now send to the protected colonies ?—I should say no, because New South Wales is content to use maize, which she can grow, as food for cattle. 2037. Victoria is a much better-developed country than New South Wales ?—That is so. 2038. And is in a better position to supply itself than New South Wales ? —I suppose that is so. 2039. Is is reasonable to suppose that New South Wales will be unable to supply itself ?—ln some years when there is a drought. 2040. If we could send into New South Wales as much as we send into the protected colonies our fullest loss would be only £250,000 ?—You have the figures ; I have not. I should think, in all probability, it would be more than £500,000. 2041. You do nor anticipate that we are going to be shut out of the market altogether, seeing that we now send into the protected colonies?—l do not say we would be shut out, but the whole of the colonies being open to us would create such a demand for our produce that the growth of the inferior class of that produce would stop altogether in Australia. 2042. Is it not a fact that South Australia, Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland are now exporting butter to New Zealand ?—lt is news to me that South Australia is doing it. Is it a large quantity ? 2043. South Australia exported butter to the value of £1,130? —That is a very small amount. 2044. You spoke of butter, did you not, as one of the items we might be able to send into these colonies ?—We havo always done a certain amount of butter and cheese trade with them when our season is done, but if they put a duty on I do not know that we would do any trade at all. 2045. You do not think the manufactures are likely to suffer very severely?— No. 2046. You think they are doomed to be wiped out, anyhow ?—No, not wiped out; but there is no great possibility of doing great manufactures in this country unless we find iron, and become an iron producing and manufacturing country, as, in spite of our high duties, America,. England, and other countries export manufactured goods to us. 2047. If the manufacturing companies are right, and you are mistaken, would not the loss of the market now provided by the large army of workers be a serious injury to the farmers ?—No. 2048. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is there a good market for oats in New South Wales at the present time? —Yes. 2049. How is it that such a large quantity has to be shipped to London ?—I was not aware that large quantities were being shipped to London. 2050. London would be the better market ?—Yes, I suppose, at the particular moment. 2051. We are not altogether dependent upon Melbourne and Sydney for our oat trade ? —No ; but the oats that Sydney or New South Wales will take from us we could not ship to London. 2052. A different quality of oat is sent Home to what is sent to Australia?— Yes, quite different. 2053. You say our oats are better in quality than Australian ?—All I can say is that the proof of that is that I received an order a few days ago for a large quantity of oats to be sent to Victoria for transhipment there. They could supply their own oats there at Is. BJd., whereas my price was 1-J-d. more at their port. 2054. By the protected duties they have fostered their own growth ? —Yes. 2055. Federation would break down that fostering?— Yes. 2056. What would they go in for? —Dairying. 2057. The bulk of the produce exported of late years has been for re-export ? —A good deal has been sent into bond for manufacturing and re-export afterwards. 2058. The Australian market is not so valuable as we were led to believe ?—The only way of arriving at what the value of the Australian market is is to take, say, the port of Sydney. Take the amount of oats that go into New South Wales by sea and those which go across the border— which, of course, we have no actual means of arriving at—add these two together, and then find what it would be in Victoria. 2059. 1 suppose you know that the exports of butter from this colony were not very large in 1899 ; they were less than £25,000? —They would be shut out altogether by a duty. 2060. Mr. Millar.] Did I understand you to say that you believed, under federation, the greatest good would be done to the greatest number?— Yes. 2061. How many hands did you say were employed on the land ? —I did not give any number at all. 2062. Have you any idea of the number employed on the land?— Yes ; I should say it would run to 250,000 or more.
245
A.—4
2063. Would you be surprised to learn that there are only 31,218 farmers in the country?— Farmers, yes. That does not give the number of farm-hands. 2064. Farm-labourers, 21,256?—Ye5. 2065. The latest statistics of the industrial workers give it at 50,000 T— I have not got all these returns. I did see that, because it was read out by Mr. Roberts yesterday when I happened to be in here. 2066. Have you any idea of the amount of the various manufactures of the colony?—No, I cannot say that I have. 2067. Would you put the export trade of £1,104,000 against a total manufacturing interest of thirteen millions ? —No ; but I do not think the question of the total extinction of New Zealand manufactures comes into the question at all. They may possibly have to suffer from a little competition, but I do not believe at all that any one of them is threatened with total extinction, and with federation our export trade with the Australian Colonies would be £5,000,000. 2068. Do you think the New Zealand agricultural farmer is threatened with total extinction if we do not federate ?—No. 2069. They are all on the same footing, then ?—ln a way, but the balance would be in favour of federation very largely. 2070. You admit that the four centres of population in this colony are almost entirely dependent upon manufactures? —No. 2071. Take Christchurch ?—Christchurch is not a manufacturing centre in the same sense as Dunedin is. 2072. What principally supports the City of Christchurch ?—Farmers. 2073. Two-thirds of the population of the centres would be directly affected by the industries? —I should question it. Geokge Bowron examined. (No. 79.) 2074. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Bowron? —A partner in the firm of Bowron Brothers, tanners and leather merchants. I have resided in New Zealand for twenty years, but am not personally acquainted with Australia, although my firm have done a considerable amount of business with that country. 2075. Is your business considerable here ?—Yes. We have two large tanneries and a fellmongery, employing 350 hands on the average. 2076. Have you considered how the industry in which you are engaged would be affected by New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth ?- -Yes ; and I can only come to the conclusion that, unless one proviso was very definitely put in, fully three-fourths of our trade would be wiped out. 2077. What is the proviso?— The proviso is, if federation came about, that the labour awards made in New Zealand should be made applicable to the Commonwealth ; practically, the Conciliation and Arbitration Act as it exists in New Zealand should be made to apply to Australia. This would place us all on an equal footing, but without it we could not possibly exist. 2078. Is the tanning industry a large trade throughout New Zealand ?—Yes. There are a considerable number of large tanneries in the colony, but I think we are the largest in Australasia, and our business is a growing one. 2079. Have you considered how federation would affect the manufacturing industries of New Zealand generally ? —I have thought more of those trades which might be called allied trades to the leather business, such as wholesale saddlery and bootmaking. As regards the latter, there can be little question that unless the proviso I have mentioned were inserted the trade would be practically non-existent in a few years. 2080. What about the saddlery?—l imagine it would be very injuriously affected, but perhaps not quite so badly as the boot trade. 2081. Have you considered the matter from the financial point of view ?—No; I have been too much engaged in my own business to study the matter from a political, social, or financial standpoint. 2082. Hon. Captain BusseM.] Do you use native materials for tanning, or what?— Our tanning agents, such as bark, &c, are all imported, but not the raw article, which is tanned. The principal tanning agent is mimosa or wattle-bark, and is imported from Australia and Tasmania. 2083. Is it not the case that having to import your tanning agents is a great handicap for the trade?—lt is, of course, a big handicap, so far as wattle-bark is concerned. 2084. Do you not think it is possible that in the course of years you will be able to compete against Australia, all things being equal?— Yes, other things being equal, and with the proviso I have named. 2085. Do you not think the inevitable tendency is that labour should come to an even levol ? —Yes; but it will take many years to do it, and in the meantime we should be non-existent. 2086. Can you not look at the matter from a further point than that of to-day only : could we not compete in the future with Australia in the tanning industry ?—I do, all things being equal, and I am not afraid of competition on equal terms. 2087. But that is scarcely a possibility?— No. I am not afraid of the ability of the New Zealand workman, and I believe the New Zealand employer, speaking of the trade generally, is more alive and progressive than the Australian; but we cannot fight them at 30 per cent, lower rate of wages and an extra hour a day, with the further handicap of having to import our tanning materials. 2088. But would you say that the Commissioners appointed to inquire into this subject are to be guided by the narrow issue of to-day, or the remote possibility of the future ?—That is a
A.—4
246
politician's matter. I look at it from my own personal business point of view. I cannot help doing so, because it is a matter of great moment to all those now employed in the trade. It is not my place to speak of the duty of the Commissioners; but, as you ask me, I think if it can be shown that federation would wipe out of existence a large portion of the industries of the colony within the next twenty years the Commission can only report to that effect. 2089. That is so ; but ought we to imperil the possible future of the colony for the sake of a little gain for the next twenty years ?—I do not look at it in that way. I not think New Zealand would recover for fifty years if her industries were ruined during the next twenty years. 2090. Even supposing there is a danger of that for fifty years, do you think we should ignore all racial and social considerations merely for the sake of fifty years?—l think so. Ido not think we ought to lose everything in the present for the sake of posterity, but that we ought, whilst denying ourselves something in the interests of future generations, yec also give due weight to present considerations. 2091. And not to look to to-morrow at all?— Not entirely. 2092. Have you any opinion as to the political aspect of the case —as to what will hapnen to the countries as to their future development ?—My opinion is so superficial and personal that I should not like to attach any weight to it. Prom a sentimental standard only, I think federation is the proper thing. 2093. Mr. Millar.] In the event of federation taking place just now, you say it would be impossible, under the tariffs ruling in Australia, for our industries to compete very long against that country ?—Yes. 2094. Do you think, if our industries once went down, and the bulk of them got concentrated in Sydney or Melbourne, that in the course of twenty years they could be profitably restarted in New Zealand?—l said that, in my opinion, this colony could not recover its position for at least fifty years. 2095. Do you think at the expiry of fifty years they would be able to start them again and compete against the Australian industries ? —Fifty years is a long time in a young colony like this; but, seeing what we have done in the last fifty years, we might do it then. 2096. Could you compete against the British industries ?—Not without a certain amount of protection. 2097. Do you think that any manufacturer starting here "fifty years hence against the Australian one, which was well established and had reduced the cost of production to a minimum, would probably be able to successfully compete against him ? —I did not express the opinion that these trades would be entirely wiped out; they would still have been in existence in a limited way, and ready to take advantage of matters when labour considerations became equalised. I did not contemplate their being entirely killed. 2098. Would it be any injury to the farming community if the amount of tanning were reduced ?—lt would be a very great injury to the agricultural community, because they would not be able to realise anything like what they do now for their hides and sheepskins. We put through about 1,000 hides and about 4,000 dozen sheep-pelts per week. 2099. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you any objection to telling the Commissioners the amount you pay, roughly speaking, for raw material in a year—say, for hides and pelts?— About £170,000 a year. 2100. What is the protection on your industry at the present time?— The duties are various. On leathers they would run from 2J to 20 per cent. 2101. Quite sufficient to exclude the greater portion of other kinds of leather from the colony ? —Yes. It acts fairly protectively, but not entirely so. A fair quantity does come in at the present time, but it does not come into active competition with what we produce here. 2102. Will the best of your leathers compare with the leathers prepared in Australia ? —lt is superior to theirs. 2103. Is the same material for tanning employed in both countries?— Very largely, excepting that the new chrome-tanning process is more developed in New Zealand than in Australia. 2104. 1 suppose we are improving the quality of our leather from time to time ?—Yes, without doubt. 2105. We have heard this morning that the quality of the leather produced in New Zealand does not compare favourably with the leather from Germany and England owing to our using a different kind of tanning material—l think we have to rely on wattle-bark instead of oak-bark : what is your opinion as to the respective merits of the leather produced here and in Australia as compared with that of England and Germany ? —We are not very much behind them in most lines. I think we are fairly well to the front, but there is not much genuine oak-tanned leather produced in either of those countries. The real oak-bark leather is so high in price as to put its use practically out of the question. The value of our leathers in New Zealand is equal to the bulk of American-produced leathers. 2106. Is there anything in the idea that our tanning process is too quick?— There is something in that. If the leather is made too quickly it is not matured, and it will not wear so long ; but many colonial tanners are hard-up, and have to put the leather through more quickly than is right. 2107. Where do you find your chief market now? —It is fairly distributed throughout the colony. 2108. Do you do any export trade ?—Quite a large trade in tanned sheepskins, which are mostly exported to America and England; also a limited trade with Australia. 2109. Mr. Leys.} You said that if the conditions were not equalised in the two countries you could not compete with Australia: do you think the wages are too high here, and that it would be desirable to equalise them to the Australian level? —No, Ido not thmk that. I only think they
247
A.—4
are too high in New Zealand as compared with the Australian rate of pay to enable New Zealand tanners to compete against Australia under a continuance of such conditions. 2110. But you do not think that our labour legislation has had the effect of unduly crippling industry here? —I am afraid it is tending that way; inasmuch as at the present time we have to compete with the rates of wages ruling throughout the world, which are very much lower than they are in New Zealand. 2111. Does that explain your last reply? Do you still think that the wages are not too high in your own business in New Zealand?—l do not think the men are earning an excessive wage, but I think they are now seeking to compel us to pay them an excessive wage. There is now a case pending in the Arbitration Court in which they seek to raise the wages 30 per cent., and that will cripple the whole business. This is one of the results of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. They are already getting higher rates of pay than in any other country in this world, and yet they seek to raise it further by 30 per cent. 2112. I presume that will be settled on the evidence by the Court?— Undoubtedly. 2113. But at present you have not suffered?—At present we have not been brought under the provisions of that Act. A case has not been brought against us yet. 2114. Do you know whether wattle is grown in Australia to any extent now as a crop, or whether it is obtained from the native bush ?—lt is largely planted in Victoria and South Australif for cropping purposes. 2115. Do you think that that industry might be introduced on the bad lands of this colony ?-- Yes, I think so, to a certain extent, in the North Island. I have seen very good bark, that has come from the Waikato district, grown in a Government plantation. We used a small lot as a trial; but, of course, the Auckland lanners are in a more favourable position for buying it than the Christchurch tanners, because of the cost of freight to the South Island. 2116. Did you find what you did use perfectly satisfactory?—l formed a very high opinion of the qualities of the bark. 2117. As good as the Australian ?—As good as the bulk of it. 2118. Then, the continuance of tanning might give rise to another very important industry ?— Undoubtedly. I believe bark to the value of about £30,000 or £40,000 is imported every year. William Williams examined. (No. 80.) 2119. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are the representative of the Bootmakers' Union in Christchurch ?—That is so. 2120. How many members are there in that union? —332. 2121. Has your union met and discussed the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—Yes ; and they came to the conclusion that it would be detrimental to the trade if federation took place. 2122. Was there much division of opinion amongst them ? —They were pretty unanimous that if it took place it meant annihilation to the boot trade of New Zealand. 2123. Why? —One reason is that the trade in Australia is more highly developed than it is here, and at the present time, notwithstanding the duty of 22J per cent., they are exporting their goods to New Zealand. Of course, there are also differential rates of wages, but the minimum wage is higher in New Zealand than in New South Wales and other centres, excepting in Victoria, where the minimum wage is 2s. per week higher than in New Zealand. The hours in Australia are also longer. 2124. Have you considered the matter in connection with any other trade but your own ?—I have. From my experience, gained in connection with the Trades and Labour Council, I think that, as far as the industries of New Zealand are concerned whose products are of an interchangeable character, the result will be, under federation, similar to the results to the boot trade. Federation can only have a detrimental effect. For instance, the furniture trade has suffered very severely from the keen competition with the Australian Colonies, and if our ports were open to Australia it simply means that those trades must suffer the same as our own. 2125. Have you any other objection to federation than the one you have mentioned? Supposing the boot trade would not suffer, would you rather remain an independent colony or join the large Commonwealth of Australia ?—I should be in favour of federating, providing it had the effect of bringing the people in the Australian Colonies up to the level of the New Zealand workman. 2126. Supposing things were equal in Australia and New Zealand with regard to the advantages of labour and conditions of trade, do you think the people would be attracted to Australia or New Zealand ?—I think, in that event, they would be attracted to New Zealand, as the climate is a better one, and the colony is more attractive in many ways than the Australian Colonies. 2127. Mr. Leys.] Have you worked in Australia ?—No. 2128. You do not speak, then, of your personal knowledge of their conditions?—We have a good deal of communication with the large centres of Australia, and we hear what is going on from the trade representatives there. 2129. Do you think it probable that by New Zealand joining the Federation we should raise the rates of wages and conditions of work in Australia to the New Zealand level ? —I am rather afraid of it, as our experience has been the other way; although we have beneficial legislation in the shape of the Arbitration Act, there are cases in which the process has been downward rather than upward. As a matter of fact, the bootmakers have not reaped any advantage under the Arbitration Act. It has been rather the other way; and the same thing can be said of the Typographical Association in regard to linotype cases. Auckland was the worst-paid centre in the colony, and the awards given have brought the level in other places down to that of Auckland.
A.—4
248
2130. But it has raised the level in Auckland ?—lt may have benefited Auckland; but still, I understand, it has had a very serious effect on the other centres. 2131. Did it lower the other centres?— Yes; it has lowered Wellington, and I am assured that practically the same result will take place here. 2132. Are you sure that they lowered Wellington ?—Yes. 2133. You think, then, you would not have any chance of raising the Australian rate ?—I think not ; I think the risk is too great to take. 2134. Do you think the result would be the other way, that they would lower you ? —-I think that would be the result, unquestionably. 2135. Mr. Millar.] Outside the mere question of wages, do you not think that in all classes of employment the social condition of the people of this colony could be more rapidly advanced under a Government of their own than under a Government which was removed twelve hundred miles away ?—I do. 2136. In your opinion, unless federation is going to give other advantages equal to what she is asked to surrender, you would not think of federating ?—No. William Daelow examined. (No. 81.) 2137. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A clicker, connected with the boot trade. 2138. Are you a member of the Bootmakers' Union in Christchurch ?—I am. 2139. Were you present at the meeting when the question of federation was considered by the union ? —Yes. 2140. And the opinion was what?— Against New Zealand joining the Federation. It was unanimous. 2141. What reason do you give for your opinion in that respect ?—As far as the boot industry goes, my opinion is that if we were to federate things in connection with the boot trade would be so centralised in Melbourne and Sydney that we would not have a chance to compete under the conditions ruling there at present. That is, if the Arbitration Act were made applicable to New South Wales, and they were brought up to the same level as ourselves, socially, politically, and as far as wages were concerned, we could not compete with them in our trade. 2142. Do you think there is any chance of the rate of wages in Australia being brought up to our level ?—I do not think so. I spent two years in New South Wales, and lam decidedly of opinion that if we were to join there would be no chance at all for a number of years of bringing the legislative programme there up to the New Zealand level. 2143. Have you considered the question of how federation would affect other trades than your own ?—The furniture trade is very much in the hands of Chinamen in Sydney, and I think that that trade would be greatly affected. 2144. Have you considered the question from any other aspect than that of trade ?—I do not think we should reap any advantage from a political standpoint if we joined. My opinion of the New South Wales mechanic is that he seems to take very little interest in political matters, while in New Zealand every man seems to take an interest in his country and its management. 2145. As a mere matter of sentiment, would you rather belong to the independent Colony of New Zealand or to the larger Federation of the Australian Commonwealth ?—As far as sentiment goes, I have not much feeling in the matter, but I would rather belong to New Zealand and keep New Zealand as it is, as we have more self-control than we should have if we joined the Commonwealth. 2146. Mr. Boberis.] How did you find the wages in New South Wales compare with ours when you weie in New South Wales? —Considerably lower than our own, and the hours were longer. The condition of the worker is much inferior to what it is here. 2147. How much more per week are you getting here than you got in Australia? —I was getting £2 ss. in New South Wales, and here £2 10s. and £3. The hours are one longer there. 2148. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think that under federation, owing to the little interest the Australians take in political matters, we should progress so rapidly in regard to labour legislation as we have done here ?—I should say decidedly not. 2149. What is your opinien as to the relative merits in regard to working-capacity of the Australian and New Zealand workman ?—Our man can more than hold his own against any Australian I have seen, and the New-Zealanders always seems to get a big wage in Australia. 2150. Mr. Leys.] From your contact with the workmen in Sydney, did you find them as comfortable and as well off as the workmen in New Zealand?— They are decidedly inferior to the workmen in New Zealand as far as comfort is concerned. 2151. Are the conditions better or worse?— Taking the New Zealand worker, he is far more advanced in social position and comfort than the New South Wales worker. 2152. Was there more poverty in Sydney than in New Zealand? —-It struck me very forcibly as I went through the city, the fact of the great poverty I met with. It is terrible. I have been in London, and it is as bad as the East End of London. 2153. That, I suppose, is producing degraded conditions of life that do not exist in New Zealand ?—Undoubtedly. 2154. Do you think the effect of that will be to prevent the early emancipation of labour, and that these conditions would all tend to drag labour down ?—lf by joining the Federation our trade went to these large cities where labour is so cheap, undoubtedly we must go down if we intend to live at all. 2155. You think, then, that with an Arbitration Act there it would be impossible to raise the condition of the workers to that of New Zealand ?—Yes, for a considerable time. 2156. I understood you also to say that the concentration of labour in the large factories there would constitute such an advantage that our people could not compete with them ?—That is
249
A.—4
correct. The large factories have such a large output that they can afford to run their machinery to the full extent, whereas in New Zealand we have not such a great quantity of machinery to run, so that the Australians can put goods on the market to a much greater extent than we can in New Zealand. Andrew Andebson examined. (No. 82.) 2157. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are a member of the firm of John Anderson and Co. ? —Yes ; we are ironfounders, engineers, and carry on a merchant business in iron and steel. We employ 260 hands. 2158. What do you consider would be the effect on the iron-foundry business of New Zealand joining the Australian Commonwealth ?—I must confess that I have not given the question thorough consideration, but, as far as I can see, it would not affect our own business at all. 2159. Have you considered what its effect would be on other industries and manufactures ? —I have not. 2160. Have you considered how it would affect the finances of the colony ?—No. I can only say that 1 think nothing would be lost by delay, and if we gave it a few years' further consideration we would then have the opportunity of seeing how federation was working in Australia. I should be very much against New Zealand going into the Federation until we have had an opportunity of seeing how it works there, and also of further considering how it is likely to affect us here. John Fishek examined. (No. 83.) 2161. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you, Mr. Fisher?—A bootmaker, and a member of the Bootmakers' Union. 2162. We hear that their opinion is against federation?— Yes, very pronounced. 2163. Will you give the Commission your reasons if you concur in that opinion ?—I concur in that opinion, and there are two standpoints to view the question from. We viewed the matter entirely from the trade standpoint, and the political aspect of the question we have never discussed. The trade would be annihilated if New Zealand joined the Federation, owing to the centralisation of the industry in Australia, unless we could get advantages which cannot be obtained now under the present conditions existing in New Zealand. If New Zealand federated with Australia the bootmakers would have to go over there. 2164. Have you any other reason to give against our federating ?—There are political reasons that enter more into this matter than the question of trade interests, and I think the evidence you have had before the Commission in some respects has been in the direction of showing a selfish spirit as far as many trades and manufactures are concerned. I think, although the trade aspect is an important one, and while the individuals who have given evidence on that aspect may bring important reasons to bear in favour of their views, it is not so important as the political aspect of this question. 2165. Well, what is your opinion on the political aspect af the question ?—lt cannot be suggested that New Zealand is not as well, as cheaply, and as reasonably governed as people can expect, and I consider that the addition of two more Houses of Parliament would make our governmental machinery cumbersome. In our own experience in regard to the aspirations of the workers, we find that the Parliament here has never yet been able to keep up to date; we have had many promises from the Government with regard to legislating on many of those aspirations and aspects of politics as they relate to labour, but they have never yet been put forward, nor are they likely to be put forward ; and if you add other cumbersome machinery to our present machinery it means that you will reduce the incentive that at present exists to get the matters I refer to attended to by the Legislature. It means also that there is a possibility of removing the decision of certain political questions from our Parliament altogether. We would have no voice in the administration of a good many things, or in the decision of such matters a Civil Service reform. 2166. You mean, in short, that progressive legislation, as you deem it, would be longer in being brought about by the Federal Parliament than it would by the State Parliaments?— Cumbersome machinery must always have that tendency. It is illustrated in America, where they cannot keep pace with public opinion through the cumbersome nature of their legislative methods. 2167. What have you to say to the sentimental question : would you rather belong to an independent colony or to a large body like the Commonwealth of Australia?—l feel proud of being a New-Zealander, more so than I would be of being an Australian ; and all Englishmen ought to aspire towards national federation. I feel proud of belonging to New Zealand in consequence of the advanced position we hold in politics, and which we hope will always be maintained ; but the federation of the Empire is a bigger question, and it is a consummation, I think, more to be desired than that of federating with Australia. 2168. Do you not think you belong to the British Empire now ? —Yes ; but we would be more so than if we were part of Australia. 2169. Mr. Beauchamp.] Evidently you are a strong Imperialist. Do you hold the view that New Zealand would become simply an appendage of Australia, and hold the same position in regard to Australia as the Chatham Islands do to New Zealand ? —lt must be so under the system of representation. 2170. Do you not think we could hold our own in the Senate and Lower House ?—Not against votes—in intelligence you might at the start; but when you come to votes, that is one of those brutal things that knocks you all out. 2171. Mr. Millar.] Your view is that the social and progressive legislation which has gone on in this colony will be difficult to continue if we become part of Australia ?—My strong opinion is 32—A. 4.
A.—4
250
that it would not be possible, because Australia is very much behind us in regard to political aspirations, and that would check all tendency to progress; and political aspirations are a quantity which you cannot measure by wages or hours of labour. 2172. You believe in being progressive all the time ?—One of the witnesses you had before you stated that bootmakers were, as a body, one of those class of people who are never satisfied. I do not know whether it is reasonable to suggest that people who feel aggrieved, and have sufficient intelligence to discuss their grievances, have no reasonable right to give expression to them, but we have that privilege here, which any one else has. 2173. And you think the workers of the colony are doing very well under present conditions ? —Both the agricultural people and the manufacturing people are, and I believe they will be astonished at the result which will overtake them if we federate. 2174. You do not believe that a wider market will be open to the agricultural industry if we federate ?—I should imagine that the home markets are better for us than imaginary foreign ones. Feed. Bevebley examined. (No. 84.) 2175. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your occupation ?—I am managing director of the Zealandia Soap and Candle Company (Limited), Woolston, and I reside in Lyttelton. I have resided in New Zealand thirty-seven years. The company employs about twenty hands. 2176. Have you considered how your industry would be affected by New Zealand joining the Commonwealth of Australia?—l think the candle part of it will be practically " knocked out." 2177. Are you protected at present?— Yes; Id. a pound on candles and £2'a ton on soap. 2178. Do you tind that sufficient protection ? —lt has only recently been reduced from 2d. to Id. on candles, and I cannot yet form an opinion as to how we are going to get on. 2179. Why do you think that, with free-trade with the Australian Colonies, your industry would be exterminated ?—The largest proportion of the raw material we use is paraffine-wax, imported through an Australian firm—James Service and Co. It comes from America, and the Melbourne people hold stocks of it. We cannot get it direct, and there is no doubt that, as there is a tendency to centralise everything in Australia, in large centres factories would grow up there accordingly. 2180. What about the other branch of your" industry ?—Soap is very bulky, and I think we could hold our own in that, as tallow is now as dear here as in Australia—slightly cheaper in Australia than here. 2181. Have you considered how federation would affect other industries ?—I could not give any opinion regarding other industries, either as to the political or sentimental point of view. I strongly prefer being a New-Zealander to being a Commonwealther. 2182. Mr Beauchamp.] Since the reduction of duties on candles from 2d. to Id., have you noticed any increase in the sale of English candles here ?—lt has been our dull season here since the duty was reduced, so that I could not form an opinion; but in the next six months we can tell better. 2183. And the duty on paraffine-wax was reduced from 1-Jd. to fd. per pound?— Yes. 2184. Have you had any offers of wax from Orepuki?—We made offers ; but, as far as I can hear, we cannot tell what they are going to do with these works yet. 2185. And they cannot tell you whether this wax is likely to be cheaper than the American wax ? —I understand they cannot. With no duty on kerosene, they cannot produce it profitably, the wax being a by-product; consequently, if they do not produce oil they cannot make wax. 2186. Have candles made in Sydney ever been offered in this market?— Not so far as I know. They make cheaper candles than we do, but the duty stops them from shipping to New Zealand. 2187. Are candles sold cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand?--Yes. Albeet Kaye examined. (No. 85.) 2188. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?— Grain and shipping merchant. 2189. How long have you resided in New Zealand ? —Seventeen years. 2190. Have you visited Australia ? —I have lived in Australia for twelve years, and I have visited it in nearly every part. 2191. Have you given consideration to the question of federation with Australia?—To a certain extent. 2192. What opinion have you arrived at in the matter?— Well, of course, I recognise, with every one else, that it is a kind of unknown quantity ; but lam in favour of federation. That is largely due to my personal knowledge of Australia generally. I am convinced that federation would be for the benefit of New Zealand. 2193. In what way would it benefit us?—ln being in such close touch with such a largely increasing population that eventually it must be an advantage, I think. 2194. Do you not think that in a reasonable time in the future New Zealand herself will carry a large population ?—Not in the same proportion as Australia. 2195. Have you considered what the effect will be upon the manufacturing industries of the colony ?—I have no doubt some will suffer materially ; but I think, taking it as a whole, the manufacturers will in the end benefit. 2196. You think they will be able to compete against the large centres of Australia, and the large manufacturing institutions there ? —I think eventually they will. It all depends on the question of labour, and that must eventually come on to the same basis. 2197. How long will it take before the conditions of labour are on the same level as those of New Zealand?—lt is a large question, and I cannot say how many years, but I should think in about ten years they would have adjusted themselves,
251
A.—4
2198. Have you considered how the revenue of the colony will be affected by federation ?—I have not considered that in the sense that I have any opinion to give on it. 2199. We have had evidence before us that there would be a loss to the New Zealand revenue of half a million : supposing that is an overestimation, and taking it at £250,000, how do you consider that amount would be made up to this colony? —I can only say that greater financial minds than mine have oaken that into consideration, and we all go under the same plan. It will in the end simply mean taking money out of one pocket instead of another. It simply means adjustment. We all recognise that the Customs is an easy way of taxing us, but in the long-run it simply means adjustment. 2200. Do you think there is any disadvantage in the distance New Zealand is from Australia? —I think nothing of that, and lam exceedingly surprised so much has been made of it. I consider it a means of increasing communication rather than a means of destroying communication. 2201. What do you think of the sentimental question of New Zealand being a separate colony or being part of the Commonwealth?—l think, in a sense, it is always best to be in the first syndicate. 2202. Mr. Leys.] Did you find the people you came in contact with in Australia knew much about New Zealand people and ways ?—The people I met were connected principally with my own business. 2203. I do not mean their knowledge of trade, but I mean their knowledge of the peculiar wants and ideas of the people of New Zealand?— Amongst the few politicians I have talked to outside my own business-people, they seem to be fairly well posted. Of course, the newspapers there do not convey much news about New Zealand. 2204. Do not you find that one continental colony knows a great deal more about the other continental colonies than they do about New Zealand ?—Quite so. 2205. Do you not think that that would operate against our making ourselves heard in the Federal Government ?—I cannot believe that there would be any feeling of injustice among the class of men who rule in Australia in politics. I cannot think at any time that New Zealand would be unjustly treated. 2206. Do you think that they would undertake works that would not be of advantage to New Zealand?— That would happen, I suppose; but I do not think there is a general feeling to do anything detrimental to New Zealand. 2207. You seem to make light of the sea division, when, after all, is that not the most radical of all barriers from a political point of view ?—Prom a political point it is a barrier. 2208. Mr. Beauchamp.] You are a large exporter of produce ?—Yes. 2209. What is your chief market in Australia ?—Sydney. 2210. Do you take as gloomy a view as some take in regard to the possibility of the export trade, in the event of our not federating, in its effect on agriculturists ?—I do not think it would harm them a great deal. We would get a fair show. 2211. What would be the effect on trade generally? —It would be reduced, I think, as we stand to-day. 2212. But is this Australian market not one that arises almost invariably from the climatic conditions ?—lt is to a certain extent; but the latitude of the North Cape, New Zealand, is that of Adelaide and Sydney, and we have got a big field above that latitude, which we are much better able to fill than Australia in a general way. 2213. Seeing that this has been a burning question for so many years in Australia, and the people of New Zealand know so little about it here, the suggestion is that there must be something in that question .of distance from the Australian Continent? —No; I think we lost a good opportunity of getting to know about federation by our Government a few years ago refusing to discuss the question of federation on its merits. 2214. To whom should we look for education on the subject ?—-You could not get better information than from the leaders in Australia. 2215. I notice that a reporter, in reply to a complaint of our Premier's regarding the want of prominence given to New Zealand in the Australian newspapers, said that the distance between New Zealand and Australia was so great, and so few people took a live interest in New Zealand affairs, that they were not warranted in giving much prominence to New Zealand items?— There is something in that. It has always seemed to me ridiculously absurd that almost all our New Zealand telegrams should be dated from Auckland. 2216. Mr. Millar.] Do you think that reciprocity would not be as good for New Zealand as federation ?—lf. you could get it, go for reciprocity, decidedly. 2217. From your experience over in Australia, what are the prospects, do you think, of a reciprocal treaty ?—I do not think we could get it. 2218. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] What is there besides wine they would be anxious to send into this country?— Sugar (from Queensland very largely), olive-oil, and salt. 2219. You do not think sufficient to make a reciprocal treaty attractive to Australia?— No. 2220. Of course, a reciprocal treaty might only deal with certain things ?—Yes. 2221. Do you know Queensland at all?— Yes. 2222. What do you know of the possibility of the sugar industry being carried on by white labour?—l do not think it could successfully compete with white labour. I have had a lot of talk about it with various people there, and a good deal with the Hon. G. W. Gray. I think they must have coloured labour there, but there is not the slightest fear of it coming to New Zealand.
A.—4
252
WELLINGTON. Monday, 25th Febkuary, 1901. Nicholas Eeid examined. (No. 86.) 1. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a merchant residing in Wellington?— Yes. 2. And also the chairman of the Chamber of Commerce ?—Yes. 3. How long have you resided in New Zealand?— Nearly forty-two years. 4. And you have been engaged in commerce here all the time ?—Nearly the whole of that period. 5. Has the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia been discussed by the Wellington Chamber of Commerce? —Not yet. 6. Can you tell the Commission in any way the opinions of the members of the Chamber upon the subject ? —I think they are very much divided on the question. 7. Will you be kind enough to give the Commission the benefit; of your own opinion on the matter ?—Firstly, 1 am not at all in favour of federation, because the loss of self-government would far outweigh anything that has yet been stated in favour of federation. Apart from that, if I take the commercial aspect of the matter, and ask myself the question, is New Zealand to federate with Australia ? I should find that in the matter of sugar our present duty of £4 13s. 4d. per ton yields a Customs revenue of £168,875. Under federation that revenue would be nil if all the sugar we require would come from Queensland ; it would be admitted free ; so that the total loss to the Customs revenue, as I have stated, would be £168,875. The quantity of sugar produced in Queensland just now would average about 100,000 tons; and, if Australia would take the whole of the production, where would New Zealand come in with free sugar ? We could not possibly get a pound from Queensland, because the whole of it could be absorbed in Australia ; and, as there would be heavy protective duties, the consequence would be to raise the price of Queensland sugar, if we got any, equal to the price of refined Fiji sugar, with the amount of duty added. The bulk of the supplies consumed in New Zealand is from Fiji, bearing a duty of £4 13s. 4d. It is well understood that the Colonial Sugar Company has practically a monopoly of the sugar trade of New Zealand, and nearly the whole of Australia. I do not suppose for one moment that the Colonial Sugar Company would allow any free sugar to come into New Zealand to interfere with the business of the Auckland refinery, and its very large sugar establishments in Fiji. It practically means, therefore, that the Colonial Sugar Company would absorb nearly the whole of the Queensland sugar produced, and consequently, if any of the sugar did come to New Zealand, the price of that free sugar would have to be on a level with the duty-paid sugar from Fiji; in other words, the Colonial Sugar Company would have one of the greatest monopolies in the colonies. 8. Have you considered what the difference to New Zealand would be by reason of a lower protective tariff than the one at present existing, if a lower tariff were passed by the Commonwealth?—lt would be impossible to say what difference it would make. I will now take a few other articles that bear very seriously upon our Customs revenue. The revenue derived from tobacco is £279,646 —that is on tobacco imported from the United States principally. There are at the present moment seven tobacco-factories in Australia. The excise duty upon tobacco will average about Is. 6d. per pound. The quality of the best tobacco turned out by the manufacturers is really excellent; it is made from imported leaf. A large quantity of tobacco is also manufactured in Victoria from leaf grown by the Chinese, who are very large growers of tobaccoleaf ; but nearly half the leaf that is produced in Victoria is shipped to Europe, because they find it is of rather too low a grade to produce a good article. The excise duty upon tobacco manufactured in Victoria is, I think, £77,000 ; and they produce far more than they are able to consume. When we consider the enormous production that will go on in Australia under federation we would probably lose half of our present Customs revenue derived from the sale of tobacco. The Customs revenue now received from tobacco is £279,646, and I anticipate that under federation we would lose at least £100,000 of that, because of the very large quantities of tobacco which would come in under the excise duty of the Commonwealth. Another article is spirits. There are several distillers in Australia, principally in Melbourne, manufacturing brandy and other spirits. The excise duty will average Bs. per gallon. Our present duty is 16s. in bulk and 16s. 6d. in bottle ; and it stands to reason that a great impetus would be given to the importation of Australian spirits, with a difference of Bs. per gallon in favour of the distillers of Australia; and what a loss it would mean to our Customs revenue. The excise duty upon spirits in Victoria last year amounted to £88,000, so that it proves to you at once the great industry in the distillation of spirits in Victoria. In South Australia they are making very good brandy, and this is coming to New Zealand, but only to a very small extent. Federation will, I have no doubt, greatly increase our business with Australia, consequently the probable loss in revenue from spirits alone would in a short time be one-third less than what it is at present. The value of the Australian wine imported into New Zealand for 1899 was £16,700, and the duty was ss. per gallon. Our Customs revenue would also suffer in other respects—in soft goods, boots and shoes, drugs and druggists' sundries, fancy goods, furniture, iron and ironware, leather and leather goods, machinery, soap, and candles, and also upon dried and evaporated fruits. The bulk of these goods are imported, manufactured, and produced in large quantities in Victoria and New South Wales, and it would be impossible for our small and scattered population to compete against the large cities of Australia in particular lines. Take boots and shoes, for instance: At the present moment there is an overproduction of these goods, especially in Victoria. With the appliances they have they can cope with the requirements of a much larger population than they have at their doors, and it will be necessary for them to find new markets for a large quantity of their goods. If lam in order 1 will read an extract from the Melbourne Argus dated
253
A.—4
the 19th August, 1899 : "The broad position is this : The Victorian manufacturers will gain largely by having a wider market thrown open to them. The duties levied in their interests will operate over a far wider area than before, and they must inevitably greatly benefit by the new conditions. They are sure to benefit far more than they realise by the change, and they are to be heartily congratulated on their brighter prospects accordingly." In the Melbourne Argus, I think, of the same date they have an article on the "Coining Tariff," which says, " Outside duties on cereals and grain- and root-crops may be continued, but they will be merely a mockery to our producers. It would only be in time of extreme scarcity, owing to failure of crops, when the farmers had nothing to sell, that importation could take place even from New Zealand." It was after reading these two articles that my attention was called to the seriousness of federating with the Commonwealth. The Customs revenue of the Commonwealth is set down, at £6,866,601, and the New Zealand Customs revenue is £2,170,000. Under federation New Zealand would have to contribute nearly £550,000 towards the management of the Commonwealth, leaving to her about £1,600,000. With the reduction in the revenue under federation owing to the reasons I have described, you will see at once the enormous loss which would accrue to New Zealand ; and that is a further reason why I state lam strongly opposed to federation. I think New Zealand should have the control of its own affairs. Dealing with the export of produce from New Zealand, and how we shall be affected in that respect under federation, I might say that four years ago New South Wales was a very large buyer of wheat and flour, but to-day she has an export surplus of wheat amounting to 180,000 tons. Victoria will have an exportable surplus of possibly over 300,000 tons, and South Australia has a surplus of over 268,000 tons. The Commonwealth will have an exportable surplus of nearly three-quarters of a million tons of wheat. While the price of wheat in Melbourne and Adelaide is a little higher than it is in New Zealand, flour can be bought nearly 10s. a ton cheaper there, and, with the low rate of freight we can get on flour from Adelaide and Melbourne, it would practically mean that the North Island would receive the bulk of its supplies from either Victoria or Adelaide ; and it is not only the lower price, but the quality of Adelaide flour is worth to the baker at least from 15s. to £1 a ton more than New Zealand flour, because the Adelaide flour produces far more bread than we could get from the New Zealand flour; so that there are two advantages—the price is lower, and the quality is about 15 to 20 per cent, better. Under federation, of course, this would be a serious blow to the milling trade. It would practically reduce by one-half the number of mills now in operation. The price of the best roller-mill flour in Melbourne on the 7th February was £6 per ton for the orders in hand, but for export the price would be shaded considerably, showing at once that they are very anxious to obtain a greater export trade in order to reduce their surplus stocks. I notice that the average yield of wheat for last year in New South Wales was 12-6 bushels per acre, which is an improvement of nearly 3 bushels more than that of the previous year ; while the area under cultivation this year far exceeds that of any previous year. It is a well-known fact that the export trade in oats from Victoria has assumed large dimensions, and that they export nearly as much as New Zealand ; also that the area of land under cultivation last year has increased by 120,000 acres, and it is only a question of time, as the Melbourne Argus stated, when it will be a farce to go outside Victoria for produce, and only in times of extreme scarcity will they have to come to New Zealand. Now, while oats are a little higher in Melbourne, it is strange that oaten chaff is sold at 7s. 6d. per ton less than it is at Dunedin. Quoting from the Dunedin price-list of the 4th February, and comparing it with the list of the same date in Melbourne, I find that the price is in favour of Melbourne by 7s. 6d. per ton; and why that state of affairs should be Ido not know. The other industries that would be greatly affected by New Zealand federating would be jams and preserves. It is well known that Victoria exports an enormous quantity of fruit in pulp, and some of it is imported into New Zealand, so that it would "be impossible for us to compete against Victoria in jams and preserves, because her output far exceeds the total output of New Zealand. Hops would benefit under federation, so would preserved milk, bacon, and cheese to a slight extent only. Butter is doubtful, because I find the price of butter in Victoria just now is on a par with the price in New Zealand. The biscuit and confectionery business of this colony would simply be wiped out by federation. Preserved meat would not benefit, because it is a well-known fact that the value of the preserved meats in New South Wales is much lower than that of the same article produced in New Zealand. New Zealand has practically lost the South Sea Island trade in preserved meat. It has gone to Sydney, because of the cheaper article produced there. The quality is not so good, but it is sufficiently good to suit the coloured population. It is doubtful if timber would benefit under federation, because kauri and white-pine is a necessity now to Australians, as Australia cannot produce timber so suitable for its requirements as kauri and white-pine. Dealing again with the question of oats, the Melbourne Leader states that the estimated yield of oats in Victoria is 8,276,100 bushels from 337,800 acres, or an average of 24-50 bushels per acre. Last season the yield was 6,116,046 bushels from 217,280 acres, which shows an increased area of production of 120,520 acres; so that in a very short time the export of oats from New Zealand will be, so far as the Australian market is concerned, almost nil. These are all the remarks I desire to make upon the question. 9. You have told us how you consider oats and the manufacturing industries would be affected by federation : have you considered the question of the iron trade ? —Yes. New Zealand imported from Australia last year hardware and ironmongery amounting to £10,896, and iron and ironware to the value of £22,563, machinery of various kinds £54,752, and manufactures of metals £11,006. Of course, it is not enumerated what the machinery is, but I have no doubt it was either imported into Australia or manufactured there. 10. With regard to foundries and manufacturing industries in the iron trade, do you think they would be able to compete successfully in New Zealand with the Australian ironfounders under freetrade between the colonies?-—No, because the first cost of coal is a very serious item. Coals can be purchased at Newcastle possibly at 7s. 6d. per ton, and, with 3s. 6d. added for freight to Sydney,
A.—4
254
it would mean 11s.; so that the foundries in would be able to get coals at 11s., while it costs £1 per ton in New Zealand. That is a very serious handicap. Then, the laid-down cost of a large quantity of raw material is also much less in Sydney than it is in New Zealand. 11. Have you considered the question of the manufacture of agricultural implements—whether they could be manufactured in New Zealand on more favourable conditions than in Australia? — I notice that the export of agricultural implements from New Zealand amounted to £1,319 in 1899, £2,810 in 1898, and £3,596 in 1897, showing a falling-off of £2,200 in the export of agricultural implements from New Zealand. This proves at once that the little trade we have in that respect will soon be a thing of the past—another two years will wipe it out; and it stands to reason that the larger production over there will enable the Australians to manufacture their own agricultural implements that they are now getting from New Zealand. 12. You said that the contribution of New Zealand to the revenue of the Commonwealth would exceed the sum of £550,000 : how do you arrive at that ?—The total revenue of the Oommonwealth, including New Zealand, is estimated to be about £8,950,000, and the amount returnable to the States, as provided by the Commonwealth Act, will, in the case of New Zealand, be £1,400,000; so that New Zealand would have to contribute £550,000 from a revenue of over £2,000,000. 13. Have you considered whether the sugar industry could be continued in Queensland with white labour ?—I do not think so. 14. And therefore you do not consider a white Australia possible?— Quite impossible. Ido not know of any part of the world where sugar is grown with white labour. Taking Mauritius, large numbers of Indians are imported there annually for the sugar-plantations. 15. Have you considered the question of the distance of New Zealand from the centre of government, in the event of New Zealand federating, amongst the disadvantages we would be subjected to ? —I would not look upon it as a serious disadvantage as compared with the other disadvantages I have mentioned. 16. Are there any advantages which you think would accrue from New Zealand federating with Australia?—l do not know of one. 17. As far as the agricultural interests are concerned, do you think they would not derive any benefit from federation ?—No. They might for the first twelve months, but no more. 18. Mr. Boberts.] Do you think, Mr. Eeid, that with intercolonial free-trade the farmers here could produce more cheaply than they can on the other side ?—I do not think so, because land and labour cost considerably more. The production of wheat is 28 bushels to the acre here as compared with 12 in New South Wales, and, in the face of that fact, how is it that flour is cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand? m 19. It is due to the oversupply of wheat in Victoria since the protective tariff has been in force, is it not ?—Yes; but that would not alter the value of the exportable surplus. It would possibly raise the price for local consumption. 20. How many years is it since the Victorians began to export oats ?—During the past two or three years. 21. So that the industry has increased during the past two years. Is it not due to the protective duty they have been labouring under ?—Probably. 22. In reference to boots and shoes, you made no mention of the American competition which most bootmakers are compluining about as more to be feared than the competition from Australia, of which they are complaining but little ? —I have not dealt with any matter outside the Commonwealth ; but at the present time I am aware that, large quantities of American boots and shoes are imported, and up to the present the competition of America has been more severely felt than the Australian competition. 23. Mr. Beauchamp.] You are a very close reader of the Australian papers, are you not, Mr. Eeid ?—As a rule, yes. 24. Prom the opinions expressed in the various papers of Australia, are you of opinion that the Commonwealth tariff will be a moderate one for revenue purposes, or a protective one ?—I think it will be a protective tariff. 25. Sufficiently high to exclude the bulk of the produce that at present finds it way to Australia?—l do not think the duties would be any heavier upon cereals than they are at present. The reason that I say a protective tariff will be imposed, as far as I can judge at present, is that it is impossible to raise eight millions through the Customs without imposing a tariff as high as at present. They cannot afford to reduce the present duties, as they must raise that amount for carrying on the Commonwealth Government. 26. Were you impressed at all with the anxiety which Victoria seemed to display to become federated, while New Zealand was hanging back—because we have had opinions expressed in that direction ? People say that federation was hastened by Victoria because she wished the Commonwealth to be formed, so that if New Zealand came in she would not come in as an original State ?—I think that is so. There are various articles I have read in the Argus in favour of federation. They have locked upon federation as being a good thing for the manufactures of Victoria, as they think they would have wider markets, and thereby they would obtain a greater advantage in production by reducing the first cost very considerably. 27. I think we export about 92 per cent, of our total produce to the United Kingdom and about 8 per cent, to Australia : do you think that with federation our exports to Australia would increase substantially, or do you think that Australia is becoming sufficiently self-contained to supply most of the products she requires for her domestic requirements ?—Australia is becoming more self-contained every year; and if we look at the immense strides that New South Wales has made in the way of extending her agricultural industry, and also at what Victoria is doing, it stands to reason that the limited area of New Zealand is nothing compared with the enormous area of Victoria and New South Wales. New South Wales, of course, suffers very seriously from
255
A.—4
drought, and in such a time she has to depend on New Zealand. If it had not been for a severe drought experienced in New South Wales previous to the harvest, instead of having a surplus of 180,000 tons of wheat, she would have had an exportable surplus of nearly 250,000 tons, fioughly speaking, I believe that last year the Commonwealth produced about 40,000,000 bushels of wheat, against New Zealand's 9,000,000 bushels. 28. Which would be preferable for the farmers, in your opinion—not to have an open market in Australia for oats, or to stand the competition they would have from the sale of Australian flour in New Zealand ?—The balance would be in favour of the farmers not federating. 29. Under the Commonwealth Bill the Federal Government have the right to retain up to 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue for the first ten years, and thereafter the whole of it for Federal purposes : do you think that that 25 per cent, would be retained by them for Federal purposes?— Yes. 30. Why ? —Because the expenses of the Federal Government are going to be far greater than it is anticipated, and it will be necessary for them to have a revenue of fully eight millions. 31. Have you seen it stated that we would be expected to contribute towards the cost of construction of such works as a trans-continental railway, which is contemplated for the development of Northern Queensland? —Under federation that would be so, and all these schemes involving the improvement of country that is so much stricken with drought, and the bringing-about of quicker communication, would fall upon New Zealand, which would really receive no benefit from them. 31a. New Zealand, of course, has been a good deal blown about: we have been praising ourselves a little too much; and no doubt under federation, as we would have only one-seventh of the representation, we might be weighted a bit by the legislators of the other side ? —I would be rather doubtful of New Zealand receiving even justice under federation. They look upon us with a very jealous eye ; and, then, we would have so little say in the administration of affairs. 32. In regard to the development of Australia, by these works to which I have referred, do you think it would mean that the producers of this colony will suffer any seriously prejudicial effect by such a development taking place in Australia ?—I do not know what the effect would be, but, of course, New Zealand would have to bear her share of the burden. 33. And you cannot see that there would be any compensating advantage ?—None. 34. And you consider that on the basis of representation we would be outvoted on all great questions?—l cannot say what would happen. 35. I suppose you know that in the event of any disagreement between the two Houses they sit together and vote according to the actual representation—each member counts as one vote? — Yes. 36. What is your opinion as to the class of men we would get to represent us in the Federal Parliament ?—That is very hard to say. What is the honorariujn ? 37. £400 per annum?—l expect it would make very little difference. 38. There does not seem to be very much interest in Australia with regard to New Zealand affairs, if we can judge from what we read ?—Probably distance has something to do with that. Certainly a great deal is due to the fact that we are divided by sea, but I do not think that the distance is a very serious obstacle; it is not such a serious argument against federation as the others I have mentioned. 39. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think that the Federation would benefit the small farmers ?—I cannot see what benefit they would receive, say, a year or two after federation. 40. Potatoes is a very large item of export in Lyttelton. A year ago they were exported from Lyttelton to the value of £126,647, and last year less than £26,927 —evidently a substantial trade is being done in potatoes; and we also hear that onions are exported : would not federation affect the small farmers in those respects ?—At that time there was a very great scarcity of potatoes, and they rose to a fabulous price, which caused a large export from here. Onions were exported of the value of £6,800 last year. Ido not think the farmers would derive any fixed benefit under federation. 41. Does it not strike you that the implement-makers of Christchurch, under federation, would have a new market opened up to them for their manufactures ?—During the last three years there has been a falling-off in the value of implements exported of nearly £2,000, proving at once that the statements' made by the implement-makers are altogether fallacious. If that falling-off continues, the export will be wiped out very quickly. 42. Might not the falling-off be due to the increased demands of our local markets?—lt may mean that the local factories have not the necessary amount of labour available to encourage an export trade ?—As a general rule, they endeavour to encourage that trade, and let the local orders hang over. 43. Is it not rather the reverse in this case—that it is their surplus that they export, and even exported at a loss, or at bare cost, in order to cheapen their home productions?— Exporters of agricultural implements only take firm orders from outside. 44. Do you think there is anything in the statement that the climate of New Zealand produces a better class of workmen than those found in Australia—that is, that the workmen here.do a better day's work than they do there? —T?hat statement must be received with a great deal of caution, because in Australia the men have to do a large amount of special work, and here, being a smaller place, men have to do all sorts of work. The Australian workmen, having to differentiate in regard to their work, are, I think, far more proficient in regard to that special work than our men. 45. That is to say, on account of the larger concerns in Australia they can specialise their work ?—-Yes. 46. Is it not possible that under federation we might develop our industries so much as to be able to specialise sufficiently to meet our local requirements, and even to compete with Australia in its own market ?—I doubt it very much, because you will find that under federation, and the
A.—4
256
removal of the Commonwealth Customs duties, our young men and women would be attracted to the larger cities over there, and consequently there would be a falling-off in our direct trade, which would disorganize business. 46a. The statement has been made that our climatic conditions are very much in our favour, and that the tendency will be not only to retain our own population, but to draw populations from Australia, which would enable us to turn out a larger amount of work than we can now : is that statement correct, in your opinion?—l do not think there is anything in it. 47. As to our cereals—evidently they have very much increased their crops in Australia—have yon thought that, on account of the larger yield per acre we have in New Zealand, there may not be a certain advantage through being close to a market, and that this advantage in respect to the yield would enable us to overcome the difficulty of distance, and thereby help us to compete in that market with the Australians on better terms than they can themselves?—l do not know at the momeut what the average yield in oats in New Zealand is ; can you tell me? 47a. The average has been about 22 to 24 bushels : do you not think that that would enable us to overcome all the disadvantages of the distance?— The production of cereals in Victoria is much less per acre than it can possibly be in New Zealand. Take the average yield of wheat: In Victoria it will be 11 bushels to the acre, in New Zealand about 29 ; consequently you would imagine that with such a heavy yield here we would be able to ship large quantities to Australia under federation. But when you consider the value of flour in Victoria, it is lower than it is in New Zealand, even with our heavy yield. They will be able to do the flour trade of the North Island on account of the lower prices and better quality, and under federation I do not know how we shall be able to compete on better terms with them. The same way with the oats —every year the area under cultivation in Victoria is increasing. 47b. But, still, does not that rather point to our farmers having under federation an advantage, seeing that our yield is so much larger, and therefore that our produce must be greater than theirs ?—I doubt it, because a yield of 12 bushels of wheat per acre is a good average for New South Wales, and a yield of 2450 bushels of oats to the acre is an excellent one for Victoria. They are satisfied, and because of that satisfaction the area under cultivation in the matter of wheat and oats is increasing enormously every year. 48. Then, is it because of the larger amount of profits that our farmer expects that would place him at a disadvantage under federation ?—-Well, in the first place, he has to pay very much more for his land compared to the price of land in Victoria, and Australia generally. Labour there is also cheaper ; the railage on wheat and oats in Victoria is also exceedingly low as compared with the railage on the same articles of produce in New Zealand. 49. But is not the tendency in New Zealand to reduce the cost of railage ?—Yes. 50. Do you think we would suffer any disadvantage by our isolation under federation?—lt need not be a serious disadvantage. 51. Carriage by water is cheaper in proportion than by rail?— Yes, very much so. 52. You refer to the cost we would be put to in contributing from the Customs and excise revenue, but have you thought that in the expenditure of that public money we would get a considerable portion of it back in the shape of public works ? —I do not think so; it would all be required for the administration of the Commonwealth. 53. You are of opinion, as far as a white Australia is concerned, that that would be impossible? —I think it is impossible. Ido not think it possible to carry on the sugar industry in the northern part of Queensland with white labour. 54. Mr. Reid.} I believe you are totally opposed to federation at all ? —Totally. 55. Do you not think that terms could be made such as were granted to West Australia?— That would not be sufficient inducement. 56. Have you considered the question of reciprocity? Would it be possible to arrange a treaty between the colonies? —In the matter of sugar there would be great difficulty. Sugar pays a duty of £4 13s. 4d. per ton. Practically, all the sugar that comes into New Zealand is produced by the Colonial Sugar Company at Fiji. The bulk of the sugar that comes from Australia is also from the same company, so that there would be no advantage to us from a reciprocity treaty. 57. Would it be possible with any other commodities to have reciprocal treaties?— Wine would possibly come in lower, but I do not know of anything else ; and they would have to give an exchange for us admitting wine free. 58. You are aware that these treaties were tried before ? —Yes, and they failed. - 59. Do you not think they might possibly renew these negotiations ?—I do not think so. Sugar is the only thing that can come in from Queensland, and wine from South Australia. 60. Mr. Leys.] Do you conclude, from the large increase in the cultivation of oats in Victoria, that they find they can export at a profit now ?—Yes. 61. Then, in that case there is no hope for our oat-growers in Victoria?—lt is only a matter of time when it would be quite hopeless to look to Victoria as a market even under free-trade. 62. Have you made any calculation of the total loss on the Customs revenue from intercolonial free-trade? —I have not, unfortunately. 63. But think of the soft-goods trade. At the present moment considerable quantities are imported into New Zealand from Sydney and Melbourne even with our protective duty ?—Under federation, I suppose the whole of these goods would be imported into Victoria and Sydney at dutypaid rates, and they would be distributed into New Zealand, and, the duty having been paid at Melbourne or Sydney, they would practically come in free to New Zealand. 64. Under the Commonwealth Bill, for the first five years re-exported goods are credited to the colony to which they are exported, and not to where the duty was paid? —That would not make much difference; but, as a wholesale warehouseman, I would prefer to be in business, after the five years, in Sydney or Melbourne, because they are better distributing centres.
257
A.—4
65. Apart from the loss of revenue through intercolonial free-trade, there is apparently a heavy loss from the fact that New Zealand has been drawing more from the Customs per head than any other colony ?—Not so much as Queensland. 66. But if we take the total of all the colonies of Australia, and take the average for all of them, it is only £2 Is. per head, while the average from New Zealand was £2 18s. That leaves a difference of 17s. per head : do you think it fair to assume that that 17s. per head would have to be made up by direct taxation in New Zealand under federation ?—Yes. 67. But we would still have to get sufficient revenue for State purposes?—Of course, if the Customs revenue were reduced we would have to contribute less to the Commonwealth. 68. But New Zealand will have to pay its interest on its loans and carry out its undertakings. Sir John Hall mentioned that the loss of our Customs revenue would amount to £500,000: how would that loss be made up to us?—By direct taxation, no doubt. 69. What would be the effect of such an enormous increase in the taxation of the colony ?—lt would have a very injurious effect upon every industry in the colony. 70. Hon. Major Steward.'] Is it not a fact that the cost of cultivation in Victoria and Sydney is considerably less than here?— Yes ; the cost there is less than 6s. an acre. 71. Is it not also true that the cost of harvesting is cheaper ?—Yes ; it is the custom in South Australia and Victoria to strip, thresh, and bag in one operation. 72. That considerably accounts for the fact that with a smaller yield they are able to get equally good financial results ?—Yes. I think it costs about 3s. per acre to cultivate land in South Australia. 73. Under the Commonwealth Act there seems to be no security that the maximum to be taken from any State by way of Customs duty will be one-fourth. If the position relatively of the States of the Commonwealth alters financially, it may happen that one State will pay more than one-fourth of its revenue ?—That is so ; it would all depend on the prosperity of the State. 74. Assuming that after a few years there is no return to New Zealand out of the fourth, and the whole of that fourth is used, it will mean, I suppose, about £500,000 ? —Fully. New Zealand's contribution will be about £550,000. 75. You gave us figures showing, according to your calculations, what we should lose in revenue by our joining the Federation : Sugar, £168,000; tobacco, £100,000; one-third duty on spirits, which would be £133,000 ?—I might say that it would possibly take three or four years before that would be accomplished. 76. These three items come to about £401,000. You also mentioned soft goods, boots and shoes, furniture, and a large number of items on which we would lose : do you think it would be assuming too much if I put that at £200,000 more?— Not exceeding £150,000. 77. Then, the colony would lose on federation £550,000 in addition to our contribution of £550,000, and that is our share to the cost of the Government ? —Yes; but if the Customs revenue decreased so would the contribution. 78. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you mean that we would lose £550,000 in addition to our contribution ?— Yes. Of course, our contribution might not be that amount, for it is a fourth that we have to pay, and if the revenue decreased so would our contribution. 79. You mean that we would lose £550,000 in revenue in addition to our contribution to the cost of the Federal Government ?—Yes, in time. 80. Hon. Major Steward.] In other words, then, adding the £550,000 which is estimated as our share of the cost of the Federal Government to the £550,000 which you estimate as our eventual loss upon the revenue, we should stand to lose about £1,100,000 ?—Yes. 81. Under all contingencies you estimate it would mean a loss to New Zealand of about £1,000,000 a year ?—Yes. 82. Hon. the Chairman.] How do you estimate that £550,000? —Goods which we are at present levying Customs duty on. 83. Yes, I understand that; and by the imposition of possibly a lower tariff in Australia we should lose £550,000 of Customs revenue. But I understood you to say, in answer to Major Steward, that, in addition to that, there would be a contribution to the cost of the Federal Government of another £500,000: how do you arrive at that ?—The cost of contributing one-fourth of the Customs revenue. That £500,000 is estimated on the present Customs duties of £2,000,000. 84. That is the total amount that it may be. Have you any data upon which you can say that our contribution to the Federal Government would be £500,000 ?—I only take it from the present duties —the amount derived from Customs revenue is fully £2,000,000 sterling. Under federation we would have to contribute a fourth of that amount. 85. But you are aware that the portion that is not required of that fourth for the expenses of the Commonwealth has to be paid back to the several States, or applied to the payment of the interest of the debts of the several States taken over by the Commonwealth. It is problematical what the cost of the Federal Government will be ?—-Yes; it was estimated at fully £8,000,000 sterling. 86. Can you tell us whether the balance of the trade between the States of the Commonwealth of Australia and New Zealand is in favour of New Zealand or the Commonwealth ?—I think it is about level at the present moment. 87. If about level, would the Commonwealth be interested in establishing a prohibitive protection tariff against New Zealand ? —I do not think so, because a prohibitive tariff would apply to all the countries outside the Commonwealth. 88. In your opinion, in the event of New Zealand not joining the Commonwealth, would the population be attracted to Australia, or from Australia to New Zealand ? —From Australia to New Zealand, I hope. 88a. Is there any matter upon which you would like to speak, and upon which you have not been questioned ? —I would like to read a letter which my firm has received from Melbourne. It is «B—A. 4.
A.—4,
258
dated the 11th February: " Under separate cover we have posted you copy of our February market report, which we trust will prove of interest. We believe, under federation, that Melbourne will rapidly become the' distributing centre of Australasia. Importers here are now holding greater stocks, and appear more anxious to compete for the export business. The authorities are also wakening up in the matter of increased facilities for shipping, and we hope by our frequent market advices you will henceforth be able to send us regular orders." That only affirms what appeared in the Melbourne Argus of October, 1899. Victoria now looks with a considerable amount of regret that New Zealand is not likely to join the Commonwealth, as she is very anxious to have a wider market for her surplus stocks. 89. Mr. Millar.] Gould you inform me whether, since the reduction of the duty on candles, there has been any attempt to bring candles in from the outside ?—Yes, there have been two attempts. 90. Was there any attempt prior to the reduction ?—No. I know for a fact that a very large soap-manufacturing business will shortly be established in Sydney, and even with our protective duties now we will not be able to compete against them. 91. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you think there will be some fear of the protective duties being dangerous to New Zealand? —No, Ido not think there is anything to fear. I think the protective duties on cereals will be slightly less than they are now. Samuel Brown examined. (No. 87.) 92. Hon. the Chairman.] You are president of the Industrial Association in Wellington? —■ Yes. 93. How many members does that association number ?—About a hundred. 94. Have they considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia? —As a body, no. We wrote to Mr. Seddon to get some information, but no notice was taken of our letter, and we had no proper data. 95. You are not able to say what is the opinion of the majority of the members of the association? —No ; every man's opinion will be simply that of the individual. 96. Will you give the Commission your opinion on the matter ? —l' may say that lam not affected by the matter one way or another. 97. What is your occupation?—l am a contractor, and a coal"and produce importer. I speak more from the industrial point of view. Ido not profess to touch the commercial aspect as much as Mr. Eeid has done. lam speaking merely from my knowledge of how it will affect the workingpeople. I think the question of whether we should federate or not is governed by factors far away from Australia. What is going to affect the workers of New Zealand in the near future is not so much the Australian competition as that of Germany and America. Ido not attach much importance to the present conditions as between the two colonies, as they will most likely be modified, and the difference is not much, if anything, greater than existed between one province and another in New Zealand at their abolition. As to the twelve hundred miles, called "the twelve hundred reasons," I think this a distinct advantage, as it would modify, if not destroy, any epidemic from the continent before it could reach New Zealand. In time the distance is no greater than separates Auckland from Dunedin; a 21-knot boat would do it in about the same time as is now taken either from Wellington to Auckland or to Dunedin, and enormously less than when the Parliament sat in Auckland without telegraph or cable. It is far more serious to consider the future competition from Germany and America, where the conditions are so different. I think in the near future, if nothing is done, it will not be possible for our workmen to compete with them and maintain their present standard of comfortable living and short hours. The Board of Trade returns show that in the Bast —China, Japan, India, &c.—the Germans and Americans are increasing their trade in a greater ratio than the English. The German works three machines where the English workman attends to one only. Sir Hiram Maxim recently stated that, while an English workman took a day and a quarter to produce a certain part of a gun, a German workman produced thirteen in the same time. The Germans produced the biggest and fastest steamer in the world, and sent her into Southampton waters with the flag flymg " Made in Germany." lam informed that the German steamer that comes to Australia is already flooding the markets with German products. Germany has already taken steps to capture the trade of Africa by giving a subsidy of some £70,000 per annum to a steamship company, who are increasing their fleet so as to call at all the ports. In America flesh and blood is scarcely considered; manufactories are largely on the piecework-hour system, which causes workmen to work at the highest possible speed, and it means that nearly two years' output is got in one year. It pays them to export their surplus and sell at a loss, so as to keep every machine constantly going. The export trade of America has been increasing at the rate of about £10,000,000 a year. Germany gives bounties to shipping and other things for export. In America they are doing something similar; all her laws are made for the special benefit of their own trade ; each country is pressing forward in the East, and New Zealand alone cannot withstand this. Australia is a country where Europe could be dumped down and only take up about half the room, though there are other questions which require to be considered. I think, from the industrial aspect, New Zealand needs Australia more than Australia needs New Zealand; that in the notdistant future they will require the help of their big brother if the workmen are to be protected from foreign cheap labour, and enjoy the comfort they have been born to. 98. Do you think they will be successful in passing a Conciliation and Arbitration Act in Australia ?—I think there is no doubt that they will pass an Arbitration Act. The question of raising the wages depends on the experience.of the people who run the Arbitration Court. 99. What do you think are the prospects of the wages in Australia being raised to the same level as in New Zealand ?—I think the tendency will be to raise them.
259
A.—4
100. How long will it take before they are on the same level as New Zealand ?—lt is impossible to say. 101. Have you considered what the effect of. federation will be upon the manufacturing industries of this colony ? —I do not think the present condition of things will last. I think the whole assumption is based on something that will not last. 102. Are not the establishments much larger and command more capital than is the case in New Zealand ?—Yes. 103. Are they not likely to operate prejudicially against the smaller manufactories in New Zealand ?—Well, the large capitalist always has the advantage, no doubt; but I look upon it this way: I think that, given anything like equal terms, the New Zealand workman will produce a greater amount of work than the Australian. Hour for hour they will do more. 104. I am not speaking of the workmen, I am speaking of the industries : can our manufactures get on equal terms with those in Australia? —I cannot say. 105. Supposing wages are cheaper in Australia, then the manufacturer is at a disadvantage in New Zealand, is he not ? —I do not see it. He may get less work for less wages. The ill-paid workman is generally the dearest man. 106. You think that more work can be done by the New-Zealander than by the Australian ? — Undoubtedly. 107. Do you think that the manufacturing industries of New Zealand will not suffer by federation ?—I am not prepared to say that they would not at the first. 108. You have merely considered it from the standpoint you have mentioned?— Yes. 109. Son. Major Steward.] You say you think that in the near future New Zealand may need Australia more than Australia may need New Zealand, and you explain that to mean that by-and-by there will be negotiations for the treatment of Australia as a most-favoured nation, and that being part of the Federation we would get the benefit of that, but not otherwise: is that so ?—I mean this : that a small colony like New Zealand will have no influence in making arrangements with the nations of Europe. 110. Do you mean that the most-favoured treatment would be with the foreign Powers and not with England?— There are many thinking people in England now who believe that there should be some modification to protect the English workman. 111. Then, you do not anticipate trade between Australia and Germany, but a British zollverein which puts duties on the goods of foreign countries ? —I think in the future something of that kind will have to eventuate. 112. If that is so, do you think that, if Great Britain adopted that policy, and New Zealand did not federate, Great Britain would exclude New Zealand from the benefit of that policy ? —You see, I had not spoken of that zollverein as an actual thing coming. I only indicated my opinion that something must take place, otherwise in the very near future New Zealand would be swamped by foreigners. New Zealand is weak by herself, but she will be stronger with Australia. 113. You anticipate that we would be in a better position in the event of our requiring a most-favoured-nation treaty. Now, if the negotiation is to take place between Australia and Great Britain, should we be in a worse position if outside the Commonwealth than in it ? —lt may not take place with Britain. 114. With whom ?—With a foreign nation. 115. If it is to be a treaty between Australia and a foreign nation, your opinion is that Australia would fare better than New Zealand ? —Yes. 116. And do you think it at all likely that Germany would give any consideration whatever to a proposal to admit Australian goods to Germany free ? —I am not prepared to say ; it is quite hypothetical. 117. It would have to be negotiated between the Home-country, would it not?—lt all depends upon the Constitution. 118. Do you think, if a zollverein came about, that, under any circumstances, New Zealand would be excluded from the benefit of it ?—I should say not. 119. Mr. Leys.] You say that the danger is from exports from Germany and America—that they export their surplus at a loss or bare profit in many cases : is there not a danger of the large factories in Australia doing the same ? —They do not produce to that extent. 120. Is not the tendency of manufacturing to concentrate in these large factories, such as you describe ? —Yes, and to a much greater extent in the Old World. 121. Under federation, will not that be the tendency in Sydney and Melbourne?—lt seems to be the tendency all over the world. 122. Would we not necessarily suffer?—l do not know. If you are selling at the same price, why should you suffer? 123. Because of the extra cheapness in manufacturing on a large scale?—l cannot say that. We are all on the same scale, and it is like saying that Willis Street is suffering from Cuba Street. 124. Manufacturing on a large scale you can produce an article at a cheaper price ?—That is so. 125. If we manufacture on a smaller scale, would we not pay a higher price ?—lf a man manufactures on a small scale, and is unable to make it pay, it shows that he has no business to be manufacturing at all. 126. You think we shall not suffer—that our small industries are in no danger of being swamped? —No doubt some of them will, but I do not think they will continue. 127. You think that the immediate effect would be detrimental to our industries?—To some it would be ; to others it would be beneficial.
260
A.—4
128. Do you know anything of the labour conditions in Australia ?—No. I only know this : that, as a matter of fact, they cannot do nearly the same work. We had men working in a Wellington bottle-factory. They told me that at Botany they had to stop five minutes every halfhour ; here they did not have to do that. 129. Mr. Luke.] Do you think there is any possibility for us, under federation, developing our iron-deposits at Parapara? Would there be any market opened up under federation for an industry of that sort ?—I should think, if we can so arrange as to be able to compete with Great Britain or America, the larger continent of Australia should be the market. 130. But do you not think the small demand of Australia might even put us to a great disadvantage with the great iron industries in America ? —Decidedly. 131. You mentioned about the boot industry, Mr. Brown. I understand that there is one factory in Melbourne which already employs fifteen hundred hands: do you think it is possible for New Zealand to maintain that industry under federation ?—I do not know. We could maintain it if we chose to do so, just the same as Melbourne. You can centralise things here if you like. 132. We cannot centralise to the same extent as they can. Do you think it is possible to compete with such an establishment ? —lt all depends upon the conditions. You do not require me to answer that question, for it requires no answer. 133. Do you know the number of men employed in the boot trade in New Zealand ?—About three to four thousand. 134. So that practically one of these boot-factories in Melbourne employs half as many men as the New Zealand trade altogether ? —Yes. 135. Do you not think that the conditions of the population of the Continent of Australia being such that there is quick and easy communication with their centres would give them an advantage under federation that we would not experience ?—What do you mean by being quick ? 136. The train is an easier means of transit than steamer ?—That would be no advantage—• you can telegraph. 137. You are of opinion that New Zealand does produce a better class of workmen?—l am. 138. You think we may suffer as regards the expenditure of public money ?—lf you put it as regards " log-rolling." 139. Take it as they are ?—Do they log-roll in Australia ? 140. They log-roll all over the world. In a House of ninety members New Zealand has sixteen representatives: what chance have our log-rollers against theirs? —I think we might be able to send sixteen very good log-rollers. 141. You think we could not send the best men from New Zealand ?—I think we could. Men have to be away for months from their homes to attend the New Zealand Parliament, and it does not take much longer to go to Australia than to Wellington from the southern part of the colony. 142. Mr. Beauchamp.] You think that by centralisation and specialisation they could compete against New Zealand ?—That is, in the ordinary way; but there are different conditions of workmen. lam not prepared to say that even with centralisation it may not cost them as much to produce boots on their large scale as in New Zealand on a small scale. 143. Assuming that we got a certain amount of manufactures dumped down in New Zealand, and competition is going to increase rather than decrease from Germany and the Bast—China and Japan —would not our manufactures suffer in a double sense from federation ?—I expect they would wipe them out. Australia would not be in it. 144. Do you take as gloomy a view of the manufactures of Australia as to think that in the course of time Germany and the East is going to wipe out all the factories ?—lt is not a gloomy view, but something has got to be altered. The tendency is not to increase the hours in Australia or New Zealand. 145. Do you think that, in order to compete with the other countries, we should increase the hours and reduce the wages ?—No. Why do you ask that question ? It is rather an insinuation. 146. There can be only another alternative, and that is to ring-fence New Zealand and Australia by high duties: would that be in the interests of manufactures ?—I do not know what you mean by " ring-fence." If you could ring-fence New Zealand it would be the best place in the world. lam not able to answer that question—it is an impossibility. 147. But the only way in which you can keep out these cheap goods is by imposing high duties ?—I am not prepared to say that. 148. Do you think that under federation there would be an active interest taken in the labour legislation passed by our Government during the past few years?—l cannot say. 149. Would such legislation have the effect of levelling up or levelling down ?—The tendency is to level up throughout the world. 150. In the course of time—in the near future—they will be paying the same rates and working the same hours as we do in New Zealand?—l think that is the tendency. 151. Mr. Millar.] I think you are pretty well aware, Mr. Brown, that the Australian rate of pay in the different industries rules lower than ours ? —I think so. 152. And that they will either have to come up to our level or we shall have to go down to theirs, to enable our men to compete ?—-But is that so? You are putting an assumption. 153. I have before me the report of the Labour Department in Victoria, in which it is shown that the wages now paid there are less than the New Zealand outside wages, and we have it in evidence that, although moles can be made at 9Jd. per pair, at the rate of a piecemeal log, the manufacturer pays the operative on the minimum wage, because he can do it for less : it is not the case in New Zealand that moles can be made for 9Jd., is it?—No ; but I think we have sac ooats starting, I think, at 10d. up to Is. Id.
261
A.—4
154. Going away from the question of wages, we will assume that wages are on a par in the two countries. There are several other conditions which apply to the workers in this colony which do not apply to Australia, as you know, especially legislative Acts. For instance, the Factory Act here makes the factory-week forty-eight hours ?—Yes ; but I presume the legislation under the Commonwealth would not be retrospective, as it would not affect any of our laws. Of course, if you tell me that it is going to affect our laws, I at once say that it is going to be a very bad thing for New Zealand. 155. It cannot affect them until the Federal Parliament legislates; but with all these conditions, which the employers of labour themselves call " equalising conditions," do you think we are able to compete ?—I assume that our laws would remain as they were. 156. But do you think that manufacturers would carry on with these laws ?—I do not know that the Workers' Compensation Act would make much difference, because everybody insures now, and nobody feels it very much. 157. But you are not of opinion that all these laws would unduly weigh on our manufacturers as against the Australians?— The feeling has been in my mind that a great many things there are only temporary, and that the tendency will be to level up. Australian people are going in for our legislation, and. are more likely to follow us than we are to follow them. 158. Suppose the levelling-up process takes place, it must be a matter of a few years, as far as one can see, judging by the results of the past few years, before they can get on a level with us?— That I cannot express an opinion upon. 159. During that time the probability is that our industries would melt quite away, and go to the other side ? —I suppose some would benefit and some would suffer. 160. Which do you think would benefit?—l could not say. In regard to boots and shoes, I am not sure, but possibly they would not benefit. The clothing and the woollen industry would probably benefit by federation. 161. What about furniture?— The furniture trade is going to be a bigger question than that of protecting themselves against New Zealand. They have to protect their own people against the Chinese, and the Commonwealth will have to do that. 162. You are aware that the Chinese furniture trade has been established for fifteen years in Victoria? —I understand so, but I did not know that. 163. And in New South Wales almost the same time ? —I do not know. 164. Instead of being dealt with, we have it in evidence in the last annual report of the Victorian Government that the law is absolutely unable to deal with the Chinese at all ?—lt may become an Imperial question in the future, and they would have no say in that matter. 165. With regard to the question of boots, I understand you to say that it is the competition from America that we have to fear?—l did not say America alone, but Germany also. 166. Do you know that the importation of boots from the United Kingdom for the last year was £113,000, as against £17,000 from the United States ?—I did not mean boots alone, but I cited boots as an instance to illustrate my argument on the question I happen to be conversant with. I was speaking of competition generally. We get competition in respect to boots all round. 167. You say it is more from Germany?— Both places. I think the Americans will beat the Germans. They beat the Chinese themselves in Canton in making mats. 16b. But your candid opinion is that labour in this colony would not be seriously affected by federation, as far as you can see ? —No, Ido not say that. I only go this far : that I think in the near future New Zealand will need Australia more than Australia will need New Zealand. lam quite prepared to say, many things and many workmen will suffer under federation ; but give the New Zealand workman fair-play, and he will turn out more work in eight hours than the Australian will in nine hours; the conditions being equal, even if the pay is a little less than the Australian rate of pay, I do not think the New Zealand workman need fear that he will go to the wall. 169. Hon. the Chairman.] Are you in favour of New Zealand federating with Australia or not? —I have no opinion at all on the matter; lam perfectly indifferent. Sir, — Wellington, 25th February, 1901. My answer to your last question, " Are you in favour of federation," is not what I wished to convey. Kindly allow me to put it thus: In the matters that I spoke of I am in favour of federation ; on the other aspects I have not sufficient information to pronounce an opinion one way or another. Samuel Beown. Hon. Colonel Pitt, Chairman, Federal Commission. Martin Kennedy examined. (No. 88.) 170. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Kennedy ?—I may be called a settler, as my biggest interest is land. Formerly I was twenty years engaged in the merchant business at Greyinouth, and subsequently was colliery- and steamboat-owner. For past ten years I have resided in Wellington, and am on the directory of several business concerns, and am managing director of two large concerns. 171. Have you lived in Australia?— Only a short time; but I have had a good deal of commercial connection with Australia while in the merchant, shipping, and colliery business. 172. Have you visited Australia recently ?—Yes, several times, and quite recently. 173. Have you studied the Commonwealth Act ?—Not very closely. I have read it, and I have considered the question of this colony federating with the Commonwealth. 174. What is your opinion upon the matter?— That we are better not to federate—that we can do better under our present Constitution. I consider our present Constitution is sufficiently elastic for the development of our resources, and that the federation we have at present with Great Britain is sufficient for New Zealand.
A.—4
262
175. Have you considered how the agricultural interests of New Zealand are likely to be affected by New Zealand not federating with Australia?— Yes. Let me say this : I consider New Zealand wants population, manufactures, and land-settlement. I fail to see how federation can promote any one of these industries in New Zealand. - 176. In reference to land-settlement, do you think the agricultural interests are likely to be retarded if New Zealand does not federate with Australia ?—I do not think the question of federation has very much influence upon the land-settlement question in New Zealand, because I believe the small proportion of cereals—that is, barley and oats —that Australia draws now, or would draw in the future, from New Zealand would be neutralised by the flour that would come from Australia to New Zealand under the Commonwealth tariff. I make that statement by reason of the fact that during the twenty years I was in business in Greymouth I have had to import flour from Australia very largely, and I used to sell it at £2 per ton more than I could get for New Zealand flour. 177. Are you aware that wheat is at present largely exported from Christchurch to Auckland? —Yes. 178. Would that trade be interfered with in the event of federation being brought about ?— Generally speaking, it would. They would draw from Australia frequently. 179. Are you aware whether in Queensland and New South Wales they are now able to grow barley successfully ?—Yes. 180. What is your opinion as to the probable effect of federation upon the manufacturing industries ? —I believe it would have a most disastrous effect. 181. Why ? —Because those industries are so much more developed in Australia than in New Zealand, and this colony would become a dumping-ground for their surplus stocks. To say that they do not produce that surplus now only means that they have no market, but immediately New Zealand was open to them they would increase their output, because they have the plant and appliances to enable them to do it. 182. Have you considered the financial aspect of the question—as to whether the colony would lose or gam in respect to its revenue by federating with Australia?—l consider that New Zealand would lose—not that it would lose the revenue, as the loss by the reduced tariff would remain in the pockets of the colonists. But, granted that we want the revenue, then we are better to have the spending of it ourselves. 183. In the event of federation, supposing a lower tariff was established in Australia, as Mr. Reid has predicted, would not the New Zealand Government lose a considerable proportion of the revenue which it now receives in the shape of Customs duties ?—We would lose our proportion of the expenditure required for the Federal Government, but I do not see that we would lose that which would not be collected. If our revenue is on a lower scale, surely the colony would not lose it, because it would be in the pockets of the individual. 184. But would it not be necessary, in order to carry on the public service of the colony, to levy further taxation to make up the revenue which would be lost through the lower Customs tariff? —Yes, I assume that; and I suppose the first thing that would have to go would be the Oldage Pensions Act, and that would be a calamity. 185. You think that is one way in which the matter might be balanced?—l do not suggest it, but I certainly think that would be the effect. 186. Other than by the imposition of additional direct taxation ? —Yes. 187. Are there any other disadvantages you can mention that you think would arise from federation besides those you have referred to ?—I think that sentiment enters very largely into all systems of goverpment, and in federating with Australia we would be parting with a good many of our liberties. We would be only a small proportion of the federated Parliament, whose headquarters would be in Australia: experience and history shows that the weaker party always suffers in these federations. New Zealand could not expect very much less. We do not want a dual system of government here, as the single system we have at present is ample for our wants. If we federated the stronger party in Australia would secure all the fat billets for their friends—l refer to the billets in New Zealand—and that would be one of the evils of federation, in my opinion. For instance, in the Customs Department the highest officers there in a few years might possibly be superseded by the friends of the strongest party in the Cabinet in Australia, and any legislation that takes place in the future would be influenced by them. It is quite immaterial what the individual opinion of the minority of the members of that Federal Parliament might be. That is the case with nearly all our colonial Legislatures, and probably, as the interests of Australia are not identical with the interests of New Zealand, any legislation and any change that took place would always be adverse to New Zealand. 188. But is not that supposed to be counterbalanced by the equal representation we have in the Senate ? —Constituencies generally find a way of getting round minority safeguards when they want to. They will get through any Acts or any safeguards you might provide. Then, again, as regards the question of distance, it is not that fact that has such an important bearing on the question of federation, but it is the fact that we have no frontier boundaries as they have in Australia. That was a sufficient ground for the Australians to federate ; but the fact of our isolation by twelve hundred miles of water is an effective reason why we should not federate. We know that the frontier tariffs were an everlasting source of menace to the peace and welfare of the various colonies, who are only separated by a land boundary ; but we need not apprehend any difficulty on that head in New Zealand. 189. You think the twelve hundred miles of water would be a distinct disadvantage to New Zealand ?—lt is a distinct reason against New Zealand federating. Besides, there is no doubt that the inter-travelling between the States of the Commonwealth in Australia is much easier, and will continue to be much greater, than it can be between Australia and New Zealand. You have only
263
A.—4
to travel in Australia and witness the constant stream of people travelling to and fro, as compared with the few who go up and down to New Zealand, to be convinced of that fact. 190. Can you mention any advantages which occur to you as likely to arise through New Zealand federating with Australia?— There would be some- advantage in the doing-away of the necessity for examining the people's luggage by the Customs authorities, and in that way the tourist traffic might be helped. I cannot see that federation would help our maritime position. 191. Do you not think that, having formed an alliance on free-trade conditions, it would be a distinct advantage to New Zealand?—-No, I do not think so, because there is very little that Australia would take from us, and there is absolutely nothing but coal that we would take from them that we require, excepting what would be to our detriment. 192. Mr. Millar.} Do you think this colony could borrow more advantageously on the London market if she were a portion of the Commonwealth, or do you think she could borrow on better terms by remaining aloof?—I do not think so. I think New Zealand has in herself all the elements of future prosperity, and she will always be able to borrow in the future as well as the Commonwealth could borrow for her. 193. Do you think there is any probability of the Commonwealth being able to borrow on equal terms with British Consols?—l do not think so. 194. Well, the price paid for British Consols and the price we pay to-day is not very different —the margin is too small ? —I think there is considerable difference. 195. Just now there is not a big margin—the difference as between 3 per cent, and 2-J per cent. ?—We do not borrow at par 3 per cent. 196. But you do not anticipate that federation would affect our borrowing-powers ?—No. 197. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think that Australia chiefly imports our produce in years when their climatical conditions are adverse ?—That is so, excepting in the case of Sydney. Of course, Sydney, being a free port, has been taking considerable quantities of our produce. It would affect particular localities in the first instance, as the growers of barley—principally Marlborough and the South Island. 198. You have been exporting malt to Australia, have you not ?—Yes, a little. 199. To which market has it been shipped ?—Sydney only. 200. How does the quality of our malt compare with the English article?— The small amount that we send from Wellington is nothing compared with what they export from Otago and Canterbury. They generally pay 10 per cent, more for the English article in Sydney than they pay for the New Zealand article. 201. How does the quality grown in Australia compare with the barley grown in New Zealand ?—My information is that they are growing quite as good, and possibly better, barley in Sydney and in Queensland, and they certainly produce more barley in Victoria than they want for local use. 202. So that they can produce in Australia an article of as good a quality as they can in this colony, and no doubt in course of time Australia will not need to depend on New Zealand for it unless there are adverse climatic conditions ?—That is so; and Australia, having greater facilities for farming and cheaper land, can produce cheaper than we can. The price of land there is perhaps only 25 per cent, of the price of land in New Zealand, quality for quality, in favourable seasons. 203. So that in making the remark you made in your opening statement, as to its being better for us to maintain our present relations with Great Britain, you had in your mind that something like 92 per cent, of our produce goes to Great Britain as against Australia's 8 per cent. ?—Undoubtedly Britain is our present and our future market. 204. As regards a reciprocity treaty, do you think there is any chance of our being able to establish a reciprocity treaty with the Commonwealth in the event of our not federating?—l think in time we should, but not in the immediate future. 205. Mr. Millar asked you just now as to whether you thought we should be better able to raise money under the Commonwealth than under the State : have you noticed the fact that the New South Wales 3J-per-cents are now quoted at £102 155., or a reduction of 55., while New Zealand with interest payable in January and July, are quoted at £107 55., or 10s. higher ? —Yes. 206. This seems to indicate, does it not, that the stock of New Zealand is in more favour than the stock of the Commonwealth ?—Possibly it would indicate that they are apprehensive of the Federation. 207. Mr. Luke.] Following up this question of billets, do you think it would be a serious disadvantage to New Zealand in that respect if its affairs were administered from the other side ? Do you think the Commonwealth Government would put their own friends into billets here ? — Perhaps the objection is more real to my mind than to other people, but it would be a decided disadvantage if it took place. If you look to the country I come from you will see that the best positions there are filled with people of that description, and not with the people belonging to the country ; and therefore I would be apprehensive of like results here. 208. But our Government would be concerned, and our State billets would accordingly be filled by our own Government; and do you think there would be a tendency on the part of the Commonwealth not to deal fairly with all the States ?—lt would be very much like it is in these days—a question of power. 209. Then, the question of distance is not a serious obstacle?—No; but it is an additional factor why this colony is not under the same obligation to federate that Australia is. 210. But, as regards the carriage of goods, it is done more cheaply by steamer than rail, and would that not always be the case, because sea-carriage is even cheaper in Australia than it is here in proportion to rail-carriage ?—That all depends. If you consider that in Australia the suppliers
A.—4
264
had only the frontiers to cross, and that they may only have a very short distance to pay for railage before they find a market, you will see that they have an advantage over us, because if we send produce and manufactured goods there it might have to go inland after landing. In that respect they would have the advantage of carriage. 212. But still the great markets would be in the large centres of population— Melbourne and Sydney —and, that being the case, we would only have the sea-carriage to consider: would we not then be able to compete with their carriage by rail ? —We are not handicapped by the distance in the matter of transit, but importations, in my opinion. 213. You think the want of intercommunication between us and the other States would be no great barrier to federation ?—I do not think so. 214. Is it not a fact that a great many people dislike travelling by sea, and it is a sea-voyage from New Zealand to Australia, whereas between the States in Australia the people are always changing and intermixing by reason of it being railway communication ? —Yes; they have better facilities of becoming acquainted with each other and each other's resources than they have with those of New Zealand. 215. They have a community of interest which more or less excludes us ?—Yes. 216. Do you think that anything is to be gained by federation in the way of defence ?—No; we are federated with Great Britain, and that is our best protection. 217. Looking to the future, and the Commonwealth growing to large dimensions, and Great Britain not being able to give us the same proportion of protection as now, and the Commonwealth establishing a navy and field Force, would not that be an advantage to us if we federated? —I think we would obtain reciprocity on that point. 218. I think you approve rather of reciprocity between the Commonwealth and ourselves as against federation ?—Yes. 219. And you think they would enter into reciprocal treaties with us ?—ln the future. I do not think in the near future. 220. We had evidence in Christchurch that the malting industry in this colony would be ruined: what is your opinion ?—lt would be adversely affected. I do not think it would be stopped. My reason for that is that, whilst a duty would be imposed on New Zealand malt, it would also be imposed on English malt, which is not the case now. 221. Mr. Leys.] In your observations, how did you find the labour conditions prevailing in Australia as compared with the labour conditions here?— The labour conditions here are much more in favour of the labourer than in Australia. 222. Are the wages lower in Australia?— Yes. 223. Is there a near prospect of that condition being improved in Australia ?—Yes, I think there is. I think they are following our lead in Australia in that respect, and in many other things, and ultimately they will be brought up to the same level as New Zealand. 224. Do you think that will be in the near future ?—lt would have been in Victoria and New South Wales. Whether federation will retard that I Cannot say; but, had no federation taken place, I believe that these two colonies would have brought their labour conditions pretty well into line with New Zealand. 225. Supposing that New Zealand federated, what, in your opinion, would be the immediate effect on labour in New Zealand under present conditions ?—I do not think that labour, as labour, would be immediately affected except in the matter of employment. A good deal of the employment would be displaced by manufactures being dumped into New Zealand, and so lessening the employment in the few factories we have. 226. Now,.with regard to prosperity, how does the prosperity of the neighbouring colonies compare with that of New Zealand for the last five years ?—New Zealand has been much more prosperous than Australia. 227. To what do you attribute that superior prosperity? —Well, of course there are a multitude of conditions which no doubt make it up. There is the higher price for exports, meat especially, and there is no doubt that the close settlement of the land has done much for it, aud the cheap money for settlers is also responsible to some extent. 228. You think that the progressive legislation of New Zealand has materially enhanced its prosperity ?—Undoubtedly I do.----229. Do you think that if we were deprived of control over our Customs revenue we could so well carry out these reforms as we do now ? —I think we could not carry them out, and instead of going forward on the same lines we would be completely stopped. 230. You think that not having an elastic finance would materially affect us in developing our resources ? —I think so. 231. Hon. Major Steward.] Supposing a previous witness is correct in his estimate that if New Zealand joined the Federation it would have to contribute half a million of money towards our share of the Commonwealth cost, and that we should also lose half a million of revenue—in other words, we should have to make up by taxation over a million of money—do you think it would be possible for our farmers to bear four times the present amount of land-tax, and that the incometax could be increased by four times ?—I think it would be a great calamity if it had to be done. I would not say whether they could or could not bear it. Thomas George Macaethy examined. (No. 89.) 232. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—I am engaged in the brewing business. 233. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Thirty-six years. 234. And before that, have you been in Australia ?—I was ten years in Australia. 235. Have you visited Australia frequently since settling in New Zealand?— Not frequently. I was there four years ago.
265
A.—4
236. Have you given attention to the Commonwealth question?— Not as much as I should have done. 237. Would you be good enough to give the Commission the benefit of your opinion on the matter? —To me the question of federation requires-very little attention, because until the question of free-trade and protection is settled in Australia, and also the racial difficulties that are likely to arise in northern Australia—until these are in a definite form the question of federation does not present itself favourably to my mind. 238. What do you assume the Federal tariff is likely to be ?—I am unable to express an opinion. 239. The Federal Government must have revenue, and is not it likely they will impose a slightly protective tariff for revenue purposes?—l think that likely. 240. Do you consider the tariff is likely to be higher than the present Customs tariff in New Zealand in the matter of protection ?—I think it is likely to be very similar—that is, taking the whole of Australia. 241. What effect would that have on the trade in New Zealand ?—lt would not be to our advantage. 242. Have you considered how the manufacturing interests would be affected in the event of New Zealand federating with Australia?—l think injuriously, owing to the aggregation of population there in two or three large centres. 243. Do you think the effect would be to attract population from New Zealand to Australia or from Australia to New Zealand?—l could give no opinion on that. 244. What are your views upon what has been called the sentimental view of the question— that of New Zealand sacrificing its independence ? —lf it was a question of vote, my vote would be against federation at present. 245. Have you any opinion as to how the agricultural interests would be affected in the event of federation?— Probably injuriously; but, inasmuch as Australia is not our principal market, Ido not think the effect would be so very serious as to induce us to enter into federation. 246. The conclusion to which you have arrived is that it is better for New Zealand to stand out ?—I think so. 247. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you considered the financial aspect at all—the effect on the credit of this colony by giving up a large amount of the Customs revenue ? —1 have not considered it enough to give an opinion, but I would consider it to be a disadvantage. 248. The taxation would have to be made up in some other form : do you think the benefits the agriculturists derive from federation would be outweighed by the extra taxation ?—Enormously. 249. With regard to representation, do you think that on all great questions we would be outvoted ? —There would be closer identity of interests amongst the Australians than with New Zealand representatives. 250. And that would be beneficial for Australia, but not for New Zealand?— Yes. 251. Under federation, assuming that large industries are established in Sydney and Melbourne, do you think we would probably lose some of our best men by going to these centres ?—For a time we might. 252. Hon. the Chairman.] You spoke of the racial difficulty in northern Australia requiring settlement ?—Yes. 253. Do you think that country can be settled by other than a coloured race ?—I have never been in the far north, but I have worked in New South Wales and Victoria, and I think Europeans would hardly work in a warmer climate. I think complications must arise in time between the Asiatic nations and Australia in the event of these Asiatics being excluded from northern Australia. As those nations become more acquainted with western notions they will become aware of their power, and will not be so easily dealt with. 254. Do you think the sugar industry will be able to be worked by a white population?—l only speak from what I read. 255. Have you ever heard of tropical climates, such as Northern Queensland, being successfully peopled by white people? —No. I have not spoken to any person who has had actual experience ; but, looking at what has occurred in other countries, I assume that to maintain the sugar industry there coloured labour must be employed. That has been the case in other hot countries. 256. What about the question of distance from the Federal seat of government: does not that weigh with you in any way? —You have telegraphic communication, which makes Sydney no further off than Nelson. 257. You see no disadvantage in that ? —No, not in that. 258. The question of federation has agitated the Australian mind for many years past, but we find that it has not been much thought of generally in New Zealand?—lt does not present the same advantages to the New-Zealanders as it does to the Australians. There are no undefined boundaries here as there are between the different colonies in Australia. 259. You have a decided opinion against federation ?—I have. 260. Mr. Beauchamp.] I dare say you have noticed that Mr. Barton and other leading politicians have stated that there shall be a white Australia : do you think that the law of man can be stronger than the law of nature?—l think the law of nature will prevail. 261. Mr. Luke.] Do yoTi think we should be better able to borrow on the London market under federation than by keeping apart ?—I do not care to answer that question. There is nothing definite to base it upon. 262. Supposing we were tied down to borrow locally, we could go on the large market of Australia?— That presents no particular advantage. 263. Did you notice by the newspapers this morning that New South Wales had paid 4 per cent for its last loan?—lt was a temporary advance on Treasury bills. I heard a question put as 34—A. 4.
A.—4
266
to the difference in rates between Consols and New South Wales securities and New Zealand, but to enable one to determine what relation one bears to the other you would require to know the time which each security has still to run, and the date when dividends are due.
Tuesday, 26th Februaby, 1901. James Mackay examined. (No. 90.) 264. Hon. the Ghatrman.] What are you, Mr. Mackay? —The Chief Clerk in the Labour Department, and Inspector of Factories. 265. You produce a return showing the rates of wages in this colony in the different trades and manufactures ?—Yes ; it is a comparative statement of wages paid in six colonies. Tasmania has been omitted, because I really do not know what the wages are there, not having been able to procure the necessary publications. 266. What are the rates compiled from ?—The New Zealand rate is compiled from our returns of factories that we receive annually from the employers, and also from my own knowledge, because I find very often that in these returns there is a difference. Ido not know whether it is a difference between a theoretical wage or a practical wage, but there is a difference in respect to the figures given by different employers in the same trade in the colony. The returns are not bound by law to be accurate. There are no penalties provided in the case of an incorrect return being forwarded by the employers ; but I sometimes think they do put the wages in rather rosy. The other returns are compiled from the blue-books of the different colonies, and from Coghlan's statistics. I might point out that the Labour Department's figures do not agree with those given by the Registrar-General of this colony in respect to the New Zealand statistics, because we have not been working on the same lines; but that has now been altered, and the difference will not occur again. 267. Does the discrepancy between your figures and those of the Registrar-General arise through the alteration of the law in respect to the definition of a factory?— Yes, partly. I think he took eight or ten persons as the basis of a factory. He went on the old system ; but now the law provides that two persons constitute a factory, and on that basis these returns, in so far as they concern this colony, have been compiled. 268. Have you any remarks to make to us in reference to these returns ?—Merely that they are compiled to the best of my ability, and any discrepancies there may appear to be in the returns of the different colonies is, I think, owing to the way they set them out. Taking New South Wales and Victoria as the colonies where they have the largest boot-factories, through the work being specialised owing to the size of the factories, sometimes the wages appear to be very low for special work, whereas New Zealand being smaller a man might do two or three different parts of the small class of work ; but, on the whole, the wages are very much higher in New Zealand than in the other colonies. 269. Are the hours of labour mentioned in that return ?—They are not, because the other colonies do not show the hours of labour in their year-books; but from my own knowledge, and from correspondence I have with people in Australia, I think many trades over there work from nine to ten hours to our almost universal eight hours here. 270. Have you any opinion you could give the Commission as to the probability of the rate of wages in Australia being brought into line with that of New Zealand ?—Of course, in New Zealand we have the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, which fixes the rate of wages in the different trades. On the other side they are endeavouring to bring such an Act into force, and if they get it they will no doubt endeavour to work up to our standard. 271. Of your knowledge, would you say that the Government in Australia are able to get such an Act passed, and to bring labour into line with the position of labour in New Zealand?— From the debate on Mr. Wise's introduction of the Bill, I should think it would go through ; but, judging from the debate, it would be very much modified to what the same Act is in New Zealand. 272. Hon. Major Steward.] Do you know whether the statistics of the five colonies included in that return are compiled on the same basis—whether they include what we include in our returns as factories ?—ln Victoria I know they do not, because the Registrar-General in Victoria takes for his basis four persons. Any place where steam or mechanical power is used is recognised by the Victorian law as a factory, irrespective of the numbers employed there. 273. Then, we cannot have an exact comparison unless we know how many factories there are with over five employes in Victoria ? —No. 274. Does that apply to New South Wales and South Australia ?—Their new Act brings it down to three. 275. In the one case no account is taken of those below three, and in the other case no account of those below four: what about the other three colonies ?—I really do not know what basis they go on. 276. Therefore, for the purposes of comparison, the return cannot be relied upon as showing the exact position ? —Not as to the number of factories, but it can be relied upon as to the wages paid. 277. Mr. Leys.] Do you know what proportion the large factories in Australia bear to the large factories in New Zealand? You say that they are more specialised, and I suppose they are also very much larger than ours ? —We had a New South Wales Factory Inspector here a little while ago, and he told me that in some of the largest factories in New South Wales the proportion would be as much as three to one. 278. Do you think it would be impossible under the conditions of New Zealand factories to specialise more than they do ?—Not being an expert in factory matters, I cannot say ; but I should think it would be unless our people had the increased output necessary to enable them to specialise work more.
267
A.—4
279. You say that the New South Wales Act as proposed is not as good as the New Zealand Act: in what respect is their Conciliation and Arbitration Act below ours ? —lt does not give the unions quite so much scope in bringing cases before the Court, and it does not give the Board so much power as ours does; but it gives the Arbitration Court, perhaps, more power to deal finally with the matter. 280. Then, if that Act were in force, do you think it would have the effect of raising the wages in Australia to the level of those in New Zealand ? —Taking the New Zealand Act as an example, I should think it would. The tendency has been to rise here under that Act. 281. I understand the New South Wales Act has encountered a good deal of opposition, and that it has been before the Parliament for a long time?— Yes. 282. But there is no certainty that it will get through ?—I think so. 283. Do you know how the Victorian Minimum Wages law works in practice ?—No ; only that in their Factories Act it gives power to form Boards from the different trades, such as Clothing Boards, Furniture Boards, and others. These Boards meet and fix the rate of wages in the different trades from time to time. They are composed of an equal number of employers and employes, and they meet in conference and fix the rate of wages and the number of hours to be worked. 284. Has that system been effective in raising the wages in Victoria?—lt has in the clothing trade, of which I can speak with certainty, because I have full information about it. 285. We have evidence that the clothing rates are very much lower in Australia than in New Zealand : does that appear from the comparison you have been able to make ?—Slightly. It was lower before the Boards were formed. 286. Do the Victorian wages generally range much lower than ours ?—Not a great deal. 287. Does the Victorian Wages Act work well ?—Yes, I think it does, according to what I hear from the other side, and from correspondence I have with members of the Labour Department, members of Parliament, and others. 288. Is there not a proposal to substitute our system for it ?—There is an agitation amongst the unions to introduce the Arbitration Act. 289. Would they prefer our Conciliation and Arbitration Act to the Victorian system ? —I think the majority would, as it would deal generally with every trade; whereas, as things are now, there are some trades which perhaps through lack of numbers, or from some other causes, have no Boards to represent them. 290. Then, upon the whole, you think the prospect of wages in Australia being raised to the New Zealand level is not very good at present ?—I think I said they were improving, and since the institution of the Boards in Victoria they have especially improved. 291. But, supposing New Zealand were to federate, what would be the immediate effect upon labour here ? Would our workers be brought into unequal competition with those in Australia ?— I think they would, seeing that there is a large amount of unemployed labour over there; and probably these unemployed, if we had federation, would come here and compete more than they do now with our workmen, and we would also have to reckon upon their goods coming to this colony. 292. Do you think the effect of all this would be to reduce wages in New Zealand?—l should say, speaking broadly, that it would, unless the working-men of all the colonies, as it were, made a sort of combination amongst themselves in order to bring the rate up to the New Zealand standard. 293. But would that be possible in the absence of legislation in Australia?—l do not think so; but, as I am a Civil servant, I cannot express an opinion as to what the Legislature might or might not do, and its effect. 294. Mr. Luke.] Is it a fact that they have got an Act over there that they are not able to enforce on account of some weakness in that Act as regards hours of labour ?—I do not know of any special provision in the New South Wales Factories Act that they are not able to enforce. 295. Mr. Beauchamp.] There has been a very great increase in the number of employes in factories according to the last returns : is that a real or a nominal increase, or has there been any different method of enumerating the number of factory-hands since the last time the numbers were taken?— The methods have been exactly the same since the Factory Act came into existence, and the increase is real —at least, the major portion is. There has been a decided increase both in the number of factories and the number of employes. 296. Is the New South Wales Legislature the only Legislature in Australia that is going to attempt to pass the Industrial and Conciliation Act ?—I think a measure has been introduced into the Victorian and West Australian Parliaments. 297. Presuming that federation means equalising the hours of labour and the rates of pay, do you think that, assuming the cost of living is cheaper in Australia than here, it would have the effect of drawing our own employes over to the large centres of Australia ?—lf the cost of living were cheaper in Australia, and wages were going up, I have no doubt federation would have that effect. 298. Mr. Millar.] Are you aware that the Federal Government have laid down the fact that they are going to introduce an Arbitration Act ?—Yes, I have seen it stated in the paper. 299. It is understood that that Act, once passed, will override all State law. You have had considerable experience of the working of arbitration here : is it not a fact that the conditions of trade at the time being largely influence the decisions of the Court here?—l have no doubt that it does. 300. In your experience, is this country as subject to periods of depression as Australia ?—No, I do not think it is. 301. Would it be a fair thing for an Act to be made applicable to the whole of the Commonwealth when the conditions are so vastly different in the different colonies ?—lt would not, unless the conditions could be brought up to the higher level prevailing here. 302. Granted that they were brought up to the highest level, and presuming that there were periods of depression in New South Wales, would our industries then be able to compete with
A.—4
268
theirs ? —I suppose the prosperous colonies would have to stand their share of the loss with all the others in the Commonwealth. 303. Presuming a dispute came before the Court in a certain industry, and while there was a great depression in New South Wales, and the decision.was given that was to apply to the whole of Australia under the conditions then existing in New South Wales, would that be a fair decision for the whole of the employes in the Commonwealth ?—Not if it were going to affect the whole Commonwealth ; but it is an economical question that requires a great deal of consideration, and is open to debate. 304. But still that is possible?— Quite possible. 305. Can you answer the question as to the increase in the number of factories for the last year, and the number of hands employed?—l could not answer that question, because the return has to be laid on the table of the House, and it would mean giving the information away before Parliament received it. But, in any case, I could not answer it at present, as it would need compilation. 306. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] With regard to what you said as to the non-reliability of the wages returns sent in by employers, is it the fact that they are not to be depended upon ?—ln some cases not. 307. When you suspect that to be the case, do you send to them for an explanation ?—No, because we cannot compel an explanation. We telephone, or go and see them, and point out the discrepancy, and, if possible, rectify the mistake ourselves. 308. Yes ; but in getting returns is it not only fair to people to point out to them where you suspect them to be incorrect ?—Yes ; we have done so, and the answer we have received is, " Those are the wages we pay." 309. The employers adhere to that ?—Yes. 310. In all cases ? —Not in all cases ; in some cases they have altered them where they have made mistakes. 311. Where do you get the other statement from?— From our own knowledge. We inquire, and we find out from other places engaged in the same line of business. For instance, if there are two coopers in Wellington, one might send in a returp showing that he paid his journeymen £5 a week. The other man sends in £3 a week. Well, we have an idea that £3 is very much nearer the mark than £5, and perhaps we telephone to him, or I go and see him, and he will say, " I have put it down, and there it is"; and, of course, if he does not alter it, we have no statutory power to compel him to do so. 312. But you do refer the return back to them when you think it is incorrect?— Yes. 313. Hen. Major Steward.] In connection with this return, do the returns of the five Australian Colonies from which your return is compiled distinguish between the factories employing five persons and those employing five or more ?—They do not state whether they employ five, or fifty, or one. It is simply a return giving the rates of wages paid in the various trades. 314. Does not each factory give the number of employes in the factory ? —They may do in the returns furnished to their Governments, but those are not the returns available to me in compiling my return. 315. Then, you have not returns available from which you yourself could distinguish the number of hands in each factory ?—Not for the other colonies. 316. Do you think that when we are in Australia it will be possible for us to obtain from any of the Labour Departments a return of what we actually want to show that ?—I think you will find that they will be very pleased to give it to you. 317. Then, if we are able to obtain that, could you distinguish, so far as New Zealand is concerned, in your return as to those factories which employ five or more hands ?—lf the Commission require it, it would be quite possible to do it. 318. Then, it would be possible in that case to get an exact comparison as regards all factories employing five or more ?—Yes. John Liddbll Kelly examined. (No. 91.) 319. Hon. the Chairman.] Your profession is a literary one ?—Yes. 320. And probably in the course of that profession you have had occasion to study the question of the federation of Australia into a Commonwealth, and its relacion with the Colony of New Zealand ?—Yes ; I have had the subject before me for ten or twelve years, more or less. 321. How long have you been in New Zealand ?—Close on twenty years. 322. Are you acquainted with Australia ?—Very slightly. 323. Would you kindly give us the opinion you have arrived at in respect to the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth ?—My conclusions are adverse to federation. There are two possible grounds I can see upon which federation would be advantageous to us. These are the grounds of finance and trade ; but they are both somewhat problematical, in my opinion. The pooling of our indebtedness would probably result in a saving to this colony, because the consolidated security of the Commonwealth would, no doubt, enable it to command the best financial advice and to place its loans to better advantage ; and, of course, New Zealand, being largely indebted, would benefit to even a greater extent through the pooling of the loans than some of the other colonies. 324. How do you think, in the matter of trade, federation would affect us ? —ln that respect it seems to me that a combination would give us freedom of interchange with the whole of Australia, and, so far as that is a benefit, we should gain; but I have grave doubts as to any benefit accruing to any country from the mere interchange of goods. The fluctuations of trade and the vagaries of interchange are quite extraordinary and irrational, and the general effect is simply to add to the cost of living. If you carry your goods across seas or across country it adds to their cost, and the
269
A.—4
much better way is for each country to produce what it requires for its own consumption, to import only what it cannot produce, and to export its surplus produce. Hon. Mr. Bowen : Free-trade, in fact. 326. Hon. the Chairman.'] Those are two points on which you think federation would confer possible advantages?— Yes. 327. Are there any other advantages which occur to you as likely to result from federation?— No. There are many slight advantages which appear likely to result from federation; but, considering the question all round, I find that the countervailing disadvantages for more than outweigh the advantages. 328. What are the disadvantages, in your opinion?—l believe there are some thirty-nine matters that are left to the Commonwealth Parliament to legislate on, and it seems to me that in respect to nearly all these we should suffer a disadvantage. 329. Those are all the matters mentioned in section 51 of the Commonwealth Act ?—Yes. 330. Will you kindly state your reasons against federation ? —My general objection to federation with Australia may be stated, first, that it would dwarf our national life and development. I know there are those who think that it would widen our outlook, and enlarge our minds on State subjects generally, if we formed part of a large Commonwealth. My view is that it will tend in the opposite direction, and that if we join the Australian Commonwealth our politics would be dwarfed to a considerable extent, as the necessity for upholding our own New Zealand interests as against the interests of combined Australia would largely dominate the State ; whereas under our present conditions of practical national independence under the Imperial Federation, which is slowly but surely growing, we have not only full individual liberty, but we have also that larger sentiment of Empire which is fitted to extend our ideas and give us broad views of duty and life generally. These, I consider, are far greater advantages than anything we could gain by joining the Australian Commonwealth. 331. You spoke of finance as being a matter of probable advantage to the colony : have you considered in that relation the loss of revenue which would accrue to the colony through its entering the Commonwealth, and to a lower protective tariff being possibly adopted by the Commonwealth ? —Yes; the loss of revenue, I take it, would be temporary, and these matters would be adjusted after a lapse of ten years—and, of course, I cannot see any prospect of our joining in any time under ten years. 332. But do you not think the loss of revenue to New Zealand would be permanent ?—We should have to adjust our tariff and bring it into line with the Commonwealth tariff, and we should have to raise revenue by direct means instead of by indirect. 333. Have you read the Commonwealth Act ?—Not the Act as passed, but I have read summaries which have been prepared and printed. 334. You consider, then, that the loss to New Zealand of her independence weighs against the possible advantages which you have mentioned ? —Yes; it far outweighs them. 335. Mr. Beauchamp.] You mentioned the matter of finance: has your attention been directed to the fact that New South Wales stocks have been quoted lower than New Zealand ■stocks?—l have not observed that. 336. You would not assign any cause for the slump that has apparently taken place in Commonwealth securities compared with the advance that has taken place in New Zealand securities? —Those are not Commonwealth securities. My opinion is that when the Commonwealth securities are combined they will be superior to any separate State securities. 337. Have you considered the loss of revenue that would accrue to this colony by the Federal Government undertaking the construction and development of national works ? It is suggested that there would be the trans-continental railway, a system of artesian wells, and the development of Northern Queensland. We would have to contribute our quota: can you tell us whether we would benefit by that expenditure?—No; in matters of that kind we would lose very heavily. 338. In the event of the loss that would accrue by the Federal Government taking over our Customs and excise, what new form of taxation would there be ? —I think the effect would be altogether good if we were to readjust our Customs taxation, and raise our revenue by more direct means. 339. You favour direct as against indirect taxation ?—Yes. I only approve of the present Customs tariff because of its protective incidence. 340. You spoke of the advantage of opening our doors. There are certain industries in this colony protected by the Customs tariff: do you think that these industries would be prejudicially affected by the competition with the Australian factories ?—Yes; and I think I indicated that, in my opinion, the growth of interchange with Australia, while bettering the trading community, would not benefit the country as a whole —-that the country as a whole would be best benefited by fostering our own industries and those industries for which the colony is fitted. 341. Mr. Luke.] You made no reference to matters of defence :do you not think we stand a better chance in the matter of defence by joining the Federation ? —No ; I believe that Imperial federation in defence matters is already practically realised ; that we shall be always on most friendly terms with the Commonwealth and on most friendly terms with the Empire in all its parts, and we shall be as ready to go to the assistance of the Empire as they will be to come to ours. 342. Supposing the whole of the Empire was in a struggle with the combined Powers of Europe, what would be the prospects then of our defence?— Our best defence lies in ourselves. If we train our young men to the use of arms, and provide them with rifles and ammunition, we need not fear. 343. Do we not need a number of men to protect the seaboard?—■Wβ might suffer by having our chief cities battered about by hostile cruisers—that is, in the event of the British navy being completely employed elsewhere. That would be inevitable. We would have to face that.
A.—4
270
344. Can you not conceive a crisis happening, wherein England would require the great portion of her fleet to be at Home and in other parts, and that Australia would require special attention, and that we may be unprotected, or with very small protection?— Federation would not improve it. The Australians would want all their fleet to protect their own coasts, and we might as well rely upon ourselves. 345. You think we could work out our destiny best by living an insular life? There is something in the axiom that unity is strength. Could we not develop the natural interests of our people and give prominence to the aspirations natural to us, and not be hampered by federation, but rather it would help in the development of that insular life ?—I think that by federating New Zealand will lose its identity. It will lose its status, and sink from the position of an independent nation to that of a province. It will lose its identity practically, and it will lose everything that is worth having. 346. Do you think we have all the elements to develop all the phases of our national life— industrial and" manufacturing interests ? —This country has all the elements that will make it as great and populous a country as Great Britain. It has coal, iron, climate, natural power in its rivers ; it has everything, in fact, that is required for a great manufacturing and industrial population. 347. Do you know Australia at all? —I had only a brief visit to Sydney. 348 You could not speak of the relative capabilities of the workmen there compared with those in New Zealand?—l know those who have worked here and there, and they unite in saying that they could not do so much work in Australia as in New Zealand. 349. Do you think we would suffer in the Federal Parliament by our distance and the small proportion of our representation ?—I profoundly believe that we should be simply ignored and be a cipher in the Commonwealth, and that whenever our interests clashed with those of Australia we would be crushed. I would rather trust a friendly understanding. 350. Do you think a reciprocal tariff is possible for us? —I am inclined to think that the Commonwealth will stand firm in putting us on the same footing as an outside nation; but I believe that within a few years we shall have an Imperial Customs Union, under which we shall have free-trade with Australia and all parts of the British Empire. 351. Do you think that by standing apart we shall hasten on the idea which seems to loom very largely now of an Imperial Federation ?—I do not know that we shall hasten it any, except that we shall be another voice, whereas if we were in the Commonwealth our voice would be merged in theirs. 352. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the Federal Government will consolidate all the State loans, and take over the State indebtedness ?—I should say so. 353. Would not that involve the practical control of the railways throughout all the States, and the security for those loans ?—I think it is possible the Commonwealth will take charge of the loans in any case. 354. In that event, do you assume that the States would be permitted to borrow after their present duties had been taken over by the Commonwealth, or would the Commonwealth have to do the borrowing ?—I should expect the Commonwealth to do the borrowing, and apportion the moneys out. 355. Do you think we would go on then as we have been doing—borrowing money for the acquisition of lands for settlement and the development of our resources, as we have been doing in our recent legislation?— Very possibly the Commonwealth Parliament would veto any such proposal on our part, and would not allow us to borrow money for those purposes. 356. Do you think the legislation referred to has been a great factor in stimulating the prosperity of New Zealand? —I do. 357. You conclude we should be very much restricted in our powers of development?— Yes; federation would restrict us in these matters. |g~; ( 358. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think the insularity of Great Britain operated against its progress? —That was a matter in my mind to use as an illustration. Ido not think history gives us an exactly similar case to that of New Zealand and Australia. But take the case of Great Britain : If Great Britain had, when owning part of France, gone in for extending her Continental possessions the result might have been a European federation, and I consider that, in such case, the progress of Great Britain would have been immeasurably retarded. She would have been held back by the other nations, and would not have occupied the prominent position she does. Her insularity has been her strength. 359. Do you consider that the distance from Australia would operate against our interests ?— Ido not attach much importance to distance. The inhabited part of West Australia is further from Sydney than we are, and is more difficult to reach. 360. But supposing a railway was made from West Australia connecting it with the other centres of Australia, that would rather annihilate the distance, would it not ?—A direct railway would. 361. Do you think the interests of the Chatham Islands, by no means so far from New Zealand as we are from Australia, have much attention from the Parliament of New Zealand or the people of New Zealand ? —No ; we never hear of them. 362. Do you think they suffer from their distance from New Zealand?—l am inclined to think that the Chatham Islands do not suffer. They are probably better without our interference. 363. Supposing they required any redress, do you not think they would suffer by reason of their distance from us ? —Yes; if there was any matter over which we had power in the islands, and the people had a grievance, they would suffer very much owing to the distance. 364. Is there any other matter in connection with the question you would like to mention ? —There are one or two other things that have weighed with me in coming to this conclusion
A.-4
271
against federation. There is the question of our railways, the control of which may pass entirely out of our hands to the Commonwealth ; and even under the inter-State law there is the restraining power absolutely in the hands of the Commonwealth Parliament, which would deprive us of the complete control of the railways which we possess. Then, there are such matters as the shipping laws. This country is especially adapted to be a great maritime nation, not only on account of its seaboard, but on account of the great number of its harbours and the indentations of the land which lead the people to be of a maritime turn. Were we in the Commonwealth, Australia might require shipping laws of an entirely different kind. Now, shipping laws which would suit them might prevent the development of our shipping. I can imagine circumstances in the event of which the shipping laws of Australia would not suit New Zealand. Then, there is the law as to aliens. We have a law forcing an educational test on aliens coming to this country. The Commonwealth would probably find it inconvenient to pass such a law as that, and our law would be overriden. If the Commonwealth set no educational test for the admission of aliens, we would require to repeal our law, and the consequence might be that the influx of Austrians, which some time ago threatened Auckland, would come on again. The coloured-labour question is another matter which has weighed with me very much. In spite of the professions of the Federal Premier, Ido not believe they will be able to decree a " white Australia." The coloured-labour question there will grow, and in the course of years it will culminate in a serious crisis, and may even eventuate in civil war. It is not altogether beyond the range of possibility that civil war may eventuate in Australia if the larger States attempt to force upon Queensland the abolition of coloured labour. We have nothing to gain and everything to lose by becoming involved in questions of that kind. Then, again, the laws affecting private banks are to be under the control of the Commonwealth Parliament. Coloured labour has an effect upon our national welfare, moral and social conditions, and so forth. Even supposing coloured labour is not imposed upon this country, the mere fact of having it in the other countries we are allied with would have a tendency to give us a lower tone. Although Ido not wish to speak as exalting New Zealand unduly, I find that the testimony of travellers is that there is a better tone in New Zealand than in Australia. Not only the political but the moral and social conditions of the people here are superior to those that generally obtain in Australia—speaking of the masses of the people. Martin Chapman examined. (No. 92.) 365. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are an English barrister and member of the New Zealand bar?— Yes. 366. How long have you been resident in New Zealand ?—I came here in 1875 to practise, but I was living here before. I was born in New Zealand. 367. Have you resided in Australia?—-Yes, as an infant in Tasmania, and I resided twelve years in Melbourne. 368. You have read the Commonwealth Act ?—I suppose, literally speaking, that is true. I have read it more than once, but I have not studied it for the purpose of giving evidence here. I did not know that I was to give evidence, otherwise I should have given more attention to it. 369. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia or not ?— That has been in my mind, I think, almost as long as I have thought about any subject. We used to talk about it as boys at school. 370. Will you give the Commission the conclusion at which you have arrived in the matter, and your reasons for it? —I have always been of opinion that federation would be good for all the colonies, and that is my opinion with regard to New Zealand in particular. I do not mean for New Zealand more than the other colonies, but I think it applies to New Zealand. The first reason I have is that I think it is an advantage to any people to belong to a great State, and not to a small one. I think the whole history of the world shows that is the case, quite apart from what I may call parochial advantages. The advantage of belonging to a large nationality is a benefit to the people, and I think, moreover, that a small State alongside a large one is always at a disadvantage. If we do not federate with Australia we should be a small State alongside a large one. There is another matter affecting ourselves in particular, and that is this : In my opinion, Australia is necessary to New Zealand. New Zealand would not in any reasonable time have been a great colony itself had it not been for the proximity to Australia. But Ido not think that the greatness of Australia depends upon the proximity of New Zealand. 371. Do you not think that New Zealand would take advantage of the prosperity of Australia even as an independent colony ?—Not necessarily so. New Zealand, as part of Australia, would be subject to the same laws in the Commonwealth; but, supposing New Zealand was a separate nation or colony, or whatever you like to call it, separate entirely from Australia, our Australian neighbours would always look with a certain amount of jealousy upon our prosperity, and try to appropriate a certain amount of that prosperity to themselves, and that is done by hostile tariffs. I think if we remain separate we shall have to fear hostile tariffs from Australia, and hostile tariffs do more harm than temporary derangements from intercolonial free-trade. 372. What are your reasons for supposing that Australia would set up a hostile tariff against New Zealand ? —Well, it is what we have always been doing ourselves. If at any time we thought we could foster any industry by excluding the products from other countries we immediately commenced to do it. 373. Is there any reason why they should fear competition from New Zealand ?—Quite apart from whether there is reason to fear competition, I think the hostile tariffs will be set up. 374. From what you have read of Australian politics, especially since the formation of the Commonwealth, what is your opinion as to what the tariff is likely to be ?—Do you mean as regards an outside colony ? 375. No, as regards the world ?—I think it is more than probable that some of our products will be found excluded, or partially excluded, by tariff. I cannot speak as a merchant, and any-
A.—4
272
thing I say on this subject must be considered as entirely theoretical. But I should have thought that produce would probably be taxed, and that would touch only New Zealand. 376. What do you think would be the effect upon our legislative independence through New Zealand joining the Commonwealth ?—Well, there would be some restriction, no doubt. That is provided by the Act. I suppose there would be a certain loss of dignity in our Legislature. 377. I mean in regard to the laws we should be prevented passing? —I should require to read the Act again before I could say. I see there are a great many subjects upon which the Commonwealth may legislate. With regard to some of them, I think this would be a benefit: that the central Legislature only should legislate on some matters. 378. Do you think that would be a benefit to New Zealand ?—I do not think it would do any harm. It has been said that New Zealand would be swamped in the Federal Parliament, but I cannot believe that. Ido not think that these colonies, spread over a vast continent, could possibly be of one opinion. Whatever New Zealand's interests might be, she would find a section whose interests were at least approximate to hers. I take Tasmania, for instance :If we except the narrowness of the strip of sea between her and the mainland, her position is exactly like New Zealand. 379. The safety of the States is supposed to lie in the equal representation in the Senate, is it not ? —I do not know exactly what you mean. 380. There are six Senators for each State, and each State is to have equal representation ? —I do not know how that would work. We may call ourselves a small State, but we are onethird in point of numbers, and in fifty years we may be first. 381. Yes ; but we were talking of equal representation in the Senate ?—Yes ; that would be an advantage, no doubt. 382. Look at section 151 in the Act: you will see that Parliament has power to establish new States?— Yes. 383. It has been suggested by one witness to the Commission that possibly in the future Queensland and Western Australia may be divided into a number of States ? —But could that be done under this Act? 384. Parliament may add to the Commonwealth or establish new States ?—Yes ; but does it say subdivide existing States ? 385. Clause 124 provides for that. Assuming that that idea were well founded, and that Queensland and Western Australia were formed into four States, which would have each a representation of six in the Senate, the proportionate power of New Zealand would be lessened?—l take it to be quite an impossibility that such, a thing should ever occur. 386. Why ? —For one thing, southern Queensland would never consent to be swamped by her northern territory. You must recollect that Queensland is divided naturally into two parts, each having its different interests. That, I presume, was one of the reasons why this clause was introduced, because the separation of northern and southern Queensland has been in the air for twenty years or more. 387. Do you think that South Australia is large enough to provide for a creation of new States ?—Yes ; that is provided for in the same way. It is possible for a new State to be formed in the north of South Australia. The two parts are divided by a desert; but, as to dividing it up into a number of States for the purpose of swamping New Zealand, we may trust the other States to prevent that, because it would mean the swamping of them as well as us. 388. You are aware that there is diversity of law in New Zealand and the other colonies ?— Yes. 389. Are you aware whether much inconvenience has arisen through that ?—No, no great inconvenience. There is diversity in the laws among the different States of Australia, and as much as there is between New Zealand and any one Australian State. 390. Do you think there would be any difficulty in accommodating those diversities of laws without federation ?—I do not think there will be any attempt to do so. 391. Would you favour the Commission as to the advantages or disadvantages of the establishment of a Federal Court of Appeal ?—lt is difficult to give reasons. My opinion on the Federal Court of Appeal is that there ought to be an appeal to the King in Council. I think there would be an advantage in having an appeal to the King in Council in every case that is large enough. You have a tribunal in every case beyond suspicion. Ido not mean suspicion of corruption. I consider our Courts are beyond suspicion of corruption, but you cannot help having a certain amount of unconscious local feeling in Courts, and that is avoided by an appeal to the Council. Even if there is no local feeling there will still be the impression. For instance, we know that people often prefer to be sued in their own town. They think they are not quite sure of justice in any town other than their own. So with disputes between persons in different provinces or States, and, I think, with persons who have to deal with large transactions, such as merchants in a large way of business. Not all, but most of them ; and bankers and large companies would probably like to have an appeal to the Privy Council as a last resort. 392. Would the establishment of a Federal Court of Appeal weigh with you in any way as to New Zealand coming under the Federation ?—No, Ido not think so. I think the Court is not constituted quite as I would like it. There are also other things about federation which are not quite as I would like them. But it is a compromise, and Ido not think we would be giving up so much as to take away the value of federation. I would say this : that the Court is not constituted as I would like it as a final Court; but there is not enough in my objection to that to warrant my objecting to federation. 393. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You said it was better to belong to a large nationality than to a small State : do you not think the large nationality that all the British colonies have a right to belong to the nationality of the British Empire —is the largest of all ?—Yes; but I carry that much further.
A.—4
273
You remember that we had a Federation here some years ago, and in the end we preferred, instead of having a group of little States, to become one big State. -My opinion was then in favour of the abolition of the provinces, and I have never seen anything to cause me to regret the abolition. I should like to see a true Imperial Federation. Such a Federation might even some day include the 394. Our provincial system was with coterminous land boundaries ?—We all belonged to little parishes, and we felt that we were jealous of one another; but our jealousy did not kill our 395. You remember that the great question was the financial difficulty : do you not see something of the same sort in this ?—I do not consider that so much of a difficulty. No doubt it is a difficulty in looking at it, but I do not think it will be such a difficulty as cannot be overcome. 396. You spoke of this State being a small one alongside a large one ?—That was on the assumption that it remained outside as a separate State. 397 That is a relative term, "alongside of." We are in the same Pacific Ocean, but are we not for all purposes the same as America is to England ?—No, I do not think so. I think the strip of sea that separates us is, so to speak, becoming narrower year by year—that is, the means of communication are improving. Twenty years ago the communication was so slight that there was hardly a link between us and Australia, but now, with telegraph and quick steamers, we are just as close to Australia as Ireland was to England a hundred years ago. And now it takes longer to go from New York to San Francisco than to go from Wellington to Sydney. 398. You do not assume that there would be such a thing as a hostile tariff against one colony ? I do not think there would be a discriminating tariff. 399. Mr. Roberts.] Yesterday we had a witness who stated that the loss of revenue to the colony through federation would be about a million of money : in the face of such a loss, do you think that federation would be justifiable ?—I think it would require very grave consideration indeed. But I cannot conceive it possible that such a loss should take place. 400. Would you in the present state of public opinion advocate federation ?—Yes, I should 401 You think a recommendation in that direction would be advisable even in the absence of public opinion ?—I do not want to usurp your functions, but if I were asked my opinion I would say, start now. You never gain anything by waiting, and I do not think this is a matter that will settle itself by waiting. 402. Mr. Beauchamp.] In what way would we be benefited by Australia ! —ln the way of trade and population. 403 You are aware that only 10 per cent, of the total exports of our colony go to Australia, even with the free port of New South Wales ?—I do not know what the statistics are. 404 And that the balance of trade, including specie, is only £300,000 in favour of Australia ? —I would like to know what that means. Who can say what is the balance of trade in cash? England is prosperous, and her imports largely exceed her exports. America is prosperous, and her exports largely exceed her imports. They are probably the two most prosperous countries in the world. By merely taking the balance of the imports and the exports you cannot determine 6 But in respect to intercolonial trade, we can perceive that there are advantages, and that New Zealand exports to Australia, roughly, a million sterling, and imports £1,300,000: do you think we would be likely to be met with a higher tariff than now, considering the amount of trade done between the colonies?—l think it is quite possible. 406 That Australia would try to shut us out while doing such a large trade with this colony ! —Yes ■ that is history all over the world. There is always a party which says that the enormous Quantities of goods coming into the country ought to be manufactured in the country, and that if we can put a heavy enough duty on imports we can make them in the country. If that party gets into the ascendency it will mean prohibitive protection duties. . .. ' . t . 407 Do you suggest that the tariff the Commonwealth might ultimately adopt in the event of our not federating would be of a prohibitive character ?—I think it is quite possible—not with regard to everything, but with regard to individual things. Anything that they think they could produce themselves would be protected. ~,',. ~ . . ,- , , , 408 Have you not been much struck with the fact that Australia each year has been becoming much more self-contained in the matter of production ?—That is a question for the m6rC 4O9. Do you think there is any real community of interest between this colony and Australia ? ~ 410. AnTYhat the people of New Zealand know pretty well what is going on on the other side, and vice versd f— Educated people do. ~"'.. , , . . , ~. .. . 411. How do you account for so few people m this colony having gone into this question of federation?—lt suprises me to be told that it is so. + - 412 As regards representation, do you not think it at all likely that two States, such as Victoria and New South Wales, might unite with the object of prejudicially affecting the smaller States —you know that Victoria and New South Wales could outvote all the smaller States, even including New Zealand I ?— That might be, but I do not think it possible for such a state of things to arise Any attempt of that kind will at once send the smaller States into opposition, and there will be always some ambitious man or party amongst the politicians of the larger States ready to call in the aid of the smaller States. ~,,-,-. 413 Where there is female suffrage in certain States the votes have to be halved: do you think that is equitable ?—That is a big question. Voting qualifications ought to be similar in the different States. We might lose somewhat by having female suffrage. 35—A. 4.
A,—4.
274
414. Under the Bill our Native race would also be excluded from exercising votes?—l think that is a. blot, but lam not prepared to say that the question of the women is a blot. Opinions may widely differ on that question. 415. Have you given any consideration to this question of white Australia: it has been frequently stated by leading politicians that there shall be a white Australia? —I think that is an academic question, and Ido not think my opinion is worth anything. My own opinion is that Australia will be a white man's country, notwithstanding that part of it is tropical. 416. Do I understand that you would be prepared to accept the Bill as it stands, or that you would ask for modifications to suit this colony?—I think, if you begin to ask for modifications, it would be practically shelving the whole thing. I would be inclined to take the Bill as it stands, with all its blots, and then try to amend them. The difficulties in the way of New Zealand federating with Australia are not one-hundredth part of those that existed with the different States of America after the revolution. The difficulties there were so great that they were very nearly declaring war on one another immediately after a successful revolution. They managed to get , over their difficulties, and I do not see why we should not. 417. Mr. Luke.] The boundaries of the Australian States are coterminous, and expenditure in a measure benefits all the States allied to them : do you not think that that would unconsciously operate against the interests of New Zealand ?—No, Ido not think so. In the first place, I think we could count on a large modicum of interest in the Parliament. 418. Such questions as the trans-continenfcal railway and irrigation would benefit Australia, but they would not benefit New Zealand at all ?—I think the Parliament may be trusted not to spend enormous sums for the benefit of one State alone. Individual States may try to get it, but a sense of justice will probably pervade the Federal Parliament as a whole. 419. But, with regard to the trans-continental railway, the proportion of the people from here who would use it would be so small that we would be at a disadvantage ?—I may be benefited by a railway though I never travelled on it in my life. I am benefited by the cheapening of the necessities of life. A railway made in New Zealand actually benefits the people in England who consume our products. 420. Do you think the markets of Australia would be open to us, and that it would be possible for us to export cheaper lines of produce, even if we did not benefit by so doing ? —Of course it would. 421. The loss would not be entirely ours ?—I did not suggest that. 422. You mentioned just now that it was quite a question as to whether the country was most prosperous that imported a larger proportion than it exported ; but is it not held that, as regards new countries that have borrowed largely from abroad, it is sounder finance to export more than we import, and the margin means a profit ? —Political economists have different opinions on that point. They draw all sorts of inferences from the statistics, and these inferences may in one case be right and in another case wrong. The fact is, we do not have before us the necessary facts to enable us to calculate these things. You must know'how money is being invested, and how much of the money earned is saved—the movements of money—and all sorts of other facts before • you can draw your conclusions; but we have the clear fact that in a great country like England the imports exceed the exports, and that in a great country like America the reverse occurs, and yet both those countries are increasing in wealth. Some political economists used to say this : Supposing you are exporting £1,000,000, and you are getting back £1,200,000 —the one side said, " You are paying £200,000 away every year," and the other side said, " No ; you are getting goods worth £1,200,000, and paying away goods worth £1,000,000." All sorts of wrong inferences are drawn from statistics. The difficulty is to get at the right one. 423. Is there any difficulty at present in enforcing any judgment given in the Courts of New Zealand on the other side ?—-There are provisions dealing with that matter in the Supreme Court Acts of the different colonies. Ido not know what the provisions are in the other colonies, but I do know what they are in our colony, and they are very efficient. You get a judgment in another colony, and you can then obtain a judgment in New Zealand and execute it. 424. But have not you to prove assets in the colony in which you want to execute it ?—I do not think so. You find your debtor in New Zealand, and if you find your debtor in New Zealand you can get judgment against him. Of course, if your debtor has got no assets in New Zealand your judgment is no good to you. 425. Supposing he has assets in one colony, and not in the colony where you want to enforce the judgment, what happens ?—Then you send your judgment to the colony where he has assets. 426. Under the Commonwealth, would this Act improve the position at all ?—I have not considered that, but I presume it would probably improve it, because all these Acts for the enforcement of judgments arc all loopholed here and there. You find cases that are not exactly provided for. Supposing New Zealand becomes part of the Commonwealth, a judgment of a Court in New Zealand would be simply enforced anywhere in the Commonwealth as a judgment of a Court of the Commonwealth. 427. Mr. Reid.] I think you said that you would take the Act as it stands, and leave modifications for hereafter? —That would be my disposition. 428. Have you considered the terms of section 128 of the Commonwealth Act ? —Yes. Perhaps it is a little unfair. 429. In what respects ?—lt depends upon the question of the propriety of giving the suffrage to the ladies. 430. But would the effect be to override New Zealand, supposing it became a part of the Commonwealth and then sought alterations in the Act —would not the united Australian vote be against her ?—New Zealand would not count her women, at any rate ; but I suppose that, as there are more men than women voters, it would be a disadvantage.
275
A.—4
431. You see that the clause provides for two conditions—the particular power and the general power ?—Yes ; but in the case of the particular power, that is an alteration in the representation of our own State; it cannot be done without the consent of the whole electorate. 432. What position would New Zealand occupy if she were to ask for modifications of the Constitution hereafter if she joined ?—I think she would not be able or likely to succeed unless she could point out that it would be to the advantage of all the States, or a majority of them. 433. Then, it would be useless for us to join first and to ask for modifications hereafter ?—■ Yes, it would, no doubt, be useless on general points. 434. With regard to the general powers of legislation under section 51, I think you will notice that some of these are exclusive to the Commonwealth and others belong to the State Parliament? —Some of them are undoubtedly exclusive. 435. With regard to such as are exclusive, are you of opinion that it would be for the advantage of this colony to have the laws relating to marriage, divorce, and matrimonial causes, and patents, dealt with by the Commonwealth rather than by New Zealand?—l think the facilities for divorce are greater in New Zealand than in any other British possession. 436. What I want to know is whether you deem it of advantage that throughout the extent of the Commonwealth there should be a uniform law in respect to these questions?—l think it would be a decided advantage. The question of marriage affects the question of inheritance, and it is a great advantage to have the laws relating to inheritance uniform. 437. You are aware that the law in New Zealand relating to marriage with a deceased wife's sister is not the law in" England ?—Yes. 438. And sometimes it brings about a difficulty in England ?—lt does. I have met with such cases, and in that respect uniformity in the law is a great advantage that is applicable to all questions of status. 439. With regard to what one might call commercial legislation, such as the laws relating to bills of exchange and bankruptcy and insolvency, would there be an advantage in having a uniform law throughout the colonies dealing with those questions?—l think so. 440. Have you had any experience in your profession of cases arising out of the winding-up of companies, and the difficulty of following those matters up in the different colonies ?—I cannot express an opinion on that point. 441. There is a provision here for a uniform law on that matter ?—lt would probably be an advantage. 442. Taking your own profession, would it be an advantage if barristers and solicitors were allowed to practise throughout the Commonwealth without having to undergo further examinations when they went from one State to another ?—I think it would be an advantage to have one uniform law in that respect. 443. And also with regard to medical men, chemists, dentists, and people of that kind ? —I am sure that would be an advantage, and it would be more likely to come about under the Commonwealth than by colonial legislation ; but what is wanted is a law akin to that of England, so that in all parts of the Empire members of all professions might be admitted to practise on our qualification. This has never been the case yet. The New Zealand lawyer is not recognised anywhere else in the world, except perhaps in Tasmania; he has to go through a complete curriculum before he can be admitted anywhere else, and I believe it is the same with chemists and doctors. 444. With regard to the Court of Appeal, have you read clause 73, which says, " The High Court shall have jurisdiction, with such exceptions and subject to such regulations as the Parliament prescribes, to hear and determine appeals from all judgments, decrees, orders, and sentences —(1) Of any Justice or Justices exercising the original jurisdiction of the High Court : (2) Of any other Federal Court, or Court exercising Federal jurisdiction ; or of the Supreme Court of any State, or of any other Court of any State from which at the establishment of the Commonwealth an appeal lies to the Queen in Council." Do you reaj that as meaning exclusive jurisdiction, or does it preserve the right of appeal to the Privy Council ?— I should be inclined to think that it was exclusive. It is a question of construction, and there may be different opinions about it. 445. You referred in your examination to the necessity of preserving the right of appeal to the Privy Council ? —Yes ; I would preserve it if possible. 446. I think this clause does it ?—lf so, that would meet one of my objections to the Act as it stands. 447. You see, the exception to subclause (3) says, " But no exception or regulation prescribed by the Parliament shall prevent the High Court from hearing and determining any appeal from the Supreme Court of a State in any matter which at the establishment of the Commonwealth an appeal lies from such Supreme Court to the Queen in Council." That seems to me to preserve the right of appeal which at present exists: what do you think, Mr. Chapman?— Yes; but does not that simply preserve vested rights ? For instance, could I give notice of appeal ? Should I, under this Act, have the right to give notice of appeal ? I have at present the right to give notice of appeal on obtaining leave from the colonial Court. 448. If you will read section 74 you will find that it says, " This Constitution shall not impair any right which the Queen may be pleased to exercise by virtue of her Royal prerogative to grant special leave of appeal from the High Court to Her Majesty in Council." Therefore you see the right is not taken away, and even in the ease of the States forming a Commonwealth there would still be an appeal to the Privy Council—where the jurisdiction, in other words, is not exclusive ?— That may be so; but does it do more than preserve the prerogative right vested in His Majesty to give leave to appeal? 449. Section 74 does that in this special case. In the other cases the prerogative would not be impaired unless specially mentioned. Section 73 deals with cases of ordinary appeals on positive law ; but section 74 appears to deal with the prerogative right so as to preserve it ?—-That
A.—4
276
is to say, apparently you would have to get leave to appeal from the Privy Council itself, and not from the Federal Court. It seems to show me that some right of appeal is taken away by section 73. 450. Messrs. Garren and Quick, who have published a commentary of this particular Act, do not hold that opinion : what is your opinion, Mr. Chapman ?—Of course, this is in the nature of argument, but my opinion at present is that there is no appeal to the Privy Council, except the prerogative appeal by leave of His Majesty in Council; but, of course, Ido not like to set up my opinion against that of people who have probably considered it a great deal more carefully than I have myself. 451. Mr. Leys.] Should we be right in assuming, from your answer to Mr. Luke, as to the benefit conferred by railways, that you would consider it equitable for Australia to tax New Zealand for such works as these trans-continental railways ?—I think there should be some modicum of taxation if we join; but, of course, it is always possible to put a proposition like that in an offensive form. To tax New Zealand more than her share I say No; but some share of it, I think, New Zealand should bear, as the other States should bear some share of our trunk railways. 452. Of course, you are aware that the Commonwealth relies entirely on its Customs and excise duties, and that these Customs and excise duties will be levelled equally on all the States, who will have to pay their quota towards the construction of Federal works : will not that be the vote from which all Federal works will be undertaken ?—I suppose so. 453. Then, you would not think that it is at all unjust to us for the Commonwealth to engage in these railways at our risk ?—Not exactly; but it would be if we are made to pay more than our share. 454. If they are constructed simply at an equal risk to all the States in the Commonwealth,you think that that would be equitable ?—You mean at an equal expense? 455. Yes—that that would be a fair procedure on their part ? —Well, it is very difficult to answer that question. Whatever money there is to be spent, I assume, will be apportioned amongst the different States, and that each will get its proper share of expenditure. That is to say, if the thing is done justly, each State will get its proper share, and also a share of any surplus earned by the lines. 456. With respect to new works that are to be undertaken by the Federal Government, does it not occur to you that in that respect there is a big community of interest in Australia that does not extend to New Zealand ? —I do not think so. Ido not think that a trans-continental railway from Adelaide to Northern Queensland would be any greater benefit to Western Australia than it would be to us, or that it would be a greater benefit to Tasmania than to us. 457. But that trans-continental railway is understood to extend from Northern Queensland to Western Australia ?—I was thinking of the one that is to go from the north to the south. 458. Well, taking both these railways, which really form the one scheme, do you think it would be fair to New Zealand to take taxation raised in this colony in order to apply it to such works in Australia?— Not if more than their share falls to the Australians. 459. You think, then, we are entitled to contribute some share towards the construction of such works ?—Yes ; and I do not see that there need be any difficulty in ascertaining what a fair share would be. It is a matter which can be adjusted perfectly fairly on some basis, either of population, of wealth, or of benefits derived. 460. You think that we should get sufficient benefit from these railways to contribute something, at any rate, towards their construction ?—I think so. I also think a trunk railway in New Zealand would come under the same category. 461. With regard to the incidence of taxation, do you think it possible to make them so equal on a system of direct taxation exclusively as we could if we had the control of the Customs and all indirect taxation ?—I do not say that it is an easy problem for any taxation to be fairly spread, but I think it is as easy to fairly spread direct taxation as it is to fairly spread indirect taxation. Indirect taxation might bear unfairly just as much as direct taxation. 462. You think, then, that if we had to place an additional £500,000 or £600,000 upon the direct taxation of this colony, that it could be done without any injustice to the people who have to pay it ?—I think it might be done just as fairly as any taxation is, but there is always some unfairness in the incidence of taxation. Some people, whatever the system of taxation is, are paying more in proportion to their means than others; but, of course, it is the object of the legislator to try and avoid that. But if he is not absolutely successful, he is no more successful with the indirect taxation than he is with the direct taxation. 463. You do not think that the placing of £500,000 or £600,000 of direct taxation on this colony would seriously cripple industries, or press hardly upon the landed interests or upon capital?—l do not see why it should, or why it need do so. 464. Do you think the tendency of the Federal Government will be to increase its powers at the expense of the States, or to diminish the powers of the States ?—I do not think so. It is not an improbability that the States will gradually lose consideration at the hands of the people generally. That has been the case in the United States, and there is a possibility of the States losing power; but if they lose in that way Ido not see that it is much disadvantage. It was intended originally under the Constitution of the United States that it should be a mere loose confederation of States, each State having the power to leave and go out when it pleased; and, moreover, that all the real power should be with the State.Legislature; but we see that the real power now is with the Federal Legislature, and that the States are mere parishes. 465. Do you think that this same tendency would inevitably arise in connection with this Commonwealth? —I do not know that it is inevitable, but I think it might arise. 466. Would you say probably ? —I would not say probably, because men's ideas change. We are much better educated than were the men who framed the Constitution of the United States. We have experiences which did not exist in their time.
277
A.—4.
467. Do you think we should lose anything in the matter of administrative efficiency if the Federal Government controlled each department in this colony ?—My own opinion is that we should gain. 468. You think that if our railways, for example, were administered from Bombala they would be better administered in the interests of this colony than if they were administered from Wellington?—l do not say " better," but there is no obstacle to their being administered just as well on the whole. 469. Then, with regard to the appointments to the Civil Service, do you think that the young men of this colony who may wish to enter the Civil Service of New Zealand would have the same advantages in applying as residents near the Federal capital ?—I should think so; of course, we must also take into consideration the personal equation. There will always be a personal equation ; but, so far as I can see, we should be just as well treated as those on the other side. You must recollect that politicians are politicians always, and require to propitiate the outlying districts just as much as they want to propitiate the near districts. 470. You think there is no advantage in having the ear of Ministers?—l cannot answer that question. 471. Hon. Major Steward.] Is there not a tendency, in the case of federation, of the stronger bodies comprised in that Federation getting the advantage in the Legislature? —Well, I do not know that there is a tendency that way. My opinion is that we shall find that the two strong colonies in Australia will always stand on opposite sides of the House. That has always been the case since I can remember. 472. As regards free-trade and protection?— Not only that, but on all sorts of questions. Melbourne has always been jealous of Sydney, and Sydney jealous of Melbourne, and I do not see how that jealousy is going to be appeased. 473. You think that that condition of things would be a sort of safeguard to New Zealand ?— Yes; and I was going to suggest, although it may not be a right way of looking at the matter, that there is a possibility that New Zealand might be in the position of holding the balance between these two great States. 474. In connection with the Federation of Germany, is it not a fact that some of the smaller States now complain that Prussian interests, for example, get better attended to than the interests of the smaller States ? —lt is possible that they may complain without reason. 1 have always been very much surprised to see how really well Germany has been governed when you consider it is really an autocratic Government. 475. I have been informed by a German that what I state is the case?— The parochial element is ten times more manifest in Germany than anything we have in the colony. 476. You think the mutual jealousy between New South Wales and Victoria, which are the two most powerful States, would be a guarantee against any combination against New Zealand ?—I think that is one of the strongest points in our favour. 477. Hon. the Chairman.] You said you thought the States would lose their powers : do you look forward to the time when the States will be absorbed in the one general Government ?—No ; Ido not think that is the tendency of the world. It is rather in the way of making the Confederation, from a positive point of view, a real thing —that is to say, real in respect to all its relations with outsiders as it should be ; but I think the tendency now is towards local self-government, which is government by the States, but they will be more and more restricted to their own concerns. 478. Do you contend that what happened in New Zealand with regard to the provinces will be repeated in reference to the States in the Commonwealth ?—No, Ido not think so. I should be inclined to say that it would be an advantage to sweep away the States and have a sort of Imperial province. 479. But do you think such a thing is likely to happen ? —I do not think so. 480. You are aware that New Zealand could not now, as of right, enter as an original State?— I understand that is so. 481. Does that affect your judgment of the matter as to whether she should seek to join the Commonwealth ? —I do not think it would make much difference. Once she does enter and is admitted, would not she be on exactly the same footing as all the others ? I do not think New Zealand should consent to go in as an inferior State. 482. Supposing New Zealand is not accepted as an original State, I ask you if that would affect your judgment as to whether you think New Zealand should join the Commonwealth ?—I think it does. I think if New Zealand joins the Commonwealth she ought to insist on joining it with the same rights as the other States, or not join at all. David James Nathan examined. (No. 93.) 483. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a merchant, residing in Wellington ?—Yes. 484. Have you any business in Australia?—We have no branch there, but we do business with Australia. 485. Would you give the Commission the benefit of your opinion as to how New Zealand would be affected, commercially speaking, by joining the Commonwealth?— From what I can see from the present Commonwealth Act, the advantages would be purely speculative, while the cost to the colony of entering the Federation would be several hundred thousand pounds. I fail to see, therefore, that we would reap an advantage commensurate with the loss of revenue and the amount we would have to pay to join the Commonwealth. I dare say there are advantages to be gained if we had entered as an original State, and had had a full voice in the framing of the Constitution ; but the cost seems to outweigh the advantages we should gain. That is my main
A.—- 1
278
objection to joining the Federation. As to whether Australia imposes a protective tariff or not, I do not think it matters very much to New Zealand, because our market is far beyond Australia, and very little of our produce is sent there, excepting at such times as when Australia must have it. 486. Will you kindly explain a little more in detail why you think the Commonwealth Bill does not suit the conditions of New Zealand ?—I do not like parting with this money. We have to part with 25 per cent, of our Customs revenue. We have also to part with the profit we make on our post and telegraphs, and in order to raise the necessary revenue we shall be called upon to increase the taxation. What advantages we are to get from the expenditure on the Commonwealth I cannot see. Apart from that, the Maoris lose their votes. 487. Do you not think there is any advantage to be gained by intercolonial free-trade ? —No. I think that Australia can grow for herself everything she requires ; and even now, after providing for herself, she has in a normal season enough to export. 488. Do you not see any advantage in the fact of our being associated with four millions of people ?—Yes; but we do a very small trade with these four millions, and they are simply lost when you consider the population of the Greater Britain with which we do the bulk of our trade. 489. Have you considered the question of how the manufacturers of the colony would be affected by federation ?—I think some of our manufacturers would have to go in for specialisation, as they do in other parts of the world; but, on the whole, I think that the little manufacturers down here could hold their own, because it has been conclusively proved that the higher wages in New Zealand is no disadvantage to the manufacturing industry. 490. We had some evidence yesterday in reference to the sugar industry, and the loss that would accrue in respect to that: can you give us any evidence on that point?— Presuming we lost that revenue, it would be a very serious item indeed. 491. Then, I take it that your opinion is it would not be wise for New Zealand to federate ?— Not under present conditions. 492. Mr. Roberts.'] Of course, you know that the contribution of 25 per cent, is not all required for the Federal Government. It is provided that any excess of receipts over expenditure shall be refunded to the States ?—That is so ; but still there is an enormous expenditure to meet, with the certainty of some tariff being put on ; but the question of anything being refunded is entirely problematical. 493. Would you assume they would be dishonest in the adjustment of the accounts ?—Far from it, but we know they have an enormous expenditure to meet. 494. It has been assumed that the contribution of New Zealand towards the Federal Government would be £57,000? —Yes, but that would be a low estimate. Of course, they have the capital of the Commonwealth to lay out, which would mean a very heavy expense. 495. not think that that might be made a very profitable speculation for the Commonwealth : they could sell the sites ?—They cannot sell that land, but only lease it. 496. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you share the opinion of one witness that a large amount of Customs duties would be lost to this colony by the re-exportation of goods from Australia ?—I agree in that view. 497. He also suggested that a large amount of revenue would be lost through the importation of raw sugar which would be dealt with by the Auckland Sugar Company, who would have virtually a monopoly without the consumer getting the benefit ?—lf raw sugar were brought in, of course we should lose on that. 498. How do you think the country would stand the extra taxation that would have to be levied in some direct form to meet the loss we would sustain through the loss of Customs revenue? Do you think it would be prejudicial to the commercial interests ?—I think so. Ido not see how the revenue would be raised, as from what I can learn you can hardly expect to increase your laudand income-tax, but you would simply have to enlarge the area of it. 499. Regarding our commercial interests, do you not think we should aim at forming an Imperial zollverein if we decide not to enter the Federation ?—Certainly, I think so. That is what I look forward to, and what I think most of the colonies are looking forward to ; and why we have not taken that interest in the formation of the Australian Commonwealth is, I think, that we are on the lookout for the consummation of the bigger question. v 500. It has been suggested that if we had free-trade under federation a large amount of Australian manufactures would come into Now Zealand to the exclusion of British manufactures : do you think, therefore, the federation with Australia would hasten the coming-about of this zollverein, or do you think it would be hastened by our standing out ?—-What I think will assist more in that direction will be the question of B,ussia on the Pacific. 501. You think it will be necessary for Britain and her dependencies to combine against the rest of the world? —Yes, to hold their own. 502. Do you think the establishment of a reciprocity treaty with Australia would give us an actual advantage ?—I think there would be an advantage. 503. Sufficiently favourable to Australia to warrant her entering into a treaty with us ? —I think so, especially in wines, dried fruits, and sugar. 504. Mr. Luke.] What do you mean when you say the manufacturing interests of New Zealand would not suffer under federation ?—Because the class of men we have manufacturing here could hold their own anywhere. It has been proved conclusively that high wages, not low, produce the cheapest goods. 505. Do you not think that centralisation would take in the large centres?-— Certainly; and that would affect certain classes of manufacture materially. 506. Is it not a fact that a great quantity of furniture is made up by Chinese labour in Sydney and Melbourne'? —I do not think, so.
279
A.—4
507. You think the industry of boot- and shoe-making might suffer under federation ?— Certainly. 508. What manufacturing industries would not only survive under federation, but grow ?— Your clothing and woollen industries would increase,-but I have not gone into this question from that point of view. I think the bulk of the manufactures here would hold their own against Australia. By introducing modern methods, and with a larger market, they could sustain themselves. I think the high wages in New Zealand, instead of affecting us prejudicially in regard to competition for increased trade, ought to be an assistance to us. 509. How do you think Australia compares with New Zealand with regard to wages ?—The wages are higher here, and they do not work the hours they do in Australia, where they work ten hours a day. 510. Would it not be a disadvantage under federation if they worked ten hours and we worked eight hours a day ? —I do not think so. 511. You think the markets in Australia would still be open to our produce whether we federated or not ?—I think so, under certain conditions of price and of harvest. 512. Looking at the future, can you conceive of a State like Tasmania, and of some parts of Victoria, developing their industries to such an extent as to meet; the whole of their requirements ? —Certainly ; and in Victoria there is no reason why they should not. 513. Mr. Leys.] I understand that on the whole you are against federation ?■—Yes, if it is proposed under this present Bill. Ernest Smith Baldwin examined. (No. 94.) 514. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you reside in Wellington?— Yes. 515. What is your occupation ?—Patent agent and consulting engineer. 516. Have you resided long in New Zealand ?—Ten years. 517. Are you acquainted with Australia ?—No, only slightly. 518. Have you looked at the Commonwealth Bill ?—Not the Bill itself, but I have seen the summary, and I have also seen the draft of the Federal Patent Act. 519. Under the Commonwealth Act the Federal Parliament has power to legislate in respect to copyrights, patents, and trade-marks?—l remember that. 520. Having regard to that, have you considered the propriety of New Zealand federating with Australia ? —Yes ; and the Federal Patent Act has been discussed by the Australian Institute of Patent Agents. 521. Has it, where ? —ln Melbourne. 522. What was the conclusion at which they arrived ? —The question was not discussed as to the effect on New Zealand, but only as to the effect on the Australian Colonies. 523. With what result there ?—Of course, it is a benefit in Australia to the inventor to have one patent for the whole of the States instead of six. 524. How would it affect us in New Zealand ?—I cannot see that it would affect us here, except in the question of fees; and the fees are so small in New Zealand that the advantages the inventor would get by having New Zealand included in the Federal Patent Act would not be commensurate with the disadvantages from having the New Zealand Patent Office abolished. 525. Just state your views on that point. You said it would be a disadvantage to have the New Zealand Patent Office abolished : what would be the disadvantages ?—Time is of importance to the inventor in securing an early date for his patent, so that the three-days sea-passage from here to Australia might be material to him; even if we had a fast service leaving here daily, it would still be a disadvantage to him—that is, in relation to, say, Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, and Queensland. They would all be within easy reach of the Federal capital, which I understand is to be within a hundred miles of Sydney. 526. Have you considered the question of federation in any other aspect ?—No, except from the sentimental point of view—as a stepping-stone to Imperial or Anglo-Saxon federation. Then I think it would be desirable, and any action that would be detrimental to that consummation I think is to be deprecated. It is a question, of course, whether it would be a disadvantage or not in promoting that Imperial Federation by New Zealand joining the Australian Commonwealth. 527. What do you understand by an Imperial Federation?—An Imperial Federation, I understand, by all the English colonies joining with Great Britain —Greater Britain, in fact. 528. Are they not joined now?— Not as a Federation. 529. Do you mean that as a Federation the administration should emanate from England ?— To the same extent as the Commonwealth of Australia does now. 530. And to that same extent we do in New Zealand now ?—Yes. 531. What would be the altered position —I do not understand it myself ?—I understand that the Commonwealth of Australia takes over functions that now belong to the different States-— Customs, for instance. Under an Imperial Federation I understand that would be taken over by the British authorities. 532. They would .all be governed through England direct ? —Yes. 533. In the same way we would have local government the same as Australia ?—Yes. 534. Have you considered the question as affecting the trades and manufactures ?—No. 535. Or the financial aspect of the question ?—No. 536. Mr. Leys.] Do you mean, then, that it would be a disadvantage from the patents point of view to federate? —Yes. 537. To the inventors, and also to the colony?— The revenue now obtained from the Patent Office is about £3,000 a year. To that extent it would be removed from the direct control of New Zealand. t 538. Would not the advantage of having the free run for patents right through Australasia be a compensation ?—We have that without federation.
A.—4
280
539. Do you not have to pay fees and registration in every colony separately ? —No, not under federation. One fee covers all the States, similarly to America. 540. One fee in New Zealand covers all Australia ?—No. 541. Would not that be given to New Zealand; and you would only pay one fee to cover the rights for Australia?— Yes, that is the gain that I mention. It would be the only advantage to the inventor. 542. Would not that advantage be a very substantial one ?—No ; it would only amount to £2 10s. That is what it costs him for his fees in New Zealand. He would have to pay that. If New Zealand does not join the Federation he would have to pay that fee in addition to the fee for the Commonwealth. If we join the Federation the New Zealand fee would not be paid. 543. You think this Federal fee is not a very serious consideration ?—The Federal fee has to be paid in any case. 544. Not under federation?— Yes. He must pay the Federal fee for his patent. It is the New Zealand fee he would not have to pay in the event of our joining the Federation. 545. If we do not federate he would have to pay one extra fee ?—Yes. 546. And you think this is not very material ?—lt is only £2 10s. 547. Mr. Reid.] Would it not be possible to secure, by lodging the specifications in one State, protection in the other State ?—That is done now to a great extent. Under the International Convention a patent filed in New Zealand has a date given to it, and any State in the Convention will grant the same date as the original filing. Therefore he gets his date, which is all-important to the inventor. That would not be improved by the Federation, except to bring in such of the States as are not now in the Convention. South Australia is not in the Convention, so that a client taking out a patent here could not claim the date in South Australia. 549. Is that the law, or is it a matter of arrangement ?—lt is a matter of law. It is arranged for in the Patent Act. Any State granting reciprocal terms will be brought under the Convention. 550. What Act: is that our Act ?—lt is in the Act of every State in the Convention. 551. There would be no advantage in that respect in joining the Federation ? —Only to bring in the States not in the Convention. 552. That is only South Australia?—l do not remember if there are any others, but that one is not in, at any rate. 553. Mr. Roberts.] Do I understand you to say that if federation is gone into the registration of patent rights will be hampered and delayed ?—Yes, as regards the New Zealand inventors. 554. Do you not think that the New Zealand Government would have a Patent Office here of their own, and that registration would take place here at once ?—I put in a proviso that if the New Zealand Patent Office was abolished. If the Patent Office remains in New Zealand we would remain as now. 555. A branch office would almost surely be established here ?—-Then we would be just the same as we are now. 556. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any other matter you would like to mention yourself?— Well, the majority of inventors in New Zealand take out patents for New Zealand only under a small fee. If we have a Federal fee it would be considerably increased, which would be a disadvantage to the patentee. He could not take out a patent by paying a small fee ; he must pay a large fee. 557. What is the approximate number of patents lodged in the year?—ln 1899 there were 992 patents filed. I have not the number of trade-marks and designs. The revenue was about £2,750 in the same year. Malcolm Macpheeson examined. (No. 95.) 558. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—General manager of the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company (Limited). 559. I suppose the question of federation has received some attention from you ?—ln a passing way. I made up my mind on the subject at a very early stage of the discussion. 560. Would you favour the Commission with your views on the matter ? —Briefly, I do not think, myself, that there is any urgent necessity for federation. Ido not think that it would be of any great value to this colony, but that it would probably cause a much larger amount of taxation owing to the additional expenditure inevitable. It is not desirable that our affairs—at least, such affairs as would be managed by the Federal Parliament—should be managed from such a distance, separated as we are by so many hundred miles of sea. Though we have many interests in common, we have many interests that are not in common, and which might not necessarily conflict, but at times might conflict. Of course, I know that many of those who are in favour of federation look upon it from a trade point of view—that is to say, they fear that our trade with Australia would seriously diminish if we do not join the Federation. I hold, however, that that remains to be proved. Undoubtedly our trade with Australia is of very great importance, but probably of not so great importance as many think. Its importance can be gauged by statistics, but I need not enter on that subject. But, admitting it to be of very great importance, one may suppose, although that point is often overlooked in the framing of tariffs, that it should be mutually beneficial to both colonies, with more or less freedom of trade existing between them. That freedom of trade can be obtained without the necessity for federation, and even if it were obtainable only by federation we should be paying too dear for our whistle. Freedom of trade by federating is going a step further than I think we should be warranted in doing. I may say, also, that I think it would take a number of years for federation in Australia to run smoothly, as no doubt there will be a great deal of friction between the different States. One can see it looming in the distance already, if we are to judge by Mr. Reid's and Mr. Barton's speeches. I may add that lam an out-and-out Free-trader myself, and I firmly hope that Mr. Beid's campaign will have the effect
281
A.— 4
that he intends it to have. If he does not succeed in getting the measure of free-trade that he wishes, he may get so much as to make the trade relations between New Zealand and Australia smooth enough to allow us to do such trade with Australia as we have done in the past. Indeed, I-think that, in spite of almost a protective tariff, Australia at times needs some of our products, and will obtain them, duty or no duty, though it must be apparent to those who have studied the trade between Australia and New Zealand that probably she has less need of those products now than she used to have in the past. That is to say, Victoria and New South Wales have so enlarged their agricultural industries, and gone in to such an extent for dairy produce, that they are much less dependent upon New Zealand than they used to be in former times. In other words, it almost seems as if we had to look more than ever to trade with England and the Continent so far as our grain and dairy produce, and so on, are concerned. There is another point which I might mention, and which has been brought up—namely, that if we do not join now there is a risk, if we wish to join some years hence, of being unable to join on equally good terms. I have not the slightest fear of that bugbear. It seems to me that if we waited until the Federation had set its house thoroughly in order, and then exhibited a desire to join, the Australians would be only too glad to admit us— not that I think they care very much one way or the other. To take the opinion of some eminent Australians—l heard of two to-day who had. been recently travelling in New Zealand—though themselves altogether in favour of Australia federating, they considered it would be a mistake on the part of New Zealand to join the Federation ; that we are so far away from Australia, have such large resources within ourselves, and can so govern ourselves that there is really no need for our joining the Federation. As an illustration of the possibility of joining the Federation in years to come, I might refer to the fact of Prince Edward Island not having joined the Dominion of Canada for about seven years after the formation of the British North American Confederation. I never heard of any difficulty being*put in its way ; on the contrary, the Dominion was willing, or, if anything, eager to embrace it within the Confederation. The case is, of course, not quite parallel, for Prince Edward Island is only a stones-throw from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Newfoundland might very reasonably be expected to join the Confederation at any time, for it is only a short distance —a very few miles at most —from Canada. Its resources are very considerable, but undeveloped. It has hitherto held aloof. How much longer it will do so no one can say, and whether it is wise in holding aloof I am not prepared to decide. But the circumstances are not parallel. Begarding the effect that federation will have on our manufactures here, that is a matter that is a little out of my groove. Of course, my own opinion is that each different manufacture should stand on its own bottom, and be willing to risk competition from Australia. But I can hardly expect manufacturers with vested interests to share in these views. If they were subjected to competition with Victorian manufacturers it might have a serious effect on them, and on that part of the population they employ. In common with other gentlemen who have spoken on the subject, I am a believer in the confederation of the Empire, but not perhaps in sucn a close federation as was spoken of by Mr. Baldwin. I need not go into that. More or less federation of the Empire is what we may all desire, but I do not think federation with Australia will stimulate that other federation to any great extent : we may about as well have federation between New Zealand and British Columbia. We know that even a few miles of sea seem to make a good deal of difference in the governing of Ireland —that is, in the way of increasing the difficulties encountered. There is also a point to be considered relating to northern Australia. It is doubtful whether it is desirable for this country to cultivate such extremely close relations with Australia, which will have very great difficulties in the future as to the tropical part of the continent in connection with the labour question. 561. What-do you think about the loss of revenue which would arise from New Zealand federating, and how that would be made up?—lt would have to be made up in one or other of two ways : either by increasing the direct taxation, or by imposing heavier taxes on commodities that cannot be produced in the country. 562. What do you think would be the effect upon the agricultural interests of the colony if we do not federate ? —I do not think they will be very prejudicially affected, unless such a wall of tariff were erected as to be practically prohibitive of our exporting to Australia, and that I do not look for. 563. I take it you do not see any reason why New Zealand should join at the present time ? —I do not. 564. flow. Major Steward.] You do not think we can count on very much naval assistance from Australia, for instance ?—I do not. If there is any counting to be done, they might as readily count upon assistance from us. Our coasts are quite as readily defensible as those of Australia. 565. You mentioned that we might make up the loss of revenue on articles we do not produce : you are aware that under the Commonwealth the Federal Government makes all the taxes ?—lf federated, yes. If the tariff were not framed in the direction of the English tariff, and were of a protective character, and certain commodities that must come here were very little taxed, we must necessarily increase direct taxation to make up the difference. 566. Of course, we would lose something through intercolonial free-trade ?—Yes ; it would not be a large amount. 567. Do you think that an additional £500,000 could be collected in New Zealand by direct taxation without disturbing the industrial position of the country ?—I think if put on gradually it would not have such a terribly serious effect on the country; but I do not speak from a landowner's point of view. 568. Mr. Boberts.] You mention that freedom of trade might be obtained by other means than that of federation : your refer to reciprocal treaties ? —Not necessarily. Australia of its own accord might so frame its tariff as to secure to us the same measure of free-trade as at present. 569. Do you think Australia is likely to frame a tariff for New Zealand against the outside world ?—No. 36—A. 4.
A.—4
282
570. Have you thought of a reciprocal treaty?—l have sometimes thought it would be possible to frame a zollverein. 571. What products of New Zealand do you think it would affect?—New-Zealanders would endeavour to get a tariff that would enable them to send all their products to Australia free, and they might be met with the difficulty that Victorians would wish to send all their manufactured goods over here. 572. You have not formed any special opinion on the matter of what could be principally included in a reciprocal treaty, but do you think it might be confined to the products of the soil alone ?—I am doubtful of that. If we had only New South Wales, Queensland, and South Australia to deal with, that might be so, but Victoria is different. I may say that, as perhaps you are aware, there was at one time—though not now—reciprocity between the United States and Canada, largely, if not solely, confined to products of the soil, and negotiations have since been entered into with a view to having a fresh treaty in that direction. Jambs Izett examined. (No. 96.) 573. lion, the Chairman.'] What are you ? —I am a journalist, at present in the employ of the Government. It is in the character of an old Australian that I desire to appear before your Commission and give evidence. 574. Will you kindly favour the Commission with your views on the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth ?—Yes, sir. So far as opinion may be formed from utterances reported to have been made by members of the Commonwealth Ministry, it will be observed that the prediction ventured by me in a letter published some two or three years ago, of which I submit a copy, that the tariff to be imposed will be mildly—not wildly — protectionist, is exceedingly likely to be verified. I am satisfied .that, however certain individuals may possibly seek to achieve gain for themselves, or advantages to the particular producing interests or industries with which they are associated, the people of New Zealand, taken as a whole, will never consent to sacrifice their political independence, if by joining the Commonwealth such a sacrifice is entailed. There is no security of permanence in relation to commercial advantages. Production varies, markets fluctuate, tariffs are amended, new competitors appear—the agencies affecting production and trade are manifold, and their possible operation cannot with any degree of confidence be relied upon. Crops fail, trade languishes, or possibly is diverted, the investment which it was anticipated would return a profit results in a loss. To barter away independence upon any calculation of possible commercial advantages or gains which may appear to the judgment to-day would not be sound policy for a people to follow, and the people of New Zealand assuredly will not adopt it. The crucial question, therefore, in this connection relates to independence. Can it be truthfully asserted of any State that has joined the Commonwealth that it has sacrificed its independence ? If New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, what position would it occupy different from any other State ? Those who talk wildly expose themselves to ridicule. It is not sufficient that every statement made should be capable of substantiation; the substantiation should be attached. Up to this time it has not been shown that politically New Zealand would sacrifice any power or privilege which has not been surrendered by the other colonies if it joined the Commonwealth. What is probably meant by this talk of sacrifice of independence is the loss of the right to take individual action as a State in certain cases ; but that right would be simply transferred to a Parliament in which we should have our fair share of representation, and to a Government in which we should have a voice. It is certainly a question whether any action which New Zealand, in a condition of isolation, might think proper to take would have strength if pitted against the larger power of the Commonwealth. In circumstances in which New Zealand agreed with the Commonwealth, of what practical value would be the fact that her action was that of an independent colony ? In circumstances in which she disagreed with the Commonwealth—so far as the influences arising from extent, population, trade, finance, are concerned—in what position would she be ? Of course, the people of New Zealand are an energetic people, and in any differences that may possibly arise they would rely upon the justice of their cause, at the same time pushing it with all their might. The people of the Commonwealth would also, of course, hold to the justice of their cause. There are cases in which the rights of the respective claimants are very difficult to determine, and such cases may arise between New Zealand and the Commonwealth ; it is here where the adventitious circumstances referred to come in and have weight. There are three or four points, however, to which I desire to, very respectfully, invite the attention of your Commission, and Ido so more in a suggestion than in a positive spirit. The first (referred to in the letter by " A Prater ") has reference to the sea between us and the Commonwealth which it is proposed New Zealand should join. Many historical examples naturally occur to the mind of the division of races into separate and distinct peoples since first the Aryans swept into Europe, dividing it intp nations differing in language, habits, interests, aspirations, characteristics. It is unnecessary to particularise examples, but these divisions certainly have been more acute in the cases of nations divided by sea. The true American has not yet appeared ;he will manifest himself when the various races which now occupy the States have become more fused. But, although a comparatively few years have elapsed since the separation, how great the change already subsisting between the Americans, as they are popularly known, and the English people. Early as it is, the Americans even claim to have a language of their own. A language of their own they certainly will have in the centuries to come. No bonds of government or politics, no ties of trade or finance, no hourly communication can prevent such changes as are seen in terms of speech, characteristics, interests, aspirations from arising; they spring from causes peculiar to the country and to circumstances. The Canadians, again, divided from the Americans by a few pegs inserted at far-apart distances in the ground, are different from the American people, and are rapidly developing different traits from the English. The colonies of Australasia are but the growth of a comparative day, but there
283
A.--4
were special circumstances attending the establishing of each of them, and these circumstances have not been without effect on the character of the people. There is a difference in character between the people of Victoria and the people of New South Wales, and, I venture to think, a greater difference still between the people of New Zealand and the people of Australia. As years roll on it may be anticipated that differences will be increased and intensified. A second point, which is not without relationship to the first, has regard to the geographical position. The navigable rivers of Australia are few and unimportant, and, considering the extent of coast-line, her harbours of value are also few. From these two facts it may be concluded that the people will be more and more forced to seek production in the interior, where food for sustenance is less varied, and the opportunities for intellectual cultivation and recreation are limited. This bears upon the question of the development of character and moral stamina. New Zealand is rich in the possession of harbours, and, lying between Australia and America, there can be no doubt that, if it is not so now, the day is not far distant when one at least of the principal highways of the commerce of the world will run past her shores. The sea will afford abundance of food, and influence the language and disposition of her people in a way denied to a very large proportion of the people of Australia. This, however, is not so large a matter as the fact that the ever proximity of the sea may be expected to produce in New Zealand the same result it has ever done in similarly situated countries. The New Zealand youth of the future may be expected, like young ducks, to take to the water, and with this disposition in , them, taken in connection with our harbours and position, we have the elements that go to the building-up of a great maritime and commercial people. As years roll on, not the hearts of our youths only but the eyes of our statesmen will be turned towards the sea, and to the lands and markets which lie beyond. Thus, in the ever-surrounding sea we are not only presented with facilities for new developments in physique and character, but the prospect of vast interests, aspirations, sympathies which will be altogether unknown to the great bulk of the people of Australia dwelling away from the coast-line. The Commonwealth Constitution would never have been accepted by the people if it had contained a provision for the abolition of the local Parliaments. The security for the continued existence of the State Legislatures is to be found in the almost insuperable difficulties attending any effort that might be made to amend the Commonwealth Constitution. The great feature of the British Constitution is its elasticity. It can at any time be altered and shaped to meet the needs of the people. During the last century the laws relating to the representation of the people were amended several times. In Australasia there is not, so far as I am aware, one colony which has not amended the original document which was its Constitution. This tying-up of the future of a people in a document almost impossible to alter is a defect in the Commonwealth Constitution, but it is the price which has had to be paid for securing the States local governments. We in New Zealand have had some experience of Provincial Governments, our provincial system of local government, with the General Assembly over all, having been almost exactly on all-fours with the condition of affairs brought into operation in Australia under the Commonwealth Act. Like the people of Australia., too, it was believed in New Zealand that Provincial Government was secured by an Imperial statute— rested upon a rock—and could not be swept away. The old one-third-nominee Legislative Council of Victoria, when, in 1856, it framed a Constitution Act—-evidently holding themselves much wiser than any body of men likely to come after them—inserted a provision that no amendment of the Constitution could be effected unless the amending Bill was carried by an absolute majority of both Houses of Parliament. This restriction, it was thought, would serve to keep the Constitution an absolutely sacred thing, impervious to all assault, the difficulty of securing an absolute majority in both Houses on any proposition being enormous. The Act had, however, only been two or three years in operation when it was amended—the section securing £50,000 annually for the support of religion being abrogated. Then followed a number of amendments—the reduction of the suffrage to manhood, an alteration of the basis of representation, the period for which members should serve, &c. Finally, the absurd restriction in the Constitution Act was itself swept away. No colonial Constitution has been more amended than this particular Constitution which was never to be touched. Is there finality in any human legislation ? Was there ever an Act passed yet that was never amended or did not need amendment? Under a system of popular government the laws must be changed to meet the necessities, the needs, the wishes of the people. Do the securities in the Commonwealth Act actually secure? May they not be swept away on a popular issue, altogether apart from the question of the abolition of the State Legislatures ? There are more ways of killing than by an open assault upon the throat. If the people of the large colonies under the Commonwealth get tired of maintaining a cumbrous, expensive, possibly effete, certainly many-headed system, and enthusiastically demand the abolition of the provinces, it will be very hard for them if they do not succeed ; and it would be very hard , for New Zealand if they did—New Zealand, of course, having joined the Federation. It is to be remembered in this connection that the act of federation is irrevocable ; it is a marriage from which there is no divorce, and death comes not to relieve the suffering. Therefore every contingency possible should be closely scanned. The contingency that some time in the distant future the State Legislatures and Governments may be abolished is at least a possible one, and therefore one which should not be overlooked. In the event of such a change, New Zealand, being cut off from the seat of government by the sea, would be subject to inconveniences and disadvantages of which the other States would have no experience. At the beginning this would be productive of serious dissatisfaction; it would end by developing an intolerable sore. In the " Official Becord of the Proceedings and Debates of the Australasian Federation Conference, 1890"—a volume which, I doubt not, is in the hands of members of your Commission— there will be found in the speech delivered by Mr. Deakin (pp. 81-83) reference to a point of some importance. He alludes to the sentiments of loyalty and pride which every one feels for his own colony. Under federation it is expected that these strong feelings shall no longer be
284
A.—4
local—they are all to be concentrated upon the Commonwealth. Victorians, New South Welshmen, Queenslanders are all to disappear, and all are to remember that they are Australians, and nothing but Australians. No doubt, in process of time this will be achieved ; local feeling will weaken, pride in the nation will develop. In Australia, contiguity and intercourse, and other things, have engendered jealousy, which again has "been a factor in stimulating sentiments of pride and devotion; but it is doubtful whether in any part of Australia there is to be found a population more inspired with love for their adopted land, pride in past achievements, and hope and confidence in its glorious future than we have here in New Zealand. By federation it is required that these intense feelings shall cease, and our patriotic aspirations be concentrated on the Commonwealth across the sea —a Commonwealth which at present presents itself in a vague and unsubstantial form. Not improbably it is the —perhaps unconscious—feeling of the terrible wrench in sentiment which the people would be called upon to undergo which lies at the bottom of much of the present feeling of opposition to federation. It need scarcely be said that it would take a very long time to obliterate the almost passionate —it can hardly be said that they have yet had a fair opportunity of full display—feelings of affection and pride which New-Zealanders cherish for their beautiful land, and would take a much longer period for similar feelings to concentrate on the Commonwealth. It is easy for those who do not share these sentiments (being, probably, recent arrivals), and who look at the question from a standpoint of pure reason, to advocate federation; but to those who comprehend—realise—the feeling that lies deep down in the heart of every true New-Zealander the difficulty involved in this consideration is manifestly no slight one. From an early period in Australasian history there have not been wanting prophets, on both sides of the Tasman Sea, confident that the feeling of attachment to the Motherland would cease to have existence with the disappearance of the colonisers ; that the generations native to the soil would be unable to recognise any bond of kinship or allegiance holding them to sympathy with England. The experiences of the past eighteen months conclusively prove how erroneous such ideas were. To remote generations, whatever their trials may be, however circumstance and exigency may shape their destiny, the people of the colonies will ever be ready to exclaim, " The land of my fathers and mine : the noblest, the best, and the bravest," feeling deeply that their right to share in the glories which cluster round " Great England " is not an inheritance to be lightly cheapened or roughly cast aside. Having, then, a pride and glory in the dear old Motherland, for which no measure of sacrifice appears to be too great; having, then, a deep love for their own beautiful isles—a love which only some terrible crisis, such as impending invasion, would serve to reveal in the full extent of its passion—what is there to bestow upon the Commonwealth ? What stores of pride, attachment, sympathy of any kind are there left that we can readily and cheerfully transfer to the body which it is proposed we should join ? Some fifteen or sixteen years ago I sent to the committee of the Imperial Association in London, of which committee Lord Eosebery was the head, an essay on the subject they had at heart to promote. It may be mentioned that the scheme of federation embodied in the Commonwealth Constitution is almost identical with that which I submitted as a proper one for adoption by the Empire. I refer to this in order to show that long ago I gave thought to this branch of the subject, and I have given occasional thought to it since. lam an ardent believer in Imperial federation. The past few months have done much to bring such a consummation nearer. Whenever the time arrives that England engages in war with a first-class maritime Power our commerce will. be threatened with paralysis, destruction will hang over our cities and our coasts, the sacrifices we have recently made will be as nothing compared with those we shall be called upon to render. The question presents itself, If New Zealand joins the Commonwealth, will such an act aid in bringing Imperial federation nearer still ? And, having joined the Commonwealth, will her voice, when the question of Imperial federation is raised, be thereby rendered clearer and more forcible ? lam of opinion that no act or thing taking place—or capable of taking place—between colonies in any way affects the question of Imperial federation. It is the people of the Mother-country that have to be moved to action in this connection, and the joiningtogether of colonies, the disintegration of colonies, the rise or the fall of colonies will fail to affect either the heart or the judgment of the people of England. Such events present themselves as matters of course in their every-day life. The sending of contingents moved. It was recognised at last that the colonies were sources of strength—thus the sense was touched; it was seen that they were making sacrifices —thus the heart was affected. To achieve any gain, therefore, in the direction of Imperial federation the action must be pertinent to England; she must be brought into it; it must press upon her people with an almost overwhelming force. With regard to Imperial federation, we apparently must be content to watch and wait until the coming of the time when from Land's End to John o' Groats the idea vibrates, and some great statesman with far-seeing eyes arises to grasp the dangers attaching to isolation, and propounds a policy fraught at once with security to England and justice to the outlanders of the Empire. With regard to the other question, I do not think that by joining the Commonwealth any voice which the people of New Zealand might desire to have heard in regard to Imperial federation will be rendered in any degree more potent. As the question of defence propelled to federation in Canada, so it proved a moving factor in the federation of Australia. The question arises, How will New Zealand stand in the matter of defence in the event of her joining the Commonwealth? Any attack upon the colonies must be made by sea ; the fleet constitutes our obvious and first defence. The remark is somewhat trite. The Governor-General, advised by his Ministers, will have the control and direction of the fleet in these waters, so far as the Commonwealth is concerned. In population the cities of New Zealand stand about on a level with some of the suburbs of Melbourne or Sydney. The population of the whole of the cities and coast towns of this colony, taken together, does not exceed 200,000; the population of Melbourne being about 500,000, and that of Sydney some 450,000. Given a Governor-General living constantly in Sydney, and naturally more attached to Australia and to Australian people than to a land and people twelve
285
A.—4,
hundred miles away, whom—not impossibly—he has never seen, given also an Administration dependent for existence on the support of Australian members of the House of Eepresentatives, what protection could New-Zealanders rely upon having extended to them in the event of attack ? Under the circumstances which have been imagined, would it not be most natural for the authorities to keep the fleet skirting the Australian coasts, m order to secure the protection of the cities of largest population, greatest wealth, highest importance? Is there not a danger that, under such a condition of affairs, New Zealand would not obtain that attention which her people might conceive they had a right to expect ? Of course, the Commonwealth Ministry would be held responsible for any laches; but would not the Australian members of the House of Eepresentatives, constituting a large majority of the Parliament, be easily persuaded to condone and grant absolution when the argument was that the vessels of war were employed for the defence of their own shores ? Surely there is a contingency here worthy of consideration. Even if the Commonwealth Administration, in the event of attack, were to do all for the defence of New Zealand that could reasonably be expected of them, it would matter little if the people of New Zealand—jealous of their rights—were persuaded that all had not been done for them that might have been accomplished. Dissatisfaction, bitterness, rancorous hatred of the Commonwealth and all connected with it might result. It is in connection with such questions that New Zealand, cut off by sea, stands in quite a different position from that of any of the Australian Colonies. On the other hand, if New Zealand does not join the Commonwealth, her Governor and Government occupy a position coequal with the Governor-General and Government of the Commonwealth. The influence of the little colony might not be so large, but constitutionally her right to affect the movements of Imperial ships would be just as great as that of her big neighbour. If, as has been emphatically asserted, joining the Australian Federation involves the loss of independence and national freedom, then, I take it, your Commission need not to procped further. No savings in lighthouse expenditure, no reductions in the amount payable for interest on debt, no attainment of new markets or securing of old ones, no gains to particular industries or industries generally can ever compensate a people for the loss of liberty. Remembering how peoples in all ages have endured and suffered to maintain their freedom, how peoples have fought, and bled, and died to achieve their freedom, it is easy to realise that no gains conceivable can weigh against the loss of it. If, on the other hand, your Commission should hold that loss of liberty is not involved in the proposition—of which, I venture to think, the fact that your Commission still continues to sit affords some evidence—then other questions arise. Questions of production, of commerce, of trades and industries: these subjects I do not profess to know anything of, and if I did know anything of them I should still regard them as of doubtful importance for reasons already expressed. Of the subjects I have dealt with, one—that of defence —is partly of a practical and partly of a constitutional character; the others may be described as sentimental and, if I may use the term, philosophical; but all the points to which I have ventured to call attention have relation to the future, and are not such as would be likely to be brought under your attention by any other witness. Of one thing I feel assured: if New Zealand joins the Federation, and if from any cause—just or unjust—she becomes dissatisfied, no people could ever have been more unhappy—more miserable,—than her people will become. Her isolated position exposes to the danger of such causes arising. Hbkby Hubrell examined. (No. 97.) 575. Hon. thi Chairman.] You are a member of the firm of Bouse and Hurrell ?—Yes, coachbuilders. We have been established twenty-six years in New Zealand. 576. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth? —I have considered it a little from a manufacturer's point of view only, and I am decidedly of opinion that federation would prove very adverse to the whole of our manufacturers. 577. Why ?—Both from a labour point of view and, so far as our trade is concerned, from a raw material point of view. The conditions of labour in Australia are very much more unfavourable to the workers than they are here. Here wages are higher and hours of labour shorter. Nine hours is about the average day's work in Australia, which, of course, is more than in our trade here. Leaving out kauri, we have to import most of our timbers from Australia, and you can actually buy some carriage parts made in Melbourne from Australian woods, and finished, for less money than you can buy the rough article for here. 578. What makes the difference in price: is there a duty?—l am sure I do not know; but there is the fact, and I have proved it over and over again. 579. Supposing New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, how would it be then ?—lt would depend a good deal on the question of tariff. 580. There would be free-trade between the States?— Well, I believe it would work very adversely, taking it as a whole. 581. Is your industry a large one ?—lt is the largest of the kind in New Zealand. We employ forty-two hands, and we are large importers as well. 582. Do you know the number of hands employed in the largest factory of the kind in Aus tralia ?—No ; but I have reason to believe that Duncan and Fraser, in Adelaide, employ th largest number, which is a little under ours. 583. How is it, then, that you are not able to compete with Australia?—We have to pay more for labour, and we have to import a lot of raw material from Australia ; and, although the factories in Australia are not, generally speaking, as large as ours, still they have far more people to cater for. 584. But if we joined the Commonwealth you would have all those people to cater for. Have you considered the question as to how federation would affect other manufactures than your own ?—I have gone into the question of the furniture trade, of which I have had a little experience, and I am of opinion that federation would ruin our local furniture-makers, because there
A.—4,
286
are some establishments, in Sydney especially, that turn out immense quantities of particular lines of furniture, practically of one pattern, and they are distributed at a very low price over Australasia. 585. Mr. Roberts.] Do you know how much higher wages are here than in Australia ?—The average is about 2s. per day. 586. Mr. Beauchamp.] With free-trade you think that, as you would have to import your raw material from Australia, the industries there would simply wipe you out ?—Yes. 587. You say you have some knowledge of the furniture trade : do you suggest by that that some of the furniture is made there by Chinese labour ?—I have heard a lot about Chinese labour in furniture-factories, and on a recent visit, two months ago, I went through the largest factory in Sydney, and I failed to see any sign of them. I have bought large quantities myself, and it is not made by Chinamen at all, but by white labour. The largest factories employ white labour purely. 588. Would that white labour be paid lesser rates than we pay for white labour here?—l think so. I cannot account for their being able to make it so cheap, excepting that they produce enormous quantities in the one pattern, which no New Zealand factory can do. 589. On the other hand, they have not as suitable woods for furniture-making as we have in New Zealand ? —They use a lot of second-grade kauri, but they also have suitable woods, which mostly come from Queensland. 590. Would that not be more costly to take to Melbourne and Sydney than we have here ? — Probably. Most of the common furniture is made from second-grade kauri, but it is turned out in enormous quantities. 591. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the wages here are too high?— No. 592. Is there a very great difference between here and Australia?— The average is about Is. 6d. to 2s. per day here higher than in Australia. 593. Do you think the effect of federation would be to bring down the wages ?—I do. 594. Did you come into contact with the workers in Australia ?—I did. 595. How do their social conditions compare with those of the workers here ?—Taking the large towns, I was very much disappointed with the moral and the social condition of the people in the large cities of Australia. 596. And you think it would prove injurious to our working-population to be brought into contact with them ?—I do. Peteb Robertson Russell examined. (No. 98.) 597. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A saddler, in the employ of Mr. Wiggins. 598. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?— Yes. 599. How do you think the industry in which you are engaged would be affected by federation ? —lt would not affect our trade in any way. In reference to this question, I think we should look further afield, and see how it would affect the colony generally, instead of any particular trade or industry. Some people are possessed of the idea that New Zealand can best attain her national development and destiny in isolation ; it is one that time will prove erroneous, and would spell disaster to the colony of both influence and education in national government. Federation would benefit the colony for many reasons. We are now confined to a population of 750,000, but if we were federated with Australia we should then be working on a population of nearly five millions. In view of the great change that would take place throughout the whole of our social and political system, the question of labour is paramount to every worker in the colony, because we are not working at the present time under the best conditions—under a system where skilled labour is not divided. With this division of labour the work could be done much cheaper, and with greater advantages to the workers. We have, for example, in connection with the boot trade, by the division of labour under the improved methods and machinery, boots of a first-class grade manufactured in America and sent to England and sold at 3s. 6d. a pair cheaper than the same quality boot can be made in England, and the Americans can earn £2 10s. per week and upwards on the division-of-labour system, while the English bootmaker, under the old system, can only earn £1 2s. to £1 4s. per week. I look upon the New Zealand climate as the best in the world for manufacturing purposes. The hours of labour in Australia may be slightly longer than here, but if we take Coghlan's statistics we find the minimum wages paid in the different trades in Australia differ very little from what we have to pay here, when taken into consideration that house-rent and living is much cheaper, and that in the matter of imports and exports we depend upon Australia in a measure for the raw material; but, as a matter of fact, we can manufacture goods here and send them to Australia. Auckland has been doing the same thing, but there has not been sufficient demand to warrant us in going into the trade in a large way. I venture to say, however, that under a system of federation our trade with Australia could be worked on a large scale. Viewing the financial aspect of federation, under present conditions we are, roughly speaking, paying interest on forty-eight millions, and the annual charge in interest is about £3 17s. per head. We are not able to reduce that debt by a conversion scheme into a lower-price stock—the experience of Canada ha's clearly proved that under federation we could borrow J per cent, cheaper than the most solvent of any of the States belonging to the Commonwealth—because we have already pledged nearly the whole of our good securities ; but under federation we could go in for converting our securities into a uniform 3-per-cent. Federal stock, with the security of Australasia behind us, and the amount saved by this process of conversion would go towards paying off the amount of the original debt by a stock. If the 10s. per cent, saved was used as a sinking fund it would save our colony in time over £1,500,000 a year. It has been argued by anti-Federalists that we would sink our individuality if we joined the Commonwealth, but I do not think that such would be the case, because very few of the measures which have been passed during
A.—4
287
the last few years would come within the province of the Federal Parliament. It would only be large questions such as those of immigration, or the old-age pensions, or the Shipping and Seamen's Act. All these will certainly come within the functions of the Federal Government. But outside of that we would be able to frame legislation on our own lines, the same as hitherto. Our banking legislation would come within the scope of the Federal Parliament, as our State bank does business outside the colony. It has been said it would be impossible for any Government to manage a State bank with any degree of success, and it has been proved, both in Queensland and New Zealand, that such institutions can be managed with wonderful success, and with advantage to the country. Under the Federal Government I would like to see the issue of Federal notes, which would mqjn a great saving to the Commonwealth. Year by year an enormous amount of money is drawn out of the country in payment of interest ; but under the issue of Federal notes the heavy toll at present levied on the taxpayers would cease. Let us take, for example, the £1,500,000 for the advances to settlers borrowed in London about four or five years ago ; it cost no less than £106,000, or thereabout, and on a long-dated currency, over 7 per cent.—it cost the colony more than any private individual would care to pay on a sum of £100 if he had freehold security to offer. This is a fair example of the disadvantage of a small country like ours. When we come to borrow we have to pay dearly for our loans. In my opinion, the matter of our distance from Australia is no disadvantage. 600. Do you not find that the question of federation hitherto has not occupied the attention of the people of New Zealand very much : how do you account for that ?—I do not know ; but very few have considered it seriously. It has not been a question that our public men have given any attention to. It is only when a new matter of this kind is brought before the public that the bulk of the people take it up, and think for themselves ; at present they seem to have a very faint idea of the meaning of federation. 601. Is that because the people are not interested in the matter? —They look at it purely from the selfish aspect of how it will affect themselves. 602. Mr. Leys.] You gave the exports to Australia at £3,000,000: are you aware that our exports to Australia are only about £1,000,000 ?—The Year-book gives £3,440,000. I mean both imports and exports, including gold. 603. Did I understand you to say that we can send saddlery and harness to Australia at a profit?—We made an experiment, and we found we could make it much cheaper here than they could in New South Wales or Victoria. 604. I find from last year's returns that we imported saddlery and harness to the value of £654 from Australia, while we exported it only to the value of £532, so that it is apparently a mere exchange of no great importance ?—The class of work that is manufactured in Australia does not suit this market. 605. But still they send us rather more than we send them?— There is very little difference. 606. Can you see any advantage in exchanges of that kind ?—There is an advantage—it cuts both ways. The advantage gained is by the employment of labour, as the amount nearly balances, to my mind. It shows sound business. 607. Do you think the balance of trade would be in our favour ?—I think it would eventually. 608. You do not apprehend that the very large specialised industries in Australia would swamp us ?—1 do not think so. The only thing we would have to be aware of is the Chinese labour and the cheap goods manufactured in Germany and elsewhere. But I think the Federal Government would attend to that. The first thing they would require to do would be to bring themselves abreast with all advanced legislation. If united to the Commonwealth our trade and commerce would benefit the whole community. 609. Is it hot the case that the saddlery industry has been one in which the wages paid in New Zealand have been very low ?—Yes, but only for incompetent hands. Good hands always received a fair wage. 610. Has there not been a large employment of boy-labour?— Yes, especially in Auckland, which has been the seat of all the trouble in our trade. 611. Those conditions are being altered, are they not?— Yes; but the result of them has meant an advance of from 15 to 20 per cent, in the price of the manufactured article. 612. How would that affect the possibility of our competing with Australia ?—lt does not affect it at all. As far as we are concerned, we have been paying the same wages all through; in fact, our wages have not advanced 5 per cent., yet we have been able to manufacture goods and export them to Australia with the usual margin of profit. 613. How are wages paid in your trade ?—We work under a system of piecework, and one man employed on a certain class of work might make from £4 to £5 a week, and another man at the same class of work might make only £2 10s. a week. It is a question of the capabilities and methods of the workmen. 614. How do your wages compare with log rates in Australia ?—The log rates in Australia are a shade lower, but there is not much difference. 615. How do the hours of labour compare ? —ln Sydney I think they are nine hours a day, and in Melbourne eight; in New Zealand they are eight also. 616. Do you think you could compete against this nine-hours labour in Sydney ?—I think so, because our men seem to have more vigour and are able to work better, which may be accounted for by our more favourable climatic conditions. 617. With regard to the prospect of New Zealand becoming a manufacturing country, do you think the sea is against us ?—I do not think so. 617 a. Do you think the proximity of the markets to the big central factories of Australia is not a very material disadvantage ?—I take it that with federation we should go in for developing the natural resources of this country in respect to the raw material. We would require to establish
A.—4
288
national industries, so that we could develop and bring them to a greater degree of efficiency. By these means it would promote a greater demand for land-settlement; and all our requirements we could thus produce, and would not be dependent on any country outside the Commonwealth for raw material. 618. Do you think the prosperity that New Zealand has enjoyed for the last five years would be enhanced by federation ?—I believe it could, because everything points clearly to the fact that we could develop our own natural resources, such as flax and leather, which is a very large industry, and could still be further cultivated. 619. But you are still importing leather ?—We do not import much ; most of our consumption is of colonial manufacture, and is equally as good as English. 620. I suppose there is nothing to prevent our becoming the growers of flax, whether we federate or not ?—Nothing; but under a system of federation we would go in for producing everything we require ourselves, and sufficient to enable us to export as well. 621. You think there is no danger of our industries being swamped before we could develop them ? —There is nothing to fear. The bootmakers have that fear, but I have had several chats with them, and they are|all open to argument, although very few of them have studied the question. 622. Mr. Beauchamp.] Are you of the opinion that the raw material of Australia is not cheaper than our raw material here ?—The raw material in Australia is equally as dear as it is here. 623. So that there is no benefit to the Australian in that respect ?—No. 624. As to coal, is not that considerably cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand?—lt is a little ; but I suppose you know we imported coal to the value of something like £92,000 last year. 625. As to the tariff which is likely to be imposed by the Commonwealth, have you given any consideration to that question ? Do you think it would be a moderate tariff for revenue purposes, or a protective tariff to encourage industries?—l understand that it is to be a protective tarift. 626. I notice that we export 92 per cent, of our produce to Great Britain and 8 per cent, to Australia. Of course, you are aware that if we did not join the Federation a protective tariff would exclude a very large quantity of stuff that we import from Great Britain : have you considered what effect that is going to have on our trade relations with the Mother-country? —Yes; with federation our market would expand, and we would have a nearer outlet for our produce. Take, for instance, the raw hides that are sent Home : Under a Commonwealth they would be absorbed in this country at possibly a higher price, because we would go into other branches of industries that are not touched now. 627. You do not think that limiting the trade between the Commonwealth and the Old Country by increasing the manufactures in Australia would be a disadvantage to New Zealand? — Ido not think so. The Old Country is simply a huge workshop; and if we increased our markets we would use up the raw material she now gets, and returns them to us as manufactured goods. This, in a sense, is due to our much smaller population, which limits our production. 628. My object in putting the question is this : that by lessening the quantity of goods imported from Great Britain we should in time, by limiting the output of Great Britain, bring about a diminution of her consumption of produce from the various colonies ? —I do not take that view. 629. It has been suggested that Australia might absorb the quota of Customs revenue to be contributed by this colony with their large public works, and that we should have to impose some further form of direct taxation to make good the amount she would have to contribute to the Commonwealth ?—By striking out the present exemption in the land-tax we could easily raise all we require without undue pressure upon any section of the community. At present the land is taxed as much as it can bear. 630. But, apart from that, do you think that there are advantages which would warrant us in joining the Federation?—l think that, under the conversion scheme I have already mentioned, the immense saving to us by joining the Commonwealth would lighten our burdens of taxation and give us better facilities for production. 631. Have you noticed that the New Zealand 3|-per-cent. stocks are £5 higher than the similar stock of New South Wales ?—The rise and fall in the value of stocks is really no index to the state of the financial barometer or the commerce of any country. Like mining stocks, they boom for a time, and then recede, according to the state of the money-market. They are no indication of the financial position and real soundness of any country. 632. Have you considered how the difficulty is to be settled in the event of a disagreement between the two Houses of the Federal Legislature ?—No ; but I understand that we have equal representation in the Senate, and therefore equality of voting-power would meet any difficulty that might be caused in that direction. 633. But the two States of Victoria and New South Wales could outvote the whole of the other States in the Lower House ?—I consider public opinion would be too strong for any one or two States to take an advantage of this kind. 634. Are you of the opinion that there is sufficient community of interest between the two countries to insure the proper safeguarding of our interests ? —I should say that under a Commonwealth system we should safeguard one another, as the interests of the community are equal. 635. As to the provision made for voting in countries where women are franchised, are you of opinion that it is equitable to stipulate, as the Constitution does, that the total number of votes shall be divided by one-half where women are franchised ? —That is a clause, I think, which requires to be amended. 636. You know also that the Maoris are excluded?— Yes. 637. In that case, would you suggest that before this colony entered the Federation some amendment of the present Bill should be suggested ?—Yes; it would be very necessary to do so.
289
A.—4
638. You would not take this Bill as it stands ?—No, because our legislation is a long way in advance of any of the Federal States, and our desire is to bring them up to our standard. To join the Commonwealth under the present Act would be a step backward for us. 6,39. As you are aware, we cannot enter as an original State ?—But I think some arrangement could be made to allow us to federate, say, in three years' time. 640. With regard to labour legislation, do you think that under federation we are likely to make as much progress as we have during the last few years under our own Government ?—I see no reason why we should not make even better progress. If the Arbitration Act is dealt with as it has been suggested it should be dealt with, then the whole difficulty, as far as labour is concerned, is over. 641. Then, whilst still advocating federation, you would demand an alteration in the Bill before we join the Commonwealth ?—As I have already stated, under the present conditions it would be against our best interests. 642. Mr. Millar.] What industries do you think federation would give an impetus to ?—All kinds of industries, farming in particular. 643. In what way ? —By an interchange of commodities. 644. What would Australia exchange with us? —Raw hides, fruit, timber, and many other things too numerous to mention. 645. Are you aware that they grow more than they consume ?—ln some things they do ; and I consider, on that account, and for many reasons quite needless for me to mention at present, it would be more encouraging for us to join them. 646. Where would Australia get her stuff from then—from New Zealand?— That is a question hard to answer at present. We might in a measure be shut out by a high tariff. 647. So from that point of view we are just as safe without federation as we would be with it ?—No. With federation we would have many advantages that we could not hope to have outside of the Union. 648. If they did not get what they require from New Zealand, where would they get it from ? —I should say they would get it from the cheapest markets, where we are likely to go when we are in want of anything. 649. It is a question of price, is it not ?—Undoubtedly. 650. Do you think they could buy it as cheaply from America as from New Zealand ?—I see no reason why they could not, when taking into account the enormous carrying-capacity of the cargo-steamers now afloat. 651. How is it that they have never done it in the past ?—Because they have had no need for it. There was not sufficient trade to be done with the colonies to encourage America to bid for our trade. Another matter we must look at in this case is that the means of production are cheaper in America than in most countries on account of the large collection of labour-saving machinery employed. 652. Is there any labour-saving machinery used in the colonies?— Yes, for many things ; and their methods of working are different. 653. Do you think that California can export grain cheaper to Australia than New Zealand can ?—I believe it could. If we are outside the Federation they might put on a tariff which would give others the same advantage as ourselves. 654. Do you think they could get freight from California to New Zealand for 10s. a ton?— There is no reason why it should not be done. 655. Is it not a question of what pays ?—Now it is how it can be made to pay with the prospect of greater trade facilities. 656. But it is not likely that grain would be carried from America to Australia, seeing that, according to your own line of argument, it would be required only in a time of drought ?—This we must examine in a wider aspect. It is not really what Australia takes from us or what we take from Australia; it is the commercial union that is established by the bonds of federation. We are better able to develop our resources, and sell in the open markets of the world what we do not require for ourselves. It is the first step to the building-up of the mighty Empire. 657. Can we satisfy the demand for land now for our own people ?—Yes; but we have not got the people to put on the land. 658. Will federation give you any greater outlet, seeing that you import all your own rice at the present time ?—lf we had 5,000,000 to work on, with the natural conditions that New Zealand offers, it would be better for us, and we would have a bigger outlet. We could work all our industries with greater economy and larger profits to the employers and better pay to the workers. 659. But you seem to assume that you are going to have the whole of those 5,000,000 to yourself ? —I think it is quite reasonable to accept it in that way under the same laws and conditions. The very nature of federation implies such. 660. As a matter of fact, the other colonies are producing more than they can consume themselves at the present time ? —They can sell in the open markets of the world what they do not require, producing more than they can consume. To my mind, that is a very hopeful sign of what could be done under the Commonwealth. 661. To which particular colony are we increasing it ?—To New South Wales and Victoria. The exports to Victoria in 1890 were £567,000, and in 1899 only £412,000. The exports to South Australia were £40,000 in 1890, and in 1899 £25,000; to Western Australia they were £2,000 in 1890, and £66,000 in 1899; to Queensland they were £84,000 in 1890, and £52,000 in 1899 ; and to New South Wales they were £885,000 in 1890, and £1,118,000 in 1899. Taken for a period of ten years, the exports to Australia have simply been pretty well standing still. 662. The figures you have just quoted offers a very strong argument for federation, if it were only from a commercial standpoint. What do you estimate the amount of saving to this colony would be under a system of conversion of loans ?—Conversion into Federal stocks would save the 37—A. 4.
A.—4
290
colony about £1,500,000 a year. Ido not mean this saving to take place all at once; it is contingent upon our own efforts, and the class of men we send to represent us. 663. You are aware, I suppose, that we have a regular system of conversion into 3-per-cents now, and that it goes on automatically ?—Yes. 664. Supposing we federated to-morrow, what good would we obtain in that direction?— The Federal Government would take up the question of conversion, and get the money on the security of the State, as I have already explained, and so many other things; and it is only when the Federal machine is set in motion that we should realise the great advantage and lasting benefit to the whole Commonwealth. As an illustration, look at the history of the United States or Canada on federation, and you will see the enormous saving to them. 665. Would you be surprised, if you worked it out, to find that it would only be £150,000 ? —That might be so under our present system; but with federation we offer better securities, and the result would be cheaper borrowing. 666. Now, out of that saving you say you would effect, what do you think the colony would have to pay for her share of the expenses to the Federal Government ?—I have never estimated what it might cost, but if it cost us half a million a year we should benefit by the change m a few years. 667. If you pay that to save £150,000, would you call it a business transaction?—l look at the transaction from a different point. We pay, say, half a million to save a million; I call that good business. 668. You think that the social welfare of the people of this colony would be as well looked after by the Government as by the State Government ?—I think so; we would not sink our individuality in any way by federation. 669. You are aware that they have had the same trade during the last ten years as this colony has had ?—Yes. 670. They have legislated for the welfare of the people much on the same lines as this colony ? —The legislation of the past in Australia has been in the same direction as here—that is, legislation for the classes rather than the masses. 671. You think that most of the people in Australia have sufficient cohesion to force upon the Government of the day their views of a social character ?—Yes ; if we federate, we federate under certain amendments that will work in harmony with our present advanced legislation. All reforms come from the people, and the Government of any country are only but a reflex of the people's desires. 672. We would require to have the Commonwealth Act amended to retain the rights and privileges we now enjoy as a separate community ?—Not necessarily advantages. If we try to gain special advantages purely for ourselves we are introducing a selfish motive, which would be a dangerous element, and which would never work in harmony with the future development of our national life, industries, and the Commonwealth. John Duthie examined. (No. 99.) 673. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a merchant, residing in Wellington?— Yes. 674. And for a number of years you were a member of the House of Eepresentatives ?—Yes; I sat in three Parliaments. 675. And have you taken an interest in the federation question ?—Of course, in a general way, but I have not given close attention to the subject. 676. Would you be kind enough to give the Commission the conclusions at which you have arrived in the matter ?—Well, it appears to me that the most advantageous feature is the probability that under federation, with the Legislature chosen on a wider basis, that legislation would accordingly be more upon broad principles. I think we alter the laws too frequently. We are always amending upon special or petty excuses, and it would probably be an advantage to have legislation for the whole of Australasia. On the other hand, I think we are too distant. This colony is not coterminous as the other States in Australia are, and is so better adapted to the development of a national character of its own. It does not follow that we would always be in sympathy with a country with so great climatic differences, and I do not think our people would be long content; and my opinion is, seeing that we have so far stood out, that it would be well to still further wait and see the development of federation in Australia. 677. Probably you have considered as to how the public finances of this colony would be affected in the event of federation taking place ?—I have only read the speeches of certain candidates as reported in the Sydney papers, and am unable to form any reliable conclusions. The statements are, of course, contradictory, and I have not been able to form conclusions to my own satisfaction. 678. Supposing Mr. Eeid got into power, do you think the tariff would be based somewhat on free-trade lines ? —Yes. 679. And if Mr. Barton remains in power what do you think the tariff would be as against 'external trade ?—Well, of course, the financial position is such that it is impossible to bring about what is understood as free-trade. Mr. Barton is apparently in earnest, and, as promised, the tariff will probably be largely devised for revenue purposes. Ido not think he has any intention at present to go to any extreme for protection. 680. Do you think it will be less protective than the tariff that exists in New Zealand ?—I expect it will be lower than that existing in Victoria. 681. What about that of New Zealand? —I do not think it will be so protective as the New Zealand tariff. 682. That being so, how would the revenue of this colony be affected?— That is a question I have not been able to follow out. I have been away in England, and it was only when passing through Australia as I returned that I have been able to glance at the question. I have not had
291
A.—4
time to mature any opinion regarding the conditions here. Since getting your subpoena I took out some figures regarding the volume of our exports to Australia. From them it will, I think, be seen that the public generally have a mistaken idea as to the value of the Australian trade to us. They are as follows : —
Value of Agricultural and Pastoral Products exported to Australia and Tasmania for the Years ending 1897-99.
Items. 1897. 1898. 1899. Remarks. knimals, living— Cattle Dogs Horses Sheep Lnimal products— Bacon and hams Hair Hides Horns and hoofs Lard deats— Beef Pork Potted and preserved ... lausage-skins ... ikins — Calf and other Babbit Sheep with wool „ no wool i'allow Vool ... )airy produce — Butter Cheese Milk, preserved toots and plants— Onions Potatoes „ (tons) Plants, shrubs, &c. rrain and products— Barley „ (bushels) Beans and peas „ • (bushels) £ 307 9 3,133 858 11,851 264 4,490 525 430 100 8 19,148 83 15 649 1,477 515 14,008 13,996 £ 1,532 51 6,188 3,106 6,181 1,357 17,296 490 205 558 9 26,187 3 5 674 1,585 39,026 7,789 £ 2,165\ 3151 4,799( l,764j 11,120 933 26,763 704 342 292 29 24,120 791 1,035 1,838 3,432 120 26,009 25,460 About balanced by imports. Probably for transhipment. Probably for transhipment. n tt a n a a 82,603 19,639 641 75,728 53,914 9,248 47,223 57,985 9,336 n 9,852 18,733 7,213 277 14,455 137,416 21,970 388 6,876 36,894 24,401 283 Unlikely exclude. Maize „ (bushels) Oats „ (bushels) Wheat „ (bushels) Bran „ (tons) ... Chaff „ (tons) ... Flour 5,046 32,955 5,541 22,809 1,933 17,825 151,144 1,444,071 10,755 53,997 20,514 6,250 5,738 1,618 96,767 9,003 1,855 720 10,285 2,055 2,449 30,962 124,612 18,969 1 7,156 2,112 10,373 508 330 1,969 4,613 18,569 12,390 9,514 84,566 787,947 94 475 799 238 2,564 267 638 246 6,236 913 185 25,868 97,748 16,983 17,007 119,765 4,975 24,485 24,917 187,139 180,712 2,243,930 37,047 331,281 13,617 5,370 109 44 8,272 1,352 264 97 25,378 5,457 514 41,253 175,853 16,924 191 4,398 1,302 15,734 982 Might exclude; but, if so, small importance. Might exclude ; but, if so, small importance. Might exclude; but, if so, small importance. „ (tons) ... Hay and straw „ (tons) ... Unlikely exclude ; must import. Hops „ (cwt.) ... Linseed Malt „ (bushels) Meal, oaten ... Pearl barley ... Pollard and sharps (tons) Seeds, grass and clover „ unenumerated ... Unlikely try exclude. They must import. 255 85 41,667 1,874 They must import.
A.—4
292
Value of Products, Mine, Forest, and Ocean, exported to Australia and Tasmania, 1897-99.
Value of Manufactured Goods exported to Australia and Tasmania during 1897-99.
Items. 1897. 1898. 1899. Remarks. Mine — Coals £ 3,651 5,090 374,692 95,442 4,577 40,594 1,007 33 £ 5,419 7,477 502,976 131,528 15,325 136,006 5,670 133 £ 4,638 4,823 645,850 160,541 593 5,102 1,966 56 „ (tons) ... Gold Suppose bunker-coals. . (oz.) ... Silver Transhipments greatly reducing supposed value of market. . (oz.) ... Gum, kauri ... „ (tons) Minerals— Sulphur „ (tons) Manganese ... (tons) Scheelite „ (tons) Unenumerated Stone Pumice Forest — Fungus „ (owt.) Timber— Logs Dressed Undressed Ocean fish— Cured Preserved Frozen Oysters 4,703 1,481 541 120 217 207 3,382 4,097 1,765 683 207 315 219 4,505 5,483 1,227 370 123 725 54 208 748 New Zealand only source supply. New Zealand most convenient source supply. New Zealand most convenient source supply. Ditto. 5,711 3,623 1,804 1,283 10,593 7,012 Probably transhipments. 3,193 6,283 114,423 2,471 12,363 132,492 3,871 19,212 155,316 New Zealand only source supply. if 167 4,832 10,984 1,600 88 4,751 9,438 4,246 305 5,725 12,931 2,128 a n it
Items. 1897. 1898. 1839. Remarks. Agricultural implements ... Machinery and machines Metal manufactures Pumps Carriages Woollen piece-goods „ blanketsEugs ... Cordage Phormium Tow ... Binder-twine ... Wood ware Furniture and upholstery Casks, empty ... Leather Saddlery and harness Boots and shoes Mats and matting Medicines Soap ... Paper bags „ wrapping Beer ... Beverages, aerated Books fancy goods and toys Pictures, drawings, &e. ... Specimens, natural history Fruit, pulp „ jams, &c. Provisions n.o.e. Paints and colours Ship-chandlery... Sugar Umbrellas and parasols ... £ 3,474 5,905 159 15 15 7,606 1,461 2,667 489 15,644 423 2,748 632 171 1 5,925 653 6 458 568 173 443 886 752 134 5,271 364 435 268 138 225 482 276 548 201 £ 1,849 8,464 167 210 206 6,859 786 1,670 12 28,954 577 5,401 194 879 14 16,733 415 16 418 676 314 435 17 736 326 1,389 168 1,270 234 106 150 97 57 50 3,829 £ 1,176 9,290 545 272 136 6,981 1,072 2,384 886 28,524 ) 922 3,524j 860 198 240 14,683 513 14 546 650 737 420 572 702 318 583 114 366 18 336 353 65 42 187 280 216 New Zealand only source oi supply. Probably mainly transhipped England takes over £80,000. Doubtful if product.
293
A.—4
Imports. —General merchandise, produce manufactures about confined to books, hardwood, coals, fruit, wines, leather, tin, lead, sugar. From these tables I conclude that Australia is net so large a consumer of our products as is generally supposed from the total value which we send. Then, a large proportion of our products now taken would still go there in any case, and I think there is so little hope of an increased market in Australia that we should not go in for federation for trade considerations. You will notice by these tables how large a proportion of Australian exports are gold and products for transhipment. 683. Have you considered the imports from Australia ?—We get coal from them —that is the principal item—and to the value of about £80,000; we get hardwood, of which Australia is the main source of supply ; we get a certain amount of fruit, although our main supply comes from the islands; we also buy wine, leather, tin, and lead, and Queensland supplies a proportion of our sugar. These items are Australian products ; the rest that we get is mainly imported general merchandise. Large centres like Sydney or Melbourne always draw a certain amount of sortingup trade. Of the merchandise we get from Australia two-thirds is transhipments from other countries. 684. Have you considered what the effect would be upon the manufacturing industry of this colony if we federate ?—I think it would press somewhat adversely upon our local people. Our present tariff is largely protective against Australian industries. Working in small factories is here a disadvantage. If there is free interchange, the competition that would arise would probably be somewhat severe upon our local people. That, however, might still be for the general public good. 685. And how about the agricultural interests? —On most products we have to find a market for our surplus in London, and the value is consequently dependent upon that market. That we should.get a market in Australia would probably be an occasional benefit, but it is not an advantage to the value of the goods, but only to the difference in price obtained, which is usually nominal. A margin of, say, Id. a bushel on oats would immediately divert shipments. 686. You think that the power of local administration would be much greater if we federated with Australia? —I do not think, as far as I recollect the Bill, that such would be the case; it seems to me from the Bill that the subjects more immediately local will be left to the State Legislature. 687. You are aware that we cannot go in as an original State?— Yes, lam aware of that; but still I think there would be no great difficulty in getting in if we wanted to. 688. On the whole, what is your opinion of New Zealand joining or not?—l think we ought to wait several years, and see the outcome of it in Australia. 689. Do you anticipate there will be any difficulty in the Australian States settling matters amongst themselves ?—Oh, no. 690. Mr. Beauchamp.) You are of opinion that the tariff imposed by the Federation will probably be lower than the New Zealand tariff?—lt is one of those matters on which I do not like to express an opinion, not having looked into it. 691. Supposing it were, then our industries would suffer a double blow by competition with goods from Germany and America in addition to the goods that would come in from Australia, or those houses in Australia that can specialise and produce them at a cheaper price than us ?—Possibly. 692. Then, as to the representation, we should have fifteen in the Lower House, and an even number of members in the Senate : do you think that those members would sufficiently safeguard the interests of New Zealand, or do you think Australian influences would dominate adversely ?— The Australian influence would dominate, but not necessarily adversely ; it is very surprising how little intercourse there is between New Zealand and Australia—how little they now know of each other. Australian people are busy with their own affairs, and do not pay much attention to us. I do not think you would ever get them to take a real interest in our affairs. Living in a different climate, and part of a compact continent, they would continue to be almost strangers, and we would not get much sympathy from them. 693. Do you think the climatic differences will produce a different type ?—Yes, probably. 694. As to the class of people who will represent us in the Federal Parliament, do you think the distance would be a bar to our getting good men ? —Scarcely ; I think you would still find sixteen good patriotic men in New Zealand. 695. You have seen a calculation made by which we might have to contribute £600,000 to the cost of the Federal Government: what would be the effect of that loss to the revenue of New Zealand? Do you think the land-values would stand more taxation ? —I have seen the calculation, but would not like to express an opinion without knowing the grounds for it. Land will probably have to bear more taxation before many years, and values will proportionately decline. 696. Do you think we stand any chance of being able to negotiate satisfactorily for- reciprocal treaties? —The general desire in Australia seems to be to get us to join in the Federation. There is, however, so little of our produce that could be excluded that I do not think it would be worth while bothering about a treaty. 697. In the case of adverse climatic conditions prevailing they must have our produce?— Yes ; they must take certain lines of our produce. 698. Mr. Luke.] Do you think it possible to preserve a white Australia, as indicated by Mr. Barton ?—I think not; it is scarcely possible to cultivate sugar-cane without coloured labour. 699. With reference to the intercolonial trade, do you anticipate any great expansion of our trade with Australia? —No; they are more and more supplying their own wants. Fifteen years ago Australia was our chief market for butter; now they not only provide that themselves, but export more largely than we do.
A.-4.
294
700. Then, do you not think that, even if we did wait for several years, as you suggest, there would still exist that difficulty arising from the community of interest amongst the States of the Australian Continent against our insular position ? —Probably so. 701. Then, you also think that we have national characteristics apart from those of Australia? —We say so. I think there is truth in it, and that they will become more accentuated with years. John Kays, J. P., examined. (No. 100.) 702. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ? —I am engaged in the drug trade, and in wholesale chemistry. 703. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—For the past eleven years. 704. I believe you have resided for many years in Australia ?—Yes. 705. How many years ?—For the greater portion of my life. I did trade in Australia for fourteen years, where our turnover was half a million a year. 706. Have you considered the question of federating with the Australian Commonwealth : have you perused the Commonwealth Bill ?—Yes, some four months ago. 707. Are you of opinion that it would be in the interests of New Zealand to federate ?— Speaking broadly, I would not be prepared to adopt the present Bill without amendments being made to it. 1 think the Bill is a very good one as it stands for Australia and Tasmania, but I believe that, with our Maori population, and the extension of the franchise to the women, it would be absolutely necessary, before New Zealand enters the Australian Commonwealth, that some amendment should be made. But, speaking from my own knowledge of the Australians—and lam intimate with many of the leading men who are now in the Federal Parliament—l feel that they would always readily accept any fair and honest suggestion that was to be put by the people of this colony, and they would gladly consent to make any amendments in the Bill that New Zealand requires. 708. But in the case of South Australia the women have the vote at present ?—Yes ; but if an amendment was made in the Bill South Australia would enjoy the privilege that we seek. 709. They have not given it to South Australia ?—No. 710. Why, then, give it to New Zealand?—l think it is only a matter of time when the whole of the six colonies of Australia will extend the franchise to the women. 711. As the Constitution is at present, New Zealand should not join? —Not under the present Constitution. I believe that New Zealand, being, as she is, a food-producing country, would greatly benefit by joining in the Federal movement. There would be intercolonial free-trade between the seven colonies, with a fairly moderate tariff against the outside world. 712. Do you not think that the effect of that moderate tariff would be to inflict a very serious loss on the public revenues of this colony in the matter of Customs duties ?—I think not. I feel that a great deal of shoddy stuff goes into the six colonies of Australia from America and Germany, and our goods and produce that go across to Australia would be infinitely superior to a great deal of the shoddy goods they receive at the present time. 713. Are you aware that America commands a large portion of the boot trade of this colony and the other colonies? —I am. 714. Under this moderate tariff that you spoke of, do you not think that America would still more largely command that trade ?—Certainly not. I think the trade that goes from New Zealand to America would go to Australia. They have means of turning out the article, and their goods would come upon the markets here, and the people would rise to the occasion and realise the fact that they were one nation and one people, and would support their own country instead of going outside. 715. Mr. Leys.] You think that federation would be an advantage to the country?— Speaking broadly, I should say so. I think the Federal Government could develop many industries which at the present time are entirely undeveloped, such as sea-fisheries. 716. Is the social legislation of Australia on an equality with ours ? —The conditions of the masses are not so good, although I believe the wages in the commercial lines are pretty well the same as in New Zealand. The hours of labour there are, I think, longer. 717. What about mechanics?—At the present time they are better off here, but that is only temporary. Many mechanics have left here because of the war, and that has caused a scarcity of labour. 718. You think that the wages must come down?—l should say so, in certain branches of trade. 719. Would Australian competition tend to precipitate that ? —No, I should say not. Australian people look upon New Zealand as part of their own country, and under federation I think they would regard New Zealand as their holiday resort. 720. Mr. Luke.] How do you account for so few visiting this colony, with all its advantages? —I can only say that, unfortunately, New Zealand has been very poorly advertised. 721. Is not that rather a powerful argument that Australia knows very little about us, and are not they as likely to know as much about us without federation as with federation ?—No; we become kith-and-kin with them under federation. 722. Do you think it possible to have the same intercommunication with the people of Australia as they will have amongst themselves, there always being a coterminous, and having the trans-continental railway ? —They can never reach Western Australia in less time than it takes to reach New Zealand, not if they ran at -the rate of sixty miles an hour. 723. You think that New-Zealanders will visit as often and intermix as freely with the people of Australia as do the people within the continent ? —More so, I believe, because of the greater attractions over here.
295
A.—4
724. I understand you to say that the wages were higher here as far as skilled artisans were concerned : do you not think the standard wage might be lowered to a level nearer their own ?—I should say not. 725. They are older colonies than ours, and yet they are behind us socially ?—lt is rather a mistake to imagine that they are older than we are. There is only New South Wales and Western Australia older than New Zealand. 726. Prom a governmental point of view, do you think our fifteen or sixteen men are likely to influence the whole body of the Australian Parliament in such a way that New Zealand would get a fair and equitable share of public money ?—Yes ; I recognise the fact that party politics can never be absolutely abolished. In an assemblage of that kind different States should combine to get their rights, and Western Australia or Queensland would be just as likely to suffer at the hands of the Federal Government as New Zealand would be; or even more so, as their representation would not be so high as ours would be. 727. Do you think the centralisation and specialisation which is possible in big communities would have a deterrent effect on the manufacturing interests of New Zealand ? —Not to any great extent; but some would suffer slightly. 728. Take boots and shoes ? —I do not think there would be any serious effect, because if you are going to build up industries with protection you make the industries not self-supporting. I believe in making each industry stand on its own bottom. 729. What are the advantages under federation for developing the fisheries ? Will not the Commonwealth develop their own fisheries, and shall we not develop those connected with our own shore?— Yes, now; but it has not been the case hitherto. 730. Mr. Beauchamp.] You have a knowledge of both New Zealand and Australia: what advantage or otherwise do you think would accrue to the importing houses of this colony by competition with Sydney and Melbourne houses ?—I do not think they would be affected much one way or another. New Zealand houses could hold their own with the wholesale houses of Australia. 731. You think the importing houses of this colony would be able to hold their own against Australia ?—Assuredly. 732. Do you think that federation would have the effect of levelling up or levelling down wages ?—Levelling up. 733. Bringing the wages of Australia up to the level of New Zealand ?—Yes, and to get a uniform wage.
Wednesday, 27th Febkuary. Thomas Lynch examined. (No. 102.) 734. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you?— Wharf-labourer. 735. And you are here as a representative of the Trades and Labour Council?— Yes. 736. How many members are represented by that council ?—Well, the whole of the unions of the city. I could not say how many that collectively represents. 737. How many labour unions, then ?—I could not even tell you that. 738. Has the question of New Zealand federating with Australia been considered by the Trades and Labour Council of Wellington ?—Yes. Last Thursday night we considered it, and the meeting was almost unanimously against it. 739. How many members were present ?—About forty, I suppose. 740. And those present were unanimously against New Zealand joining the Federation? —Almost unanimous—there was one in favour of federation. 741. Can you express to us the reasons why the council came to that decision?—l can try. In the first place, we believe that the only thing of vital importance to the working-man when any subject is brought up is, will it have a tendency to raise wages or to lower the expenses of the working-man ? We have failed to get any one to give us an argument on that subject—that it would raise the wages or lower the expenses by joining the Federation. In the second place, when the representatives go away to represent the masses the people lose control of them. There are outside questions mixed up with home questions, and the average man does not follow them up, and so they lose track of them, and they do things which are against the interests of labour. 742. Well, now, are you able to give us any opinion, or was the matter considered, as to the effect federation would have on the manufactures of this country ? —Well, in business, the only way with regard to the products or manufactures is, if we can make goods cheaper or better than the rest of the world, they will buy our goods no matter what the tariff is. 743. Your union appear to have looked at it in the light of the tendency to increase or lower wages ? —Yes. 744. If wages are kept up to the present rate, do you think it is possible for manufacturers in this country to compete with manufacturers in countries where wages are lower ?—Yes. 745. Why ? —ln this country I have seen evidence complaining about the eight-hour day. Any one who has given the subject any thought knows that a man in eight hours' work has got more energy ; he has got more leisure for his brain to think ; and he can produce more work in that eight hours than any other man could in ten hours. 746. Do you not think that increased wages increases the cost of the production to the manufacturer ? —No. The lowest-paid workmen on top of the earth are the Hindoos or the Chinese, probably. They cannot pretend to compete with high-priced labour. High-priced labour is generally intelligent labour, and low-priced labour is not.
A.—4
296
747. Do you not know it has been matter of complaint amongst labouring-classes in this colony that in Melbourne furniture has been produced cheaper on account of the employment of Chinese labour?— The Chinaman, unless he adopts the tools of the modern working-man, cannot compete. 748. Have you considered the question in any other aspect except in so far as it affects the matter of wages?— Yes. In the first place, the tendency of things in Australia, according to Mr. Barton's ideas, would simply mean a repetition of the trusts and combines of America. The tariff cannot benefit, for this reason. Take the manufacturer :If he has to compete with the rest of the manufacturers in his own country he has got to bring it down pretty low. Men find that, instead of competing, it is better to join together and regulate the price of the products and wages. Combinations are better for the manufacturers, but they are not good for the workmen. 749. Assuming for a moment that the wages of the workmen were the same in Australia as in New Zealand, would you be in favour of New Zealand joining the Federation or maintaining her present political independence ?—We are better off as we are. 750. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Have you considered the question as affecting the future of the colony, say, fifty years hence?— Yes. Take it in the course of fifty years from now: What we really want, and what the tendency of things is, is to give labour the full product of its labour. If they adopt a protective tariff in Australia it will not take twenty years to develop trusts and combinations. There is another point that it seems to me the people in large bodies do not sufficiently think of—what the effect of any proposal will be. The next thing will be a large navy and a standing army in Australia. It will start small and gradually increase. Then comes an aggressive policy : that means expense, and simply of no benefit to any kind of labour. 751. Mr. Beauchamp.] As regards conditions of labour, do you think the conditions in Australia are worse than those obtaining here ?—ln Australia I find there are often a number of men unemployed. Wherever there are two men looking for one job wages must be low ; wherever there are two jobs, and only one man available, wages must be high. 752. We have seen it stated pretty frequently that an effort will be made to pass an Arbitration and Conciliation Act: do you think that Act will have the effect of levelling up or levelling down ? —I do not think any Conciliation and Arbitration Act will raise wages if there are more men than here are jobs. 753. You have lived in America ?—Yes. 754. And you speak of trust and combines there : are you of opinion that the wages ruling there are lower than here ?—ln the last twenty years the wages in America have dropped very much. First-class workmen have been glad to get a job at 8 dollars a week—less than £2. Men there are in a far worse position than here. 755. You are not apprehensive of competition from Chinese or Japanese?— No. 756. Do you not think they could readily adapt themselves to our methods ? —lf they do so, and adopt the latest tool, why not ? 757. So far they have not adapted themselves in that way?— No. 758. Do you think federation would have a serious effect upon the industries of this colony ?— No. In this country, if you have an intelligent workman, and give him good tools, why should he be afraid of any other man on the top of the earth ? 759. Do you think the Australian workman is in any way inferior to us ?—No, I cannot say he is; but the man who works longer hours is not as bright and active as the man who works shorter hours. • 760. By specialising, do you not think the factories in Australia would be able to compete with our industries here ?—Well, we must specialise here, that is all. I will take a man and put him on one particular section of an engine, and if he is kept doing that work day in and day out he can turn out more of that product than any other man going right round the circle. 761. You think that in time New Zealand will become an exporter of manufactured goods?— If adapted for the particular manufacture, yes. 762. Mr. Luke.] Does it not follow that where labour combines, and so gets advantages, manufacturers and others who control the great industries should also combine ?—Certainly. 763. On moral grounds, do you object to trusts and combines?— Certainly, because they are monopolies. 764. Is it your opinion that labour gets better terms under combines ? —No. Take the case of the Sparrow Point Mill, of Baltimore—a mill that employed about 2,500 men : When the steel combine took place there were certain mills that had to be shut down, in order to limit the price. This firm received so-much per month for closing their mill, and these 2,500 men were thrown out of employment, and had to look for employment in the rest of the mills which were working. You can plainly see what the result would be. 765. Are wages generally higher in New Zealand than in Australia? —'Well, there is a great deal of boy-labour in New Zealand. 766. Does that exist in Australia?— Yes, certainly ; it exists more or less all over the world. 767. Do you think that these large cities would manufacture things adapted to them and export the surplus to New Zealand if we federate^? —I do not think that would be a paying business. I know it is done. They keep up the price in the nearest market, and send the surplus at a lower price to outside markets. 768. Do you not think that might arise under federation ?—lf they would give us the things it would not injure us much. I would like some one to give me a suit of clothes. 769. What about the sugar industry ? —That is a matter of large mistakes. The whole idea of these men is to get the cheapest possible labour on top of the earth. With regard to white labour not being able to work there, I say that if we give the white man the proper conditions and remuneration for his labour he can live anywhere that a black man can.
297
A.—4
770. Do you not think in time that the climate would have an effect on them—not on the man perhaps, but on the coming generation ?—lt does not have that effect on the black race. 771. You think that federation is generally against the interests of New Zealand ?—Yes. 772. Mr. Reid.] What parts of Australia have you resided in?— Melbourne, Sydney, and Adelaide. 773. I think you told us there were always a large number of unemployed there ?—Yes. 774. In the cities or in the country?—ln the cities. 775. What class do these unemployed represent ? —All trades, including labourers. 776. Is that modified by seasons? —Oh, yes. In Sydney there was a demand for men to go up country and fell bush; men went up, and that lessened the number of unemployed. 777. It exists from time to time as a constant thing?— Yes. 778. You think it cannot be avoided in the present condition of things? —Yes. 779. Why ? —By breaking up the large estates and by taxing the land-values you will very soon end it. 780. Mr. Leys],] You think there is no danger of the creation of trusts in New Zealand ?—We can watch that point. We have a pretty close touch on our representatives, and if they go in that direction we can pretty soon jump on them. 781. You attribute the creation of these trusts to a protective policy?— Yes. 781 a. Do you think a free-trade policy is superior ?—Yes, certainly. 782. You do not hold with the protective policy of New Zealand?—No; I cannot conceive how a man can expect that it would benefit him. Take any industry that has three items of raw material, and each of these three has got a 20-per-cent. duty on it. Every man sells his goods for the highest price he can possibly get, and if the three items have 20 per cent., that is 60 per cent. he has to pay for the article; that is not its real worth. He has only 20 per cent, on the production of the finished article, so that there is three to one against him. If you give him the raw material free, and let him get the tools, there is no reason why he should not compete, unless he is an inferior man; and the sooner the inferior men close up the better for the whole community. 783. Do you think federation with Australia would tend towards free-trade, in the way of widening the free-trade world ?—lf you abolish your tariff you can federate with the whole world. 784. Do you think our present industries could survive under a free-trade policy ?—Why not, if you get your raw material at the open market-price, and you have the workmen and the tools to put it into shape ? 785. Can our manufacturers, paying a high wage and working short hours, compete against the system that obtains in America?—lf the United States were to abolish their tariff, I am afraid that, unless other places changed their ideas, the United States could beat anything, because of the specialisation. 786. Is it not a fact that the Chinese and Japanese are employed in the timber-mills of western United States?—l suppose they are, more or less. 787. Is there not a danger of their coming to New Zealand in that trade?—lf you compare Chinamen and white men in labour there is no fear of the competition. One has got energy, the other has not. 788. Do you think the American workman does not turn out more work in ten hours than the New Zealand workman in eight ? —You could not answer that generally, Yes or No. It just depends on what the work is. 789. But is not the tendency in America to use men up and to get a fresh supply ?—ls that the tendency ? Do you want to do that ? 790. No; we are raising the question whether they cannot get more work out of their men, and therefore compete unfairly with New Zealand? —If they wish to run men down they can do so, and get a larger product that way, but that is not very good policy. 791. Hon. Captain Russell.] I understood you to say that the Anglo-Saxon can work in any climate?—l said the white race. 792. Can you give us any example of where white men have worked continuously in the tropics ? —Yes ; in South Carolina. 793. That is not the tropics ?—Well, it was a place of which it was said that no white man could possibly work in, and therefore they must have slaves to do the work. That was the argument given out at the time, but white men are working there now. 794. You said that white men could inhabit the tropics and compete with black labour there : give us one instance where that has been done for two generations ? —White men refuse to go into a tropical country and compete with men who simply get a pound of rice to live upon. 795. You said that white men could compete with Chinamen anywhere?— Yes. 796. Why, then, are you afraid of their coming here ? —I am not afraid of them. Major William Madooks examined. (No. 103.) 797. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your official position in New Zealand? —Staff Officer to the Commander of the Forces. 798. You belong also to the regiment of Boyal Artillery ? —Yes. 799. You have lately seen service in South Africa?— Yes. 800. For how long ?—Fourteen months. 801. Colonel Penton, Commander of the Forces, is not in Wellington, is he?—No, he is away. 802. In your opinion, do you think it would be a benefit as a matter of defence for New Zealand to be federated with Australia ?—I do not think that New Zealand would derive any benefit at present by federating. 803. Do you think that New Zealand would be able to defend herself against a hostile attack ?—With the assistance of the navy. 38—A. 4.
A.—4
298
804. Perhaps you would not mind stating your reasons for coming to that conclusion ?—I look upon the navy as undoubtedly the first line of defence for New Zealand, and, whether New Zealand is federated or not, the duties of the navy would be precisely the same. They would not alter their strategy or tactics in any way, whether we federated, or not. "So that in the matter of their assistance we would not gain any benefit by federating. Then, if we federated we should be under the command of the chief officer commanding the Australian troops, and we should be administered and organized by him ; and I cannot see that the organization and administration would be facilitated or expedited in any way by doing so. Also we would have to assimilate our forces to the forces of the other States, and make them uniform, which would mean an alteration of conditions that would not probably suit us. We might have to be organized and equipped under conditions favourable to Australia and not favourable to New Zealand—which would not be suitable. Then, in the case of a national emergency, if New Zealand was invaded or attacked, the forces of Australia would be fully employed in looking after their own interests, and would not be able to give us much assistance. We would have to rely on ourselves and the navy. Then, again, if Australia was attacked, we would require all our men here, and would have none to send to her assistance. I think where we might derive some benefit from federation in the future is that Australia may have a navy of her own from which we probably would not derive any benefit unless we were federated. 805. Do you think the cost of defence in New Zealand would be greater or less under federation than it is at present ?—I think it would be about the same. 806. Assuming that we were sufficiently protected from a naval point of view, is there any reason, in your opinion, why the land forces of New Zealand should not be made efficient for the land-defence of New Zealand? —No ; I think there is no reason why they should not, provided we have enough arms and ammunition in the country. 807. Hon. Major Steward.] You contemplate that the only danger likely to arise in Australia from a European foe would be through complications with Great Britain ?—Yes. 808. In the event of there being hostilities between Britain and a first-class Continental Power, would it not follow that both Australia and New Zealand would be equally objects of attack to the enemy ?—Yes. 809. Therefore, under those circumstances, if we were attacked, both Australia as well as New Zealand must endeavour to do what each could for the protection of their coasts ? —Yes. 810. Under such circumstances, is it at all probable that Australia, if we were federated with her, would have any ships to spare to send down to assist New Zealand ?—At the present time she owns practically none. 811. You hardly conceive any possibility of there being an Australian navy that would be able, while protecting its own coasts, to send vessels to help New Zealand?—l suppose they might do so if they got a big enough navy. 812. Is that likely to happen within any reasonable time ?—I do not think so. 813. Consequently, we are not likely to get any special benefit through federating with Australia from that point of view ?—I think not. 814. And, supposing we do not federate, I think you have held that the duty of the Imperial navy would be the same as at present—that is to say, that they would have to protect New Zealand as well as Australia?— Yes. 815. Mr. Leys.] Mr. Barton has recently stated that New Zealand would benefit through the construction of the trans-continental railway, seeing that the troops could then more easily be concentrated for the general defence of the Commonwealth : can you see any force in that argument ? —No; I do not think the railway would benefit New Zealand much. 816. Do you think a large standing army will be created in Australia ?—No. I think it will be a larger one than they have at present, but on the same footing, mostly Volunteers. 817. You do not think that by means of these railways a large expeditionary force could be concentrated, say, at Sydney for despatch to New Zealand?—Oh, in that way, yes, the railways might be of use ; but I do not think they would despatch any forces here, because in the case of an emergency they would want all their own troops to look after their own interests, and would not be able to spare them to send to New Zealand. If they could spare them lam sure they would send them in case of trouble, whether we federate or not, should New Zealand be attacked. 818. You do not think it probable, in the event of an enemy landing in New Zealand, that we could look for a Federal assistance from the standing army of Australia ?—We would, I think, undoubtedly get what assistance could be spared, whether we federate or not. If we were not federated we could not demand it. 819. Mr. Luke.] Is it not the case that New Zealand, by reason of the configuration of the coast-line, is easier of attack than Australia?—l think so. 820. And, if it could be more easily taken possession of than Australia, would not the ragged coast-line of New Zealand be rather an element in favour of our being able to defend it ?—There are so many bays, and there is so much smooth water where a foe could make a sudden raid, that I think it would be rather open to attack. This country is also richer than Australia, and if a foe landed he could live on the country better than he could live on the country in Australia. 821. From your experience in South Africa, do you not think the natural advantages of New Zealand are such that comparatively few men could defend the colony as compared with the number of men required to defend some parts of Australia ?—I have not seen much of Australia, but certainly New Zealand is very advantageously configurated in that respect; and from the country I saw in Australia I should think the advantage lies with us. 822. Mr. Beauchamp.] In configuration and formation generally, how does this country compare with that portion of South Africa in which we have recently been fighting?—l think our country is more difficult, and on the wild parts of the coast it would be a very difficult country for a foreign military force to operate in.
299
A.—4
823. Hon. Mr. Bmven.] Do you think it is at all likely that, in the event of complications arising, a foreign enemy could land a dangerous force on our coast? —It is within the bounds of possibility, but I think it is extremely improbable. What we have to fear most is a sudden raid on the ports by a few ships. 824. The defence of the navy would be really that of the whole of the Pacific Ocean, would it not—following the enemy wherever he might be, rather than to defend particular coasts ?—Yes. 825. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Then, I presume that naval strategy in these waters would not be to watch the ports, but to watch the enemy's fleets?— Yes, undoubtedly; to watch his fleets. 826. Then, under these circumstances, so long as England has the command of the sea, we need not anticipate more than, say, ten thousand men at the outside being landed on the coast ?—No; I think we need not expect more than that so long as we have command of the seas. 827. Then, under those circumstances, the local forces of New Zealand ought to be more than sufficient to prevent an enemy doing anything more than raid one or two seaport towns ?— Quite so. 828. And federation with the Commonwealth would not affect naval strategy in any degree whatever ?—No ; while New Zealand remains a dependency of the Empire we are as safe as if we were part of the Commonwealth. William Cable examined. (No. 104.) 829. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Cable?—An engineer, and president of the Engineers' Association. 830. Is that a numerous body ? —lt is composed of the local employers. 831. Has the association considered the question of federation as a body?— No. 832. Will you give the Commission the benefit of your individual opinion as to the wisdom or otherwise of New Zealand federating with Australia ? —I do not consider it desirable from a trade point of view. The wages in New South Wales are at least 10 per cent, under the local rate 3, and if we federated the duties would be taken off, and it would simply mean that in competition with Sydney people wages would have to come down here. Under existing conditions we are unable to compete with them, as they not only pay lower wages, but coal costs them 30 per cent, less than what we pay here. Then, again, on account of the large population there, and the large importation of raw materials from, say, England, they are brought into Sydney at a much lower rate than they can be brought into the small seaport towns of New Zealand. These two points alone would tend to reduce wages very much there. 833. Are you speaking in respect to the ironfounders of New Zealand ?—Yes. 834. You think they would be prejudicially affected by federation ? —Undoubtedly. 835. Have you considered the matter as regards manufactures generally in New Zealand ?— The same remarks would apply to a lot of them. In the large centres of Australia they go in for specialising their work; thereby the cost of output is very much reduced. With our smaller markets and smaller demand, specialising is an impossibility. 836. Have you considered the matter from any other point of view than that of trade ?—No, except in a very general way. I really do not see any advantage that we should obtain by federating. 837. Do you not consider that having four million people additional to trade with on the other side would be an advantage ?—But the trade would be done by the other side. 838. Then, you are against federation ?—Oh, yes. 839. Hon. Captain Bussell.] I presume you think that the population of New Zealand will be a considerably.large one in the course of a few years? —Yes, undoubtedly. 840. And that, acre for acre, we might maintain a larger population than any portion of Australia ?—Yes. 841. Under these circumstances, viewing federation not from the standpoint of to-day, but from the standpoint of generations to come, shall we not be able to hold our own and compete favourably with Australia in regard to our manufactures ? —Well, we have got to get the generations unborn yet to work on. 842. But federation means an alliance for generations to come, and not only for to-day ?— I cannot see that there is any advantage in federating with Australia. 843. But do you not think we shall be able to hold our own in any part of the world when we grow into a big nation ? —I am simply viewing this matter as I find it to-day, and not from what might happen fifty or a hundred years hence. 844. You would not give any opinion as to the likely effect of federation ?—No, I am not much of a prophet; but, generally speaking, New Zealand is getting along very nicely as it is, and it would be a pity to upset things by joining this Commonwealth. 845. You attach importance to the price of coal, I understand ?—There is no doubt it is an important matter. 846. And should we not be able to establish manufactories alongside some of our coalfields, which would assist us in our manufactures and in competing with Australian goods ?—That might be done ; but, unfortunately, the coalfields of New Zealand are where the harbours are bad. 847. Take Dunedin, for instance: is there not coal very close to Dunedin?—There is a brown coal. 848. There is another point which perhaps may be of some importance : We believe that the motive-power in the future may be electricity, and when that comes about shall we not, by reason of our enormous water-supplies, have a great advantage over Australia in regard to producing the motive-power ?—I cannot speak from personal knowledge as to what natural motive-powers the Australian Colonies may be able to develop, as I have never been through Australia. 849. But we have enormous water-supplies throughout New Zealand, have we not ?—Yes.
A.—4
300
850. Could we not in some way or another convert them into power ?—There is no doubt that the main streams could be brought in. 851. Would not that fully compensate us for the want of cheap coal, and give us the same advantages they have in Australia ? —Of course, they have the advantage in Australia of cheap coal; but, as to their water-power and their main streams, I know nothing about them. 852. Is coal any cheaper in Victoria than it is in many parts of New Zealand? —I dare say it will be, but I do not know for certain. 853. Do you not think there is a possibility of establishing works at Parapara, in New Zealand, of a payable nature, which will affect our manufactures very materially for good ?—The Parapara ore might be made payable in the course of another century, but I am afraid it will not be done till that time, or, at any rate, for fifty years. 854. Then, you decline to consider the question from the standpoint of, say, a hundred years hence ? —Yes. 855. Mr. Roberts.] Your main objection, as a manufacturer, to federation is, I understand, on account of the additional price of labour and the additional cost of production in New Zealand ? — Yes. 856. Do you not consider that the workman in this colony gives very much better service for his wages than the workman on the other side ?—I am not in a position to know, because Ido not go to the other side ; but there is this fact: that even with their bad climate their manufactures can compete with New Zealand now. 857. So that you do not believe that the workman of this colony can, working eight hours a day and at the present wages, give as good a value for his work as the workman can in Australia with longer hours and lower wages ?—I do not think so. 858. Then, if you are opposed to federation, and you consider that the cost of production is so great here, do you not look forward to the time when we shall be able to export our manufactures from this colony to other parts of the world ?—lt will not be done in our lifetime. 859. Then, you think that we shall continue to produce in New Zealand enough for New Zealand only ? —Yes. 860. And not to export?—No, considering the existing wages and short hours that are involved. 861. Mr. Beauchamp.] You are protected down to the extent of about 5 per cent., are you not?— Yes. 862. Even with that protection, and with the extra protection you have in the shape of the transit-charges, you are well met with competition from Australia ?—Yes. 863. And you think that competition will greatly increase if we federate, in consequence of the free-trade between the colonies ?—Yes. 864. Do you not think that under federation there will be a very strong effort made to bring the Australian rate of wages up to the same level as wages in this colony ? —I am doubtful if it could be managed, because in the large centres of Australia there is always a large floating working population seeking work, and they take it at lower rates than the men get in the smaller towns. 865. You refer only to manufactures that are not what you might call indigenous to the colony ? —Yes. 866. Mr. Luke.] Do you think that there is no prejudicial difference in the quantity of work a man can turn out in Australia as compared with what a man can turn out in New Zealand ? —So far as our trade in this colony is concerned, a man here can turn out more work in ten hours than he can in eight, and the same remark applies to Australia. 867. And you think that, as regards a comparative estimate between the workman of Australia and the workman of New Zealand, there would be little or no difference ?—No. 868. Has it been your experience that raw material, especially bar- and pig-iron, comes any cheaper to the big centres of Australia than it does to New Zealand ? —lt does. 869. We had evidence in Dunedin that a large quantity of pig-iron is brought out from Home as stiffening, at a nominal charge, and at no freight at all: does that ever happen in New Zealand ?—No ; but I can get material in Sydney much cheaper than I can get it at Wellington here direct from Home. 870. Is not coal considerably cheaper in New South Wales than it is in New Zealand ?—Yes. 871. And generally cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand? —In the seaport towns it is. 872. Is not coal a very important element of manufacture in your line of business?— Yes. 872 a. Do the Australian manufacturers go into the iron trade very much ? —Yes. 873. In what particular ?—ln dredging machinery. 874. Do you think it is possible, in reference to the manufacture of woollen goods, that they could be exported from New Zealand at a profit ?—We could export woollen goods, provided that the wages were as high on the other side as they are here. 875. And in certain lines of industry you think it is possible that we might find a market for them in Australia if there were equal conditions of wages and hours of labour ? —Yes; but they can just as well manufacture those things as we can. 876. Mr. Leys.] Is not competition in dredging machinery from Australia due to the fact that the New Zealand foundries could not take the work at the time ?—Of course, there might be something in that. But the Sydney and Melbourne people secured a lot of orders that engineers in the North Island never had a chance to compete for. 877. Were not all the engineering shops in New Zealand pretty busy at the time ?—Oh, no. Foundries in Sydney and Melbourne were busy with dredging material when the foundries in the North Island were slack. 878. Is the price for dredging machinery lower in the Australian shops tLau the price in New Zealand ?—Yes.
301
A.—4
879. Can you tell us why there were no tenders in New Zealand for the Government railwaywagons?—That might be due to a variety of causes. 880. Is it not a fact that there was no tender accepted on the first occasion of the tendering ? —The Government advertised for four or five hundred trucks, and they were all placed in Invercargill. 881. Was that on the first invitation for tenders or on the subsequent occasion ?—I cannot say ; I did not tender myself; and I take it that, as far as the Wellington foundries were concerned, the reason our men did not tender was that they were hampered for room in their premises, and therefore were unable to tender at any price. 882. Is it not a fact that the New Zealand agricultural-implement makers are successfully exporting their implements to Australia ?—Not now ; but they did a bit of business with Christchurch years ago, when there was a different tariff. But I believe the amount sent now is merely a nominal thing, or they may export a specialty that is not made over there. 883. Hon. Major Steward.] I take it that, from your special knowledge of your own industry, and from your independent knowledge of the industries of the colony, you are of opinion that to join the Federation would have an injurious effect upon the industries of New Zealand generally ? —Yes. 884. Then, that opinion is based upon two conditions—namely, that the price of material in some instances, and the price of coal and the price of labour, is less in Australia than in New Zealand ? —They are. 885. Consequently, if New Zealand joined the Federation, you apprehend that under these circumstances the trade that is now done in these industries in New Zealand would be transferred to Australia? —Otherwise the wages would have to be reduced here. 886. But supposing the wages were not reduced, but present conditions were maintained, the result would inevitably be that business would go from here to where it could be done more cheaply ?—Yes. 887. If that were the case, and it continued for a period of years, would it be possible, in your opinion, supposing conditions altered in our favour subsequently, to bring back the business to New Zealand ?—lt is always a difficulty to pick up lost trade. 888. Then, if that is so, and even supposing that in years to come the conditions altered in our favour, would not New Zealand then have a very uphill fight to get back her business ?—She would. 889. That is to say, if there is any possible advantage in future years from federation it is a problematical advantage, but in the meantime it would be a positive disadvantage to New Zealand ? —Exactly. 890. I presume your feeling is that you prefer to stick to the bone you have rather than to grasp at the shadow you see in the water ? —Very much so. 891. Mr. Luke.] As regards the dredging machinery, have our shops been capable of turning out the dredges as soon as the companies have been able to pay for them ?—Very much sooner. 892. Has it not been a question of financing with some private companies to some extent?— Yes. John Pearce Luke examined. (No. 105.) 893. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—An engineer, and one of the directors of Luke and Co. 894. Will you give the Commission the benefit of your views on the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth ?—I do not know that 1 can add much to what Mr. Cable has stated. lam very strongly against federation, and not altogether from the trade point of view. Ido not take the gloomy view that some manufacturers do, of what would happen to this colony if we federated, because I do not think that, with regard to manufacturing under che federation of this country with Australia, the conditions would very much alter from what they are at the present time, as we do not now get a great deal of competition from the other side. Certainly in respect to our own business we do get some competition ; but from my personal observation in New South Wales and Victoria two years ago I can say that the industries of New South Wales under free-trade are on a better footing than those of Victoria, which is a protective colony. I do not believe in a very high protective tariff, and I also consider that the conditions of life for the worker in New Zealand are very much superior to what I saw in Victoria. In the iron trade it was lamentable to see in Victoria the number of works that were practically closed. Those works had been fostered by a long period of protection, and that, I consider, would be a very bad thing to introduce into the Commonwealth. 895. When you said just now that you did not believe in a highly protective tariff, did you mean that you did not believe in a highly protective tariff itself, or that you did not believe that there would be a highly protective tariff imposed by the Commonwealth ?—I do not believe in it myself. At the present time there is not much difference in the matter of the tariff between New Zealand and Australia. We will not send for goods that we can produce ourselves, and they will not obtain them from us, even if we federated with them, when they can buy them nearer to their own doors. I look upon the relationship of New Zealand to Australia in this matter in the same light that England bore in the early days to the Continent. If you take the Scotchman you will find that, although there are only four million of people, yet their grit and determination have permeated the whole Anglo-Saxon race. They have gone out into the whole of these southern colonies, and are now at the head of our industries, and the same remark applies to the Scotchman in America. What is true of the Scotchman is also true of the people of New Zealand, and I feel that if we parted with the freedom we have to-day we should simply lower the tone of national life in New Zealand instead of keeping it up to the present high standard. As a nation, we have a strong national character and ambition in life. No doubt at the start of this Commonwealth there
A.—4
302
will be some people who will suffer, but I do not know who is going to puffer but the manufacturers whose business has got to be fostered ; and if that is the case, that in order for them to keep going they have got to be fostered and coddled, the sooner some of them are killed off the better. That is my opinion after twenty-seven years' experience in New Zealand, and twenty-one years in business. In New Zealand we can produce enough for the requirements of the colony, and little over. We'are too far away from a market for our engineering goods, and I do not see how we can expect to enlarge that market. Another thing is that there is no cfesire on the part of the youths of this colony to go into any other trade than that of engineering, and after these young fellows serve their time at the engineering they get distributed all over the globe. After one of them has served his time in our shops he can command a position in that line in any part of the British Empire. 896. I take it that your opinion is against federation ?—Strongly. 897. I should like to ask you whether you think we have anything to fear from the manufacturers on the other side in the event of federation ?—-No; and in the dredging business I do not fear the competition from the workers' point of view; but I view this question from a financial point of view, and I say it is manifestly unfair that we manufacturers in New Zealand should be bound under certain conditions of finance in regard to the supply of dredgers—that is to say, that 25 per cent, of the contract price should be held over from the contractors, whereas in Australia contractors get the cash on the delivery of the documents. 898. But do you think that your establishments in this colony can compete against the larger ones on similar lines in the Australian Colonies ?—lf they cannot compete they must go to the wall; but I say it is far better to build up a farming and pastoral industry generally if our manufacturing industries cannot progress without heavy protection. 899. Do you mean to say that you do not think New Zealand will ever become a great manufacturing colony ?—I do not see how it will, because if we federated Australia will not accept our goods unless we can manufacture cheaper than they can themselves. Ido not see how federation is going to enable us to produce cheaper than the Australians can now. 900. Have you considered this matter from any other point of view than that of manufacturing?—No, only generally. I have, in common with most people, given it a good deal of thought, and, with others, I look upon the proposal of the Australian Government to spend £100,000 on receiving the Duke of York as undemocratic, and I only cite that as an instance of what will occur under this Commonwealth. If we join them, this colony would be taxed simply to exalt the position of gentlemen in public life on the other side, and it would be a very wrong thing, in my opinion, to encourage. 901. Hon. Captain Russell.] You think we cannot compete with Australia in the manufacturing of machinery ? —I have seen the workers in Australia at work, and I must say that they work just as well and do as much as we do in New Zealand, and my observations convinced me that Australian workmen were equal to the New-Zealanders. 902. You think the Australian is not inferior to the New-Zealander in the same class of work? —I do not think so. I was unable to tell from personal observation whether or not the maximum would be kept up if distributed over the same number of years, but a man would become older at fifty in Australia than a man in New Zealand at sixty. 903. Is it not possible that the whole of the islands of the Pacific may gravitate to the Commonwealth ?—That is a political question I have not gone into. 904. But it may affect the question of our federating ? —I would rather see this colony remain independent, and fight out its own destiny, than be associated with the people over there. 905. If there were a large federation of Australasia, including Polynesia and Melanesia, could not New Zealand compete with Australia in supplying these islands?—We compete with Australia now in some things, and I can only say that I am strongly against this scheme, and I should not be prepared to give up our independence for any advantage we might gain in that respect, because Ido not see how the conditions would alter even under federation; it would be a matter of supply and demand. 906. But if we were not federated with Australia would we not be able to supply all those islands with machinery on better terms than Australia?—l do not know that federation would make any difference to us in that respect. I do not know of machinery having been sent to the islands. 907. I had in view the matter of sugar-mills and coffee-mills; you drew a comparison between New Zealand and Scotland ?—Yes ; I said that we are an exactly similar people, and working out a similar destiny. 908. And you said that the Scotchmen permeated practically the whole of the Anglo-Saxon world ? —I say that the engineers who are turned out in this colony go forth and take the same position in the world as Scotch engineers have done in the past. Every lad who serves his time as an engineer has got an open market in the world, practically, if he wants a position. 909. Do you not think it is rather an argument in favour of federation than against it ? —Not at all. 910. Does it not lead to the supposition that the New-Zealander, being an equivalent to the Scotchman, will be able to compete favourably with the Australian in other parts of the world ? —I do not think that there is any argument in that. I think that federation will lead to the detriment of the New-Zealander, and I think that if it leads to what one of our friends spoke about this morning—combinations and trusts —it would not be to the advantage of our workmen. 911. Have you considered the question of the ultimate possibility of federation ?—My opinion is that this colony will have a very dense population, almost as dense as that of England. There is a lot of land about this colony that will carry a lot of population. 912. When we come to that position, should not our manufacturers then be able to compete ?
303
A.—4
—We have got nothing at all to fear from the manufacturers' point of view by keeping out of federation. New Zealand will for a number of years make all she needs. I am not speaking of woollen goods or boot-making only, but of the engineering business generally. We have no particular natural advantages that are going to stand _us in any stead—not for many years to come— and on that account we shall not have, in respect of manufactures, much to expect. Mr. Cable said that it would be another generation before we could manufacture iron ; but I would go further, and say that we will not manufacture iron in New Zealand under present conditions at all. With our iron-deposits we cannot do like they do on Lake Superior—scoop up the raw material into the big steamers, with very little handling. Everything is done at a minimum of cost there ; and how can we compete against them with the small market like we would have in New Zealand ? The iron industry, in respect of the production of the raw material, is only one that can be dealt with in this country by the State nationalising the iron-ore and working it. 913. Mr. Roberts.] You mentioned that you had in your business competition with Australia in the building of dredges : was that open competition or not, or was it through your shops being full?—I do not know. The tenders were not considered in Wellington, to my knowledge. 914. Were they considered in other places ?—I think so ; but lam under the impression that they thought we were all full up, and the companies thought they could get the dredges cheaper in Australia. It was not the case that there was no competition in Wellington, because we did not fear competition with Australia very much; but I feel that if the New-Zealander is given the eight hours, other things being equal, the Australians will not be long before they get it. In the larger shops of Australia I heard they were working the eight hours, and certainly their wages were not very much less than they were in New Zealand. 915. Mr. Beauchamp.] I judge from your remarks that you are a Free-trader at heart ? —I am. I think we only want just as much protection in this colony as will prevent the people sending away for the things they require. We want more patriotism here ; we want to make the people feel that we are as good as our neighbours, and that we have a right to get our clothing, and so on, made in the places where we are getting our living. 916. Have you had much to fight against in the matter of dredges ?—Yes. 917. With inter-free-trade in your industries, do you think you could survive and carry on business profitably ? —I do not see how it is going to affect us. 918. You are protected now ?—Only 5 per cent, on dredges, plus the cost of importing. 919. Have you heard it suggested that, in the event of federation, some of the largest ironfounders in this colony would establish themselves in Sydney and Melbourne ?—I think, if they had had as much to do with iron-foundries as I have had during the last twenty-one years, they would not want to establish themselves anywhere at all. 920. You spoke just now of the inability of this colony to work some of the iron-deposits we have here : had you in your mind the vast iron-deposits at Parapara ?—I do not see how you are going to work those deposits profitably, because when you start the blowing-furnaces you must keep them going continually for long periods. 921. Do you know that alongside these deposits there are the natural fluxes? —I do not think that any individual could take up that matter; it would have to be done by the State. If the capitalists take these deposits up and work them they must manufacture several grades of iron, or certain foundries must import. 922. With State aid for a number of years, do you not think that this industry could then get along without the State aid ?—I do not think you would be able to manufacture iron in this colony with any prospect of commercial success for at least a quarter of a century. 923. Through losing a large portion of our revenue by federation, do you think it would be unwise to subject ourselves to taxation by people who know very little as to our requirements ? — One of the business objections to federation is that they are going to draw about half a million of money from this colony for administrative purposes and give us very little in return for it, and therefore it is going to be a dear bargain for New Zealand. 924. How do you think that money can be made up ?—You will have to squeeze the manufacturers. Those are the only men you can squeeze. 925. And not by lowering the exemption under the land- and income-tax ?—I am not up in those questions. 926. As to representation, we should have fifteen members in a House of ninety, and would that enable us to make ourselves heard ?—We should be the younger brother, and should have very little influence. I would not depend upon the elder brother. 927. Mr. Leys.] Is it not the fact that you can find New Zealand artisans all over Australia, seeming to indicate that we are bringing up artisans in a restricted market where they can find no employment? —While we turn out perhaps twenty engineering apprentices who are good workmen, during that time we would not turn out two blacksmiths, and certainly not one boilermaker. All the Wellington boys want to be engineers, and after the engineering apprentice is out of his time he can find employment on the steamers in every sea, or on the tea-plantations or sugar-planta-tions, or in freezing-works and woollen-factories—in fact, there are a thousand and one avenues for the employment of his services. 928. Do you attribute their ability to get employment to the superior character of the men or to their superior training?—l say we have a superior youth in this colony. 929. You think that our industries would be able to produce mechanics who would regenerate the industries of the world ?—I say that we shall produce in our industrial life sufficient for our own requirements, and what we should look for is that such artisans as are turned out in New Zealand shall have an open market for their labours. 930. And you think that that would be facilitated by federation ?—I do not think federation will make any difference in that respect.
A.—4
304
931. Am I to assume from that answer that you object to this labour legislation as rather restricting the operations of manufacturers ?—Speaking as an employer, I might say that, of course, it does press heavily sometimes, but that will adjust itself in time ; but labour at the present time, after having had a good deal to put up with for a number of years, is righting itself, and is making the most of its chance. I think, however, it has got to the maximum of its claims at the present time. 932. You think it would be an injury to the country to bring us down to the Australian level? —Yes, I think so. 933. Federation would tend to bring it down ?—We would run a big risk of that. William Cbabtbee examined. (No. 106.) 934. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ?—An engineer. 935. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Twenty-six years. 936. Have you lived in Australia?— Yes, for twenty years. 937. Would you give the Commission, shortly, your views on the question of New Zealand federating or not with the Commonwealth of Australia?—My views are favourable to federation ; I believe it would be a good thing for us. It certainly would give us an open market, and we could compete with any manufacturers for the northern Australian trade. Anything that we could manufacture here that would suit them we could supply in competition with all the southern parts of Victoria and Tasmania. 938. Do you think we could successfully compete with the difference in wages that now exists? --I think so. lam not speaking generally of engineering. In engineering Ido no anticipate that we could do anything with the large centres in Australia, and I do not think that they could compete against us here. 939. What were you referring to when you said we could supply Australia ?—I was referring to boots, shoes, jams, and that class of goods. In those matters we could supply the northern part of Australia just as well as Adelaide or Victoria could. 940. Do you know anything about the boot trade ?—I do not know much about it, but it is a trade that is rushed. 941. We have had evidence that the boot trade is a declining one ?—I suppose the reason is that they have not got a market. 942. Do you know that the trade is very seriously attacked from America?— That is very likely ; but if we joined the Federation we would have a market of a few millions more than we have now. 943. Do you know that a great quantity of fruit-pulp is imported here from Tasmania?— Yes ; I should imagine that would be stopped now that they have the Victorian market. 944. It still comes into this colony?—I think they could get rid of it in Victoria to a large extent. 945. You think the manufacturers of this colony could compete with Australia ? —For the trade of the outlying parts we could. 947. Have you considered what the difference would be to New Zealand from a financial aspect ?—I have not personally considered it. 948. Have you considered the sentimental question of sacrificing our independence: do you attach any importance to that ? —None whatever. 949. Then, I take it that you are in favour of federation ? —Yes. 950. Have you any other reasons to state than those you have given us ?— For one thing, we have not enough population to develop any manufactories ; and, supposing the iron and other mineral deposits of ours could be worked, it could not be done profitably without having a market to send it to. We have not got sufficient manufactures to employ all the mechanics we have, and they have to go away when their time is out. That they will continue to do unless work is found for them. 951. Do you think New Zealand in the future is likely to carry a large population?— Unless it could become an exporting nation, I do not think it will. 952. Do you think the effect of the Commonwealth will be to attract population from Australia to New Zealand, or the other way about ?—I think, as it is so near, and the population always goes where it can get the best wages, that they will go to Australia. 953. But the wages are higher in New Zealand ?—They are now. A few years ago they were much higher in Australia ; it all depends upon how busy a country is. 954. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that great manufacturing-works will be established in Australia near the coal? —That is very possible. 955. Do you not think big boot- and shoe-factories in Australia and New South Wales will not only supply all their own wants, but swamp our boot-manufactures here? —Victoria is certainly not better off for manufactures than we are. Coal is little or no cheaper there than it is here. 956. Do you not attach any importance to specialising ?—That is the whole trend of the work of the world; we shall have to specialise too. 957. Do you think we can do so to the same extent in our small factories ?—The factories will get larger. 958. If we federate, do you not think we should get swamped before the specialising got to work ?—The only thing that could swamp us is more capital, and I do not think they have that. 959. Do you know that the Victorian factories are already competing in this market notwithstanding heavy protective duty ?—-They have heavy duty in Victoria, and it is possible they get rid of their overproduction by sending it here. 960. You think we would better keep our people here under federation than otherwise ?—Yes. 961. You do not think these boot-factories in Australia would attract them on account of the superior facilities for obtaining employment ?—No, I do not think there is anything in that.
305
A.— 4.
962. Mr. Beaitchamp.] With inter-free-trade under federation, would it not be possible that our markets would be further swamped by these boots and shoes which would come from the big factories in Sydney and Melbourne?—l do not think it. There would be a further large protection duty against goods coming from America to make up for the loss to the Customs through intercolonial free-trade. Ido not think it is possible to have a tariff lower than the one we have now. 963. Generally, you are of opinion that our industries would not suffer by federation?— Yes. 964. Mr. Millar.] Have you any idea of what value free-trade with New South Wales has been to the products of New Zealand ?—No. 965. Do you think that under the system of specialising, and considering the size of some of the establishments in Australia, it would be possible to compete against these men with free-trade ? Supposing tenders were called for ten railway-engines, do you think any firm in New Zealand could compete against Hudson's, in New South Wales? —Yes, I certainly think so ; there are shops quite as well equipped as Hudson's. 966. How do you account, then, for the fact that when the Government called for tenders for iron trucks- there were no tenders from this colony at all ?—The foundries in the colony have lately been fairly busy, and certainly there is not a foundry with sufficient land in Wellington to take the trucks in hand ; that is a trade that suits Hudson Brothers better than any place in our town. 967. If they have the plant in Australia they could manufacture sufficient to supply the whole of Australasia if worked to its utmost extent: do you think that New Zealand manufactures would be able to compete with those manufactures ?—We shall have to compete against it. 968. If that is the case, how can you say there is a prospect of exporting boots and shoes from this colony?—lf clever men or syndicates took the business in hand they could make boots as cheaply as America can. 969. Has not Melbourne got an immediate population of half a million ?—Yes. 970. Could not these boots be distributed amongst that population at no cost at all ?—That is so; but they make a certain amount for the home market, and all they make above that they have to export. 971. Do you not think the population of Melbourne will increase as rapidly as the four centres of New Zealand ?—A good deal depends on the market. I do not see what is to make a big increase in Melbourne. 972. Do you see what will make an increase in Wellington ?—Yes; I think Wellington will grow very largely. 973. More largely in proportion than Melbourne ? —Yes. 974. You consider it would be in the interests of manufactures of this colony to federate ? —I do. 975. Independent of what we would have to pay for it ?—I do not see that we should have to pay much for it. 976. Would you support federation at any cost ? —I would not say that, but from what I can see lam in favour of it. I think we ought to try and make a big nation ; it did not do much harm to the German States, or to England and Scotland. 977. You are not prepared to federate unless the price is not too high ?—I am in favour of federation on equal terms. 978. Do I understand you to say that you are not in favour of federation unless this colony will gain as much as she will lose?— Unless this colony has equal terms with the others. 979. 'Mr. Leys.] Would you be in favour of New Zealand going into federation under the sent Commonwealth Act ?—I really do not property understand the Commonwealth Act, but I am prepared to go in, all fair and equal. 980. If admitted as an original State on the same terms as the others, you think it would be advisable for New Zealand to go in? —Yes. David Eobbrtson examined. (No. 107.) 981. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—An engineer. 982. Are you representing the Engineers' Association ?—No. 983. How long have you been in New Zealand?— About thirty-eight years. 984. What are your views of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—I think we have everything to lose and nothing to gain—we have too good a country to give away to them. 985. You think New Zealand should maintain its own independence ?—Certainly. 986. What are your reasons for that ?—All the reasons I know are against federation, both in the engineering and other trades. Climate is a great consideration. 987. You think it would have a bad effect on the other trades of New Zealand besides the engineering trade?— Certainly. 988. You think we should not be able to compete with the larger concerns in Australia?—We could not at all. We left England because the competition was keen there, and because of the crowded population, and by federating with Australia we should simply be going back to all that again. 989. Do you not see any advantage in the greater population for trade purposes ? —I do not think that we will ever do a large trade with Australia, except in times of drought. 990. That is the agricultural interest? —Yes, and that is the only one that will ever get much advantage from Australian trade. 991. Have you studied the Commonwealth Bill ?—I have had a read at it, and Ido not think there could be any advantage for New Zealand to federate. We are too far away from them for one thing, and the small voice we should have in the Commonwealth Parliament would hardly be heard unless we had some great man, like Mr. Seddon, composing the whole fifteen. If we had fifteen Seddons to send over we might make some impression. 39—A. 4.
A.—4
306
992. Have you any other reasons to adduce to us ? —No ; only I think that the competition we would receive would give New Zealand a very great check even in the manufactures we have got. We have had a great struggle to get them up to the pitch they are in, and even the workmen would be at a great disadvantage from the competition. 993. Have you any opinion as to their passing a Conciliation and Arbitration Act ?—I think they will have great difficulty in getting that through the Commonwealth Parliament. Eev. William Albert Evans examined. (No. 108.) 994. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A Congregational minister. 995. Eesiding in Wellington ?—Yes. 996. Have you given consideration to the federation question ?—I have in some of its phases. 997. Will you please state to the Commission the result of that consideration ?—The conclusion to which I have come is that it would not be wise for New Zealand at the present time to join the Federation —in the first place, because of the insular character of New Zealand. If New Zealand were related, to the other States of Australia as New South Wales or Queensland is, I should say decidedly, yes, federate, because then there would be a homogeneous country, and that, to my mind is a very important factor, but, as New Zealand is separatee by sea and has a geographical character of its own, it would be better if New Zealand did not federate, because it seems to me that the difference between the distance created by sea and that created by land is a very important one. Insularity has a great effect on the social and moral character of the people, and is of great importance in moulding the social and political life and character of a nation. It seems to me to be very much better for New Zealand to have freedom to work out its own destiny and character. If New Zealand were to federate it would only have a minor voice in the Commonwealth, and, in view of the contiguous part of Australia, the probabilities are that the same interest would not be taken in the well-being of New Zealand as would be taken in the other States of the Commonwealth. Then, it seems to me that a country situated as New Zealand is situated —placed under a more or less rigid Constitution—has not the same liberty to work out its own possibilities as if it were under a Constitution'that was perfectly elastic. It seems to me that the success of the Old Country is very largely to be found in the freedom of the Constitution. 998. Have you considered the question from a financial point of view—as to what the loss would be to New Zealand through federating?—No, only to a certain extent, but my opinion is of no value; Ido not wish to express any opinion on that subject. 999. Mr. Leys.] Have you resided in Australia?— No. 1000. Mr. Luke.] Do you think the effects of federation on the social conditions and characteristics of our people would be detrimental ? —I do. I cannot see that they would have exactly the same freedom of conditions. 1001. Do you think that our distance from the Continent of Australia would prejudicially affect us at all, either on those accounts or on account of commerce ?—I have just stated that we should not loom as largely as we should loom in the imagination and consideration of the various representatives in the Senate and House of Eepresentatives. 1002. Do you think that our joining the Australian Commonwealth would hasten Imperial federation ?—I do not think it would, simply because it seems to me that that has been in the air for some time, and there is a movement in that direction. 1003. Do you think it possible under federation for a community of interest to grow up between these States that would be detrimental to us ?—No, I should not think so. 1004. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think Imperial federation would be in some way retarded by our federating.with Australia, and so encouraging the importation of Australian manufactures against English manufactures, which would be to some extent shut out by tariff?—l can quite see the possibility. It will be very much more satisfactory to all the dependencies of the Empire to have Imperial federation rather than Australian federation. 1005. Do you think, as far as Britain is concerned, it would be better to have two great forces in these seas —New Zealaud and Australia ? —I do not think it would make any great difference. 1006. Do you think that under federation we would progress as rapidly in legislation for the mass as we have done in the last few years ? —I do not think so. 1007. Then, as to the character of the men sent to the Federal Parliament, do you think we should get as good men as now ?—That could be overcome. 1008. At the present time you do not favour federation because it is not opportune to join ?— Yes, that is so. 1009. Mr. Millar.] Have you looked at the question of coloured labour—as to how it will affect us in years to come ?—Yes ; it seems to me that that is one reason why we should not federate, because, I suppose, the Federal laws would supersede any State laws that may have been enacted with regard to coloured labour, and I cannot see how parts of Australia could be developed without coloured labour. Once coloured labour is allowed there, I cannot see how the line is to be drawn as between the States that are federated. That would be very prejudicial to the social conditions we have in New Zealand now. Under federation intercourse would be much more frequent than now, in so far as facilities would be created for undesirable people in Australia to come over to New Zealand and mix with our people—it would act detrimentally on their morals. Ido not think that a ring of law can be created around a country which would keep it pure in morals. 1010. On the whole, you do not think New-Zealanders are more moral than Australians?—l have not been over to Australia, and therefore do not know first hand. 1011. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] I suppose you understand by Imperial federation absolutely one Crown governing every part of it?— Yes. 1012. You would not put that on the same level as federation which means amalgamation of government ?—No.
A.—4
307
William Booth examined. (No. 109.) 1013. Hon. the Chairman.] Where do you reside, Mr. Booth ?—At Carterton, in the Wairarapa. 1014. And you are a timber merchant ? —Yes. 1015. Do you hold any office in connection with any society or company ? —I am a director of the Wellington Meat Export Company, and have been eighteen years a director of the .Carterton Building and Investment Society. I have also been a member of the Wellington Harbour Board, for the last fifteen years. I have also been a director of the Bank of New Zealand. 1016. Have you given any attention to the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth ? —I have read what has appeared in the public papers in New Zealand, and also a good deal of what has appeared in the public papers of Australia, on the subject. 1017. To what conclusion has that reading led you ?—That New Zealand should not federate at present, except for defence purposes. 1018. Will you state the reasons why you have come to that conclusion?—l think New Zealand is, from its size, its climate, and its racial characteristics, designed rather to stand alone. It has a prospect of becoming a large and powerful nation, and I think it is too far from Australia to make federation reasonably successful. I do not think the results to the trade and industries of the colony will be so serious a disadvantage as the restrictions arising from federation might be to the development of the New Zealand character. 1019. Will you explain how you think it might have a restrictive effect upon the New Zealand character? —I think the feeling of independence which is growing to possess—and usefully to possess—the minds of the people of New Zealand would be injuriously affected. 1020. What do you think will be the effect on the industries and workers of this colony supposing New Zealand federated?—l think, on the whole, the influence would be unfriendly. We do not look to any great extent to Australia for a market at present, and I see no likelihood that in the immediate future, at any rate, we shall be doing so. 1021. Have you considered whether the balance of trade would be in favour of New Zealand ? —I think, on the whole, it is and has been so for some time since the ports of New South Wales were opened, but not to such an extent as would justify any interference with the healthy development of character in our own people as an independent people. 1022. What do you think would be the effect upon the agricultural and pastoral industries of this colony if New Zealand federated with Australia?—l am not as competent to judge of what the effect on these industries would be as the gentlemen you have met in the South Island, and I think you will be more likely to find from the public documents, and from other gentlemen who are greater authorities on the subject than I am, what that effect is likely to be. They can give you more information upon that subject than I am able to do. 1023. Have you considered what the effect of federation would be upon the colonial finance of New Zealand —first, the effect on our revenue?—No, I have not gone into that subject. To do so would require a great variety of detailed information, which I think only public offices for the most part possess. 1024. Do you think that New Zealand joining the Federation would enable the loans of the State of New Zealand to be negotiated upon more advantageous terms than at present ?—I think it would be the fault of those who have charge of New Zealand finance if New Zealand is not able to borrow as cheaply as the Australian Commonwealth. 1025. Will you tell us something about the timber trade : how do you think that would be affected if New Zealand joined the Australian Commonwealth?— The timber trade would be affected in regard to white-pine timber, for which we would find an easy access to the markets in Australia, but I doubt if federation would be any advantage to the traders in New Zealand. 1026. Is white-pine subject to a duty in Australia?—l do not know that it is. We send the timber in the rough state. They object to manufactured timber. 1027. But dressed white-pine timber is carried into Australia from New Zealand? —I am not aware that it is to any great extent. The export is one which would not be interfered with, I think, as white-pine timber is required for butter-boxes, fruit-cases, casks, and purposes of that kind. They have no timber in Australia which will answer those purposes as well as our whitepine, and I do not think they could import timber for such purposes to compete with ours. 1028. Have you studied the Commonwealth Bill ? —I have read carefully those portions of it which have appeared in the public papers. I have not seen a copy of the whole Bill. 1029. Have you considered whether the Constitution proposed is a desirable one for New Zealand to go into ?—My impression is that it would not be advantageous to New Zealand. I think we are too far removed, and especially too far separated by water from Australia. I think the larger and more immediate interests of Australia would operate in the Commonwealth Parliament, on the whole, to the disadvantage of New Zealand. Ido not mean that there is any disposition on the part of the Australian people to be unfriendly to us, but the tendency of the arrangement would be, on the whole, unfriendly to us. 1030. Do you think New Zealand would in any way suffer from the want of knowledge on the part of the representatives of Australia of the wants and conditions of New Zealand ?—I think that is likely to be the result to a certain extent. 1031. Then, I take it that, on the whole, you are against federation?—At present I strongly think it would be undesirable for New Zealand to federate, excepting for defence purposes. 1032. What advantage do you consider we should gain in the matter of defence?—lt seems to me that the great battles of the future—the battles likely to affect the destinies of the British Empire —will be fought in Europe, and with the navies of European Powers. I think it would be a great advantage that there should be one common system of defence, under one Government, for the whole Empire, so far as relates to the navy.
A.—4
308
1033. Do you not think that the first line of defence would be the navy? —Yes; the fighting would be chiefly at sea, and in Europe. lam not an authority on this matter, and do not claim to speak with any authority upon such a subject. Ido not suppose that, the Empire being at war, we should have to face here any attack beyond what we could largely provide for ourselves. 1034. Taking it all round, do you think that there would be any difficulty in New Zealand protecting herself?— Judging from the experience of the present war in Soutli Africa, which has been continued for more than fifteen months, I do not think we should be called upon to do anything beyond what we could easily provide for. 1035. Hon. Captain Bussell] Under these circumstances, is there any necessity for a federation with Australia ? —No, not a federation with Australia —federation for mutual defence only. 1036. You think there is a necessity for federation for defence purposes?—l think it is desirable. 1037. But, seeing the vast area of country that Australia covers, would not New Zealand enjoy the advantage of having their own system of defence if we were combined with Australia in that matter ?—That would depend upon the arrangement made as to the disposition of the fleet. 1038. lam alluding to your last answer as to the defence of land ?—I do not think that federation need much affect the position so far as the land forces are concerned. 1039. That is to say, with an Imperial federation, would that, in your opinion, deal with the question of naval defence ? —I should think it would. 1040. And do you think that the federation of New Zealand with the Australian Colonies would advance or retard Imperial federation ?—I do not know ; but I should think, on the whole, it would be likely to advance it. 1041. I mean, supposing New Zealand remains a State by itself and Australia is federated, is that more likely to lead to Imperial federation, or do you think the alliance of New Zealand with Australia would in itself do more to advance that Imperial federation ?—I do not think that it need have much effect either way. 1042. You said that you do not think it would be desirable to federate at present: have you thought of the possible condition of things a hundred years hence ? —I look at the matter as it appears at present. It may be a long time before the mass of the people of New Zealand would be favourable to that change. 1043. Do you know Australia yourself?—l was over as representative of the Government at the Exhibition of 1888, and I was there two or three months, travelling about Australia. 1044. Did you never live there ?—No. 1045. Do you imagine that the difference in our surroundings, the one country being continental and the other insular, is liable to lead to the development of a different type ?—I think so. 1046. Do you think that there will be, say, in the course of five or six generations a marked variation? —I think so. If the people are cared for, as there is every prospect of their being, as compared with the way in which people have been cared for in the past, I see no reason—in fact, I think it is highly probable the population of New Zealand will be a very advanced and superior population. 1047. To that of Australia?—l would not like to say, or to make any comparison between ourselves and the Australians. It might be thought unfriendly; but I see no reason why the population of New Zealand should not constitute a great and powerful nation, one of the most advanced of modern times, in the not distant future. 1048. But do you think that there would be differentiation of type between the NewZealanders and Australians, without drawing a comparison as to which is the best ?—I think there would be striking differences, the result of marked difference of environment, not such differences as exist between the Latin and the Teutonic races. 1050. Have you considered the question at all from the racial aspect—as to the possibility of the peopling of Australia by a coloured people ? —No. 1051. You mean the one being a country of plains and hills, and a tropical climate, and the other of a temperate climate ? —I mean the influences which go to make up the national life and character of a people owing to their habitual environment. 1052. Well, that being so, in five generations or more, do you think it would materially affect the question of federation?—l do not know; but I think it is very likely that the character of people evolved in New Zealand will have marked differences from the people of Australia. 1053. About the coloured-labour question : have you thought of that aspect of the matter at all?—I hope the mass of the people in Australia will have sufficient strength of character to make the best use of the country by white labour or coloured, or both. It seems to me that they ought to become equal to a position which demands that they shall regulate and control the natural productions which are suitable for the country, and not to leave the country unprofitable because coloured labour is found necessary. 1054. Where would you suggest drawing such a line ? —I could not say. That would have to be left to those who had the matter in hand at the time when the crisis arrives and a decision has to be taken. 1055. Do you think that that decision will be taken by man or by destiny—by Providence ? —I do not know. I think before it becomes a question of Providence or destiny it will become a burning question in Australia, and I hope the people there will be wise enough to provide that where white labour cannot be used coloured labour may be, and that they will so deal with the question that the waste lands of the country are used in such a way as to secure all possible production. 1056. Would you suggest the 13th parallel of latitude as the line about where it would be difficult for the Anglo-Saxon to live and to breed ? —I do not know what the latitude might be, because in
309
A.—4
different countries the latitude is not the only factor in fixing the nature of the climate. The English climate, for instance, is much modified by the Gulf Stream. 1057. Do you know an instance of any other country where the Anglo-Saxon has been able to labour successfully in the tropical belt ?—I do not know of one. 1058. Do you know what portion of Australia is within the tropical belt ?—I do not. 1059. There is more than one-half of it. Then, do you not think, however great the law of man may be, or however great his lawgiver may be, that the law of nature will prevail, and that the whole of the Northern Territory will become peopled with coloured people ?—That may be the case, but I take it that the Commonwealth will have to decide that question. 1060. Under the law of nature ?—I think the law of nature is likely to be modified there. The Commonwealth will have the power, I take it, to settle that question, within limits. 1061. Even if it opened up the territory to the prospects of the incursion of the 400,000,000 of Chinese we hear are waiting for an outlet, would you not think that that would constitute a very serious danger?— Yes, it may come to be a serious danger in the not very distant future. 1062. But do you not think it would operate on the Northern Territory?—lt depends to what extent the Australians are prepared to and are capable of keeping the Chinese out, and other coloured races out. 1063. Is it not going to be a probem in the future of vast importance ?—I think it is going to be a political problem of great moment. 1064. And if the coloured races get into northern Australia, Australia being a Commonwealth, their manufactures and productions will of necessity travel through the whole of the Commonwealth ?—Yes. 1065. Then, is it a disadvantage or an advantage to federate? —I am afraid it is impossible to say what might arise from the unforeseen. We know that so many powerful sentiments arise among nations, and great changes come—sometimes very suddenly—and they exercise a most powerful influence upon the destinies of nations, that I think it will not be prudent to even attempt to prophesy what will happen in respect to these great eastern peoples. 1066. Mr. Beauchamp.] I understand you place considerable importance on the first line of defence —the navy: do you consider that the advantages we would derive in respect of the navy from being federated would compensate us for the disadvantages accruing under federation ? —No, because it would be quite open to us to make a separate arrangement, as we grow richer and stronger, with the Imperial Government, or we might establish a navy of our own. 1067. Would not the Imperial Government be bound to protect us, seeing that we contribute to the cost of the Imperial navy ?—Yes, it would be bound to protect us as an outlying part of the Empire. Britain could not allow even a small part of her Empire to be endangered without being prepared to use all her strength to save it. 1068. At the present time we export to the United Kingdom 92 per cent., as against 8 per cent, to Australia, and in the event of federation, and consequently with free-trade to Australia, it is possible that there would be a quantity of manufactured goods sent into this country from Australia to the exclusion of British goods : do you think the exclusion of British goods would in any way retard Imperial federation ? —I think, if the Customs regulations which govern our trade relations with the Old Country became offensive, there might be a change in public sentiment at Home that would be very difficult to deal with. Britain takes everything we send her without imposing duties, and if we were to impose any duty by way of a barrier against her trade, or if restrictions upon it of an offensive character were to become popular in this country, I would not answer at all for the effect on the public sentiment at Home. 1069. Have you thought of the effect on the industries of this colony of inter-free-trade—l mean to say the competition which would probably arise through the establishment of large industries in such centres as Melbourne and Sydney ? —lt has a very indirect bearing, but I have no fear for the safety of New Zealand industries. We are not likely to have for a long time more than is needed to supply our own population. There is not much prospect for many years to come, even with free-trade in Australia, of our being able to do an export trade in manufactured products, beyond such products as butter and cheese. 1070. You refer more particularly to products that are indigenous to the soil, with regard to which our climatic conditions are such that there is no probability of competition arising?— Yes. 1071. As to our securities, you cannot see that we would derive any benefit by raising our loans through the Commonwealth ?—I think it would be quite the fault of those who have charge of New Zealand finance if any disadvantage arises in that respect. 1072. Mr. Luke.] Do I gather that we would not be at any disadvantage under federation in the matter of finance, but rather that you object to federation on political grounds—that is to say, that by living an insular life we could develop ourselves to a greater extent than would be possible under the Commonwealth ?—-I think so. 1073. Do you not think we stand in relation to Australia much as Great Britain does to Europe ? —That might happen many generations hence. You will probably have changes in New Zealand which will inevitably bring the two countries together at some future time. 1074. Then, you think that federation would greatly restrict the evolution that should be possible to us by living an insular life ?—I think so. I think we are, as a nation, sufficient to ourselves at present, and are likely to be so for some generations to come. There is no possibility of any considerable export trade in manufacturers' goods, inasmuch as in cotton and woollen goods we cannot compete with Europe, and we cannot compete against Europe in the eastern markets. We cannot look for much of a market in Australia for some generations, and our development will rather be in the direction of the natural products of the soil, and a larger proportion of export of those productions to European countries.
A.—4
310
1075. Then, you do not think any difference in the conditions of labour here as compared with Australia would put us at a disadvantage in competing for the trade of Australia ?—I think those conditions would soon find their natural level. The inequalities—whatever they may be now —will in course of time adjust themselves. 1076. Then, your opinion is that we have greater opportunities for evolving our own destiny by keeping apart from Australia?—l think so. 1077. Mr. Leys.] When you spoke of federating for defence purposes, did you contemplate an independent agreement between the Government of this colony and the Government of the Commonwealth, apart from Imperial federation?—l meant a joint agreement between the Government of this colony and the Government of the Commonwealth with the Home Government. 1978. You think that would be easily effected ?—Yes. 1079. And it would meet all our requirements? —Yes. 1080. Would federation have any effect on the meat industry ?—Not an unfriendly effect. 1081. Hon. Major Steivard.] Will you kindly make clear what you meant when you said that New Zealand should not federate excepting for defence purposes ? Did you mean that if New Zealand joined the Federation she could be better defended than if she stood out ?—That would depend on the arrangement that might be made. I think, when the Commonwealth is completely established, this question of Federal defence might, and I believe will, arise. In the event of serious danger threatening the Empire in Europe it would arise at once; but I take it that there would be found sufficient patriotism in the Commonwealth people, and in the New Zealand people, and in their Governments to agree at once upon some basis on which the defence of the country would be provided for. 1082. Is it not the fact that any possible danger from an outside enemy really arises not from possible complications with New Zealand and Australia, but with the Mother-country?— Yes. 1083. Then, if the Mother-country is at war, say, with a first-class Power, would it make any difference as to the disposition of her fleet, whether we were members of the Australian Federation or not ? Would not she in any case send such ships as she might be able to the support of New Zealand ?—I think so. 1084. Then, so far as the danger arising from complications between a European nation and the Mother-country is concerned, are we not in as good a position as regards obtaining assistance from her as we would be if we were federated with Australia ? —Yes ; but if there were not a united sentiment between the two Governments, complications might easily arise. 1085. It is to be assumed that self-interest to a certain extent governs us all, and that it would not be to the advantage of Australia for an enemy to effect a permanent lodgment in New Zealand : therefore would not Australia, in her own interests, come to our assistance ?—Probably she would. 1086. Is it not likely that there would be a bond of sympathy between us, such as prompted the colonies to go to the assistance of England in South Africa ?—No doubt. Robert Kihkpatrick Simpson examined. (No. 110.) 1087. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Simpson?—A farmer. 1088. Where do you reside ?—ln Eangitikei. 1089. How long have you resided in New Zealand?— For forty-two years. 1090. Will you give the Commission the benefit of your opinion on the question of New Zealand federating or not with the Australian. Commonwealth?—l must admit that such an important question has not received the consideration from me that it deserves, and I am afraid I am scarcely in a position to give you any positive information on the subject. I only received your summons yesterday, two or three hours before I left, and therefore I had no time to really look the matter up. Looking at federation from an agricultural point of view, I might say that the information I have had has enabled me to arrive at a decision to support federation. That is my first impression, but I feel that I would rather prefer to wait to see how federation works out in the Australian Colonies. I have not even had an opportunity of perusing the Commonwealth Bill, and of knowing what its conditions are, or how it would bear on our finances. My answer to your question is that I should prefer to wait and see how it works out on the other side. 1091. Have you considered how the agricultural interests of the colony would be affected ?— I have to a certain extent only. I thought, probably, if we federated we might have a tariff that would be more favourable to our agricultural interests than it is now. Ido not think that Australia is a very large market for New Zealand; but Ido know that the very heavy protective tariff in Victoria has certainly operated against our agricultural interests. 1092. Are you aware that in Victoria they can now produce more than they require for cheir own needs ?—I know that in a bad season of drought they require to draw from us, and that is my only reason for thinking that federation would prove a good thing for the agricultural industry. 1093. How do you think it would affect the pastoral industries ? —I do not know that it would affect them very much. Three years ago I went to Melbourne, and I found there the market for beef was so good that I determined to try a shipment on my own account; but when I discovered that I should have to pay £1 10s. per head protective tariff to land beasts in Victoria I abandoned the idea. I would have tried it but for the import duty in Melbourne. 1094. When you say that you think that we should not federate at present, do you mean that you have not fully considered the subject, or is it because you think it would be better for New Zealand as a whole to wait ?—I think it would be better for New Zealand as a whole to wait, apart from my own consideration of the matter, and I certainly think we should not take a leap in the dark or go into this matter before we have obtained the fullest information as to how it will work.
311
A.—4
Abthub Edwaed Eussell examined. (No. 111.) 1095. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are a farmer, residing in Palmerston North ?—Yes; and I have resided in New Zealand all my life —fifty-five years. 1096. Have you considered the matter of New- Zealand federating or otherwise with the Australian Commonwealth ? —I have got an opinion on the matter, which, I suppose, every intelligent man has ; but I only received my subpoena two days ago, and I have not read the subject up. Until one has read the Federation Bill, and formed some idea as to how their legislation may affect this country if we joined the Federation, one cannot give a very definite opinion on the matter. 1097. Have you not read what has appeared in the public Press of Australia and New Zealand upon the question ?—Yes. 1098. What conclusion have you arrived at on the matter ?—I am opposed to federation. 1099. On what grounds?—l do not see what we have to gain by it. There is only one possible gain that I can foresee, and that is in regard to the agricultural interest, but the gain would not be a very large one. In favourable seasons they produce as much in Australia as they want, and in bad seasons they take from us. But they have not lately had a bad season, so they have not required to come to us for produce. Of course, lam a Free-trader, and we know that if Australia puts on a duty against our produce they have to pay it when they want our produce ; therefore in any respect federation would not be a very great gain to us. 1100. You are aware probably what portion of our export trade goes to Australia?—l cannot quote the figures, but I know it is, proportionately, very small, because London takes the chief portion. 1101. Do I take it that, as an agriculturist, you do not consider that the agricultural interest would be materially benefited by federation ?—I think it would be benefited, but not to such an extent as to outweigh the other disadvantages. 1102. What about the sentimental aspect of the question —of New Zealand's giving up its independence ? —Well, Ido not think it is a matter of sentiment; it is a very practical one. We have men up country here on land that we call the back blocks, and, in my opinion, we should be the back blocks of Australia. 1103. Have you considered the financial aspect of the question ?—No, I have not. 1104. Do you know of any other advantage which will arise to this colony through federation ? —None at all. In defence matters we are entirely dependent upon the fleet of England, and if it were once defeated we should have to reckon with a very great Power; but probably, while we have the assistance of a fleet in being, we need have no fear of being unable to resist any force that would be likely to come to this country. 1105. Hon. Captain Russell.'] Are you aware that Australia produces 8j500,000 bushels of maize, against 500,000 bushels produced in New Zealand? —No, I am not. 1106. Are you aware that Australia produces 40,000,000 bushels of wheat to New Zealand's 8,500,000 bushels ?—I do not know the figures, but I know it is a very great industry. 1107. Does not that indicate the possibility of their being able to supply us with wheat instead of our sending wheat to them ?—Undoubtedly. 1108. I might tell you that in other crops Australia can produce twice as much as we can —■ they produce seven times as much hay, twice as much potatoes, and it is onry in oats where we can beat Australia : therefore can you say that there can be any great gain to the agriculturist ?— Yes ; eventually there would be some gain, but not a very great one. 1109. Mr. Beauchamp.] I suppose you, like a great many others, consider that Australia only takes produce from us when the climatic conditions are adverse ?—Yes, to any great extent. 1110. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any other matter you wish to speak on?— The only other reason why lam strongly opposed to federation is because of the racial difficulty. It is a matter of very great importance to Australia. The Americans started by importing a few slaves, and now they have eight millions; and I very much question whether Australia will be able to do without coloured labour in one-half her territory. They will find the force of circumstances too much for them, and I think we have a very compact population of Europeans here, and we should keep it so. Mtbe Caselbebg examined. (No. 112.) 1111. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Caselberg ?—Chairman of the Masterton Chamber of Commerce and managing director of the Wairarapa Farmers' Co-operative Association. I reside in Masterton. 1112. Has the question of federation been considered by that association as a body?—No; I have thought of it personally, but it has never been considered by us as a body. 1113. Will you give the Commission the benefit of your opinion on the matter?— Speaking as a man who has been trading in the Wairarapa for some thirty-six years, and doing business largely with the farmers in the Wairarapa, the products of which are frozen meat, dairy produce, and wool, I should say federation will not affect us beneficially in the least degree. Occasionally we ship butter to Australia, but that has been in an abnormal season, because in ordinary seasons Australia produces, and even exports, everything we grow here. I heard statistics given before this Commission which startled me, as I had no idea that Australia grew wheat in such large quantities. The only thing we can really export in the shape of cereals to Australia is a little oats. Then, again, there is the danger of our being inundated with cheaper flour and manufactured articles. Consequently, taking one thing with another, the advantage would not be on our side. On the other hand, the only product outside of farm produce that we can send there is a little white-pine timber, and it is really no advantage to New Zealand to export it, because it is a timber that cannot be reproduced, and it is becoming so very scarce that we shall require it all ourselves in a very few years, and
A.—4
312
then we shall not have it. Coming to the political aspect of the question, I have not really heard it discussed, and Ido not think I could throw any further light on that matter by giving the Commission the benefit of my opinion. To sum up the matter, I consider nothing is to be gained by entering into federation with Australia just now. 1114. Have you considered the financial aspect of the question?—l have to a small extent only; it is a question that has not come into consideration amongst the people generally, excepting, probably, the politicians and statesmen. The ordinary rank and file, of whom lam only one, have not, I think, really looked into the question at all. On the whole, I should say we have nothing to gain by federating, but everything to lose. The question of combining for mutual defence, I should say, is a very simple one, because, while we are all part of the British Empire, in the case of war arising we should have to contribute our quota of men towards the defence of the Empire, and we should have to be prepared to defend this country also, and probably to pay our share towards the fleet, whether we joined the Commonwealth or not. That is a question that requires no argument at all, as it is self-evident that we should have to protect ourselves. 1115. Have you discussed this matter with other persons engaged in the agricultural or pastoral pursuits in your district ?—I can only say that I have discussed it for a few moments with people who are engaged in agriculture, and they have simply looked upon it from a business point of view—as to whether it will open up a better market for their produce, and, if so, they would like to join; but if there is not likely to be any increasing advantage they prefer to remain as they are —in other words, they would not sanction any experimental legislation or go into partnership with people we know nothing about. 1116. Then, they look at it entirely from the view that affects their particular work ?—Certainly, that is the view nine-tenths of the people will take. The psychological view is one that only very few will go in for. 1117. You would rather see New Zealand remain independent as at present?— That is my view. 1118. Mr. Beauchamp.] This question is not a real live one yet ? —Not yet. I expect it will be worked up shortly. I was reading an article in our local paper, and it advocated federation, but simply from a selfish view—that we would get a better market for our produce. 1119. Amongst those who have considered the question, and with whom you have discussed it, they think it would be a leap in the dark if we federated now ?—Yes; they think it would be premature. 1120. Do you consider this colony sufficiently self-contained to work out its own destiny?— Yes, I do. We have every element to enable us to do so. 1121. Hon. the Chairman.'] Have you anything further that you wish to state, and upon which you have not been questioned ?—Yes, only this : I have heard the matter discussed of our being twelve hundred miles away from Australia. I think that is a very great obstacle to federation for this country. You may say that the position of England to Europe is analogous to New Zealand and Australia; yet, while England is only two or three hours away from Europe, by retaining her insularity she has retained her very high position as a nation; and, taking nation for nation, there is more liberty and prosperity in England than in any other nation on the Continent. I think it is due to her insular position. In the second place, I think we have nothing to fear by being left out in the cold. 1122. Do you think, in the event of New Zealand federating, she would suffer in the matter of governmental administration from being such a distance from the centre of government ?—I do, for the reason that it would have the effect of centralising everything to the Federal capital. It would also have the disadvantage of drawing all our talented and capable young men away to wherever the headquarters of the nation is. Andeew Collins examined. (No. 113.) 1123. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ? —Baker by trade. 1124. You are a representative of the Wellington Trades and Labour Council ?—I am one of three to come here and give evidence. 1125. Will you state to the Commission your own views upon the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—I think, from a labour point of view we have nothing to gain by federating, but we have practically everything to lose. Wages are higher in New Zealand and hours of labour shorter, and we have practically solved one of the bugbears of the labour question—the boy-labour question—through the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. 1126. Have you considered whether under federation the conditions of work, pay, and hours would be assimilated in New Zealand and the Commonwealth?—l think it would have the tendency to lower wages and extend the hours of work. 1127. Have you thought of the matter from any other point than that of labour?— No. The manufacturers can take care of themselves. 1128. Have you any other reasons to state than those you have mentioned ?—Yes; we object to federate with any other country or continent that brings us into competition with black labour. I think it is a blot on our civilisation that they should still have this ' 'blackbirding " system that they have in Queensland. They call it black labour, but I put it down as slavery. They tell the Labour party on the other side that they could not do without the black labour. They told us that in Auckland, but they do without it. They told us that white labour could not work in a hot climate. Chili is one of the hottest places, and yet white labour works there. Klondike is one of the coldest places, and white men work there. White men can work anywhere when you make it worth their while. 1129. Do you think that white labour can work in Queensland ?—Yes; if not, the sugar industry could go. We have other objections too.
313
A.—4
1130. What are they?— Competition is too keen. Passing through Sydney in 1898 on my way to the Old Country, I saw a lot of furniture being put on board the " Waikare." I made inquiries and went to the factory where it was made. Now, with all our heavy duty on furniture, that stuff was consigned to " J.R.K.," Wanganui. There were seven pieces of furniture, and cost over in Australia £2 10s. That was not made by Chinese labour at all, but by boy-labour and by sweated labour in the factories. That furniture would be landed here at a cost of £3 10s. or £4, and I was given to understand that they would get £9 10s. or £10 for it in the colony. Then, there is the matter of the Chinese labour. I was through a Chinese factory there, and I found that Chinese were employed for seventeen hours a day, making articles of furniture which were as good as European manufacture. We all recognise that the Chinese are a very industrious race, and that is the very reason why we are against them. We cannot compete with Chinese labour. On the other hand, on the other side everything seems to be in the direction of combinations and trusts, and wherever you find these the workers suffer, and we do not want to see that brought about in this country. I am sorry to say it is even coming about in New Zealand. I may say that organized labour on the other side is not in favour of the Commonwealth Bill, and they do not know how it is going to pan out. 1131. Did you hear Mr. Lynch's evidence ?—No. 1132. He said that no workmen in New Zealand need fear a workman on the other side?— I say the same —that is, as far as the workmen are concerned. But if the Union Steamship Company have done anything acceptable for the workers, they have done something by keeping up the fares. If there were cheap fares from here to Sydney, there are sufficient unemployed over there to swamp the labour-market here, if they only got the chance to come across. 1133. Mr. Leys.] From your observations in Australia, do you not think the condition is likely to be improved very soon under the labour legislation of the Commonwealth ?—lf we take the past for it, no. Take the Labour party in Sydney: they are practically all single-taxers and Freetraders, who have held the balance of power for years past, and practically got no labour legislation on their statute-books. 1134. Are things any better in Victoria? —Very little. lam not an out-and-out Protectionist. I believe in protecting industries up to a certain point until they get a proper footing, and if they cannot run alone after that they should shut down. I find the tendency in this colony is to pocket all the duties and lower wages. If that is to be brought about, then protection ought to be withdrawn. 1135. Do you think that if New Zealand threw in her lot with Australia the differences would be overcome ?—I think we would be outweighed. 1136. Mr. Luke.] When were you last in Australia?—l was over at the Commonwealth inauguration. 1137. Did you find from your inquiries that there was a wide difference in wages?—ln some cases, not in others ; but they work longer hours. 1138. What are the number of hours over there?—No fixed quantity, only in some trades. 1139. But they have a statute on the subject ?—Victoria has the finest Factory Act in the world. 1140. Is it a question of having a good law, but not enforcing it?— Yes; it is no good getting labour measures on our statute-book if the administration is wrong. 1141. Is it a fact that there is no penalty provided ?—I understand there is a penal clause. 1142. You consider the social Status of workers in New Zealand is better than that of the Australian workers ?—Yes ; and it is not perfect here. 1143. You consider that New Zealand would not be able to elevate the social conditions of wage-earners in Australia to the level of those in New Zealand ? —We would stand a great chance of losing what we have got. 1144. Mr. Beauchamp.] They have a Minimum Wages Act in Australia?—lt only affects four or five dangerous trades. 1145. In those trades does it operate beneficially ?—Yes. 1146. Under the Commonwealth, do you not think it likely that there will be a strong endeavour to bring the labour legislation into line with ours at an early date?—No; I have no hope of a Conciliation and Arbitration Act passing there for years. 1147. Do you think our industries would be adversely affected by federation?— Yes. Patkick Joseph O'Ebgan examined. (No. 114.) 1148. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—Journalist and law student. 1149. You have been in the House of Representatives for this colony ?—Yes; I was a member of the New Zealand Legislature for six years. 1150. Have you given attention to the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia? —I have given it considerable attention, and I have read a great deal of literature on the subject, including the Commonwealth Constitution itself. 1151. Will you tell the Commission the conclusion at which you have arrived on the matter? I am prepared to admit that there are arguments against it, but, on the whole, I am strongly inclined to the colony joining the Commonwealth. I think the objections we most frequently hear are based on misconceptions arising from inaccurate information. 1152. Will you give the Commission the conclusions at which you have arrived on the matter ? One of the most common objections to our joining is that the colony would become merged in Australia, would lose its identity, and its representation, be practically lost in the Australian Parliament. Well, I think that idea arises from the fact that those holding that opinion have not carefully studied the question. If members of the Commission will look at section 51 of the Commonwealth Act they will find that the powers of the Federal Parliament are clearly prescribed. 40—A. 4.
A.—4
314
The best way to arrive at a conclusion as to what position we would occupy is by going back some years, and ascertaining to what extent our legislative functions would have been reduced had we been in the Commonwealth. I have gone into that, and I find that in 1897 we passed forty-four statutes, incuding public, private, and general ActSj and out of that number only one would have passed from the control of the New Zealand Parliament to the Commonwealth Parliament—that dealing with patents, designs, and trade-marks, which is referred to in subsection (18) of section 51 of the Constitution. Coming to 1898, we passed in that year seventy statutes, and out of that number only five would have passed from our control—namely, the Defence Act, Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act Amendment, the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act Amendment, the Old-age Pensions, and the Bank of New Zealand Act Amendment Acts. I may say that the Constitution empowers the Commonwealth Parliament to deal with banking legislation only in so far as it relates to banks doing business beyond the State in which they have their headquarters, and thus it would deal with the Bank of New Zealand. In 1899 sixty-four Acts were passed by the New Zealand Parliament, only three of which would have passed to the federal Parliament. Those were the Immigration Eestriction, Pacific Cable, and Shipping and Seamen's Acts. Then, coming to last session—a record session as far as the bulk of its statute-book is concerned, with one exception—namely, 1882 —last session we passed 110 statutes, and out of that number only seven would have passed from the control of the New Zealand to the Federal Parliament. Those Acts were the Customs Duties, Defence Act Amendment, Industrial Conciliation Amendment, Old-age Pensions Act Amendment, Pacific Cable Authorisation, Post Office Act Amendment, and Weights and Measures Acts. Thus in four years fifteen Acts out of 288 passed by our Legislature would have gone from its control to the Parliament of the Commonwealth. If that fact were brought before the people of the colony they would find that, although the objection to which I have referred is a very widespread and plausible one, it does not stand the test of investigation. I venture the opinion that every one of these thirty-nine subsections of section 51 deals with subjects that can be dealt with more advantageously by the Federal Parliament than by the State Parliaments. It would be most advantageous for the defence, for instance, to be controlled solely by the Federal Parliament. Take, for instance, the question of sending troops to South Africa :My own opinion is that we have overdone it; that it is highly disadvantageous to this colony to be depleted of so many young men for purposes that are quite unnecessary. The local Parliaments are too susceptible to ephemeral outbursts of popular clamour, but the Federal Parliament could withstand these. You may take a hundred and one other questions, and the conclusion will be the same. I am sure there are a number of questions affecting the commercial unity in respect of which it is exceedingly desirable to have uniformity of law as between this colony and* Australia. Take banking legislation, weights and measures, bills of exchange, promissory notes, and kindred matters : it is highly desirable that we should have complete uniformity concerning them, and the absence of uniformity must cause grave inconvenience to commercial men under present conditions. Take, again, the position of lawyers who pass in New Zealand : they have no status whatever in Australia. Now, I would like to refer to another objection arising out of the same question. From my interpretation of the Constitution, assuming that we were represented in the Commonwealth Parliament, we should have six members in the Senate out of a total ■of forty-two, and twelve in the Lower House, out of a total of eighty-four—of course, the representation is liable to be altered by the Federal Parliament — but, taking the Act as it is, that would be about our share of representation. I do not admit that we would lose our identity simply because we have only one-seventh of the total representation. The Commonwealth legislation will necessarily be restricted to certain things in which the States have a common interest, and if you read section 99 of the Act, you will find that the Constitution prevents the Federal Parliament from differentiating between the different States. The position is, therefore, that no legislation should be introduced into the Federal Parliament dealing with one particular State that did not apply equally to all the States. Now, look at section 128, which deals with the alteration of the Constitution, and you find that any such alteration affecting all the States equally has, after passing the Parliament, to be referred to the people. Then, read the last paragraph : "No alteration diminishing the proportionate representation in any State in either House of Parliament, or the minimum number of representatives of a State in the House of Representatives, or increasing, diminishing, or otherwise altering the limits of the State, or in any manner affecting the provisions of the Constitution in relation thereto, shall become law unless the majority of the electors voting in that State approve the proposed law." Thus it is quite clear that any alteration affecting a particular State must first be ratified by the people of that State; while any general curtailment of State rights, since it would affect all equally, would have to be referred to all the electors of the Commonwealth for acceptance. What better safeguard for State rights could you have? 1153. Hon. the Chairman.] Eead the third paragraph of clause 7 : "Until the Parliament otherwise provides, there shall be six Senators for each original State. The Parliament may make laws increasing or diminishing the number of Senators for each State, but so that equal representation of the several original States shall be maintained, and that no original State shall have less than six Senators." New Zealand would not be an original State? —Of course, if she joins she should be admitted as an original State, and there are numerous details in which the Constitution would have to be amended before New Zealand could join. But I maintain that the section quoted is covered by the last one —that point has been emphasized by several Australian papers dealing with the misconceptions that have arisen in New Zealand in connection with the question. If these points are fairly considered it will be obvious that there is really not so much in the objection as to our losing our autonomy. The next objection that we most frequently hear is that we are too far away from Australia. I think that objection, however, entirely disappears; and, indeed, the objection on the score of black labour is considerably
315
A.—4
modified, in the light of out , own action in regard to Fiji. If we are to stand out of the Commonwealth because we are twelve hundred miles away we should have nothing to do with Fiji, which is very much further away—about eighteen hundred miles. And if we cannot become associated with Australia because of the black-labour difficulty we should have nothing to do with Fiji, where black labour predominates. I would ask you also, in considering the question of distance, to remember that, although we are twelve hundred miles away, the sea is the cheapest, safest, and easiest highway known. As for the alleged racial difference, are we not of the same stock as the Australians ? Federation has been a decided success in Canada, but there you have two races and two languages, even in the Canadian Parliament—French and British. If it were not for the Federation of Canada the French people there would not be so devoted to the Empire as they are, and this goes to show that federation is a most desirable method of smoothing race differences where they exist, and it accentuates the argument in favour of federation generally. As to the question of trade, I quite admit that this colony can get along with Australia without federating, and, in fact, can even do without Australia; but that argument cuts both ways. Australia can also do without us ; but there are mutual advantages in allowing trade the freest play possible, and, as far as I am concerned, I would make trade as free as modern steam communication and the winds of heaven could make it. I would also point out that the same objections in respect of the tariff have been used in every Australian Colony against federation. One of the recent Premiers of Victoria " stumped " the country against federation, and his sole objection was that he would lose £1 10s. per head stock-tax; but the people came to the conclusion that federation was not to be thrown on one side because a few pastoralists would lose the benefit of the stock-tax. There must be some sacrifice on somebody's part; and, indeed, the same can be said of every great national undertaking. Take the question of railways, for instance : Nothing so conduces to the public good as the railway, and yet individuals sometimes suffer through the making of a railway, or, more correctly, they imagine they will suffer. The total Customs revenue derived from goods imported from Australia is now about £228,500 : it would be paying a very poor compliment to our own industrial resources if we were to believe that because of the remission of less than a quarter of a million Customs duties our factories would be closed and certain industries ruined. Experience has taught me to take all these predictions of evil with the proverbial grain of salt. On the other hand, if we look at the figures of our trade with Australia we shall find that by far the greater portion of our trade is with New South Wales, and the reason is that Sydney is practically a free port. Our exports to Victoria have fallen from £527,500 in 1893 to £400,773 in 1898. Our exports to New South Wales have risen from £678,904 in 1893 to £901,416 in 1898. Our imports from New South Wales in 1899 were £641,804, and from Victoria they were £332,422. Our total exports to Australia in 1899 were valued at £1,475,157, and our imports amounted to £1,158,865, leaving a balance of exports over imports of £316,292. These figures, taken from the parliamentary records, go to show that our trade with New South Wales is rapidly increasing, and I think the really serious question for us, whether we join or stand out of the Commonwealth, is that of trade. Free-trade as between this colony and the Commonwealth would be of immense mutual advantage. Now, the question of free-trade has yet to be fought out in Australia, and until it has been decided we cannot know what is to be the tariff. It is impossible to say, for instance, until then, how much Customs revenue we would lose by joining the Commonwealth, but, of course, the amount of £228,000, already quoted, would have to go. Probably, however, the Federal tariff will involve a considerable modification of the free-trade policy of New South Wales. Again, I think it must be borne in mind that less favourable social conditions in Australia are due to other causes as well as differences in legislation. To begin with, there is there a greater centralisation of population. One reason why o.ur people are better socially is because of the more general distribution of population. But in any case it is bad policy to refuse closer association with one's fellows on the score of their inferiority. If federation is to be sacrificed to protection, I think protection should show some better justification for its continuation in New Zealand than the continual disputes which are taking place before the Arbitration Courts. As for our not being able to join as an original State, I think the people of Australia are so anxious for us to unite with them that they would gladly offer us reasonable facilities. If we had been represented at the Commonwealth Conventions the restriction in regard to the franchise and aboriginals would never have applied to New Zealand. That restriction is quite necessary in Australia if injustice is to be avoided in connection with those electorates which contain a large proportion of blacks. 1154. I understand you to say that, although you favour the federation of New Zealand with Australia, it is distinctly upon the condition that New Zealand joins as an original State ?—I qualify that. Ido not mean that we should occupy the same position in regard to every little detail as the other original States, but that we should occupy something approaching an equality with the other States. 1155. You say that you consider it a blot upon the Commonwealth Bill that the Maoris should not be counted in reference to the quota of the constituencies'?—lt would be a blot if it was intended for the Maoris ; but we cannot blame the framers of the Bill. It should be amended before we could join the Commonwealth. 1156. Do you think, at this early stage, the Federal Government would begin to tinker with their Constitution ?—They must be willing to alter it, else why are they desirous that we should join them ? 1157. Do you think they would tinker with it just to get New Zealand in? —Yes, I think they would. 1158. If they began to alter their Constitution, might they not be liable to demands being made from other States which they have not now ? —I do not think so, because other States cannot legitimately make other claims, having accepted the Act as it stands. 1159. You referred to the advantage of federation in regard to commercial law : are you aware that there is no difference in that law ?—1 am not prepared to specify all the differences. In
A.—4
316
many I have "had with commercial people I have heard frequent complaints at the difference between the laws of this colony and those of the other colonies, especially, I believe, in connection with companies. But, even if there is no difference now, there is nothing to prevent differences in future. 1160. Do you think these are advantages that could not be brought about without going the length of joining the Federation ? —Most decidedly, these advantages could be obtained without our joining. 1161. Have you considered the amount of revenue that would be lost to this country by federation? —It is impossible to estimate it. 1162. Sir John Hall said he had seen a calculation, which he believed to be correct, putting the amount at something like half a million?—l am not prepared to question that without knowing the source of the information ; but until the tariff is finally decided I fail to see how any one could tell how we shall be affected in the matter of revenue. 1163. Assuming free-trade, are you aware what we should lose in sugar duties alone?— That depends upon what you mean by free-trade. 1164. Supposing that we are in the Commonwealth?—We would, of course, lose £228,000 — the amount of revenue derivable from our Australian imports—but nobody can tell to what further extent we would be affected until the Federal tariff is known. 1165. It has been stated that we should lose £160,000 on sugar alone by a competent authority?— That is quite correct, and I would welcome the change, because I think one of the blackest blots on our tariff is that sugar duty. The New Zealand Sugar-refining Company recently raised the price of sugar immediately after declaring a handsome dividend, and the people are therefore required to tax themselves to the amount of £160,000 in order to provide the company with dividends. 1166. Assuming that Sir John Hall is right, and that we should lose £500,000 of revenue —it has been stated by other witnesses to be a great deal more —how would that be made up ?—lt will have to be met by direct taxation largely, which also would be a welcome change. 1167. A single-tax?— You will always get the best government and the most economical administration under direct taxation, and sooner or later this colony must adopt direct taxation, because we cannot be great without external trade, and heavy Customs duties are in the way of external tfade. 1168. You know that Mr. Barton has said that he must have £8,500,000? —I have seen that statement, but that goes beyond the question of the expense of mere administration. The expense of government will be about £500,000 annually altogether—that is to say, about £70,000 for each State, including New Zealand, otherwise about £83,000. 1169. Have you considered the question of the proportion of our export trade to Australia as compared with the total export trade of the colony? —It is, of course, very small compared with the total export trade, because the bulk of our trade is necessarily with Britain, where we send the most of our goods. 1170. You spoke of the legislative independence of the colony, and you instanced a number of measures which were passed last year of which only a certain number would have been passed had we been federated with the Commonwealth ; but, supposing the Federal Parliament legislated upon all the thirty-nine matters that are reserved to it by the Federal Act, you are aware that any laws they passed upon those subjects would supersede any laws which any of the States passed ?— Certainly. 1171. "Would not that interfere with our legislative independence ? —Certainly not, because these thirty-nine articles refer to matters in respect to which I think it would be better for us to have one uniform system. 1172. Supposing they passed an Arbitration and Conciliation Bill, would it not be impossible for the State of New Zealand to pass one? —That is so, but only in so far as the State Act applied to disputes extending beyond our State boundaries. 1173. We shall have to accept it ? —lt would not supersede our legislation. 1174. Is it not the tendency of the central authorities to increase their powers ?—To a certain extent, yes ; centralisation is the inevitable rule in every department of life, politically, commercially, and socially. 1175. Do you not think that the tendency of the Federal power will be to aggrandise its powers at the expense of the State Legislature ?—I have no doubt that in the course of years political parties will be differentiated between a States-right party and a centralisation party. I think that is to be expected ; and consequently, if any alteration is to be made, it must apply equally to all the States, because the Federal Parliament derives its authority from the States, and I am certain the States would give no mandate to do that which would be detrimental to their interests. 1176. Do you look forward at all to the time when the Constitution may be altered, when the States may be blotted out of existence ?—lt is possible, but it could only be done by the consent of the people, and it is possible that it would be advantageous to do it at some future time. 1177. You are aware that there is power under the Constitution to create new States?— That is so. 1178. And that a large part of Northern Queensland may be divided and created into several new States ? —Yes. 1179. In that case, assuming that New Zealand was entitled to equal representation in the Senate, would not her representation be proportionately weakened ? —Yes; that is a possibility upon a possibility. 1180. Hon. Captain Russell.) Do you not think there is a danger of the States' representatives being overruled by the majority of the people—that is to say, that the vote of the Senate may be overruled completely by the vote of the majority of the people?— That is possible, but I do not think it is very probable.
A.—4
317
1181. Under the 57th clause, whenever there is a difference between the two Houses of Legislature ultimately they vote together : cannot you conceive, under such circumstances, that our State representatives might be completely overriden by the stronger numerical vote of the people of New South Wales and Victoria?— That js possible; but, as I have said already, in a question of this kind you must be prepared to make some sacrifice, and, while what you # suggest is possible, I think it is exceedingly improbable. 1182. Do you not think it is possible that coterminous States will have a community of interest which will not apply to Western Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand ?—That is possible, and probable. 1183. In which case the greater numerical majority would swamp the State votes of those belonging to the other States? — Not in a matter affecting the Constitution. It is not likely that the larger States would interfere with the interests of a. distant State, because it would'not be to their interests to do so, since any such interference would have to be sanctioned by such State. Of course, these possibilities would have to be provided against by some safeguards—by amending the Constitution —assuming we were to join. 1184. You think we could not accept the Constitution Act as it stands at present?— Certainly I would not accept it without amendments. 1185. Do you think it is at all probable that they would alter their Constitution for the sole purpose of protecting New Zealand ?—lf they would not we should stand out. 1186. About the coloured-labour question: do you attach much importance to that ?—I do; but I think the importance of it is greatly exaggerated. Remember that the majority of British subjects are black. With all our aversion to the black people, we turned out the other day to do honour to the Indian troops, of whom we were very proud. Some of our statesmen are anxious to annex Fiji, and if we want the black to leave us alone we should leave him alone. If the black man is left on his own lands he will not, as a rule, desire to compete with white labour in industries. Speaking of the coloured-labour question in Queensland, Ido not speak authoritatively, but it is said that in many cases the kanakas are brought from their islands against their will. That, of course, should not be allowed; and lam sceptical, too, as to the alleged advantages of coloured labour. 1187. Do you imagine that tropical Australia will for the future be allowed to lie unproductive ?—I think not. 1188. Can it be cultivated by the Anglo-Saxon race ?—I believe it can. 1189. Can you give us any illustration where the white man has engaged in such work in the tropics and has been successful, and has perpetuated his race ?—I do not know that it would be safe to take my opinion as authoritative, but there are certain very hot countries in South America where white men work just as well as black men. 1190. Not Anglo-Saxons?—l think they can do whatever anybody else can do, although lam not an Anglo-Saxon. 1191. Can you give me any illustration of it?—l cannot. 1192. Taking the Southern States of America, is not the coloured-labour question a very vital problem indeed there ?—I think it is so largely on account of the wrong-headedness of the" white man. 1193. But might we not have wrong-headed men in the Commonwealth of Australia?— I hope not to the same extent as in America. In the Southern States of America, where feeling is exceedingly strong against the negroes, it is, I think, largely explainable by the fact that the whites there were until recently a slave-owning population, and they look upon the blacks as having the social status of slaves still. Of course, we have no such conditions here. 1194. But'the feeling of antagonism is as strong in the North as in the Southern States, is it not ? —lt is not nearly so strong as in the Southern States. 1195. Is it not a fact that the negroes in the Southern States are increasing enormously in population, while the Europeans are not doing so ? —That is due to the fact that the negro pays deference to the vital law of nature, whereas the progressive white man is learning too much, and he is going to cut his own throat unless he mends his ways. 1196. Do not the vital statistics prove at the present time that the birth-rate of the white people of this colony is steadily diminishing ?—Yes; and it will serve them right, therefore, if they get swamped by the blacks. Those who behave themselves have a right to possess the land, and how can those who exterminate themselves complain? 1197. Does not that bring you to the conclusion that the black people must do the work in the tropics, and that they will increase, but that the white people will not ?—I do not profess to know much about the question of the coloured race in Australia; but it is quite possible that in certain industries black labour would be pieferable in tropical Australia, but it would have to be under proper safeguards. 1198. You think it probable, then, that the northern part of Australia will be peopled by coloured races ?—I think it is likely. 1199. Then, they, being members of the Commonwealth, will be allowed to send their manufactures into every part of the Commonwealth ?—Why should they not ? We do not object to buying bananas from Fiji. 1200. Is it not possible that, the whole of northern Australia being occupied by coloured people, that they will become a strength there, and in time dominate the whole of the northern part of the Commonwealth ?—All those things are possible, and they should be taken into due consideration in discussing the question of joining the Commonwealth. 1201. I understand that you approve of federation in the abstract, and that, apart from any political tendency, you think the tendency is towards aggregation ?—That is so. 1202. Is it not a fact that the feeling in the Canadian Confederation now is inimical to any further federation with the Empire ?—I think the Canadian people have done more in the direction
A.—4
318
of Imperial federation than we have. We allow, in the case of goods coming from Britain, no preference to goods coming from Eussia, China, and Japan, whereas Canada gives 5 per cent, preference to all British goods. 1203. Have you read the debates in the Canadian- Parliament, where the principal men have stated that they were afraid of any further closer alliance ?—I believe that the French population of Canada are less enthusiastic about expansion than we ; but they are more friendly disposed to the British Empire than they could possibly be if they were not federated, and in any case the analogy does not apply to these colonies, because we are all one people. 1204. Well, has the federation of Austro-Hungary been a great success?— Perhaps it has not been a great success, because federation is not based on the free-will of the people, and there are restrictions in the matter of franchise. Then, what is more important, you have a very acute racial feeling, which does not exist in the case of Australasia. 1205. Take Sweden and Norway : do you consider that there federation is a complete success ? —I think it would naturally be more successful there, because they are practically the same people, and speak the same language, and have similar ideas and interests. 1206. But it is said that the two peoples may fly at one another's throats at any time ?—The same thing was said about Scotland and England, and Ireland and England, but there is really nothing in that except talk. 1207. Do you consider the federation of England and Ireland a complete success? —No ; I do not think that the analogy is fair, because the so-called Union is no federation. Still, the Union has put an end to cut-throat tariffs between the two peoples, which is a great advantage, and the troubles which exist are more due to economic evils than to the Union. 1208. Take the German Federation : have they not Eussia on one side and France on the other?— Very likely the sense of a common danger tends to the integrity of that Federation. 1209. Is there nothing but the sense of a common danger that binds them together ?—At first such was the case, but the other advantages of the Federation have strengthened it; and, after all, a sense of common danger is nothing but a sense of common interest, which must underlie federation. 1210. In this Federation that we have been discussing, are not the States coterminous?— That is so. 1211. Can you give any illustration of a federation of two countries lying so far apart as New Zealand does from Australia?—No; but Prince Edward Island is not joined to the Canadian mainland. 1212. Do you not think that the distance which separates us must prevent any intimate fusing of our respective peoples? —I think not, because the distance is becoming a less important factor every day. When we are improving the facilities for travelling the intervening distance is becoming lessened, and, as a matter of fact, you can send goods cheaper to Australia by sea than if it were possible to send them over a bridge laid right across the Tasman Sea. You can send them cheaper by steamer than you can by rail. 1213. Is there not a potentiality of New Zealand becoming a country with a very large population ? —Most decidedly. 1214. Is it not allowable to assume that it will carry a population half as large as that of the United Kingdom ?—lt ought to carry as large a population. New Zealand is more than three times as large as Ireland, and Ireland has supported eight millions of people, and could support them again. 1215. Is there not a potentiality of this country being a great country independent of any connection with the Australian Commonwealth ?—Most decidedly, but the more intimate with the outside world the better. 1216. Under these circumstances, should we not rather work out our own destiny instead of being a dependency of a larger country ? —While we shall inevitably become a great nation standing by ourselves, I think we should become a greater nation by having the closest contact with the rest of the world, and therefore by forming part of a great nation like Australia we would rise to a higher degree than by remaining alone. 1217. By remaining alone, should we not also, for all practical reasons, be a part of and one with the great English Empire ?—Yes, we should ; but still I think federation would accentuate the Imperial sentiment. 1218. You are a Free-trader ?—Yes. 1219. Is it not possible that a federation with Australia will check the possibility of free-trade coming about ? —I do not think so. I think the result would be rather the other way, because federation would afford indisputable advantages in the matter of intercolonial free-trade, and the people would begin to see that, if free-trade were good intercolonially, it would be a good thing to apply it to the rest of the world. 1220. Do you think the Commonwealth is likely to emulate the American system of having a protective tariff simply with a view to protecting their own industries ?—I do not think it is probable, because America is a world in itself; but it may be some years before public feeling will run in favour of free-trade. 1221. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Your argument is that it would enlarge the minds of the people of this colony if they belonged to a larger Commonwealth than that of New Zealand ?—Yes. 1222. Why should it not tend to enlarge their minds by belonging—as they really do belong— to the British Empire, and by being connected with it in every way by bonds of kinship and blood ? Why should not connection with the British Empire tend to enlarge their minds more than if they belonged to an Australian Commonwealth?— Because, I think, to belong to the Commonwealth would afford a more practical broad-mindedness ; the feelings which bind us to the Empire are largely sentimental.
319
A.—4
1223. Do you think the tightening of the bonds in a technical way will tighten the real bonds that bind us to the British Empire?—l think so. 1224. With regard to the insularity of this country, do you not think that insular countries make a character for themselves ? —Yes; and that, is one of the disadvantages we have to fight against—one of our greatest dangers is our insularity. 1225. Do you think the insularity will be removed by federation with another country twelve hundred miles away ?—lt would certainly be modified. 1226. With regard to the coloured-labour question, I think that you misunderstood Captain Eussell's question on one point, as you seemed to consider that the question was one of antipathy or non-antipathy between the coloured and white races?—lt is largely that. 1227. I rather think that Captain Russell was alluding to the question of semi-slave labour which might arise where there is a coloured race ? —Well, I do not look upon cheap labour as the best by any means. I think people that utilise cheap labour are the largest sufferers by it ultimately, and that the best-paid labour is really the cheapest. Experience has shown that the highly paid intelligent worker is the cheapest in the long-run as compared with the dull inferiorpaid labourer, and I conclude, therefore, that the white labourer has nothing to fear from the black labourer under proper social conditions. 1228. Then, you see no difficulty in the extent of sea between this country and Australia?—l think that is a difficulty ; but I contend that it is largely one of sentiment, and it is not by any means an insurmountable obstacle to the consummation of federation. 1229. Is not this case, as far as distance is concerned, very similar in the matter of federation to one between an American and a European Power ?—I do not admit that, because we are of the same race as the Australians, whereas that is not the case as between the Americans and the people of any European nation. 1230. Mr. Millar.] Can you tell me of any practical benefit that the workers of this colony are likely to receive from federation ? —Of course, my position is this : I have every sympathy with the workers, and I consider anything that is good for the colony would be good for them. 1231. But they represent a very large portion of the population of this colony, do they not?— They represent the great majority. I take it that lam a worker myself, and a very hard worker. 1232. I refer to the manual labour of this colony : are there any practical advantages to be gained by federation for these men ?—lf there were no advantages to them in it 1 should be the first to strenuously oppose it. 1233. I believe your argument, summed up, is this : that under certain conditions, if we were going to gain a practical advantage, you would be in favour of federation, and federation would be a good thing, but otherwise it requires consideration before going into it? —Yes; but the arguments of a great majority of the people against joining the Commonwealth are not based on a sound foundation. They do not arise from a practical acquaintance with the Act, and Ido not think the subject has been ventilated as well as it might have been in this colony. Had it been discussed in Parliament there would now be a much more intelligent public opinion on it than there is to-day. 1234. Did you not endeavour to bring the question of federation up in the House during the time you were in Parliament ?—During the last three sessions I was in Parliament I gave notice of motion to discuss it, but the feeling of the House generally was unsympathetic, and certain gentlemen took care to prevent my getting an opportunity to move the resolution. 1235. Mr. Luke.] You alluded to the distance between Australia and this colony : how do you account for there being so little interchange between the people of Australia and the people of New Zealand ?—That is accounted for by the great obstacles there are in the way in the shape of Customs duties. Notice the difference in reference to New South Wales, which allows us freetrade. I think intercolonial free-trade would incidentally expedite travelling, and therefore be the means of promoting a greater bond of sympathy between us. 1236. What do you think is the value of the produce they take from New Zealand for their own consumption ?—I have not checked the figures, but we exported approximately in 1899 £1,475,157. 1237. Have you taken into consideration the fact that a very large portion of those goods are sent there for reshipment ?—No. 1238. Well, you can estimate that the value of the produce they take from this colony for home consumption in Australia would be approximately £600,000 ? —I do not think that is a fair way of putting it. Ido not think we should be concerned with what they do with our goods after they get them. You have the plain fact that they have got them, and we ought not to be concerned more with what they choose to do with them afterwards. 1239. Do you think that amount of trade is a sufficient set-off against the cost that it would be to New Zealand in the matter of the loss of independence, and for the pleasure of having her affairs administered by the Federal Parliament ?—I do not admit that any of those disabilities would arise. A larger trade would, of course, be developed under federation, and that means more than mere buying and selling ; it means social intercourse and good-feeling. 1240. Do you not think it possible that under federation, with the means they have got in these large centres to specialise and centralise their manufactures, that they would swamp this colony with manufactured goods ?—We would be foolish to refuse goods from them if they were better and cheaper than ours ; and do you believe they would send us these goods without getting goods from us ? I cannot admit that the argument implied in your question is a valid one. But innumerable instances could be cited in favour of free-trade. Take timber :We possess no timber comparable to Australian hardwood for such works as bridge- and wharf-building, and the Australians could do well with some of our softer timbers. 1241. But federation is not necessary in order to get that duty removed?—l have answered that point already: I consider that if you have complete free-trade between the two countries you have got federation.
A.—4
320
1242. There is no reason why we should not have a reciprocity tariff without federation, is there ?—Eeciprocity might mean anything—it might mean intercolonial free-trade, or it might mean a retaliatory, prohibitive tariff. Ido not think much of the reciprocity aspect of the matter, but I do think a great deal of unconditional free-trade.. 1243. You do not fear the effect of federation upon the labour-market ?—No. I am willing to admit, not that some one must make a sacrifice in connection with every great national undertaking, but some one will always imagine that he is likey to be prejudicially affected. 1244. Are you prepared to admit that we should not enjoy better social conditions if we were federated with Australia than we do now?'—No. Our better condition is due to our environment more than to anything else. Here we have not got our population concentrated in large centres as they have in Australia. 1245. Do you think that if we federate we could elevate the conditions of labour in Australia to the level they are at in New Zealand?—l think that, on the whole, the tendency would be to widen the area of social betterment. 1246. How long do you think it would take?— That is impossible to estimate. But the consummation of the Commonwealth must certainly hasten universal suffrage in Australia; and there is no reason to doubt that the general tendency of the whole movement will be to raise political and social conditions generally. 1247. There are over 49,000 persons employed in the factories of New Zealand, and do you suppose that their interests in the process of elevation would be prejudiced ?—I think not. There may possibly be disadvantages to some, but I wish to repeat that these things are inevitable in connection with every movement, and the same arguments were raised in the Australian Colonies and in Canada. 1248. Taking the boot and shoe trade, there is one factory in Australia employing thirteen or fourteen hundred, while in New Zealand the whole number is approximately between three and four thousand : can you conceive of that factory dumping down its surplus stock here, and so swamping the local industry ?—lf any industry cannot stand here on its merits, then it is not worth subsidising. 1249. Take the furniture trade : can you conceive of t*hat trade being seriously affected by federation ?—The principle on which I would go in dealing with such matters is that, if the trades and industries concerned cannot stand the test of competition in "the open market, then the people engaged in them had better devote themselves to something else. 1250. If our labour cannot stand that strain, you are of opinion that they should do something else ?—Yes ; I think our people should be able to get cheap boots rather than have to pay excessive taxation in order to enable the manufacturers to keep four thousand operatives in employment at low wages, which are a source of discontent. 1251. You- do not think the effect of federation would be to dislocate the manufacturing interests, and to affect adversely the labour portion of the whole community ?—Not excepting in so far as it would be advantageous to do so, because if industries cannot exist without special taxation they should not exist. It is bad policy to force industries artificially. Would it pay us to grow oats in a greenhouse? . 1252. Could these people readily adjust themselves to the new conditions that might be imposed on them ? —I think you could have framed just as strong an argument against the employment of the linotype machines, or any labour-saving invention. 1253. You think there is nothing in the argument as regards conserving our political independence and working out our own destiny ourselves ?—No ; I do not think there is any objection to federation on that ground. Patriotism is a grand thing, but it can be overdone. Patriotism that deludes people into an overweening opinion of themselves is empty conceit and a dangerous prejudice, and the more dangerous because of its nice name —" patriotism." 1254. Mr. Beid.] Have you considered the position of the High Court in Australia?— Not carefully. 1255. They have the jurisdiction in appeal ?—Yes. 1256. Do you know the number of Supreme Court Judges there are in New Zealand?— There are six. 1257. You know that they constitute a Court of Appeal in New Zealand? —Yes. 1258. Do you think it would be an advantage to have a Court of Appeal of, possibly, three Judges to hear State appeals that are carried from New Zealand? —Speaking as a layman, I should say not; but, of course, that is more a matter for legal opinion to decide on. Personally, I think the minimum is rather low, but there is nothing to show that it will not be higher. 1259. Is there any advantage in going to the Australian Court of Appeal, seeing we have a Court of Appeal in New Zealand ? —I should think not, although in respect of some cases there might be an advantage in obtaining a change of venue. But I think that the benefits of the Privy Council are exaggerated, because it is too expensive, and enables a rich man to browbeat a poor man, and for that reason, if for no other, I should prefer the Federal Court of Appeal. 1260. Did you notice the other day that it was proposed to reconstitute the Court of Appeal ? —I understand that an amendment in that direction is contemplated. 1261. Are you aware that of late years they have added a colonial Judge to the Privy Council ? —Yes; but I may say that I am not at all in a position to deal with this aspect of the Federal question. Broadly speaking, I should prefer the appeal to the Federal Court to that of the Privy Council, as the former would be an advantage in many ways by removing, say, very contentious cases from here to Australia, where you would get at least an equally competent decision free from all local feeling. As for the Privy Council, it is too expensive, and lam afraid distance induces an exaggerated idea of its excellence. Mr. H. W. Lucy some time ago stated that in deciding a most important case affecting a self-governing colony —presumably it was the Midland Eailway case— the majority of the Judges were asleep.
321
A.—4
1262. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that we really lose anything by a complete surrender of our local self-government ? I have said at the outset that we must lose something ; but certainly I deny that we are going to surrender everything, or, indeed, anything, without a greater corresponding gain. 1263. We completely surrender our self-government, do we not ?—I do not admit that. 1264. We cease to exist as a colony ?—As a colony we would cease to be a separate national entity, and we would become a State of a Commonwealth; but Ido not think we surrender any function of self-government that we cannot advantageously surrender. Independence in the widest sense is an idle chimera. To live to ourselves is quite impossible. 1265. You think we lose nothing?—ln minor matters we must be prepared to make some sacrifices. 1266. You stated that the cause of the trouble in Ireland was not so much the connection with England as the bad land-laws : do you think that those bad laws were deliberately enacted by the British Government from motives of injustice to Ireland?— Not necessarily always, but certainly in more remote times. 1267. Do you think, then, that they mainly arose because English statesmen did not understand the requirements of Ireland ?—I will not put it that way either. They arose in this way : In the first place, there came an incursion of Norman-French bandits who had conquered England. In due course these people became Englishmen, and they looked upon Ireland with the contempt that a ruthless conqueror always entertains for those whom he gets under him. Out of these conditions you have a series of abnormal political conditions which utterly destroy any comparison with Australasia. 1268. Do you think the remedy in Ireland would not proceed more rapidly if Ireland had obtained self-government ? —I think the difficulty is largely due to mutual misunderstanding. One of the best friends of Ireland was William Pitt, as far as intention was concerned. He foresaw the desirability of promoting good-feeling between the two nations, and he offered to give the Irish people free-trade, which the so-called Parliament refused. The Union was brought about at first by very unfair means, but it has conferred the benefit of free-trade on the two peoples. As for the other difficulties—the social difficulties existing —these are but a local phase of the same thing elsewhere, and are largely connected with the land question. Anything outside of that is largely one of sentiment. Settle the land question, and the problem would be simplified. 1269. Are you a Home-Euler ? -Of course I am ; and the real solution of the Home Eule difficulty is federation—a Home Bule that would extend the benefits of self-government to the component portions of the United Kingdom, the Imperial Parliament becoming a Federal Parliament. 1270. You think that bythe institution of self-government in Ireland all these troubles would be remedied ?—Well, if you gave them self-government to-morrow you would still have the land question, and that is the root of the problem. 1271. Do you regard the centralisation of government in Great Britain as an evil or a benefit? —As an evil, of course. The House of Commons has far more work than it can do, and the result is that domestic questions are greatly neglected, and India and Ireland are neglected. That is why I believe in Home Eule as a general principle. 1272. Is not this Federal movement a movement really in the direction of centralisation?— Not centralisation merely. The whole strength of the British Empire lies in the principle of selfgovernment, and without self-government the central or Imperial idea would crumble. It is the neglect of this cardinal fact which has broken other empires. 1273. You have stated that you believe the Federal Government would gradually assume larger powers : why do you say that ?—Quite so, because the conditions alter from generation to generation ; and, specialisation being the tendency, it is reasonable to expect higher development of it in future. 1274. Do you not think that a number of the Australian States may see that they have sufficient community of interest to hand over their powers to the Central Government, and by their majority vote may force on a system of centralisation greatly to the disadvantage of New Zealand ? —I think that is guarded against in the Constitution Act, section 128, which says that no change can be made affecting any particular State without the electors of that State being consulted. As far as the laws applying to the States are concerned, I should say the majority must rule, and if we join we must take our chance in matters of that kind. 1275. You think there is not a serious danger of some of the large Australian States having a common interest amending the Constitution in a direction adverse to New Zealand ? —I think not. 1276. Have you considered the effect upon our power of self-development of handing over the whole of our Customs revenue to the Federal Parliament? —No, I cannot say that I have, excepting on broad principles. I consider the Customs duties are an impediment to healthy social development. 1277. Do you think the State Government of New Zealand could carry on the works it has been doing for the development of the country, such as the purchase of land, and the subdivision of it, if it had not any control of its Customs revenue ?—I do not think the Customs revenue affects the question of purchasing land for settlement in this colony, because the money comes from another source. At any rate, we do not surrender our right to raise money for purchasing land for settlement by surrendering our Customs revenue. Further, we do not surrender our revenue, because it is distributed pro raid amongst the States; and as for curtailing borrowing, while that would not eventuate, I would not be sorry if it did effect such a change. Borrowing has been one of the greatest curses of this colony, and we shall realise some day that such is the case. 1278. Do you contemplate the time when the Federal Government will take over the whole of the debts and railways, and take the power of borrowing from the States ?—The Act provides for 41—A. 4.
A.—4
322
the taking-over of State debts, but it does not say that the States are to be denied the right to borrow. The Act affords facilities for taking over the State debts by the Commonwealth, and for consolidating and converting loans, which I think would be a great advantage. 1279. If the Government assume liability for the" public debt, would they not necessarily take over the railways for part security? —Very likely that would be part of the arrangement. 1280. In that case would the railways be as well administered ?—Yes, I think so. 1281. And do you think the other administrative departments of the Government would be as well administered ? —I do. 1282. Hon. the Chairman.'] Do I understand you to say that you approved of the appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal rather than to the Privy Council because it removed the appeal from the area of local influence as regards New Zealand?—l said that, as far as this colony was concerned, I would prefer appeal to the Federal High Court, because it would involve a change of venue, which is often desirable. 1283. How about appeal to the Privy Council?— Another reason in favour of the Federal Court was'that the Privy Council is too costly for a poor man. 1284. How about Australian appeals to the Court of Appeal, and the liability for partial decisions there ?—I do not make it an important objection, but I point out that it is possible for questions to arise where a change of venue is necessary. Australia, however, is a larger community.
Thuesday, 28th Febbuaby, 1901. William Geay examined. (No. 115.) 1285. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are the Secretary of the Post and Telegraph Department of New Zealand ?—Yes. 1286. And you have held that office for considerable number of years ?—Yes. 1287. Part of our commission, Mr. Gray, is to inquire as to how postal matters would be affected in the event of New Zealand federating with Australia: can you give us any statement of facts upon that point?— Well, I think the service would not be so economically administered if federation did take place as under existing conditions, through New Zealand being too far removed from the Central Administration; and, further, I may say that our administration at the present time appears relatively on a cheaper basis than that of the other colonies—or, at least, those whose business I have been able to review. 1288. That is, as to the revenue over expenditure?— Yes; contrasting the revenue with the expenditure, we are in a more favourable position than some of the other colonies. 1289. In what way would distance handicap the administration ? —The head office, instead of being in some central position in the colony, would be twelve hundred miles away. 1290. And I suppose that that would require the frequent use of the cable?— Undoubtedly. 1291. Do you think that in the matter of revenue New Zealand would suffer by being federated with Australia? —I think it probably would, as there no doubt would be a desire to apply part of our surplus to those colonies which now show a deficit. 1292. There seems to be a prospect of universal penny-postage being adopted in Australia, does there not?—l think it will probably be agreed to when the Federal Parliament meets. Victoria is on the eve of having penny-postage within its borders, and I do not think it will be very long before the penny rate will be extended to the other States, and no doubt to New Zealand as well. 1293. Can you tell us of any advantage which you think would be likely to accrue to this colony through federation taking place ? —ln regard to postal matters, I do not see any advantage except uniformity of practice throughout the whole of Australasia. 1294. In what ?—ln administration, and in rates, and dealings between the Post Office and the public. 1295. How will it affect the Classification Act?— That I can scarcely answer, because the whole of the services on the other side are not classified. Victoria is classified, and New South Wales, but the Victorian classification scheme has lately undergone, or is now undergoing revision. The desire was that the revision should take place before federation, but that, I think, has not been accomplished. I assume that the control of the post and telegraph services of Australia will be taken over on the Ist March by the Commonwealth. 1296. What would be the effect of federation in respect to the over-sea contracts for mails ?— I do not know that the services would be carried out much more economically than under existing arrangements. There would be very little difference, and what difference there would be would be scarcely worth considering. 1297. Would there be any difference, do you think, in the salaries of the officials under federation ? —lt is quite likely there would, as there is a great diversity in the rates of pay now. 1298. Are they more highly paid in Australia than here? —In some instances they are. In Victoria the pay is higher, but not so high as in New South Wales. 1299. Are you acquainted with the various systems of administration in the several States of Australia and Tasmania ?—Yes, in a general way. 1300. Does the administration in those States in regard to postal matters recommend itself as being in any way better than that in vogue in New Zealand ?—No; I think I might say that we are a little ahead of them. 1301. Mr. Beauchamp.] What was the last year's profit of our Post and Telegraph Department?— About £97,000. 1302. Net?— That was the difference between revenue and expenditure; but then if you take into account the value of the work we do for the Government it would bring up the credit balance to over £200,000.
323
A.—4
1303. Roughly speaking, about £100,000 free work is undertaken by the Post and Telegraph Departments ?—Yes. 1304. In the event of federation, I suppose each State would have to bear its own charge incurred in that direction ?—I think probably that what is now sent free would be charged for. 1305. So that each State would have to contribute its own cost in respect to Government work?—No doubt. 1306. Can you tell us the percentage of expenses to revenue in New Zealand as compared with other colonies?— Yes ; the following return, which I will read, gives it in a general way : —
Comparative Statement of Revenue and Expenditure, etc., of New Zealand and Several Australian States, 1899.
Note.—The foregoing figures are extracted from the annual reports of the Administrations of the States of Australia, the revenue and expenditure being shown, as far as oan be asortained, on the basis of that entered against New Zealand. 1307. In this balance as regards New Zealand, do you take credit for the amount of work you have done on account of the Government? —No, that is excluded. 1308. What is the practice obtaining in the other colonies in that respect: is it the same as ours ? —To some extent it is. In New South Wales I think they take credit for a proportion of the value of free telegrams, and this is the case in Victoria. 1309. Under the Commonwealth Bill our post and telegraphs would be taken over altogether, and we get no revenue in the shape of returns even from the profit arising on this department ?— I assume that they would take the total earnings of the several colonies, and strike a balance, and whatever it might be, either debit or credit, would be divided probably on a population basis. 1310. And you think it is probable that our surplus might be appropriated to make up for the deficiencies of other colonies ?—Yes. 1311. Mr. Leys.] Can you tell us whether, in the aggregate, there is a profit or a loss on the Commonwealth Post Offices?—l should say that there is a small profit just now, assuming the figures in the return I have quoted are correct, and assuming that New South Wales takes credit for a proportion of their free post and telegraph work, which we do not do. If this is done their revenue is swelled to that extent as compared with our own. 1312. Deducting that amount, do you think that there would still be a profit?—l think there would be, There are only two deficits, amounting to £70,000, as against nearly £127,000 of profit, so that there is a difference in favour of revenue of over £50,000. 1313. And relatively our profit is very much greater than that of the other colonies ?—Yes. 1314. There is a provision in the Commonwealth Bill for crediting each State after five years with the balance in its favour : have you noticed that ?—That is to say, that we would practically remain as we are financially for five years. 1315. Would you assume from clause 2 of the Bill that each department would be credited with its own revenue?—l think so. 1316. Looking at clause 93, do you think that that would govern the Postal Department ?—I think it would. 1317. So that for five years we should not lose our postal revenue?— No. 1318. But after five, apparently, it would be taken into a general account ?—Yes. 1319. Hon. Major Stetvard.] In connection with your replies to Mr. Beauehamp about free services, did you mean that under federation the State departments would have to pay postage ?— I cannot say what the policy would be, but I should assume that the Government would attempt that. 1320. As the free services represent about £100,000, would not that increase the post and telegraph revenue by that amount ?—Yes ; but, of course, Government would have to pay all the same —it would be taking money out of one pocket and putting it in the other. 1321. But under the section which has been quoted, whereby the balance to the credit of the Postal Department would be credited to the State by the Commonwealth, would not they credit that £100,000, although the department have to pay it in another way ?—That would be so. 1322. So that it is as broad as it is long?— Yes. 1323. Hon. the Chairman.] Are the Postal and Telegraph Departments united as here ?—Yes, in all the colonies. 1324. Mr. Beauehamp.] What was the estimated loss of revenue by the establishment of the penny-post ?—About £80,000. 1325. Are our telegraphic rates cheaper than those provided in the other colonies?— They are cheaper.
Revenue. Expenditure. Peieentage of Revenue to Expenditure. Percentage of Expenditure to Revenue. Percentage of Salaries to Revenue. New Zealand New South Wales ... Victoria Queensland Western Australia ... £, a. d. 488,245 16 4 789,657 5 11 606,957 0 0 298,800 17 6 203,962 5 1 £ s. a. 390,448 1 7 734,547 10 10 534,005 0 0 347,712 18 1 230,700 7 7 125-05 107-5 113-66 85-93 88-41 79-97 93-02 87-98 116-37 113-11 49-33 49-89 51-95 50-11 74-15
A.—4
324
Pieecb Charles Fbeeth examined. (No. 116.) 1326. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a journalist, residing in Wellington ?—Yes. 1327. Have you ever resided in Australia ?—Yes, for different periods of over five years ; but I am a native of New Zealand. 1328. Will you kindly state your views on the question of New Zealand federating or not federating with Australia?— Yes. I have been studying the question from the point of view of one of the native-born. Shortly, lam in favour of a Commonwealth of our own. I contend that here is a people absolutely self-contained and self-containing, capable of living up to the best traditions of its ancestors, living in a land self-sustained and self-sustaining. lam of opinion that there is nothing that our people require or will require hereafter in the way of necessaries of life which this colony and the adjacent islands cannot provide ; and I contend that the people here are peculiarly adapted to nation-making. Some of the best blood of all nations is in the veins of the pioneers of this country, and it is within the knowledge of those present that it is becoming transmitted with most gratifying results to the second and third generation. My observation is that the Australians differ from us in character, disposition, and sympathies, and that the probable tendency will be to widen the gap between us in this respect. I have arrived at the conclusion that the Australian is not of the same robust, moral, vigorous type as the New-Zealander ; and it seems likely to me that in Australia the type will degenerate, while here it will become more distinctive for physical and mental development, independence of character, moral stamina, and high ideals. My reason for saying this is that the Australian tendency is to crowd into cities ; the New Zealand tendency is to spread out and take a strong hold upon the soil. The Australian climatic influences and natural conditions breed pessimism, wantonness, desire for luxury, and prodigality. New Zealand climatic influences and natural conditions tend to foster industry, shrewdness, thrift, and the spirit of self-help. I assert that Australia is not necessary for us as a market, but that climatic influences operating on natural conditions frequently make us necessary to them. If we retain our independence we shall only be one degree worse off than before. We shall lose the allegedly free-trade port of Sydney, and, instead of " all but one," all Australian ports will be closed against us. If we lose our independence we shall gain free entrance to Queensland, New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria, South Australia, and West Australia, and throw our markets open to the untrammelled competition of the cheap labour in those places. I am of opinion that Australia will never be a market for our principal products—meat, butter, cheese, grain, and wool —and that federation will never make her so. If Australians want our products, no tariff devised will keep them out, and their buyers will have to bear the brunt of the Customs duties imposed. New Zealand will lose by joining the Commonwealth : her independence ; a considerable portion of her self-government; the control of her principal means of revenue; such sums as may be devoted to Commonwealth administrative purposes ; such sums as may be required (as a pro raid contribution) for establishing and maintaining the Federal Parliament, with its staff and accessories ; the amount to be paid for salaries of our representatives and Senators, and their expenses; and the large sum of Customs revenue, which will have to be made up by some form of special taxation. Besides, we will have to maintain a State Parliament, just as expensive as the present one, for local-governmenc purposes. We shall get in return trade with Australia. This trade abler men than myself have already shown to you to be not such a very great thing to sacrifice, if such a sacrifice is the price to be given for national liberty. I realise that it will be easy to get into the Federation, but that it might cost bloodshed to get out again. As for defence, I do not think Australia will help us very much in that. As the captain of the warship "Archer" said at a public dinner the other night, the sea-fight which will decide the fate of Australasia will be fought in the English Channel. Personally, I think too much is made of the defence question in the federation argument. As a matter of fact, if it comes to fighting, New Zealand would be precious little use to Australia, and vice versd. Person illy, I think, if we guard our harbours and coal-supply, Providence will do the rest. The coal problem is our safeguard from invasion from without. If an enemy surmounted that obstacle and gained a footing, he could never gain the mastery if we were efficiently armed, and pursued Boer tactics. If attacked we should probably have to do as the pioneers of old times did : discard the British officer, and do the " chucking-out " ourselves. I refuse to believe that Australians could govern us as well as we can govern ourselves. I venture to say our legislators are, on the whole, of a better type than the Australian, and that our legislation in the past has added in no small measure to our reputation as an altruistic, yet shrewd, far-seeing people. I have arrived at the conclusion that only by remaining untrammelled can we pursue a broad, progressive, enlightened, commonweal policy. lam satisfied that if the workers permit the sacrifice of the colony's autonomy they will never cease to regret it. I think the trend of our future action should be, in order to strengthen our position, to encourage State control of all essential public services; to strongly counteract all attempts at formation of trusts and combines ; to arrange for periodical conferences (in camera) of the Cabinet for the time being and a given number of leading business-men in the community as to the best methods of exploiting foreign markets ; to increase, if necessary, facilities for enabling young colonists, the sons of settlers in particular, to go upon the land; to press every opportunity of cementing the Imperial connection ; to recognise Volunteering as a disciplinary measure from the schools upwards; to encourage horsemanship and prize-shooting, but discourage militarism and excessive wasteful expenditure on orthodox training, permanent forces, and coastal defences ; and to cease to import military experts (so called), training instead men of our own community to administer our defences and public services with sympathy, judgment, and efficiency. 1329. You say that you would discourage coastal defence?—l meant to imply that I would discourage excessive expenditure on permanent forces and coastal defence. 1330. But you recognise that certain fortifications are necessary for some of the harbours in the colony, in order to allow ships to load and unload with safety ?—Yes. You will notice I referred to that matter in my statement.
325
A.—4.
1331. Then, I understand you to say that you are distinctly against New Zealand federating with Australia ?—Yes. 1332. And as a journalist you have studied the question, and have read the Commonwealth Bill ?—Yes. 1333. Mr. Leys.] You say you resided in Australia : from your residence there, do you think our population are better off, on the whole, than the Australian population ?—Yes, because in Australia there is a tendency to concentration in the cities, while here the population is spread out on the soil, and they have better opportunities for relaxation and enjoying life in the best and most desirable way. They live under better climatic conditions, and they have a more healthy moral and physical tone. 1334. Do you think that the social condition of the working-population here is better than in Australia?— Yes, lam certain it is. That is the aggregate of my experience. 1335. Do you think that there is more poverty in Australian cities than in New Zealand cities ?—Eelatively, of course there is. It is very seldom that you see a beggar in the streets of New Zealand—you do in Australia—and, of course, that is owing to the fact that we provide for our beggars and poor better than they do in Australia ; but it is a fact that obtrudes itself on any visitor that there is a great deal of poverty there, and the conditions of life are not so desirable as they are here. 1336. Do you think that the congestion you speak of will tend to keep the population on a lower level ? —Yes. My opinion is that the congestion in the Australian cities will increase, and that while that goes on the population will not be so well off, and that the people in the States will be more and more dependent on a country like New Zealand for their supplies as time goes on. 1337. Under these circumstances, do you think that the adoption of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and similar measures could raise the working-population to the level of the New Zealand population?—On the whole, it would raise it no doubt; but whether it would raise it to the level of the New Zealand population, considering that we are constantly improving our social surroundings, is somewhat doubtful. There is a very much larger field for these measures to operate in over in Australia, and they will consequently take longer to bring them into operation; but not only cannot these problems be approached with any certainty in Australia, but the question becomes harder as the population is larger. 1338. Is it your impression, then, that the first effect of federation would be to bring some of these ills to our own shores through the competition that would then arise ?—Yes ; and any inequality of labour conditions arising in this way will rather tend to push us downhill than to lift us up. 1339. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the matter of defence, I suppose you are quite prepared to admit that the Australians and New-Zealanders would assist one another, in the event of any trouble arising, just as readily as both of them have assisted England in South Africa during the present trouble ?—Theoretically, their sympathies would be with one another, of course ; but I do not see very well how they could assist one another, because if Australia were attacked it would be by an outside foe, and New Zealand could not go to her assistance, for to do so would be to leave her own shores unprotected and open to attack. 1340. Do you contemplate that the attacking force would be sufficiently large to invade both countries simultaneously ? —I do not say that it would be necessarily so ; but I do say that if New Zealand were attacked the Australians would be unable to spare any number of men from their own shores to assist us, with the chance of having them seized in mid-ocean. 1341. When you spoke of the undesirableness of our joining the Commonwealth, and made a reference to.the adjacent islands, did you allude to the possibility of New Zealand federating with the islands of the South Pacific ?—Not necessarily ; but I had in my mind the fact that we would have an open market in the islands of the Pacific under any conditions if we took the right steps to see that we secured them while the islands were still in a state of transition between one ownership and another. 1342. Have you given any consideration to the question of whether white labour can be employed in the cultivation of the soil in tropical and sub-tropical Australia? —I am unable to persuade myself, after the observations I have made, that these tropical places where the sugar-cane is grown are places where white men can labour. lam of opinion that they must bo developed by kanakas. 1343. It is stated by some politicians in Australia that they intend to have a white Australia, and, if so, would it not affect very disastrously large industries in Queensland, such as the sugar industry ? —lnevitably so. 1344. You anticipate that there will be trouble in respect to that question in tropical and subtropical Australia?— Yes; history shows that where the body politic and vested interests are at issue bloodshed often results, and that may probably occur in a case like this if the matter is pressed. 1344 a. Are you of opinion that our industries could be better developed by not federating ?— Yes; I think we are quite capable of becoming a nation in ourselves, working on our own lines, developing our own industries, producing all we require, and finding markets for our surplus produce, if not in Australia, in other parts of the world. Albert Akthub Cokrigan examined. (No. 117.) 1345. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the manager of the D.I.C. in Wellington ?—Yes. 1346. How long have you resided in New Zealand?— Twenty-six years. 1347. Have you ever resided in Australia?— Not at all. 1348. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating or not with the Australian Commonwealth ?—No, not particularly. I have been asked to come here, and I did not offer to
A.—4
326
come. I have not regarded the question of federating with Australia as a practical thing at all, as it seems to me that anything that will upset our industries here would not be seriously considered by our people. 1349. Are you of opinion that federation would upset the industries here?— Yes. That is as a general opinion ; but it is not the outcome of any special study of the matter on my part. My opinion, as a business-man, is that if you do anything to upset the industries of New Zealand it will affect practically the whole of the people. 1350. Are you of opinion that New Zealand federating with Australia will have that effect ? — Yes. If we were levelled down to intercolonial free-trade, and had to compete with the stocks traders could dump down on New Zealand at any time, it would be a very disastrous thing for the colony. 1351. You mean that the revenue of the colony would be seriously affected by any alteration of the Customs duties ?—We have a Customs tariff to protect our industries, and if you bring our people into competition with other people who are working at reduced wages, and possibly longer hours, our position would be very bad. 1352. That is, as far as the workers are concerned ?—Yes. 1353. Have you considered the position as far as the manufacturers are concerned?— Yes ; I buy largely of boots, shoes, drapery, clothing, and other goods of New Zealand manufacture. If we had to compete with the Australians on their cheaper markets our buying, as a company, would be very much smaller from the New Zealand manufacturers. 1354. You mean that the manufacturers of New Zealand would not be able to compete with the larger concerns commanding the greater amount of capital in Australia?— Yes ; and New Zealand manufacturers would also have to compete against lower wages and longer hours. 1355. Have you considered at all how the revenue of New Zealand would be affected by any alteration in the Customs tariff?— No. 1356. What is your opinion on the sentimental side of the question—as to New Zealand sacrificing its independence ?—I think we are very much better as we are. 1357. Why?—l do not think it would be advisable to become a province of Australia, as practically we should be if we federated; and I should be very sorry to see it. 1358. Is there any advantage that you think would accrue to New Zealand from joining the Commonwealth ?—Not as we understand the Commonwealth now. We would simply be absorbed by Australia. 1359. Do you not think it would be to our advantage to have four million extra people to trade with ?—I do not think so, as we cannot supply our own people yet. 1360. But you must not look at the matter from the point of to-day, but, say, from fifty years hence? —I would not like to express an opinion on that point; but I consider that at the present time federation would be a disadvantage. 1361. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the past Australia has been subjected to greater financial crises than this colony, and I suppose you assume that, in the event of a future crisis through having intercolonial free-trade between the colonies, it would simply mean that New Zealand would be a dumping-ground for surplus and bankruptcy stocks ?—That has happened before, and is what I endeavoured to make clear in my previous remarks. 1362. Apart from any competition that would arise from the big industrial concerns in Australia ? —Quite so. 1363. Do you do anything in furniture ? —Yes. 1364. Have you come into competition with the cheap furniture of Australia, which it is said is manufactured by Japs and Chinese labour ?—Yes, we have experienced that competition in past times, but it is not so marked at the present time; business is rather good throughout this colony, and competition is not so marked. 1365. So that with the present duty and the better condition of affairs in Australia you are not suffering now? —No. Thomas William Hislop examined. (No. 118.) 1366. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a barrister and solicitor, practising in Wellington ?— Yes. 1367. And you have been a member of the Legislature of New Zealand and Cabinet Minister? —Yes. 1368. Do you know Australia at all?— Only by reading of it, and by looking at the statistics occasionally. 1369. Will you be kind enough to give the Commission the benefit of your views upon the advisability or otherwise of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth of Australia ?—Well, I have not followed the question very closely lately ; but in the year 1876, when the question of separation and federation was being discussed in the House of Representatives, I gave the matter a good deal of attention. I studied the movement in Canada and in other places, and have continued to give the question some attention, and I have come to the conclusion that federation is essential to the well-being of these communities, and to the solution in them of the big questions which underlie the development of humanity. I believe that many large questions can only be properly solved if federation is carried out. I have read the Commonwealth Act, and lam distinctly of opinion that most of the questions mentioned in section 51, as questions over which the Commonwealth Parliament has paramount power of legislation, could be best dealt with by a federated Parliament. In regard to most of them there is nothing affecting the independence of the State or local patriotism. The question, for instance, of bankruptcy and laws regulating the interchange of commodities, and a great many other questions mentioned in the section, can certainly be far more advantageously dealt with by the federated Parliament than by each Parliament locally, and I am quite satisfied that if we had general provisions for the whole of the Australian Colonies dealing
327
A.—4
with these questions trade would be facilitated to some extent. Ido not wish to exaggerate the importance of this, but certainly it would be of considerable advantage. With regard to several matters which have been mentioned by witnesses—for instance, the labour Conciliation Act and labour laws generally—as likely to be interfered with, the Act only gives power to the Commonwealth Parliament to deal witli them, and we may take it as certain that they would not deal with them except in a progressive way, and therefore that the laws in force in New Zealand would remain in force until they were advanced enough in the Commonwealth to pass a general law something like we have. I have seen it mentioned by some of the witnesses that the shorter hours here and higher wages necessarily mean dearer work. My reading has led me to the opposite conclusion. In Canada, when experimenting with shorter hours, it was demonstrated, particularly in the tobacco-works, where machinery was used, that the shortening of hours from 10 to 9, instead of increasing the cost of production, decreased it. So I, for one, do not accept the statement that it is necessary at all that the cost of an article will be increased by the shortening of hours and increasing of wages. Of course, there is a limit to that, as to everything else. The general conclusions to which I have come is that, within limits, better conditions bring about better and cheaper work. I ha/ye also seen references made to the cost to the colony of joining the Commonwealth. One witness stated that it would cost the colony £600,000. Ido not know how he arrived at that conclusion, because the total cost of all the departments in Australia which are taken over by the Commonwealth are something like £3,000,000 ; that includes the Post Office, and so on. If you deduct the revenue of the Post and Telegraph Office, the total net cost of the departments taken over would be about £1,000,000 ; and if you divide that by seven, after adding the cost of our departments, you will see that the cost to the colony would not be anything like what is stated. The only power about which I would have any hesitation in handing over to the Commonwealth is the power to deal with oar railways. There is power given to the Commonwealth to make railways in Australia which might not be of any very direct advantage to New Zealand. The Commonwealth has power to charge the interest to any State in respect of railways by which it is specially benefited. Some provision should be made to charge interest specially against particular States in respect of which more than one but not all the States are benefited. I think our railways might be left to ourselves, and that we might be freed from any burden in respect of the Australian railways. 1370. You said you did not understand how the loss of revenue was arrived at?—lt was the cost I said. I did not understand the reference was to revenue. 1371. That is probably in the shape of loss of revenue ?—Revenue not collected ? 1372. Yes?— Then, the colony cannot use money not collected. 1373. Do you understand that if Mr. Barton remains in power the Federal tariff will be a higher or lower one than the tariff at present in vogue in New Zealand ?—I notice that Mr. Barton used the words " moderate protection." If he takes the mean between Victoria and New South Wales it would be just about what we have now. 1374. We are told that the duty collected on sugar in this colony is £160,000 per annum : does it occur to you that the whole of that revenue on one item alone would be lost to New Zealand?—l am not at present sufficiently acquainted with the particulars of where our sugar comes from to express an opinion on that. 1375. It comes from Queensland ?—Some comes from Germany and Fiji, and if we federated with Fiji there would also be a loss. 1376. Supposing we federated with Australia, we are told that there would be a loss of the whole of that £160,000 of revenue which we now receive from sugar duties ?—Even so, I do not look upon that .as calamitous. The people would have the benefit of it, and they could pay it in some other form. 1377. But there are other commodities, such as tobacco and spirits, on which revenue would be lost, and it is in that respect that the £600,000 is calculated ? —The country within which the commodity was consumed would get the benefit of the loss of duty. That can always be corrected by excise duties, as at Home. 1377 a. You have referred to the thirty-nine matters that the Commonwealth may legislate upon : if they legislate upon the whole of these, what would there be left for the State Parliament to legislate upon ?—I do not know that I can tell you right off. There are a great number of things left. 1378. Do you not think that the legislative independence of the colony would be very seriously curtailed ? —I would not regard as a calamity the fact of our local legislation being curtailed. Our representatives would take a part in the legislation of the Commonwealth. I think any loss of what is called independence would be quite compensated for in our having a voice in the solution of problems in which we have at present no voice, and which are of great importance, and by bringing about uniformity in regulation on many subjects. 1379. You are aware, also, that if a law is passed by the Commonwealth which is inconsistent with a State law the Federal law prevails ? —Yes, I understand that. 1380. Therefore, if the Commonwealth legislated upon the thirty-nine matters, the State would be debarred from passing any law inconsistent with that?— Yes. 1381. Well, now, supposing they passed an arbitration and conciliation law, to begin with, which is distasteful to this colony, we would have to put up with it ?—I do not anticipate anything of the kind, for this reasan : The first Act passed was by the South Australian Parliament. There is a large proportion of the people in New South Wales and Victoria in favour of similar legislation; and even in West Australia, where the franchise has been restricted hitherto, there is a considerable party having views in the same direction. I anticipate that they will never pass a law which will abrogate what is in force in New Zealand until they pass at least an equally good Act for the whole of the Commonwealth. I may say I do not look upon our Act as perfect by any
A.—4
328
means, and I do not anticipate that an Act of that kind will be passed which would be less useful than the Act nSw in force. 1382. Do you consider it a matter of any importance that the Native population of this colony are not taken into consideration in the matter of elections to the Federal Parliament ?—I did not notice that. Ido not think it is just. 1383. You know, too, that New Zealand could not now join as an original State ?—-It would have to come in under an Act. 1384. Do you see any disadvantage in reference to administration in the distance that New Zealand is from the centre of the Federal Government ?—ln some departments there would be a disadvantage ; in others there would be an advantage, I think. 1385. Have you ever known of a country separated so far by sea as New Zealand is from Australia federating ? —I do not know of any so far away by sea, except it is the western States of America, which were practically only approachable by sea for all commercial purposes for a great many years after they joined the Confederacy. 1386. Do you not think that where people are on the same continent they know more about one another and of each other's interests than those who are separated by such a large extent of sea? —I should say that the Californians, when they first joined the States, knew a great deal less about other parts of America than we do of Australia. 1387. You think that we might suffer somewhat in administration, but not to a large extent ? -No. 1388. Do you think that the people of the Chatham Islands, who are not nearly so far away as Australia, do not suffer in administration by reason of their distance from New Zealand ?—The Chathams are visited once in two months, and have no cable. 1389. ■in the matter of a grievance, do you think they would have the same attention paid to them as if they were fifty miles from New Zealand?—l know some districts in New Zealand quite as neglected as the Chatham Islands. But the cases are not analogous. They are not represented as we should be, and they are not connected with cable. Newfoundland is a considerable distance from Canada. Originally a number of States refused to go into the Canadian Confederacy, but ultimately all came in except Newfoundland, which is rich in minerals. They raised the same objections as New Zealand is doing, and their development has been very slow, and they are certainly not a progressive community. 1390. Do you think it is probable that in the course of years the different States of Australia will be abolished?—l do not think it at all likely. I think, as the Commonwealth develops they will settle down to specialising their functions, as they have done in other Federations. 1391. Does noc all history prove that it is the aim of Central Governments to increase their powers ? —lt depends upon who are administering them. In America under certain administrators that has been the case. 1392. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] But, on the whole, has not the tendency been to usurp the powers of the State ? —The tendency of Governments under ambitious rulers is to increase their powers. 1393. Hon. the Chairman.] And that was our experience in New Zealand in the abolition of the provinces ?—I do not think they interfered much with the local legislation. 1394. They absolutely wiped them out. Do you not think that the same line of conduct is likely to be followed in the Commonwealth of Australia ? —No, I do not think so ; and they could not do it without the concurrence of the State Legislatures. This did not obtain in our provinces. 1395. With a majority of the States and the people it can be done?— Yes. 1396. Hon. Captain Russell.'] Have you considered the question from the point of view of the possible condition of Australia and New Zealand in the future—say, a hundred or two hundred years hence ?—What I meant to indicate was that the questions which underlie the well-being of States can best be dealt with by general legislation. Even if some of those joined with us are behind in some things, it is better that we should be helping along our neighbours, for if they do not improve they will ultimately tend to degrade us, whether we are federated to them or not. 1397. You drew a comparison between New Zealand and Newfoundland : is there not the possibility that New Zealand will bo the most populous of all colonies in these seas—that is, area for area ? —lt all depends upon what area you take. I should question it very much if you take Victoria by itself. 1398. Except Victoria, I suppose New Zealand will be the most populous State?—l think it likely. 1399. We may have, at any rate, a population equal to half that of the United Kingdom ?—I should doubt that. 1400. What population do you think it would be possible for New Zealand to maintain ?—I have never been able to satisfy my mind on that subject; but, as long as we continue sending out rents, interest, and suchlike, we shall not be able to support a population anything like half of England. Instead of drawing incomes from other places, as England does, we are sending onethird of our exports Home to pay interest. 1401. And you, like myself, hope that that will terminate in the course of time ?—I do not see how it can so long as we carry on the present system. 1402. Then, in the course of two or three hundred years, do you think our climatic conditions and the configuration of our country may lead to a difference in type between the New-Zealander and the Australian ?—There will be differences, but I do not know that Australians will be inferior. We see persons of the third and fourth generation from Australia, and in physique we find they are quite equal to ourselves. At all events, we find a body of Victorian poloists coming over here, and, although they are Victorian-born, they wipe us out. 1403. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the European population of New Zealand and the present occupied portions of Australia remain practically identical, what do you think will become of tropical and sub-tropical Australia? —I do not think that the question of whether the
329
A.—4
white race can become used to a hot climate has been solved yet. We know that white people are healthier in India now than previously ; but if, as is supposed by some, the people in the hotter regions will not have very much vigour, then, as a consequence, although they may have lower wages, they will not produce so much work per man" per day. 1404. But, caking India as your own illustration, do you know of any families that have been reared in India ?—I have known some people who have been brought up entirely in India, but not many, of course. 1405. Do you not think that experience points out that European populations do not exist as workers in the tropics ?—Generally that has been so, but how far that has been due to facilities for getting black labour has not been demonstrated--1406. Does not all history prove that a particular race of people must work under the burning sun, and that those born in the temperate climates cannot from generation to generation live in the tropics?—lt must be harder to get used to hot climates than to cold. 1407. What is to become, then, of northern Australia?—l do not recognise that its possible future affects the question of the advisability to federate. 1408. Will China demand equal trade with Australia ?—I cannot tell; but Ido not know that affects the question of our joining the Federation. So far as the products of these people are concerned, they will be products that cannot be produced in New Zealand, and therefore they will not enter into competition with the New Zealand article. Then, so far as their social conditions are concerned, I should think it would be better for us to be in the Confederacy, for then we should be able to help to control these things, whereas if we were outside we should be helpless. 1409. If more than half of that colony could not be occupied by white, must it not be occupied by some other people ? —That is so, if the pressure keeps up and there are no checks. 1410. Suppose they represented fifty or sixty millions of people in northern Australia, mostly coloured people, will not the whole policy of the Commonwealth be affected by them ?—Probably. 1411. Is it desirable that we should ally ourselves to a country more than half of which will be dominated by coloured people ?—But Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia, and South Australia will be quite as aware of and alive to that as we are, and they will have to meet any difficulty as it arises. 1412. You imagine there will be a difficulty ? —-No doubt the thing would have to be regulated as it arose. 1413. Even supposing it is regulated, if there are millions of coloured people, will they not produce all sorts of articles and reduce the standard of life all over the Commonwealth ?—We heard that long ago —that the Chinese, Japanese, and the Indians were going to wipe us all out. It does not matter what the rate of wages in a particular place is, natural conditions being alike, the cost of production is the same. Machinery is so much entering into work that we cannot produce successfully with a low class of labour. The difference between a good man and a bad working a machine is even greater than the difference been a good and bad workman without a machine. 1414. Is it not a fact that numerous spindles have been stopped in Lancashire and started in the East ?—I understand that they are very busy in Lancashire now. When you look at statistics you find that the volume of trade is increasing. 1415. Take the Town of Dundee : has not the jute trade migrated from there to the banks of the Hoogli ?—lt is quite natural that its manufacture should be carried on effectively at the source of supply. 1416. Does that not point to the fact of coloured labour being a very serious problem in the course of a few hundred years ?—Of course, it will be; but even the coloured labourer is not stationary. Even in India in the wheat districts he is developing. 1417. If millions of coloured people come into Australia, will it not affect the characteristics of the whole race ?—Not necessarily of the white people. 1418. Not in the course of three or four centuries? —It is hard to say. 1419. Can you tell of any practical benefit that would accrue to the manual workers of this colony by federation ? —I do not think we ought to look upon the matter exclusively from our home Island point of view; I think we should look at it more from a national point of view. 1420. You are aware that industries are more fully developed in Australia and on a much larger scale than in New Zealand?— Some of them. 1421. You are aware that that would minimise cost of production ? —Up to a certain point. But you will find in Victoria and New South Wales hundreds of small factories carrying on alongside large industrial undertakings. It does not mean that because there is a large manufactory in one line that small manufactories cannot live. 1422. If that is the case, how is it that New Zealand, with a protective tariff, could not compete with America in, say, boots?—l do not think that the imports of boots from America are very large. 1423. I understand that it is only special classes of boots that come from America ?—Perhaps it is, too, that the manufacturers here have, been resting on their protection, and have not been getting the best class of machinery. If that is so, then it does not matter what amount of protection you have ; to get the best machinery is the best means of protection. lam better acquainted with the woollen industry, and with that it was always a necessity to get the latest machinery, and when that was done there was no difficulty in producing so as to enable us to compete. 1424. Do you look forward to that trade increasing?—lt depends on the development of this and neighbouring communities. J 425. Has the New South Wales market been of much advantage to New Zealand trade? — Not much; but I think when you begin to specialise it will be of value. 1426. I think you said we should have a share in solving some of the problems in which we 42—A. 4.
330
A.—4
have no voice : what are the problems ?—One of them was referred to by Captain Eussell dealing with the coloured labour of northern Australia. Then, there is the question of the Pacific islands. 1427. Do you not think that would be solved by the British Government? —I do not know. Power is given under the Bill for the Commonwealth to deal with some aspects of it. 1428. As a matter of fact, is there not just now a difference of opinion between the Commonwealth and New Zealand with respect to some of these islands ?—Yes, Fiji. 1429. Do you think that this colony is as likely to be as well developed under a central form of government as under the local government ?—I think, under the combined system we shall develop more satisfactorily. Our own improvement is involved in that of our neighbours. 1430. Do you not think it probable, when the Commonwealth Parliament has legislated on those thirty-nine articles, that there will be a growing feeling amongst people that they have practically reduced the State Parliament to a Eoad Board?—No, I think not. 1431. You have had an extensive knowledge of public life : take the Commonwealth Parliament as it stands, and the Federal Ministry, what would be more likely to influence them —sixty-five representatives from Australia or fifteen from New Zealand ?—lt depends largely upon the character of the representatives. But Australia is not one State, an,d has not one interest —it is just as divided; and I think the spirit of rivalry between States is quite as strong there as in our local Parliament. 1432. Has it not generally been a question of votes in the New Zealand Parliament? —I have known Ministries which would "not allow votes to interfere at all. But I do not think it at all likely that there would be a combination against New Zealand. 1433. Taking the question of a big railway policy developed for the Commonwealth, do you think New Zealand would get the same share as Australia would? —I think, proportionately to its revenue it would. I think, roughly speaking, that revenue would be made the basis for the determination of these matters. 1434. According to you, if that policy were carried out New South Wales and Victoria would get the bulk of the expenditure?— New South Wales and Victoria are interested in the construction of railways beyond their borders. 1435. What would the revenue of Western Australia be compared with New South Wales ?— Ido not know. One of the questions is the construction of the-trans-continental railway. That may be considered by Victoria and New South Wales as of importance to them. 1436. Would you consider that we should join the Federation if we have to bear our share of the public-works expenditure of Australia?—l said it was advisable that some modifications should be made in the Act to meet these matters. I said it was one of the weak points. 1437. Mr. Beauchamp.] I judge you would not accept the Bill in its present form ?—I have said that modifications are necessary. 1438. If we could get no modifications, would you go in under that Bill?—I should prefer to wait and try to have modification. 1439. Do you think it would be wise to increase the direct taxation in the colony to make good the amount we would have to contribute to the Federal Government by way of Customs duties? —1 do not think it is advisable, but if it is necessary it will have to be done. 1440. Even if it is a sum of £600,000 per annum ? —That is only the amount of our surplus. 1441. The representatives might say that there should be a black Australia; we might recognise that it would be very undesirable to have anything to do with a country where black labour was recognised : do you not think that, in spite of our opposition, the protest of New Zealand would be ignored? —It is less likely to be ignored if-we are part of the Federation. 1442. By net federating we can protect ourselves?—No, I say not. We cannot possibly escape the influences of bad surroundings if they exist. Certainly not merely by not going into the Commonwealth. 1443. With regard to our industries, do you think they would be affected by specialisation in Australia? —Some of them may be, but the industries do not necessarily flourish most in large centres of population; other things influence their development. 1444. It is from a political standpoint you favour federation mostly : you do not attach much importance to the trade aspect?—l do. Many branches of our trade will be developed largely if we have a market in Australia. There are many pursuits better carried on here than there which would be developed more rapidly under federation. 1445. You remarked to Captain Eussell, I think, that New Zealand could never become a great or densely populated country so long as we sent so much money away to pay for loans; but do you not look forward to the time when we shall be able to pay off"our indebtedness?—l do not think it is in the nature of things—certainly not until the country is more fully developed, and it will take a long time for that to come about. 1446. If such a thing could be obtained, would you favour a reciprocal treaty rather than federation ? —I prefer federation. I do not know that anything has ever been obtained by reciprocal arrangements ; we have tried them, but they have never lasted. 1447. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think we enjoy a higher social condition in this colony than on the other side ? —I have not heard Australians say so. I think you find the Victorians are rather glad to get back to Victoria. 1448. The hours of labour are shorter and the wages higher ? —I do not think that is so. I understood that they had the eight-hours system in Victoria, and I think the hours in South Australia and New South Wales are about equal to our own. 1449. Do you not think we shall develop characteristics peculiar to ourselves as compared with Australia, owing to climate, &c. ?—I do not know. I think, where there has been competition the Australians have done very well. 1450. Is not our standard of education higher than in Australia ? —l|'have|not|heard it so stated; I think they have the same standards practically that we have.
331
A.—4
1451. Our system of education is freer than it is likely to be under federation?—l think not. 1452. You say we do not lose anything by sacrificing our independence ? —We do not lose our independence at all. You might as well say that a person in the north of Scotland has lost his individualism because he is one of forty millions instead of one of three millions. J 453. He is much nearer the centre than we are? —He was not a hundred years ago. He was then practically further from London than we are from Perth at the present lime. 1454. Do you not think it possible that community of interest will grow up unconsciously between the Australians, and, the Government being on the spot, they might possibly unite to make their voice heard?— The interests are just as divergent amongst the different Australian States as they are between New Zealand and the States of Australia. 1455. Mr. Reid.] Have you considered clauses 73 and 74, relating to the judicature?— Yes. 1455 a. Those clauses give an appeal, to the High Court of Appeal from the Commonwealth Court ? —Yes, I think so. 1456. Would you consider it an advantage that we should appeal from a Court possessing six Judges to one possessing three ?—I do not think the number of Judges is of very great importance : they would be specially fitted for the duties. 1457. In any case, you do not see any disadvantage ?—No ; the chief advantage of appeal is getting the case reheard, with the further light given by time. I think three is a very good Court of Appeal. Ido not think it is a disadvantage, but, on the contrary, it may be an advantage if the Judges are specially fitted for the work, and the work especially assigned to them. 1458. From whom do you think such Judges would be appointed?— Probably they would be men who had shown themselves specially fitted for that work. 1459. Have you considered the point as to whether the Privy Council appeal is excluded by section 73 ?—I do not think it is. 1460. In that case there is still the appeal open to the Privy Council ?—Yes. 1461. Would there be any advantage in going to this High Court compared with the Privy Council? —There would be the saving of time. One disadvantage of the Privy Council is that, in regard to Native matters especially, it is very difficult to get the matter properly understood. 1462. Would you consider there is any anomaly in the fact that an appeal from our Court of Appeal to the High Court would be limited by Federal legislation : do you see any difficulty in that? —Not in the slightest. 1463. Mr. Leys.] You referred to the American Constitution : is it not the case that the security under the American Constitution against the absorption of the powers of the States by the Central Government is greater than under this Commonwealth Constitution ?—lt requires a bigger majority to alter it—l think, the concurrence of two-thirds of the States. 1464. "Under this clause 128, providing for the alteration of the Constitution, is it not the case that a bare majority of the States and of the electors of the Commonwealth could make any alteration in the Constitution ? —Yes, subject to the reservations in the section. 1465. Is it not the case that in America the Central Government has absorbed a very large amount of the original power of the States by liberal interpretation of the Constitution ?—They could not do that, because the Constitution must be interpreted by Judges. If any question arises between the States and the Central Government it has to be decided by the Judges. 1466. Was it not the case that originally the States were practically independent Governments, paying very little attention to the Central Government ? -That is so. 1467. Have they not now sunk into a very subordinate position in regard to their legislation? —No ; I think they pass more laws than any other people in the world. Bryce tells us so. 1468. Does not Mr. Bryce hold the particular view that the Central Government has absorbed large powers through liberal interpretations ?—I do not remember that, and Ido not see how it is possible, because the Federal Judges have to determine the question as between the relative rights of the Central Government and the State Government. 1469. But do you not think there would be a liability, under these circumstances, for amendments to be made in the Constitution in the interests of the Australian Continent that might be to the disadvantage of an outlying State like New Zealand ? —lt is possible, but I do not think it is likely. It is not a matter that I should regard with any degree of concern, because I feel certain that our interests would receive due attention, and that the administration of the whole of the Commonwealth would be carried on with justice to all concerned. 1470. You think that placing ourselves at the mercy of a population vote in which the Australian voters would have a preponderance is not attended with any risk?— Everything is attended with a risk. There is risk in government by ourselves. It is a very difficult thing to protect ourselves from evils committed by ourselves through legislation. t 1471. To put a case, do you think that this might arise : that the administration of the public lands of Australia might be transferred to the Federal Government ?—That could certainly not be done without the concurrence of a majority of the States and a majority of the people. 1472. Do you not think it likely that, considering the condition, of three-quarters of the Australian people, they will make an amendment in that direction ?—I should not think so, but I have not considered the question, and I do not know what the conditions would be. 1473. Perhaps you have noticed that Mr. Barton has already announced as a part of the Federal policy the development of tropical Australia and the construction of irrigation-works : do you not see that there are many works of that kind which may be advantageously carried out by the Federal Government for the benefit of Australia, but which would be of no advantage to New Zealand?— Well, I think the effect in that direction probably would be to increase our trade, and such works would certainly not be done unless there was reason to expect a commensurate advantage which would bring in the necessary revenue to recoup the annual cost, either directly or indirectly.
A.—4
332
1474. You think that they will not borrow very largely for works that are practically unrernunerative, but which might indirectly be beneficial to the whole of Australia? —I think very likely they would borrow, I do not say largely, to develop the country ; and I should also think the probability is that they would borrow for matters of importance to New Zealand. There are many things which a federated Australia could do which could not be done by an individual State. 1475. In these things do you not see a community of interest in Australia in which we should not have any share at all ?—I do not see that the Victorian or the present South Australian people have a much greater interest in developing northern Australia than we should have if we were part of the Commonwealth. 1476. You think that they have no more practical interest in extending the area of settlement in north Australia than we have ?—lf we develop our sea-carrying facilities the possibilities are that we could compete with them in northern Australia. 1477. In what way? —The cost of taking articles from other parts of Australia to the north is very little, if any, less than the cost of taking them from here. 1478. Even with trans-continental railways developing the interior?— They could not compete with the sea-carriage. I noticed the other day that a witness stated that the cost of carriage for exporting from this colony was greater than in any of the other countries. I wish to say that there was a return prepared by Mr. Maxwell some years ago-showing that the cost of taking our produce to the coast in New Zealand was very much less than it was in any other part of the world. 1479. Is it not the case that they have already a very fine line of steamers trading between Australian ports and ports of Northern Queensland, and no such lines exist from New Zealand to northern Australia ?—We could develop, I think, such a line in a little time. Not very long ago there was no line from Wellington to Sydney; now we have a fairly good service, and as the colony becomes more populated we shall develop other lines. 1480. Do you really think that we are as likely to develop as many lines and as good a service between here and northern Australia as they have now between Sydney and Melbourne and northern Australia ?—I am not sufficiently acquainted with those lines to answer the question; but, take potatoes and other produce at present sent to Sydney, we shall, when the demand becomes sufficiently great for them in northern Australia, be able to compete. 1481. I suppose you know that potatoes are a very erratic article of export?— Yes; but the potato trade has never been properly looked after. For instance, if you establish, as probably you could establish, farina works in the potato districts in New Zealand, so as to be able to take advantage of the market when potatoes were low, instead of having a varying production it could be regulated. I am sure that potato-growing could be more largely developed, and then you would always be able to take advantage of the market in Australia, from parts of which you are now practically excluded. 1482. But even the New South Wales market is a very uncertain one, because they are dependent on the seasons? —Well, it is practically the only one we have; but the market for potatoes is a very large one, and their profitable production could, in the way I have indicated, be made very much steadier. 1483. Do you think there is any risk of our becoming a discontented State with a Government far removed from us? —I do not say there is none, but I think it is a very small one indeed, and it has been no hindrance to the Federations which have taken place. In the case of the Swiss and other Federations the same argument was used. 1484. Is it not the case that in those Federations the Central Government is gradually increasing in power and the States Government is gradually declining ? —I cannot answer that question straight oft' by specific examples, but there have been very few alterations in the American Constitution, and, I think, none in the Canadian ; and, in any case, I do not think that any of the States comprising the Canadian Union would like to withdraw from the Federation. Manitoba was one State which did not enter the Federation at once, but it did so after very careful consideration, and I am perfectly satisfied, from what I have read, that none of them would like to withdraw, now. 1485. You can see no essential difference between the isolation by sea and the isolation by land distance—by nominal boundary ?—No; I think the cost of going from Quebec to Vancouver is probably considerably greater than that of going from here to Sydney. 1486. You do not think insularity tends to develop different characteristics and different aspirations ?—They may, but they may also tend to develop an egoism and other qualities that are perhaps not desirable. Ido not think that insularity develops a better type of human being. 1487. Do you think that our existence as part of the British Empire is not sufficient to give us the power of expansion ?—You have no practical power as a part of the British Empire. 1488. Ron. Major Steward.] You are in favour of federating on the broad principle that social and political questions could be better dealt with by federation than by the States separately ?—I think they can be dealt with more permanently, and especially there would be better progress all along the line. There may not be as much progress in one individual State as there is now, but there will be better progress all round, and that must, of course, beneficially affect the development - of the whole country. 1489. That is a general theoretical argument in favour of federation per se, also it may be said that one advantage of federating would be to secure unanimity of legislation on such subjects as marriage, divorce, and currency; but is it not possible that a State may be called upon to pay too much for the advantages which it would obtain ?—Quite possible. 1490. Taking the Commonwealth Act now before us, you are aware that at present we cannot claim to join the Federation as an original State: do you think that if New Zealand determines that she will embark in the Federation she ought rightly to ask to be admitted on terms not inferior to the terms given to the original States?— Certainly.
333
A.—4
1491. Referring to the suffrage, the Constitution states that we cannot count our Maori population : do you not think that if we decided to join we should make a special stipulation with regard to that also ? —I think so. 1492. Then, do you not think it will be expedient that some provision should be made with regard to charging to the various States their proportion of the cost of works executed by the Commonwealth ?—I have said that already. 1493. If these three points were provided for, are there any others that you think we should require to specially stipulate for in the interests of New Zealand? —I do not know of any. Matthew Gawthokp Heeles examined. (No. 119.) 1494. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Heeles ?—General manager of the Wellington Woollen Company. 1495. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Thirty years. 1496. Have you ever resided in Australia'?—l have only been there as a visitor. 1497. Will you kindly give the Commission your opinion as to how federation with Australia would affect, first of all, the wool industries ? —I would ask the Commission to accept as my evidence the facts given to the Commission by Mr. John Ross. I entirely indorse everything Mr. Ross said. He seems to cover in his letter the whole of che ground industrially, socially, and politically on this question of federation, and I cannot do better than ask you to accept his letter as my views also. 1498. But we want some evidence, if you can give it to us, as to the woollen industry : how do you consider the woollen-manufacturing industry would be affected by federation with Australia ? —I think injuriously, because, we cannot compete with the labour conditions there. As an illustration, I might say that a pair of trousers in Australia costs 10d. to make for labour, while here they cost from Is. Bd. to Is. 9d. 1499. Have you read Mr. Morrison's evidence in Dunedin ? —Yes. 1500. He was of opinion that the woollen-factories of this colony could successfully export to Australia? —Well, it was done, but they have not done any considerable export trade for the last few years ; we tried it and failed, and the Kaiapoi Company tried it and failed. Ido not anticipate that we should do much trade with Australia supposing we did federate. Samuel Kibkpatkick examined. (No. 120.) 1501. Hon. the Chairman.] Where do you reside, Mr. Kirkpatrick?—ln Nelson; I have lived in New Zealand twenty-three years. 1502. I believe you have resided in the United States ? —Yes. 1503. Are you acquainted with Australia at all?—I was only there a month about twenty years ago—in Sydney. 1504. What is your business?—l am a jam-manufacturer, and I have also a coffee and spice business. We employ forty hands. I would employ more, but I cannot get them. I advertised for hands a short time ago in Nelson, and received no applications. 1505. What, in your opinion, would be the effect of New Zealand federating with Australia? —I will confine myself to my own business, and I might say it would very seriously affect the jam trade, and that, of course, would affect the fruit-growing industries. Taking the first item of solder, which is used in tin-making, they can get block tin and lead cheaper in Sydney than we can in New Zealand, because it is produced there ; also tin plates, because the freight from England to Sydney is very much less than it is from England to New Zealand. Then, again, you can get fruit cheaper in Australia than in Nelson ; but that is a disadvantage which would be likely to decrease when more fruit is produced in New Zealand. Then, the cost of labour here is higher than it is in Australia. If you take raspberries grown in Nelson last year, we bought them at 3d., whereas we used to get them at 2-J-d. This year more was grown than we could have arranged for. We bought all we wanted at 3d., and we took the balance of the crop at 2d., thinking we could send them over to Australia ; but I got a cable from Hobart offering me them at If d. f .o.b. Hobart ; so that if we federated our jlruit-growers would have to come down to the Hobart price. In Tasmania they had a very heavy fruit-crop, and the fruit-growers only got Id. for raspberries. My quotation was not from a grower, but from a manufacturer; so that he would have to make his profit, and he would have to reckon his expenses of putting the fruit on board the steamer. 1506. Are there any other disadvantages that occur to you if New Zealand federated ?—ln New Zealand the merchants and manufacturers are at a very great disadvantage owing to there being so many ports. The larger output a factory can produce the cheaper it can do it; and in Australia—in Melbourne and Sydney—the factories are all concentrated in those two towns. In New Zealand the manufacturer and importer has got to provide a branch establishment practically in five ports, and we have no large population concentrated in one place that would take our output for local consumption. Everything has got to go by sea to other ports, and, as I said, this involves a manufacturer having branches in ail the towns, involving additional clerical staff and the keeping of big stocks in every place. If I had a factory in Sydney I should only have to keep the one stock, and I should work it with the one staff; and therefore we are at a decided disadvantage as compared with the Melbourne and Sydney factories, where they also have much cheaper labour, and where they work a greater number of hours. I consider that federation would put a stop to our fruit- and fish-preserving. In the jam-making we have to put the fruit through immediately it comes into the factory to avoid fermentation ; and in that respect I might say that the labour laws handicap us, in this respect: Under the old Act we were allowed eight Saturday afternoons during the twelve months; but under the Act introduced last session, which did not pass, but which is likely to pass next session, we will have to stop all work on Saturday afternoons. Therefore, as the fruit has to be picked when it is ripe, if we do not put it through on
A.—4
334
Saturday morning, when it arrives at the factory,- it would be bad by Monday. They have not that to contend with in Australia. 1507. Is there much fruit-pulp imported to New Zealand?— Very little now. The fruit they bring into Dunedin is what they call sulphured; it is not pulp. 1508. Have you considered how federating would affect manufactures other than yours in New Zealand ?—I think it would affect them in the same way on account of the difference in the wages and the quantities produced on the other side. In tin-making we could get automatic machinery for making tins that would turn out 20,000 tins a day ; but, of course, with our limited output, you would not require to work it more than a few days in the year. With our present plant we can turn out 6,000 a day. This shows what can be done in a large concern like they have in Australia, and how their larger output would practically swamp ours. 1509. Supposing federation came about, what do you think would happen to such manufactures as yours in New Zealand : would they establish themselves in Australia and leave this colony ? —As we have our plant and buildings here, we should probably have to shut up. Given the same conditions as prevail in Australia as regards labour and the facilities for getting fruit; we could hold our own ; but until the conditions become equal we cannot. 1510. Are there are any advantages which you can see would accrue to New Zealand from federating with Australia ?—I see none ; and I consider that there is no community of feeling between Australia and New Zealand. We are an island and Australia is a great continent, and where there is a great continent there is a friendly feeling between the countries comprising that continent, and there is more feeling between those than there is between them and an outlying island. 1511. Do you think that, in the matter of government, New Zealand would suffer from being twelve hundred miles distant from the Continent of Australia ?—I think it would, because the legislation which would suit New Zealand would not suit Australia, and vice versd. In the matter of railways, harbours, &c, our interests are also entirely diverse. In reference to the question of black labour in Queensland, I can understand that it is very difficult for white people to cultivate the sugar-canes, because there is no draught between the sugar-canes, and the atmosphere is stagnant, and the work is practically impossible, or very trying indeed, to white labour. 1512. Do I take it that your opinion is against New Zealand federating?— Yes; I think it would be a decided disadvantage to New Zealand ; but I look upon the matter from my own point of view, having never studied the political aspect of the question. If it came to war with any other nation I do not see how Australia could help New Zealand. If any nation was going to fight New Zealand they would be strong enough to attack Australia at the same time. 1513. Mr. Leys.] Is the fruit industry of great importance to the settlers of New Zealand ? — It is now a big industry in California. 1514. Is the industry extending now in New Zealand ?—Yes ; the people here are going in for a better class of fruit. In the past the growers have not been growing as good a variety of fruits as they ought to, but the Government experts have done good in explaining to the people how to fight the various pests, and to grow fruit generally, and this has improved the industry. 1515. Do you think we shall be able to develop the industry to such an extent as would not only supply our own wants, but also to export ? —I do not see how we can compete with the fruit in Tasmania, because whatever fruit we can grow here they can also grow there, and California grows enormous quantities ; and they also can fruits in a large way, and send them from 'Frisco to England. 1516. There is still, I understand, a very large field for expansion in the New Zealand jam industry ?—Yes. . 1517. Irrespective of foreign markets?— Yes. 1518. And it will, you think, provide employment to an increasing number of people ?—Yes. 1519. Mr. Luke.] Do you think that the effect of federation would be such that the Nelson District could not compete with Australia ? —Not under the present labour conditions prevailing in Australia. 1520. Is it the question of the factory law that affects the picking of the fruit ?—lt only affects it when it comes into the factory. 1521. Cannot small fruit be kept from Saturday to Monday?—No, because it ferments practically when it is put in the casks. 1522. Do you not think that under federation you could not only supply the market, but with superior appliances and superior fruit, aud by the centralisation of the industry, you could then compete against the big people of Australia?— You cannot centralise here, but you would have to go to Australia in order to get cheap labour. 1523. Mr. Beauchamp.] Would you describe New Zealand as being a good fruit-raising country ? —Yes. 1524. Despite the blight?— Yes; they have the same blights in America that we have in New Zealand, but New Zealand has been more slow in fighting them. The first idea of planting orchards in New Zealand was to dig a hole and put a tree in it. They used to take the largest trees they could get, and, of course, the result has been that their orchards have not been planted properly, and they cannot get the proper results. In America the whole of the ground is first of all trenched, and they take the best varieties of trees. We have the same conditions here as regards the climate as they have in California, and we ought to get satisfactory results. 1525. How do our wages compare with those in Tasmania ?—I know they are cheaper in Tasmania than they are here. 1526. You mentioned the fact that raspberries were offered to you at lfd. at Hobart: what did they want in Nelson for them ?—They would be satisfied with 2Jd. J 527. Is the cheap fruit in Hobart due to the fact that most of the growers have the benefit of
335
A.—4
Conveying their fruit to the market by water-carriage ?—They cannot be grown for Id. We have to pay per pound in Nelson to get the fruit picked. I believe they can manufacture it cheaper in Tasmania than we can. 1528. Is fruit-growing on the increase in New Zealand?—ln my district it is considerably. 1529. How does the fruit grown in Nelson 'compare with the southern fruit in Otago ?—I have not seen their fruit. I have imported black-currants from Otago, but I found they would not carry. 1530. Can the jam-manufacturers in Australia distribute their jams to various ports in New Zealand as cheaply as you can from Nelson ?—About the same. 1531. So that if the labour is cheaper, and they can produce their fruit more cheaply, you are at a serious disadvantage?—We are paying £1 ss. freight from Nelson to Dunedin per ton, as compared with £1 2s. 6d. from Melbourne to Nelson. 1532. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] With regard to the pulp, does it not pay to pulp for export ?—No, not at present prices. The raspberries are worth more here than in London. 1533. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are aware that hops and barley for malting purposes are largely grown in the Nelson District : how would those industries be affected by federation ?—I do not know, because I do not know what quantities are shipped to Australia ; but it would injure the Nelson hop-growers if they had to pay a duty to get into Australia and Tasmania. 1534. Mr. Millar.} Do you know of any hops being shipped from Nelson to England?— There have been some shipped, but I do not know whether the experiment proved a success. Albert Hunter Cooper examined. (No. 121.) 1535. Hon. the Chairman.} What are you?—l am a bootmaker resident at Wellington, and I have been in New Zealand twenty-eight years. 1536. You attend here, I think, as president of the Trades and Labour Council at Wellington ? —Yes. 1537. And you attend as delegate from your association ?—Yes. 1538. How many members are there in that body ? —There are sixty-two delegates, representing about two thousand unionists in Wellington. 1539. Has your council considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ? — It has. 1540. At what decision did they arrive?— They are very strongly against federation. 1541. Is that a unanimous opinion, or is there division about the matter? —There was only one voted in favour of federation. 1542. Do you agree with the views of the majority of the unionists?—l do. 1543. Upon what grounds? —I consider that the intercolonial free-trade which would come about under federation would prove very injurious to the various manufacturing industries. There has been considerable progress in labour legislation during recent years, and the labour organizations which are represented by the trades council are in hopes of making further progress in the future, and they consider that if the barriers of protection were thrown down between this colony and Australia it would tend to nullify to a large extent the advanced legislation we have already got, arid also prevent us making further progress for some years, at all events, in the future. 1544. Have you any hope of the wages in Australia being raised to the level which obtains in New Zealand ? —Not for some considerable time, at all events. 1545. Do you consider that the manufactures would be prejudicially affected by federation?— I do. 1546. Is there any other disadvantage you can mention under federation?—l do not see that we should gain any advantage whatever. 1547. I gather, then, that you and your union are decidedly against federation ?—Yes. John Taylor Dalrymple examined. (No. 122.) 1548. Hon. the Chairman.} You reside in Rangitikei ? —Yes. 1549. What are you ?—I am a farmer and grazier. I have resided in New Zealand for fifty years, and have been engaged in farming pursuits most of that time. 1550. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating or otherwise with Australia ?—Not very much. I have not seen the Commonwealth Bill, and lam not in a position to express a very decided opinion on the matter, further than to say that I think the great benefit that would accrue to New Zealand would be that she would have an open market for her produce ; and, apart from that, it would be a great step in the direction of bringing about free-trade between Great Britain and her colonies. 1551. Do you not think that could be brought about just as well if New Zealand remained out of the Commonwealth ?—I do not think so, because there would be no union. 1552. Do you know what proportion of our agricultural exports go to Australia ?—No. 1553. I suppose you are aware that the greater part of them goes to England ?—Yes; I am aware that there is prohibitive duty on all our agricultural produce in every State but one in Australia which prevents it going there. We could compete with Australia if it were not for that, because we grow a much larger quantity of grain per acre than they can. 1554. Are you aware that a good deal of wheat at the present time comes from the Canterbury District to Auckland ? —Yes. 1555. If there were free-trade with Australia, would there not be a danger of the northern mills being all supplied with wheat from Sydney ?—Perhaps as regards wheat, but the oats is a larger item, and I think we could compete very well with them if there were free-trade. 1556. Do you not know that Victoria is at present a very large exporter of oats ?—That is only one portion of Australia.
A. —4.
336
1557. Have you considered the matter in any other aspect than as regards agriculture ?—I have not. 1558. Do you think federation would be a benefit'?—-I think so. 1559. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do they use any maize in place of oats in Queensland and New South Wales?— They do when they cannot get oats. 1560. Hon. Major Steward.] If the result of federation, by reducing the Customs revenue, were to necessitate the doubling of the land-tax, would the farmers then be benefited?— Not if it were doubled; but I cannot see that that would happen. But if we had free-trade throughout the colonies we might then double the land-tax, and I, for one, should be very glad to pay it. 1561. Mr. Leys.] Do you mean that for free-trade you would be willing to submit to the doubling of the land-tax ?—I would if I could get free-trade ; but when I speak of free-trade Ido not mean free-trade in tobacco and spirits, but only as far as agricultural products are concerned. 1562. Mr. Beauchamp.] In addition to the extra land-tax which might be imposed on the farmers, there is the question of competition from Australian wheat and other products : such being the case, would you still advocate federation?— Yes. I think the quantity we can grow here gives us the advantage. We can grow three times more wheat per acre than they can in Australia, at much the same cost as far as labour is concerned. 1563. We are told that in Australia the cost of cultivating the land, and also harvesting the crop, is very much cheaper than it is here, and that in regard to wheat they produce something like 40,000,000 bushels of wheat per annum as against our 8,000,000 : how does that affect your opinion?— The harvesting is cheaper, but not the cultivation. 1564. I understand that in South Australia they simply scarify the soil before putting in the seed :is that so ?—Not at all. My opinion may be wrong, but it is contrary to that. 1565. Then, you say that the cost of cultivating the land there is as great as it is in New Zealand ?—Yes. Henry Fielder examined. (No. 123.) 1566. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your occupation ?—Cabinetmaker and upholsterer. 1567. You reside in Wellington?— Yes. 1568. How long have you lived in New Zealand ?—About forty-five years. 1569. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—Yes, I have been seriously thinking over it. 1570. Will you give the Commission the conclusion at which you have arrived in the matter? —I have come to the conclusion that if we federate with Australia we give our birthright away. 1571. Then, you are against it ?—Decidedly so, inasmuch as we have got a profitable country, and we are going to give it to a country of which two-thirds is a barren waste. 1572. Looking at it from a manufacturer's point of view, how do you think the manufacturing interest in this colony would be affected if we federated ?—I think practical business-men could hold their own here against any of the decent manufacturers of Australia; but, of course, we would have to contend with Chinamen both in Melbourne and Sydney. In Sydney there are over • seventeen hundred Chinamen employed in our trade, but only in one branch of it. Chinamen do not do upholstering-work, but they manufacture dressers, drawers, sideboards, .tables, and all that sort of thing. But that class of work is not exported from Sydney. Sydney, however, at the present time has two or three white Chinamen working there. One of the witnesses the other day said that he did not see any Chinamen working in Sydney ; but I know that he bought a lot of white Chinamen's furniture to recoup him for his expenses, and he brought it over here, and it is in Wellington now. 1573. What do you mean by " white Chinamen " ?—White men that are worse than Chinese. 1574. In what way ? —The Chinamen will not work all night, and the Chinamen in Sydney take good care that they get a living-wage when working as journeymen. 1575. You think that with federation you would be exposed to that competition ?—Smaller manufacturers would 1576. You spoke of New Zealand manufacturers not being afraid of competing with Australia : how would it be with intercolonial free-trade between New Zealand and Australia ?—lt would never do for us to have free-trade. 1577. In what way would it be disadvantageous to you ? —They could land so much cheaper in Sydney from England than we could in New Zealand, and therefore they could put their stuff on the Sydney market at considerably less cost than we could. In Wellington to-day there are ten or twelve Sydney commercial travellers. 1578. Do you think that other industries besides your own would be prejudicially affected by federation ?—Yes; I think the engineering trade would be very much affected, and the boot trade too. 1579. How about the tailors and drapers ?—Well, the tailoring trade I do not wish to say anything about, but I know we cannot compete against them at present. 1580. Are you aware of any advantages that would accrue to New Zealand through federation? —No; it would be a serious loss to New Zealand. 1581. Do you think New Zealand would progress by herself in contest with the large population of Australia? —Very much indeed, if our labour laws were only a little less stringent. 1582. What do you mean by that? —That we are very much hampered by the labour laws in New Zealand; in fact, if it goes on much longer, in another ten years' time we shall not have such a thing as a New-Zealand-born mechanic; we shall have to import them. 1583. Do you mean that the wages should be less ?—No. . 1584. What is the direction in which the reform should go ?—ln allowing us to pick our men, and pay them what they are worth. We are not allowed to take boys into our employ except one to every five men : what are you going to do with the other 75 per cent, of them ?
A.—4.
337
1585. Have you considered the question of federation in any other aspect than that of trade? —No, not particularly ;we should have a very large influx of undesirable people coming to New Zealand if we federated. 1586. Do you think that people would be attracted from Australia?— Yes. 1587. What by ?—By the profitable country wßich we are in. 1588. You consider that New Zealand should retain her present political independence ? — Yes ; and we can do it. 1589. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Have we not white Chinamen in New Zealand?— Yes, we have one or two. 1590. Would federation affect that question : is not human nature the same whether in New Zealand or Australia ?—Of course, the population is much greater over in Australia, and the one or two "sweaters " here in New Zealand are just a mere trifle to what it is in Australia. They do not affect us so much. 1591. What do you think, from your experience, is the relative value of a New Zealand and an Australian workman ?—-It is always said that when a New Zealand mechanic goes to Australia he gets the preference over any other man. 1592. Would not that be in our favour and to the benefit of our men going over and competing with the Australians ? —Our young men do not like the place well enough. I have forty or fifty men working for me. They repeatedly go over to Australia, but they come back again, and say that a man can live and breathe here. 1593. Then, you think that, on the whole, New Zealand would be able to compete with the Australians in any enterprise they went into ?—Yes ; in fact, in the higher classes of manufacture of goods, especially in our line, we could, vulgarly speaking, " knock spots out of them." 1594. What are you afraid of?—I am afraid of nothing. lam speaking for the others. 1595. If New Zealand can " wipe spots out of them," why should they be afraid of federation ?—They have got all the syndicates and combinations. 1596. Do you not think that in fifty years' time there will be equality of wage throughout New Zealand, whether we federate or not ?—Yes, that is true. 1597. Would not our men have the pull ?—lf we are not making mechanics, where are they going to get the pull ? 1598. Why do we not make mechanics ?—The laws do not allow us. 1599. The Masters and Apprentices Act limits you to what ?—One boy to five men. 1600. Would not the employment of boys tend to drive men out of the trade ?—No ; boys make men. 1601. To what extent is the trade protected through the Customs?—To 25 per cent. 1602. With that protection, and with the protection you have through the transit-charges, are you meeting with any competition from Australia, England, or America in the shape of manufactured furniture ?—With America and Sydney. 1603. Is this furniture from America and Sydney manufactured by Chinese ?—By these white Chinamen. 1604. That competition would be accentuated by free-trade ? —Yes. 1605. And with cheaper wages ruling in Australia they could make up furniture and supply New Zealand to the detriment of the New Zealand manufacturers ?—Yes. I may state that a first-class mechanic in England and Australia can earn better wages than in New Zealand. Our standard wage is 9s. a day. I pay 10s. and 11s. to a decent man. I sent over to Australia to get men, and they wanted 10s. to 11s. a day to come over. It is only those who are kicking up a row about the wages that cannot earn these wages. 1606. In regard to white Chinese in the colony, does not our labour legislation prevent such a set of men working? —You cannot stop a man working all night and all Sunday. 1607. At that sort of business run by one or two men? —Yes ; the proprietors of shops. 1608. The amount of stuff they turn out would not be felt by men of your standing in business ?—No. 1609. As regards wages, do you pay higher than in Australia, generally speaking ?—Generally speaking, the wages are higher here than in Australia. 1610. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the labour laws have been injurious in any respect except in the restriction of apprentices ? —Yes, in many ways. 1611. Mention some? —There is this conciliation business that is carried on. We are never safe. Only last week a young fellow was working for me who is nineteen years old and has been eighteen months at the trade. He started with a man in this city at 7s. 6d. a week. He left and came to me, and I gave him 12s. 6d. per week, and last Christmas I raised him up to £1 16s. per week. His union came to me and have demanded that I get a permit for him to work, and that I pay him 7s. per day. He has only been two years at the trade, and you cannot make a mechanic in two years. 1612. Has your trade been before the Conciliation Board?—lt has. 1613. And are you working under an award of the Arbitration Court ?—Yes. 1614. Upon the whole, was that award a fair one? —In some ways to the men, not to the masters. 1615. But you say you could hold your own in certain work ?—ln high-class work I could hold my own with any man in the colony. 1616. Is it desirable that we should produce that low class of work? —Certainly not. 1617. Are we not likely to produce it if we put no check on sweating by our labour laws?— No, Ido not think so. Our men here do not care much about sweating. 1618. As a matter of fact, were there not eases of boy-labour in a great many trades before it was placed under restraint ?—No, Ido not think so. I reckon that we ought to have three boys to five men. I have forty-five mechanics in my factory, and only one boy. 43—A. 4. "
A.—4
338
1619. Why have you not more ? —They are not worth picking up. Boys know they have got the law made for them and they will stand by it. 1620. It would appear from that that the trouble arises from the intractability of the boys themselves ?—Yes. 1621. Is that not because they can get so many openings? —I suppose it is. 1622. If you could get really industrious boys, would you put them on? —Yes ; I would put on half a dozen to-morrow. 1623. What do you think is the condition of the industrial population of Australia compared with that of the working-population of New Zealand? Do you think they have equal comfort, or, on the average, are so well paid ?—No, not to take them on the whole ; in Australia they are not as well paid and are not housed as well as in New Zealand. 1624. Do you think that the effect .of free-trade would be to lower the condition of labour here? —Yes, very quickly. 1625. Hon. Major Steward.] Have you any competition from America in your trade?— Chiefly chairs and rolled-top desks. The whole of the furniture that is sent to New Zealand is not very great in quantity; it is not serious competition, and is the lowest class of goods—a class of goods that would not sell in any respectable shop. B. Mblland. (No. 124.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. E. Melland as his evidence, as he could not appear for examination : — " I have taken considerable interest in the subject of Australasian federation since the idea was first mooted, but more from the point of view of comparative politics than from that of the actual financial benefit or otherwise to New Zealand. It is a matter for regret that this colony was not represented at the second Conference at which the Commonwealth Bill was framed, as the influence of our representatives would no doubt have been in the direction of maintaining the power of appeal to the Privy Council inviolate, and would also in several minor matters have tended to improve the Bill from our point of view. To give one instance only: Instead of the Maoris being placed on the same level as the black fellows of Australia, it might have been possible to have had New Zealand excepted from the cla.use which forbids the Native races being counted in the population for Federal purposes. I will not, however, dwell on these minor objections to the Act, because I have come to the conclusion that on the whole it would not be wise for New Zealand to join the Commonwealth. Of course, there is much to be said on both sides, but I will endeavour to be brief in discussing the pros and cons, as they appear to me, on the lines on which most of your witnesses have been examined. lam surprised to see that apparently a majority of our New Zealand manufacturers, both employers and workmen, are evidently unwilling to run the risks of free-trade with Australia. When in Australia last winter I listened more 'than once to Melbourne and Sydney men discussing federation, and nothing struck me more than their almost unanimous agreement that climate is of the first importance in this matter, and that men would do as much in Melbourne in eight hours as in Sydney in ten. If this is so, surely our climate here should give us a similar advantage over Melbourne. Moreover, climatic advantages of this sort become intensified with each succeeding generation, and are therefore of the greatest importance. Even now I am unwilling to believe that our workmen are inferior to those of Australia. I consider that we have already proved our superiority in regard to woollen manufactures. On the whole, while federation would no doubt cause some dislocation of industries — some being more profitably carried on in one colony and some in another — I believe that the balance of advantage from the manufacturing point of view is in favour of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth. There can be no doubt that from a farmer's point of view federation with Australia would be a distinct gain. What this gain would amount to it is impossible to estimate, even roughly, until we know what the Federal tariff is to be. With freetrade we should export oats to all ports of Australia, and probably dairy produce to the northern colonies ; with a low tariff we should still send over large quantities of oats in dry seasons ; while a high tariff would practically kill the trade, as maize and other substitutes would be largely used. Under free-trade with Australia, also, our fish-export trade would be benefited, and the fruit which we now import in the face of a high tariff would reach the consumers at a much lower price than at present. 1 cannot see that union with Australia would benefit us in respect to defence, financially or otherwise. What we need is to look to ourselves for the encouragement of Volunteering and rifle-practice in time of peace, and to England for the presence of one or two cruisers in time of war. As your knowledge and calculations on the subject of finance must be far more complete and accurate than my own, I will say nothing except to point out that much of the financial benefit this colony would receive from free-trade with Australia would be neutralised by the extra cost of government. Ido not think our own Government would cost much less than it does now, while our share of the Federal Government would be a large and no doubt constantly increasing sum. The advantage from the political and social aspect of the question is no doubt of more importance than all the others, and it is, at the same time, the one which shows the most formidable balance of argument against the proposed Federation. The Commonwealth Act, although admirably adapted for the purposes of Australia, implies a union far too close to be desirable —I had almost said practicable—between countries separated by twelve hundred miles of sea, and so widely different in many ways. No doubt centralisation of legislation, especially on matters of first importance, has many obvious advantages and very few drawbacks ; but centralisation of administration tends to bureaucracy and extravagance, and is, moreover, fatal to the true idea of a democracy. John Stuart Mill long since pointed out how essential local administrative institutions are to the political education of the people. Of course, it will be said that the Federal Government is only taking over the Defence, Customs, and Post and Telegraph Departments, and
339
A.—4
that these are safeguards to protect the States. But, passing over the fact that the Customs duties would doubtless be arranged to meet the wishes of Victoria and New South Wales rather than of New Zealand, and that we should often find it very inconvenient to have our post and telegraphs administered from some remote town in Australia, I should like to ask, as a political student, what are these safeguards worth ? There is no written Constitution that cannot be interpreted in different ways, and that cannot be widened in its scope by Supreme Court decisions. In the words of John Morley, ' It is the well-known nature of every political assemby to increase its powers '; and if we look to Switzerland, Canada, or the United States we see the Central Government continually gaining power at the expense of the federated States, and in spite of safeguards. Similarly with the Australian Commonwealth, I have no doubt that the constant tendency would be towards the further centralisation of administration, and that this would be very detrimental to the best interests of New Zealand. On the whole, therefore, though I grieve for the New Zealand farmer, who would most probably profit by federation, and though I think the fears of our manufacturers and of their workmen are baseless, still I consider a wise caution should deter us from sinking our own individuality and becoming, politically, a part of a country so far away and so different from our own. I will give only one instance of how we possibly may be affected by merging our political identity in that of Australia. The idea of what is loosely called ' Imperial federation ' has long been 'in the air," and may some day be an accomplished fact. Each colony is to have a representative, either in a reformed House of Lords or in a new Imperial Chamber to be specially created for the purpose. As we are at present, New Zealand would have its own representative, but if we were a State of the Commonwealth I presume we should only have a small share of the representative or representatives to be nominated by the Federal Government. I will not follow the argument further or into more detail, as I am well aware that my opinions have no particular value or novelty, and may, indeed, have been already laid before you, and more forcibly expressed, by other witnesses." John Boss. (No. 125.) Mr. Boss, resident partner of Sargood, Son, and Ewen, New Zealand, in lieu of being examined, handed in the following memorandum on the question of federation :— " In common with most of our people, on the first flush the sentiment of federation seemed fetching, but on reflection, and looked at commercially, I came to the conclusion that it would place us at a disadvantage in many ways. Inasmuch as New Zealand is a self-contained colony, with a grand climate, numerous resources, fertile soil, and a vigorous and robust race, hence it is quite capable of standing alone and working out its own destiny, whilst any advantages to be gained by federation are distant and problematical. In fact, lam of opinion that, for a considerable time at least, our manufacturing industries would suffer severely. Even now we find it difficult to hold our own in many lines, and with a low uniform tariff competition would be still keener, and lead to an all-round reduction in workmen's wages, so as to assimilate with the low rates ruling in congested cities like Sydney and Melbourne, not to speak of the Home-country, America, and Germany. lam strongly in favour of workmen getting a fair wage for a fair day's work, but it must be obvious even to the unions that a fixity for a reasonable period, and at a rate that permits of fair competition, is imperative, as uncertainty as to price of labour, constant chopping and changing, and asking for more—like Oliver Twist—hinders progress, locks up capital, opens the door to outside competition, and spells ruin to existing industries and to the workmen themselves. The progress motto should be on the principle of the three Fs—"Fair wage"; " fixity of tenure " ; " freedom of contract." The latter would give merit a show against the deadlevelism which unions impose on their members. Nor do I see that our agricultural productions would advantage much by federation, as it is only when hard pressed through droughts, &c, that Australia buys of New Zealand. Hence, under similar circumstances, they would not shut their doors against us buying in the nearest and cheapest market in the future, simply because New Zealand declined to enter the Commonwealth. A point worthy of consideration is that New Zealand holds a unique position among the colonies—apart from her climatic, resourceful, and racial advantages—in that her advanced legislation, grappling with and giving effect to political and social problems for the betterment of humanity, has brought her prominently and favourably before the world as eminently progressive. There is no reason why she should sacrifice this proud position. Only now is New Zealand beginning to reap the full fruits and advantages of years of hard toil and much expenditure by the early settlers, and wise legislation by many able statesmen at the helm, since its initiation as a colony. We should not, therefore, lightly barter our independence, right of self-government, and merge and lose our identity in that of,the Commonwealth of Australia. I further hold that, in the interests of Australia and New Zealand, they should not federate, as a healthy friendly rivalry acts as a stimulus, and will aid the progress of both politically, commercially, and socially; and should outside trouble arise they will loyally stand by each other. Reciprocity should meet all that is required. Finally, the importance of this question of federation will be a sufficient excuse for my venturing to offer a suggestion to the Boyal Commission—namely, that, to my mind, it would greatly facilitate their work of inquiry if the people were educated in advance of the Commissioners' sittings by publishing in the newspapers the nature and scope of their inquiries, and giving a short synopsis of the salient points of the Federal Constitution ; the basis upon which New Zealand, would be admitted and stand; its power and representation in the Federal Parliament; and the power the Federal Parliament holds of taxing the various States to make good deficiencies in the Federal revenue, and for levying money to carry on Federal works, &c, in all States. To federate with our present limited knowledge of commitment is too risky, bearing in mind that, once wedded, divorce would be difficult. Better wait developments by Australian Federal Parliament, even if it costs us more to join in later on."
A.—4
340
Charles Phaeazyn. (No. 126.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. Charles Pharazyn as his evidence, as he could not appear for examination : — " Featherston, 27th February, 1901. " As it is impossible for me to attend and give evidence before the Commission, I trust I may be allowed to express my views in writing. I can really sum up the conclusions at which I have arrived in the one word ' wait.' lam as strong an advocate of the principle of federation as any one living, but I regard it as very like the question of matrimony —marriage is desirable in itself, but any prudent man attaches great importance to the question as to when it will be wise for him to choose a wife. There is one important difference between matrimony and federation—viz., that in the former-the bond will certainly be severed by death, and possibly by divorce, but with regard to the latter the step, once taken, is irrevocable. It appears to me that the difficulties of the States in Australia are enormous before they will get everything to work smoothly, and that these difficulties would be much increased if the peculiar conditions of New Zealand were allowed to complicate the problem. The wise course appears to be to wait events in the most friendly spirit, making it quite clear that we have every wish to join when it becomes desirable to all concerned for us to do so. In the meantime there are a number of questions on which common action with the Commonwealth should be easily arranged—such as defence, post and telegraphs, and possibly finance. If this can be done in a thoroughly friendly spirit we may gradually grow together, and the first act of joining may become very simple. The great secret of success in the English character is that in great things we are content to leave things to a process of evolution, which, though perhaps slow, is far more certain to be satisfactory in the end than any precipitate action. I trust that the Commission will advocate this course in its report, and particularly that it will see the importance of making it quite clear that it is merely a question with us of the right time to do what we fully recognise will in all probability be ultimately the right thing to do." John Duncan. (No. 127.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. John Duncan as his evidence, as he could not appear for examination : — " Unfortunately your sittings in Wellington are coincident with the despatch of the San Francisco mail, which always entails a very considerable amount of work at this season of the year ; and I find it quite impossible to attend to give evidence before the Commission, as my time is more than fully occupied with the work above referred to. I had not devoted much attention to the question of federation beyond feeling that it would be prudent on the part of New Zealand to wait until such time the regulations of the Australian Commonwealth had been settled, so that it might be seen clearly to what we were committing ourselves, instead of dealing with the matter now, when it is quite uncertain what regulations may be framed by the Commonwealth. But, if the figures given to the Commission by Mr. Nicholas Eeid are correct, then it is difficult for me to see how you can avoid pledging the country to federation at as short a date as possible, if the object of your considerations is to advance the interests of the greater against the lesser number. Mr. Eeid indicated that under federation there would be a reduction of duty on sugar, salt, tobacco, boots, &c, to the amount of about £550,000 —in other words, a reduction of the duties on the necessaries of life to the extent named. Now, this boon would be reaped almost entirely by the small farmers, the artisans, and the labouring-classes, and would represent a very large saving in the cost of their living. For some years past it has been given as a reason why wages should be higher in New Zealand than Australia that the cost of living here was considerably more than in the other colony; and, admitting that to be correct, you will see that if such a reduction in the cost of living here was made as is indicated by Mr. Reid the argument above quoted would cease to have effect, and, whether there was a levelling-up of the Australian rates of pay or a slight levelling-down on the part of New Zealand, we might hope to secure an equal wage in the entire Federation. This would do away with all the difficulties which we have had in securing an outside market for the labours of our artisans ; and, given equality of wage and equality of cost of living, I see no reason why New Zealand should have anything to dread in joining the Federation. In point of fact, with its better climate, its more productive soil, and better type of settler, I should think that it would be a mere question of time when it would be able to take a leading position in the Federation." William Thompson Glasgow examined. (No. 127 a.) 1626. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your official position, Mr. Glasgow?— Secretary and Inspector of Customs, and Secretary for the Marine Department. 1627. We want some evidence as to the probable effect upon the revenue of the colony if the Commonwealth Government imposed a tariff of, say, 15 per cent, on goods that are exported from New Zealand to Australia?—l suppose you mean on goods that in New Zealand are liable to an ad valorem duty, such as textiles and apparel. 1628. And produce too ?—That is not liable to an ad valorem rate of duty—for instance, the duty on grain in New Zealand is 9d. a cental. 1629. If our duties that are at the rate of 20 per cent, were reduced to 15 per cent., what would be the loss ?—The loss would be very considerable. 1630. Supposing it was a uniform duty of 15 per cent., what would the loss be?—Do you mean on goods liable in New Zealand to ad valorem rates of duty ? 1631. Yes?—l will furnish a return showing the result. [See end of evidence.] I would like to say that under the New Zealand tariff a duty is charged on almost everything that is imported at 20 per cent., for revenue purposes, on goods that are not manufactured in the colony; but the tariff of Victoria discriminates to a large extent. For instance, we charge duty on
341
A.—4
ail hardware and ironmongery at 20 per cent., but in Victoria only metal manufactures that are manufactured in the colony are chargeable with duty. Cutlery, for instance, is free. If the Federal Government adopts the principle underlying the Victorian tariff—the protective principle —it will increase our loss of revenue, because a large quantity of goods on which we get 20 per cent, will be free if we federate. A rough estimate can be made on simple lines, just simply taking our present ad valorem duties and calculating what they would amount to at 15 per cent. 1632. Can you tell us, approximately, what is the revenue derived in the year on sugar imported from Queensland ?—£31,633. 1633. And on the sugar from Fiji?—£lol,3lß. 1634. How would our federating with Australia affect that duty ?— We should have to admit the Queensland refined sugar free, and we would probably get all our sugar from there. 1635. Hon. Mr. Boiven.~] What would be the actual effect ?—lt would shut up the Auckland refinery, and seriously affect the island trade. 1636. Hon. the Chairman.] We had it put to us by one witness that we should lose over £100,000 duty :is that so ?—I think so. 1637. Why? — Because we would get all the sugar from Queensland. I think that the establishment by the Union Company of a regular service with Fiji has been brought about by the development of the sugar trade ; and I think also that statistics will show that the export trade from New Zealand to the islands has grown a great deal since sugar began to come from Fiji, because the company do not like their boats to go back empty, and they place the freight as low as possible in order to insure getting a cargo. 1638. Hon. Major Steward.} Then, do I understand that you think we shall practically lose the whole of the duty that we are getting on the sugar now ?—Yes, as far I can see at present. Next to Fiji and Queensland, the largest quantity of sugar is imported from New South Wales. It is probably refined sugar. 1639. Hon. the Chairman.'] Just tell us, please, what sum we should lose on other articles ? — I take it, Mr. Chairman, that nearly all the sugar consumed in New Zealand would, if we federated with Australia, come from Australia, and we should get no duty on it at all. At present we get £156,000 revenue from imported sugar. There is a very small quantity, probably crystallized sugar, imported from the United Kingdom, and there is a'little imported from Victoria, Hongkong, and China. 1640. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Is there not some imported from Mauritius ? —No. 1641. Hon. the Chairman.] What would be the loss of duty, if any, on spirits imported from Australia under federation?— The Victorian rate of duty is 14s. a gallon, and, assuming that the Federal tariff will be at that rate, instead of 16s. a gallon, which is the New Zealand rate, I hand in a return showing the loss in respect to spirits, wine, and tobacco. [See end of evidence.] 1642. Could you give us some idea of what the loss of revenue to the colony would be through joining the Commonwealth ? —lt would be very difficult without making some assumption as to what the tariff of the Commonwealth would be. 1643. Could you give any idea of what the loss of duty would be to this colony through the manufactures from Australia coming in free, and which now pay duty ?—I do not think it would amount to very much. Assuming that we had to admit the present dutiable Australian fruit free, that would be a serious item. 1644. They would be free ?—And would Australian wines be free ? 1645. Yes"?—An important element comes in there : if Australian wine comes in free we will get very much less wine from England and Spain. I think they will practically shut out the foreign wines except those of an expensive kind. Then, there is a probable loss on tobacco of a large amount. 1646. Do you think there would be a loss of £100,000 on tobacco ?—I hardly think it would amount to that, but I think it could be fairly well arrived at. We know from the Victorian statistics the total amount on which import duty and the amount on which excise is paid, and we may assume that if the same advantages exist in New Zealand there would be the same proportion of Australian tobacco used. I think that would be the most reliable way of getting at the loss. 1647. You say you believe the loss on spirits would be £100,000? —I have not made any calculation at all. 1648. Do you think it probable or possible that there would be such a loss ?—lt seems to me to be a very large amount. 1649. What are the matters on which you suggest we should inquire in the other colonies in respect to the tariffs there ?—The difficulty seems to me to be this: that there are very few lines of produce of Australia charged with duty in New Zealand that are imported to any extent into New Zealand. Those lines are : wine, spirits, fruit, tobacco, coal, bark, and timber. Those are the outstanding exports of the indigenous produce of Australia. 1650. What are the indigenous articles we export to Australia?— Nearly all agricultural produce, and animal matter, such as frozen and preserved meats. 1651. Mr. Leys.] I would like to ask you, Mr. Glasgow, whether our tariff, taking it all round, is not very much higher than the Victorian tariff—that is to say, is it not in result likely to draw from the people a very much larger amount of revenue than the Victorian tariff ?—That is so. 1652. Table 65 of " Coghlan's Statistics " shows the amount per head of the various colonies contributed to the revenue through the Customs—import duties and excise : In Victoria the amount per head is £1 195., whilst for New Zealand it is £2 18s. Id. per head; so that really if the Victorian tariff were adopted we should lose 19s. Id. per head of our Customs revenue. How much per head of the population do the reductions made last year represent? —I make it 3s. I might
A.—4
342
say that, notwithstanding the reductions made last session, the revenue will be higher this year than what it was last year. 1653. Is it the case, Mr. Glasgow, that New Zealand draws a very much larger amount per head of population from the Customs and excise duties than is levied in the Commonwealth as a whole ?—Yes. 1654. Can you tell us from recent statistics the amount of Customs and excise duties actually received by the Commonwealth ?—I have no doubt the figures given by Coghlan are correct. The total import and excise duties for 1899-1900 in the Commonwealth amounted to £7,629,027. 1655. How much did that average per head of the population of the Commonwealth ?— £2 Is. 1656. Was that amount very much below the amount levied in New Zealand per head?— The amount for New Zealand is £2 18s. Id. per head, so that it is 17s. Id. less than New Zealand's. 1657. I notice from a statement made by Mr. Barton that the Federal Government contemplate raising from £8,000,000 to £8,500,000 for Federal and State purposes : can you tell us what amount per head he would have to raise per head of the population over the population of the Commonwealth to obtain that amount, on the basis of the population for 1899-1900 ?—Taking the amount required at £8,500,000, the taxation per head would be £2 ss. Bd. instead of £2 Is. 1658. Can you inform us what loss there would be to New Zealand under federation if a Customs tariff in that proportion were brought into force ?—lt amounts to £469,000 approximately. 1659. Do you think that is, approximately, a fair way of estimating the loss of revenue which is likely to accrue to New Zealand, under federation ? —I should like a little time to think about it; but as far as I can see at present it is a very fair way. 1660. Can you suggest any other way?— Not at present. 1661. Mr. Beauchamp.] I suppose it would be quite impossible to form anything like an approximately correct idea of the amount of loss we should be likely to sustain through inter-free-trade with Australia in respect to the duties on spirits and tobacco produced in Australia ?—lt would be extremely difficult unless we have some means of estimating what amount of Australian produce, tobacco, and spirits would come in under the new conditions. 1662. Mr. Millar.] Under the Commonwealth Act you are aware that the Federal Parliament can take the power to deal with the lighthouses, and that we might have to hand over to them the whole of our light dues : is there any profit from the Marine Department now ?—No. 1663. So that there would be no loss of revenue from that source ?—No loss of revenue. 1664. Can you differentiate the amount of excise duty from the Customs duty ?—Yes. 1665. Could that be done in regard to the other Australian Colonies as well?— Yes; it is given in the statistics, and I will show it in the return. 1666. Mr. Roberts,] In addition to the loss on sugar, a loss would also occur on molasses and saccharine?— Yes ; I think all the molasses imported would come from Australia. 1667. And you also think that the loss of duty on the importation of Australian wines would be £11,600?— Yes. 1668. Can you form any opinion as to what the probable loss on tobacco would be ?—No ; but, as I said, I could make a calculation. 1669. Could' you make a similar statement with regard to spirits ? —You see, I am met with the difficulty I stated before ; I do not know whether to take the Victorian excise rate or that of New South Wales. 1670. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is there any duty on raw sugar imported from Fiji to any part of Australia ?—Yes ;. 3s. raw, 4s. refined. 1671. Hon. the Chairman.] Part of the duty of this Commission is to endeavour to ascertain whether a reciprocal treaty could be entered into between Australia and New Zealand in respect to certain articles of commerce : could you suggest to the Commission the lines on which they should proceed ?—lt seems to me that if we abolished the duty on wine and fruit, and possibly genuine brandy distilled from Australian grapes or wine, we should get in return free entry for our agricultural produce, or get it in at a reduced rate. 1672. Would we not be giving them a great deal more than they would be giving us ?—Yes. By agricultural produce I mean hams, bacon, malt, grain, cheese, butter. It seems to me that we have more to send to them than they have to send to us. 1673. In quantity, not in value ?—ln value. 1674. If they have a good season in Australia Victoria can produce all that they want ?—I still think New Zealand would be able to compete with Victoria. But really this is a matter upon which I do not think I should express an opinion. 1675. Mr. Roberts.] Do you think there is any possibility of a reciprocal treaty on any other basis to include only the natural products of the soil? —Yes; I think if woollens and blankets were entirely free in Australia there would be a large export to Australia. 1676. It would open a very dangerous door ? —They would demand reciprocity for their manufactures. 1677. Is there any other suggestion you can make in regard to a reciprocal treaty ?—Beer, and the natural products of the soil, and woollens and blankets—that is all. 1678. Mr. Leys.] Can you give us any estimate of the extent to which the Federal Government would relieve the revenues of New Zealand by the departments they would take over and pay out of the Customs and excise duties which they would be entitled to take under the Commonwealth Act ? —I could only speak of the Customs Department. The cost of collecting the Customs and excise duty in Victoria is £3 percent.; in New Zealand it is just about £1 10s. per cent. 1679. Can you explain the difference ?—Greater economy. The salaries here are lower. The head of the Customs in Victoria receives £1,200; I only get £650, and I manage the Marine Department also. In Victoria they have a Marine Board for the marine work.
A.— 4
343
1680. Do you know whether this higher scale prevails in New South Wales as well as in Victoria?—l think so. The officers are very much better paid there. I think the Collector gets £1,000 a year. 1681. Do you assume from that that the Federal administration will be very much more costly than the New Zealand Civil Service administration? —I think it is a fair assumption. 1682. Hon. Major Steward.] Referring to the suggestion that it might be possible to enter into a reciprocity treaty to take sugar as one of the items to be admitted free, do you not think there would be serious difficulty if we admitted Queensland sugar free as regards our relations with Fiji, inasmuch as Fiji is penalised to the extent of -Jd. per pound ?—I pointed out that it would seriously affect the Fiji trade—l mean the trade from New Zealand to Fiji. 1683. Mr. Roberts.] In mentioning the article fruit, which might fairly be included in a treaty, did you include dried fruits V —No ; but the question of dried fruits is a matter in connection with South Australia. The imports of raisins and currants from there is very small at present. 1684. Can you tell the Commission why currants are assessed at such a large duty—equal to tobacco ?—lt arises from the fact that the duty of 2d. per pound was imposed when the value was greater than now. 1685. In reference to wines and brandy, you would only propose, under a reciprocal treaty, that the provincial duty should be made in their favour ? —Yes ; I do not think that these should be free altogether. 1686. What allowance do you think should be made in favour of Australian wines and brandy —half-duty? — Not more than that. 1687. Hon. the Chairman.'] Is there anything you can suggest to us that you have not been asked upon?—Of course, the Commission will take into account the interests of the local production in connection with fruit and wine. Return op Estimated Loss op Revenue. Estimated loss of revenue in New Zealand in the event of a Federal tariff operating in New Zealand, altering present ad valorem rates to 15 per cent. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... £152,000 Estimated loss of revenue in New Zealand on spirits, wine, and tobacco on the assumption that the import and excise rates of duty would be the same in New Zealand as now in Victoria — £ Spirits ... ... ... ... ... ... 127,000 Wine ... ... ... ... ... ... 12,000 Tobacco ... ... ... ... ... ... 65,000 204,000 Estimated loss of revenue in New Zealand on fresh fruit if Australian fruit is admitted free ... ... ... ... ... .. £4,000
AUCKLAND. Monday, 4th Maech, 1901. Hon. William Rolleston examined. (No. 128.) 1. Hon. the Chairman.] You reside in the Provincial District of Canterbury?— Yes. 2. And you have been for many years a member of the colonial Legislature ?—Yes. 3. And a Cabinet Minister?— Yes, for some years. 4. We understand that you have taken considerable interest in this question of Australian federation, and you have been good enough to hand a paper to the Commission on the subject ?— Yes ; I was afraid I shculd be prevented by circumstances from appearing before the Commission, and I ventured to place a statement before them, and I am here to-day to ask that they will take that as the statement of my views, and I will also answer any questions, so far as I am able, that may be put to me. 5. You would like to put this statement in and have it read?— Yes. It is a statement of my views on the question of Imperial and Australian federation prepared by me when I was a member of the House of Representatives. I submit it, with some modifications, to the Commission :— At the time of the Jubilee celebrations I put forward the view I then held of Imperial federation, and Ido not know that I can explain myself better now. The federation of the Empire, as Mr. Chamberlain wisely says, must be a matter of gradual development. Common interests and common obligations may grow up simultaneously with the fostering of a feeling of kinship between the colonies, and concurrently with the growth of a desire for closer union with the Mothercountry. The greatest of common obligations, that of defence, has been the basis of all federal unions in the past. We have advanced a stage towards federal union by the recognition of our responsibilities •■in this respect, and by the fact of our contributing to the maintenance of the Imperial navy. Whether any, and what, approach can be made through trade, which is the greatest of common interests, remains to be seen. The problem will require a good deal of patience in its solution. Our trade and commerce, of course, depend on the maintenance of the naval supremacy of Great Britain. The maintenance of local independence and autonomy, together with the promotion of a closer alliance with the Mother-country, are the great principles which have to
A.—4
344
be kept in view in helping forward the growth of the Imperial tie. We must be satisfied with establishing common bonds of union from time to time as occasion arises. As has recently been the case with the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, on which an Australian Chief Justice has been placed, some sort of representative Council will, as Mr. Chamberlain suggests, grow up to represent the common obligations and interests which we create ; but so far no suggestion of a practical character has been made which would bring federation under the Imperial parliamentary system or make it a mechanical union. Eepresentation on the Board of Trade suggests itself as a step towards dealing with the common interests of trade, and on a Council in connection with the War Department for dealing with the common obligations of Imperial defence. The idea which has been mooted of representatives in the Upper Chamber of the constituent parts of the Empire, though at first sight appearing attractive, has not taken practical hold of men's minds, and I do not think it likely that it will. The connection which is maintained through the appointment of colonial Governors by the Queen, and the fact that our legislation is in a number of matters subject to the approval of the Imperial authorities, constitutes for the present a very real bond of union, both in legislation and in administration. It is possible to conceive a considerable change in the condition of this bond as independent Commonwealths grow in strength and changes come over the whole system of representative and Responsible Government. The change need not weaken the ties of kinship, but the possibility would seem to indicate the wisdom of maintaining the Federal tie as general and as comprehensive as may be. It need not be the less real because it is more general, and the tension may be less in the event of strained relations. Mr. Freeman, speaking of a federal union, says each of the members of the union must be wholly independent in those matters which concern each member only. On the other hand, all must be subject to a common power in those matters which concern the whole body of the members collectively. Thus each member will fix for itself the laws of its jurisprudence, and even the details of its own political Constitution, and it will do this not as a matter of privilege or concession from any higher power, but as a matter of absolute right, by virtue of its inherent power as an independent Commonwealth ; but in all matters that concern the general body the sovereignty of the several members will cease. Each member is perfectly independent within its v own sphere, but there is another sphere in which its independence—or, rather, its separate existence—ceases. The tie between Imperial Great Britain and her colonies or groups of colonies may vary, and will vary, in the closeness of this bond, according to circumstance, local autonomy being an essential condition in each case. Africa will probably be a group of federated republics under the suzerainty of the Empire, with common tariffs, railway connections, and post and telegraphs, appeals in law, common coinage, and the first and foremost link of common defence. They will probably have common bonds between themselves other than those they have with Great Britain, but there will be the same Federal ties with the Empire —ties which will tend to the maintenance of peace, and the cementing of the union of English-speaking people such as obtain between the Canadian and Australian groups and the Mother-country. You will gather from what I have said my views as to Imperial federation. It is not, and cannot be, so far as we can see, at present to any extent an administrative or parliamentary union. But it is a tie, uniting people speaking the same language, with the same sympathies and the same aspirations, giving effect by treaty and otherwise to their common efforts in the interests of peace and progressive civilisation. This, I take it, is the ideal which patriots and statesmen and philanthropists have in view. As to the establishment of an Australian Commonwealth, including New Zealand, I cannot give an unqualified answer. It is, I think, to be regretted that the original proposal of a Federal Council with well-defined functions was not more favourably regarded. For purposes of defence and the common interests involved in trade, and a number of other subjects, it would tend to the advantage of both Australia and New Zealand that there should be a Federal tie mutually agreed upon, but without any surrender of local autonomy. This is the same tie, differing only in degree and closeness, which will ultimately obtain between different colonies, or groups of colonies, and the Home-country. The defence question has already been put on a fair footing. I cannot believe that, as between Australia and New Zealand, common interests cannot be regulated by commercial treaty. Federation in this sense I regard as a most desirable thing. But there seems to be generally a good deal of confusion in the minds of those who are discussing the question. Federation is " a blessed word," conveying a grand undefined idea. Till recently Ido not think a dozen members of Parliament had read or studied the Commonwealth Bill, and even now there is a general haziness as to the precise effect of a number of its provisions. This is not unnatural, considering the necessity for compromises which arose after the adoption of the resolutions upon which it was originally framed. The history of the Bill is too long to enter upon now. It is, on the whole, a wonderful monument of ability and patience, and, with the exception of the confusion arising from the compromises I have referred to (principally in the financial clauses), it is a model of lucid arrangement. The question, however, is, what is the general effect of this Bill as bearing upon the possibility or advisableness of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth? I may premise my remarks under this head by saying that it appears to me a pity that New Zealand was not represented in the final Conference. Both as a matter of expediency and of courtesy between two neighbouring colonies it would have been desirable that one or two of our leading men should have been there. It is not impossible that in certain large questions like those of defence and trade a common understanding might have been come to, the terms of which might have been embodied in the Act, without committing New Zealand to come in under the same parliamentary government. If lam not»,mistaken, the Canadian Constitution provides for a difference in the terms of union in respect of several of the States. I think, too, that it is a pity that the Parliament of New Zealand should not have set up a Committee of the best men of both Houses during the last session to inquire into the whole subject. It would have prevented any possibility of the idea arising among Australian statesmen that we were unsympathetic with them, or that we would not go great lengths to cultivate the kindliest relations with them, and the closest union consistent with the maintenance of our
345
A.—4.
independence and existence as an autonomous State. The objects of the Bill were defined, I think, in one of the drafts in an early stage as being to " enlarge the powers of self-government of the people of Australia, and to create a Federal Government." (I quote from memory.) The ultimate outcome of the Bill is rather a unification or amalgamation of the local Governments of Australia than the creation of a Federal union, in which other countries like New Zealand, desiring to maintain their own autonomy, could advantageously join. Whether the Bill will work out advantageously to Australia I have not sufficient knowledge to form a trustworthy opinion. Nothing but experience can show. It properly recognises that universal suffrage is the only permanent basis upon which the democracy of the future can be built. Its framers also seem to recognise that the hope of a democracy rests with localisation of Government, keeping the people in close touch with their Government, and giving them a potent influence in the administration. I approach this subject with natural instincts on the side of the maintenance of the power of the States (the democratic side in America). The provisions for the constitution of the Senate are supposed to secure this by giving each original State an equal number of Senators (six), whether the State be great or small, but the provisions of the Bill defining the thirty-nine articles of legislation, in respect of which there are powers concurrent with those of the Federal Parliament and the State Legislatures, giving at the same time an overriding power to the Federal Legislature (sections 106-108), leave doubts as to how far the safeguards may ultimately prove effective. It will, I think, prove necessary very soon to bring under review the clauses defining the mode of altering the Constitution, and when once the central power is instituted the tendency will be in the direction of overriding the local Governments by the Federal authority. Lord Tennyson, in South Australia, and Sir Henry Norman both seem to be impressed with this danger. I observe that Mr. Barton thinks it a matter for congratulation that " the provisions of the Commonwealth Constitution as to proposed amendments are simpler and easier than those of the Swiss, and are undoubtedly more liberal and less cumbrous than those of either the German or the American Federal Constitution." The same is true of the Constitution of Canada, which can only be amended by the Imperial Parliament. There, too, the range of subjects to be dealt with conclusively by the States is larger and more clearly laid down. The mixed system of finance under which the States and the Commonwealth dip their hands into the same purse will have the tendency to promote conflict between the local and Federal Government, and, as was the case in New Zealand as between the colony and the provinces, the central power will be likely to prevail. Federation should rather be the delegation by groups of States of some of their common functions to a central power, as occasion arises, than the constitution of a central authority with powers of overruling and absorbing the legislation and administration of the States. Of the clauses with regard to finance and trade I do not profess to see the issue. One of the foremost of Australian statesmen says, " the problem of Federal finance is insoluble until we gain experience of the course of commerce, and of the changes in industry under the new and unprecedented conditions of intercolonial free-trade." And the same writer (Mr. Wise) anticipates that a period of financial disorder will ensue upon the initiation of the Commonwealth, and says, " We have not yet sufficient data for any useful calculations as to the incidence of Federal taxation." This, coming from an advocate of Australian federation, is not encouraging to New-Zealanders, who do not seem to appreciate the financial difficulties ahead which will be the outcome, under the most favourable circumstances, of the "unprecedented" proposals of the Bill. The powers given for making laws for the regulation of trade and commerce by the Ist subsection of section 51 and by section 100, for constituting an Inter-State Commission for interpreting and administering such laws, are, as Dr. Quick, a member of the Commission, says, " enormous.' They give control over every form of traffic, intercourse, and communication between States, and throughout States, including roads, railways, rivers, and other waterways ; also control over shipping and navigation. It enables the Federal authority to follow trade and commerce throughout the Commonwealth, to supervise and protect it, promote and encourage, increase facilities, and remove impediments and obstructions that interfere with freedom and equality of trade. I may here refer to what was the English Times' correspondent's statement of the causes which led to the Federal movement being revived about the year 1894. It was, no doubt, owing to the financial difficulties which had arisen with the banks and monetary institutions, and a desire to consolidate the credit of Australia and facilitate their borrowing-powers. Here, again, the Bill provides for the conferring of enormous powers on the Commonwealth in respect of borrowing money on the credit of the Commonwealth, and also (section 105) in respect of taking over the debts of the States. Visions of what took place in New Zealand over the consolidation of provincial loans, and subsequently over the Bank of New Zealand troubles, and the almost infinite possibilities of log-rolling and intrigue, come before one's mind in this connection. If the effect of these features of the Bill are such an unknown quantity in respect of Australia itself, whose statesmen have framed the Bill, the possible effect upon New Zealand is surely a matter for the gravest consideration before we commit ourselves to the irrevocable step of joining the Commonwealth. As to whether Australasian federation is a step to Imperial federation, I do not think it is. At any rate, not necessarily so ; and I can imagine circumstances under which it might lead to an opposite result. I believe the late Mr. Dalley, one of the foremost of Australian statesmen, thought this would be the case—that is, that the tendency might be in the direction of a desire for independence. It will be gathered from what I said before that the Imperial tie should be as comprehensive as possible, embracing not only what we understand by colonies, but possibly States, like those in Africa, bound by treaties in respect of great national interests under the suzerainty of Great Britain. Imperial federation as it already exists will only suffer by any attempt to draw the bonds too closely, or to deal with subjects other than those of the largest magnitude, such as common defence. It is a matter of slow development as between autonomous States. Like the training of a fruit-tree on the wall, each branch will have its own connection with the parent 44—A. 4,
A.—4
346
stem, will get its own interconnection through its union with the Empire. This will be preeminently true in regard to defence. It is to the Imperial navy we shall have to look for safety as against external aggression, and that safety will depend upon the wisdom of the arrangements that are made as between the Empire and these colonies in respect of this greatest of Federal obligations. The importance of providing against divided control and management in case of active warfare is obvious. This will be a matter for treaty as between the Imperial Government and the several States, or groups of States. The dealing with the question as between Australia and the Home Government would doubtless be simplified by negotiating with one instead of a number of States; but, if points of difference arose, these differences might be more difficult of adjustment. The Constitution of a parliamentary union which might involve questions of taxation, and possibilities of friction, such as led to the secession of the States of America, is too remote to be considered within the range of practical politics. The Australian Commonwealth is not a federation in the proper sense of the word, but a unification or amalgamation of Governments. It will create a Government with enormously increased powers for good or ill, for increased internal developments, and for wider influences in its dealings with the outside world, but it is open to grave question whether it will increase the sentiment inspired by the Crown and sceptre of Great Britain. Temporary frenzies and impulses are liable to seize upon a young people, and the feeling of reverence for the traditions of the past may at times be insufficient to prevent antagonism to the Old Country. A few years ago the Daily Telegraph, in Sydney, was writing of Australian independence. Looking to the not-far-off future, New Zealand will occupy an unrivalled position. Prom its climate, the fertility of its soil, the physical character of its population, and its position as a maritime Power, occasions might arise when its power as a separate State in these seas would exercise an enormous influence in maintaining the Imperial union and guiding public opinion should popular outbursts run riot elsewhere in these seas. As to how federation with Australia would affect New Zealand— (a) commercially, (b) as regards our powers of self-government: I think, with regard to (a), that what I have said above explains generally my views so far as they have been formed. The effect on commerce is hard for men with much more knowledge than I can pretend to have to foresee. Nothing but experience over a course of years will enable us to judge. Meantime we should be surrendering our powers of control, and in a manner which might prove prejudicial to us. I have quoted Dr. Quick above as to the enormous powers which will be wielded by the Federal Government and Inter-State Commission in respect of trade and commerce, and we cannot forget in how small a proportion New Zealand would be represented in the Federal Parliament, and how its powers would be exercised far from popular control and criticism. The effect of intercolonial freetrade upon our manufactures is hard to estimate. It might (I do not say it would, for there is not sufficient information to go upon) lead to our industries being seriously affected by competition with Australian goods. The effect upon our export of farm produce is equally hard to foresee. We cannot, to begin with, do more than conjecture how far Australia is, by the progress of settlement, going to make itself independent of those articles of produce (potatoes, onions, oats, and dairy produce) of which we have always a surplus. It is certain that there will be periods of drought when its own supply will be entirely inadequate. Will it then be content to forego the advantage of New Zealand trade by putting it under the disabilities of protective or prohibitive duties ? A statement of the different ways in which the trade of New Zealand with Victoria and New South Wales has been affected by the protective and free-trade policies of the two States would be instructive. The market has been very fitful over a number of years. For example, the potato trade varied between the years 1894 and 1897 from £2,758 to £102,800, and the butter export varied from £455 to £51,055 in the same period, and then, singularly enough, dropped to £17,154 in 1899. Australia, so far as a cursory view enables one to form a judgment, will partly, under the impulse of federation and inter-State freetrade, become self-supporting, and trade will be governed by the laws of supply and demand, not by tariffs. These are points upon which it seems to me we ought to have the best information which could have been collected by commercial and financial experts. We should then be in a position to approach the Federal Government and discuss the question of a reciprocal treaty on fair terms. I cannot but think that our present attitude towards the great movement of our sistercolonies is not a worthy one, and is liable to be interpreted as one of indifference. My own belief is that, apart from any question of federation, our interests must ever be closely bound up with those of Australia, and that mutually satisfactory arrangements could be arrived at. On the other hand, from the Australian point of view, I do not see what advantage would accrue to Australia by New Zealand being driven by trade considerations to enter into administrative and political relations, which might not work out harmoniously, and might, indeed, be embarrassing to the Commonwealth. As regards our local powers of self-government (b), I hold strong views that the hope of democracy rests in the development of local self-government, and that centralisation of power in the hands of a far-distant Government, removed from the vision and the prompt and close criticism of those governed, might lead to very unsatisfactory results. Our present democracy is assuming very curious phases in which "the people " are often little concerned. There is an idea afloat that you would get a better class of men interested in legislation and government. Ido not believe it. I have no belief that we should be better represented in the Federal Parliament. One thing is certain, the Parliament would occupy six months of the year. The members must be either wealthy men who could afford to leave their business, and to whom a seat in the Federal Parliament would offer attractions from the speculative openings which would present themselves in connection with finance, or they would be a class of men who are described by the term of professional politicians. The settler class who are represented here would be less and less represented, and the influence of wealth and speculation—potent factors in the decay of democracy—would assert itself to an extent hitherto unknown. The provision of £400 a year in a Constitutional Act as an honorarium is a curious feature.
347
A.—4
6. Before I ask the members of the Commission to question you on this statement, do you wish to add anything to the paper that has been read?—No, I cannot say that I do, though I do not for a moment think it a complete presentment of the case. 7. In the paper you say that our attitude is one of indifference to the Australian States?—l did not quite intend to convey that impression. I was speaking there rather of the attitude of the Legislature of New Zealand, and that the setting-up of a committee would have prevented the possibility of such an idea being entertained. The question was never discussed in the Legislature under the lead of the Government, and my own opinion, as stated in that paper, is tha.t both Australia and New Zealand lost a great opportunity in the practically falling through of the original Federal Council Bill, and we might, if we had taken a larger part in the deliberations that led up to the present Commonwealth Bill, have secured a modification of the provisions of that Bill, either, in respect of New Zealand, where these present conditions affect New Zealand unfavourably, or we might have generally modified the provisions of the Bill in the direction of making it rather a Federal Bill than an amalgamation of administrative bodies and the creation of a parliamentary union. 8. The Federal Council sat every two years continuously up to 1898, did it not?— Yes, I think so. That was the intention. 9. And it only passed out of existence, as it were, when the Commonwealth Bill became practically a certainty ?—Yes, that is the case. I regretted that, if a modification of that Bill was necessary, it was not attempted rather than the establishment of the present form of Commonwealth, into which, according to my ideas, New Zealand cannot wisely enter. 10. New Zealand was represented at the Conferences of 1890 and 1891 ?—Yes, I believe it was. 11. It was after the Conference of 1891 that Sir Samuel Griffiths, as Chairman of the particular Committee, brought up a complete Commonwealth Bill to be submitted to the Parliaments ? —Yes. 12. Is it not a fact, as Coghlan says, that no parliamentary sanction was sought to the provisions of that Bill in any of the colonies?—l believe so ;at any rate, no active steps were taken to give it practical effect. 13. In that year, or for four years afterwards, nothing was done in the Australian Colonies in the way of obtaining legislative sanction for that Bill?—I cannot speak positively, but it was in 1894 or 1895 that the present legislation was drafted. 14. But the present movement, was that not the outcome of popular action rather than of legislative action? —I cannot say. 15. I am only asking this because you seem to think that our Legislature might be deemed to have been indifferent in the matter, and I am putting it as a reason why our Legislature should not be blamed with indifference if the Australian Legislature allowed the matter to sleep for four years, and were only spurred on to acting by popular feeling?—l can hardly express an opinion on that. 16. You cannot say whether it will work out satisfactorily for Australia or not ? —No. 17. Is it not a fact that after the Bill was submitted to the Parliaments in 1898 the Legislative Council of New South Wales objected to it ?—I do not remember that particular fact. 18. Do you not remember that twelve new members had to be appointed to enable Mr. Reid to carry it—he had to swamp the Legislative Council?— That does not occur to my memory just now. 19. I would like to ask you what you think the effect of the Commonwealth will be upon the legislative independence of the colony supposing we were to federate, having regard to the thirtynine articles of legislation which are reserved to the Federal Parliament ? —I tried in the paper I have submitted to indicate, so far as I was capable of forming a judgment, what would be the result. My own opinion is that New Zealand would be in a minority in the Commonwealth Legislature, and that the general tendency of the Commonwealth Legislature as constituted under this Act would be to ultimately override the State powers, and that New Zealand, being at the distance it is, might be very prejudicially affected by that state of things. 20. What do you think would be the effect upon the State Governments : do you not think they would be diminished very much in political matters ? —I should not look upon that as an advantage. I think they would drop in importance in a manner prejudicial to the general interest, and that is the opinion, I see, of prominent men in Australia—that the local legislation would be liable to be superseded by the central legislation. 21. You have noticed, probably, by the public prints that the Federal Government has already taken over the Customs matters and the defence ? —Yes. 22. And that in Melbourne, at all events, the Premier is not filling up the portfolio represented by Sir George Turner ? —Yes. 23. That points in the same direction, does it not?— Yes. There are larger considerations than the effecting of departmental economies. 24. Have you considered what would be the effect of federation upon the colonial revenue of, say, New Zealand as a State ?—I have no accurate figures. I have studied anything that came before me in that way, and the most valuable paper I have seen on that subject is one by Mr. James Allen, M.H.E., a gentleman you have, I think, had before you. 25. Do you agree with the views expressed by Mr. Allen?—Yes, I do. The general result is that New Zealand would suffer in her revenue under the operation of a uniform tariff on the population ratio to the extent of over half a million. 26. Do you think there would be any effect, and, if any, what, upon the mental condition of the inhabitants of this colony by our joining the Commonwealth ?—I do not quite understand what you mean by " mental condition."
A.—4
348
27. That the thoughts of the New-Zealanders would be upon a higher plane, for instance ?— 1 have no sympathy with that feeling at all. I notice that it has been put forward in somewhat grandiloquent language that our minds would be raised to a higher plane, and that we would have a higher idea of government; but Ido not sympathize with that at all. This is quite a different matter from our connection with the Empire in the forefront of civilisation, to which we, no less than Australia, are bound by ties of race and tradition and affection. The idea of Imperial federation has an elevating influence. 28. 1 notice in the paper that you have handed in to the Commission no opinion is expressed upon the question of coloured labour in Australia: have you any views on that which you would submit to the Commission ?—I have not given that question much attention. It seems to me, broadly, that certain parts of Australia will continue to employ coloured labour, but what effect it may have on trade in Australia and New Zealand I do not feel qualified to speak with any sufficient knowledge. It will continue a vexed question. 29. Have you considered the question of the institution of a Federal Court of Appeal ?—I was present in England during the debate on the Bill, and listened to the debate on the second reading, and I confess that I came away from the debate without any clear idea as to the precise practical result of the alteration that was effected—by the compromise, as it was called —in the Bill. It seems to me that, whatever change was made, it was a restriction to a certain extent of a right of appeal on the part of the subject in Australia. 30. That it was the alteration of appeal only on questions affecting the Constitution ?—Yes, it was that, but lam not clear that it stopped there. Of course, of that you are better qualified to judge than myself, but it is not clear to a layman. 31. If the result is to restrict the right of appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal, and to limit in any way the right of appeal to the Privy Council, do you approve of that ?—Certainly not. Speaking generally, I would not approve of any act that restricted the British subject from appealing to the highest Court in the Empire. The matter is to be the subject of further developments, as promised by Mr. Chamberlain. 32. In your paper you have advocated the establishment of a Federal tie without the surrendering of local autonomy : do I take it that you consider our local autonomy will be prejudicially interfered with if we join the Australian Commonwealth?—l think, undoubtedly, that might be so. When I speak of a Federal tie, I mean a tie established by treaty rather than by administrative union. 33. You advocate here and recommend a reciprocal tariff between Australia and New Zealand : do you think that is possible ?—I think that is an object to be aimed at, and I should think would be the outcome of common-sense dealing between the Commonwealth and New Zealand. 34. Mr. Leys.] Do you regard the greater facility for amending the Constitution, as compared with that of America or Canada, as an evil, and not as an advantage ?—I think it might be. I think the relation of the States in America to the Central Government has been maintained by the difficulty imposed of any alteration in the Constitution. 35. You think that would facilitate the Central Government absorbing the powers of the States ?—I think it would be used in that way as opportunity arose. 36. I suppose you have considered clause 128, which enables a majority of electors and a majority of the States to make any amendment to the Constitution : do you think that nullifies the security supposed to exist in the Constitution under equal representation in the Senate ?—lt seems to go in that direction. 37. Do you regard that as practically putting amendments to the popular vote over the heads of the Senate ?— lt does undoubtedly to some extent. I would say, incidentally, that Ido not think the popular vote is altogether a satisfactory solution of the intricate questions that would arise in regard to alterations of provisions in the Constitution. 38. Do you think it likely there would be such community of interest in Australia that they may make amendments of the Constitution through the popular vote transferring powers to the Central Government that would be to the disadvantage of a State like New Zealand?—l think only experience will show that. But I would be sorry that New Zealand should subject itself to the possibility of that taking place. 39. Do you think, for example, that the public debts and the railways will be transferred to the Central Government without the consent of the Australian States ?—I do not think I have thought that question out enough ; but I think, myself, that the Inter-State Commissions are merely intermediary steps to the ultimate absolute absorption of the railways—that that is a concession to the States temporarily, and ultimately there is no doubt the Railway Department will be taken over by the Commonwealth. 40. You see that the Federal Government have already announced that railway-construction is part of their programme—the trans-continental railway ? —Yes ; and the whole question of dealing with the debts and the raising of moneys with the guarantee of the Commonwealth will sooner or later be dealt with more directly by the greater power. 41. Do you think the taking-over of the Customs and excise would interfere with our raising money for State purposes ? In other words, do you think the fact of the Federal Government taking over our Customs and excise, and so lessening the security New Zealand has to offer to the London bondholders, would interfere with States like New Zealand raising money for such purposes as lands for settlement, &c. ?—I think that, so far as we understand the matter at the present time, the finances of New Zealand would be very seriously affected. I think, in the paper by Mr. Allen, to which I referred, he shows that we should be affected to the extent of over half a million annually ; and, of course, our power of borrowing on our share of the Customs will be much diminished. 42. Do you think we shall be materially restricted in our power of developing our own resources ?—I think we might be, or we should have to apply to the Commonwealth Legislature to help us to get money if we wanted it.
349
A.—4
43. If through the loss of this revenue we had to largely increase the direct taxation in the colony, do you think that would have a mischievous effect on capital and industry ?—Of course, that would depend very much on the manner in which it was done. I think our Customs duties are high enough at present, and any additional revenue that would be required would have to be in the way of direct taxation. 44. Do you think there would be a loss of administrative efficiency in the departments taken over by the Federal Government as far as this colony is concerned ?—I saw the evidence given before the Commission by an officer of the Government, He is a gentleman I respect very much, and, speaking for his own department, he seemed to think there would be a diminution of efficiency and economy. It seems obvious that, where there is a less perfect knowledge of the subject through the administration being conducted from a distance, the control will be less efficient. 45. You seem to regard this dipping into one purse as a very serious blot on the Federal Constitution : did we not have the same experience in the days of the Provincial Governments ?— Yes. 46. It did not work well then ?—No. Of course, the necessities of the provinces entailed the increase of the Customs in order to increase their individual share, and I am afraid the same result will take place in this case. 47. Mr. Luke.] You mentioned that you thought distance would prejudicially affect us under federation—you do not lose sight of the fact that the distance has been very much shortened, and will be so in the future, and that we will be as close to the Federal Parliament as some parts of the Commonwealth : do you not think that that objection therefore breaks down in the light of development ?—I do not think it does. By distance Ido not mean only mileage. I think that, whatever may come of this matter, we are going to be a population here separated, very much from the population of Australia in regard to our common ideas on many public matters, and our power of discussion will be limited by many causes. lam not at all sure that in the States of Australia, as, for instance, between Queensland and the seat of government, distance will not be found a great disability, but I think the disability for the same and other reasons would be greater here. 48. Will not the infusion of the ideas, conceptions, and characteristics that mark New Zealand be an advantage to the Commonwealth, and afford us a wider field for the development of those characteristics in the same sense that the infusion of their aims and objects would probably be an advantage to us? —I think that is rather in the region of "speculation. I think the mutual advantages you speak of will accrue without our joining the Commonwealth. 49. Is there not a danger of our becoming contracted in our conceptions if we live an insular life such as we shall live if we remain outside the Commonwealth?—No, I do not think so. By keeping up our national character, as we are keeping it up by education and progressive legislation, I do not fear that New Zealand will ever become contracted. Our insular position gives us the greatest facility of communication by the great highway of the sea. 50. You also said that you thought we should lack efficiency of administration under federation : would it be an advantage under federation to have the various departments of the State controlled more particularly by the heads of departments, without any interference on the part of any Government of the day?—l do not think we have had experience enough to judge of what the effect will be over such a huge area as the Commonwealth would be. 51. Mr. Beauchamp.] I understand that you would advocate Imperial federation, or the establishment of a zollverein, in preference to the idea of a Commonwealth?—l would. 52. By our joining the Commonwealth, and admitting a large quantity of Australian-manufac-tured goods free of duty, and trying to shut out English goods, do you not think the establishment of a zollverein would be somewhat retarded ?—I think that would be a question of the terms of the union. 53. Do you think we should get money cheaper if we federated than we do at the present time ? —Of course, the security would be greater ; but, so far as I can see now, the security is sufficient for borrowing on fair terms by the State. • 54. Have you noticed that New South Wales 3-J-per-cents are very much lower than New Zealand 3f-per-cents ?—I have not noticed that. 55. At the various Federal Conferences to which you referred, but at which New Zealand was not represented, do you think that, if New Zealand had been represented, and our representatives had advocated federation strongly, Tasmania and Victoria would have exhibited the same eagerness to join the Commonwealth ? —I cannot say. I scarcely think the question of New Zealand produce —taking our onions and agricultural produce—will be a question that will last very long. I take it that the production of Australia will shortly enable it to more than overtake its own wants in any but times of drought. The question of joining the Commonwealth seems to me to depend on larger considerations than the fiscal changes that will take place in respect to these common products. 56. Your opinion is that the various States of Australia are becoming sufficiently self-contained in the matter of manufacture and produce as to obviate the necessity of any of those States coming here for our productions, unless when adverse climatic changes prevail ?—Quite so. 57. Do you consider there is a real community of interest between New Zealand and Australia, or do you think the national type is so different in Australia as to prevent the encouragement of that feeling ?—I do not think so. I hope to see in the future the closest community of interests established ; it is only a question of time and common-sense. 58. With regard to our State representatives, do you think we should get under the Commonwealth as good men to represent us in the State Governments as we have had in the past in New Zealand ?—lt is doubtful; and I think there would be a deterioration of State Government. They would not have the same objects and aims. 59. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you consider the integrity of the Empire would be best consulted in the future by there being one great British Power in these seas or two ?—I think, undoubtedly,
A.—4
350
it is to the Imperial interest to have two Powers rather than one, and I have in my paper indicated the manner in which the influence of a second Power might be an advantage. lam very strongly of opinion that, in the interests of Imperial federation in the future, it is of great importance that there should be two Powers rather than one_in these seas. 60. Hon. the Chairman.] Does the fact that New Zealand cannot now join as an original State affect your judgment in the matter, or is your objection to New Zealand joining the Commonwealth independent of that fact ?—I do not know what the result would be of our not joining as an original State. I can scarcely think that the Australian Colonies would impose any penal conditions on our joining otherwise than as an original State, or that we would be placed at any greater disadvantage by not so joining. 61. No; but probably one of the chief disadvantages in reference to representation in the Senate lies in section 7of the Act. There you see that the number must always be maintained in respect of original States; and I would ask whether the fact that New Zealand cannot now join as an original State affects your opinion in the matter — whether your opinion was based upon matters independent of that ?—Quite independent of that. 62. I would like to ask you whether you have any opinion to give us upon the question of how the defence of the colony would be affected by our federating with the Commonwealth ?—That question involves consideration of a number of questions with which I am not sufficiently conversant, and in respect of which I should hesitate to express an opinion. Dr. Eichard Laishley, LL.D., Ph.D., M.A., &c, examined. (No. 129.) 63. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a barrister and solicitor, practising in Auckland ?—Yes. 64. I believe you have given some consideration to the question of New Zealand federating with Australia, or otherwise ? —Yes; and have publicly spoken and written on it to a considerable extent. 65. Perhaps the more convenient course would be to ask you to favour the Commission with the conclusions at which you have arrived on the matter ?—So far as my opinion goes—but, of course, I am a mere groper after information on this matter, and am aware that no person can come to a sound conclusion without much closer investigation than I have given to it—l think the arguments against Australian federation as for New Zealand are overwhelming. I will state them now, according to my view, in sequence, placed in their relative importance. The first consideration is the irrevocable nature of the compact—the fact that the status quo ante can never be regained. The next factor is the ignoble surrender of our independence; and this surrender seems to me a vital consideration. As far as I can see, although nominally there are certain rights reserved to the States, practically there are none, inasmuch as the sth, 105 th, and 109 th sections of the Act override everything—that is to say, they place the paramount power in the hands of the Federal Parliament. In addition to this, even supposing we joined, the number of our representatives would, of course, be absolutely insignificant; for we would be entitled, probably, only to six out of forty-two in the Senate, and, say, to fifteen out of eighty-four in the Lower House. That must result in great neglect of New Zealand interests, and practically means our political submersion. Moreover, the impotence of our voting-power would be especially significant; for we are not only remote, but insular and we would have comparatively few sympathies in common with the Australian Continent; and one effect of our insular position must be that our needs would be largely unknown to the very great majority of members from the other Australasian districts. Another likely result is that our insularity would probably involve the deterioration of our members, inasmuch as we could only hope to send capitalists or professional politicians. Further, the constituencies here would have very little opportunity of communicating their needs to their representatives by reason of our sea remoteness; and thus the constituencies would be largely out of touch with and without influence upon even the small batch of their members. Consequently, for the reasons I have given, by joining the Federation we would really net only give up our power of government, but would be practically submerged. But there are other important considerations under this heading. For instance, there are large undertakings which are looming up, such as trans-continental railways, huge irrigation-works, and the creation of a capital, which would be practically valueless to us; but to their cost and maintenance we would have to contribute very largely—probably one-seventh. This, to my mind, is a grave consideration, as far as federating with Australia is concerned—that is to say, the surrender of our independence, and the rendering of ourselves really a very insignificant feature in the government. The next consideration to which I invite your attention is the fact that the inauguration of free-trade, or modified protection, to which we would be enforcedly a party, would do us great harm ; for we would probably havo to compete against lower freights from Europe and Asia to Australia, larger capital, and cheaper labour ; for my information is that labour in New South Wales is at least 25 per cent, cheaper than it is here, and that the labourer works there longer hours than here. We would also have to contend against increased facilities of transit for produce and manufactures, and the fact of vast areas of land, good land, coming into cultivation, to which cheap labour and easy transit would, of course, apply. All these things, I apprehend, would enable goods to be manufactured and produced and brought into New Zealand at rates with which we could not compete. The third consideration is the direct annual cash cost that New Zealand would have to incur. I estimate it at £318,061 a year, made up of two main features —viz., the loss of import Customs revenue (£228,536), and the contribution towards the Commonwealth expenses of about £89,525, plus the loss of rebate refunds, and plus our recurrent contributions to extraordinary expenditure of Australia, such as for a trans-con-tinental railway of a thousand miles, huge irrigation-works, and the creation of a capital. The result, to my mind, would inevitably be to increase the cost of living here (for those who could at all get a living) by reason of the extra taxation required, and by reason also of the higher price for commodities imported from places outside the Commonwealth, which might be subject to a heavier tariff than now—that is. to say, the higher price payable for commodities imported from England
351
A.—4
and elsewhere. The fourth consideration against federation is the abolition of the Privy Council appeal, or, at all events, the possible abolition; for, of course, the taking of an appeal to the Federal Court under section 73 would not remove it from the possibility of local influence, as is the case in the taking of an ultimate appeal to England, and is -therefore objectionable pro tanto. Of course, the removal of an appeal to England is an absolute removal from all local influences, whereas an appeal to Australia would be merely a system of partial removal from local influence. As an instance, I might give a case of an appeal which took place, and of which the members of this Commission will probably be aware —-that was the case of Murray-Aynsley verms the Union Bank of Australia, which is a very significant appeal. I might respectfully point out in this connection that the question has arisen that it may be cheaper for the Commonwealth to borrow than for New Zealand to borrow, but I consider that that suggestion is entirely irrelevant, inasmuch as the pooling of debts is expressly barred by the Act. There can be no pooling of the debts. In this connection I would respectfully refer the Commission to the sth section and 109 th section of the Aot, which are paramount, and seem to me to destroy absolutely any independence that might be otherwise left to New Zealand. And the fifth objection to New Zealand federating is the Maori questions involved, which I need not dilate on here. There is, moreover, another and it may be an important question which arises—it was hinted at in the Hon. Mr. Eolleston's examination—if New Zealand federation took place, and that is, how the surrender of a part of our securities —viz., the Customs duties—would affect us with our State creditors and our State credit; in other words, whether we are justified, as far as our State creditors are concerned, in surrendering to the Commonwealth that security. In concluding my statement, perhaps the Commission will pardon me if I mention that I have written somewhat extensively on New Zealand federation, and I would respectfully refer the Commission to some of the articles —namely, " What Surrender of our Independence to the Commonwealth means " (Auckland Star of 4th November, 1899); " What Federation means to the Farmer here " (Auckland Star, 20th October, 1899); " What Federation means to the Working-man" (Auckland Star, 7th September, 1899). Other articles of mine will be found in other issues of the Auckland Star for August, September, and November, 1899, and in the New Zealand Herald of the 12th August, 1899. Supplementing what I have stated as to how federation will affect the farmers, it seems to me that there would probably be a very direct taxation on land in order to make up the £315,000 I have referred to. Secondly, there will be the risk of free ports ; thirdly, very likely a fall in landvalues ; and, fourthly, the farmers would have, in common with every other resident in New Zealand, to face the increased cost of revenue. In favour of New Zealand federation there seem to me to be three main arguments used—that is to say, a free-trade or modified protective tariff, the benefit of Australian resources for defence, and the advantages of our being a part of a neighbouring and powerful Confederation. But these are largely outweighed—in fact, I might say are simply overwhelmed —by the arguments contra which I have given you this morning. 66. What did you say the advantages were in favour of federation ? —A free-trade or modified protective tariff, the benefit of Australian resources for defence, and the advantage of our being part of a great Confederation of the same language, rights, and aspirations. But I would point out specially as regards defence that a standing army in Australia could be of no value to us in the case of a crisis, and that by joining an Australian Confederation we would probably forego the aegis of the Imperial navy, and be dependent on an Australasian navy; and if a war crisis occurred probably it would be in Australia and Tasmania, phis New Zealand, so that we could not look for much help from an Australasian navy in view of the extensive seaboard outside New Zealand'in the Commonwealth requiring protection. 67. What do you understand will be the tariff of the Commonwealth if Mr. Barton comes into power : will it be a lower or higher protective tariff than we have at the present time in New Zealand ?—I cannot say. 68. Is it not to be expected that there will be intercolonial free-trade, and that our farmers and manufacturers will have a bigger market ? —What is beyond doubt is that if we do not federate there will be a protective tariff levied against our oats and other produce, and therefore we should by federating avoid that protective tariff being imposed against us. 69. You have given us an opinion as to what New Zealand would lose if she did federate— namely, the loss of Customs revenue that we would have to part with : what tariff have you taken as a basis for that computation? —I have prepared a paper on the question of direct financial loss, and I have worked the direct loss out at £318,061 in detail; but that paper has not been published. 70. What is the rate of duty upon which you based your calculation ?—The Hon. Major Atkinson worked it out at £400,000, but I have worked it out at £318,061, which includes £89,525 cost of contributions to the Commonwealth expenses ; therefore the balance (£228,536) would be loss of revenue in Customs duties. 71. Would you favour us with that paper?—l will give it to you presently. Before leaving the question of finance I wish to mention that there is not much difference between my estimate and Sir Harry Atkinson's estimate—in fact, you will see in Hansard how he arrived at this estimate of £400,000; whilst a further estimate has been made by a member of the present House of Eepresentatives, Mr. James Allen, of £658,000, which, of course, is very much greater. 72. You said that one of the objections to the workers here would be that they would have to compete against the longer hours worked in Australia ?—My opinion is not from my own knowledge, but is simply derived from workers, that the hours are longer in New South Wales, and that there is now a difference of 25 per cent, in the wages in favour of New Zealand workers. 73. Are you aware that they celebrate the eight-hours movement over there ?—I am not speaking from my own knowledge, but what the workers have told me about the ten hours a day worked in Australia. A little while ago the Labour Council here requested me to address them on the subject of New Zealand federation, and I was then informed that in New South Wales the rate of wages was 25 per cent, lower than ours, and that the hours were longer.
A.—4
352
74. Do you know the amount of sugar duty we should lose ?—No. 75. About £158,900. I understand you to say that you consider the agricultural interests would suffer if we federated ?—Yes ; the farming community. 76. How ? —By reason of the large areas of land which have been gradually brought into cultivation, in Australia and cheaper labour, which would enable the cost of production to be cheapened, and to export it to all the States of the Commonwealth at a very much cheaper rate than we could do it at. 77. Are you referring to any particular commodity?— Wheat, for instance. 78. Is not flour-milling an important industry in this district ?—Yes. 79. Have you considered that probably wheat would be imported from Australia here, and that it would interfere with the market in Canterbury?— Yes, at a price we could not compete with the Australians at; and the same observation applies to flour. 80. Do you consider that population would be attracted from New Zealand in the event of federation ? —As far as I can see, depopulation would probably ensue, and there would be stagnation, the same as there is in Tasmania now. In addition, I would like to say, to show how insignificant a part we would play, the Commonwealth Act is entitled " The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act," not " Commonwealth of Australasia." Of course, that may be a very minor matter ; but I would point out that it is a little significant, at all events, in respect of our submersion. 81. You stated that our representation in the Senate would be only one-seventh of the whole: are you aware that under the Act the Federal Parliament has the power to establish new States ? —Yes, under section 121. 82. And it has been suggested to us that probably new States may be carved out of Northern Queensland ?—Yes. 83. Supposing three new States were formed there, which would, of course, have representation in the Senate, would not that proportionately reduce our representation ?—Yes. 84. Mr. Boberts.] You said you considered that the farmers of Australia with federation could successfully compete with the farmers here, and that our farmers would not be able to export their produce to the other side :is that so?—I think the farmers in Australia would be able to more than compete with the farmers here, and for the reasons I have already given. 85. Do you not think that the large production of cereals in Australia during the past few years has been entirely the result of the heavy import duties they have there?— Yes. 86. Do you not think that the yield that the farmers have here per acre is sufficient to enable them to compete with the Australian producers ? —I fancy not; but lam not a farmer, purely a doctrinaire in expressing any opinion on the subject. 87. Mr. Millar.] How do you think the social condition of our people here would be affected by the legislation of the Federal Parliament: do you think that as much interest would be taken in it as is taken at the present time ?—I should say not. 88. Have you in the course of your reading found any evidence that the Australian Parliaments have paid as much attention to social legislation as the New Zealand Parliaments have ?—My own idea is that they have not paid as much attention to it. Of course, the twelve hundred miles of sea is a very serious consideration, as it makes us remote and insular. 89. Have you given any study to the black-labour question ?—No. 90. On the question of finance, have you noticed that Mr. Lyne, the Premier of New South Wales and a member of the Federal Parliament, has said that the Customs tariff would be from 10 to 15 per cent. ? —That can only be purely speculative. 91. Have you assumed that tariff when estimating the loss to the revenue of New Zealand? — I have not considered what the effect of a 10- or 15-per-cent. tariff would be on New Zealand specifically. 92. Would that increase your estimate of the effect of federation on New Zealand?— The article from which I quote will give you full information respecting how my calculations were arrived at, and that article I will hand to you presently. 93. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the financial estimates which you made, did you take into consideration the loss of Customs revenue to this colony by our admitting free from Australia a very large quantity of goods on which excise duty had been paid hitherto there —I refer to such goods as tobacco and spirits ? —No ; I reckon direct loss on import duties alone at £318,061 annually, plus the loss of rebate refunds, and also plus any contributions for extraordinary internal expenditure in Australia. 94. I believe it is provided that for a certain time the State to which the goods are brought shall be credited with the excise duty, and therefore we shall get no benefit at all. At the present time the works and distilleries where the tobacco and spirits are manufactured pay an excise duty to the States in which the manufactures are produced. With inter-free-trade for a time they would admit these manufactures entirely free, which would naturally mean a loss of revenue to us ?—I have mentioned that I have considered the loss of rebate refunds as a plus to the £318,061. 95. With regard to the Fiji sugar, we should lose the duty that we at present collect from that source, because under federation I suppose that we would import all our sugar from Queensland : have you considered that ?—That I have not taken into account. 96. So that if you take all these things into consideration, and the estimate comes to £600,000, you would not consider it unreasonable?—My own estimate amounts to £318,061, plus the loss on rebate refunds and the expenditure on extraordinary internal works in the Commonwealth. 97. Have you considered what extra taxation the farmers would have to pay in order to make up their share of the loss in the Customs revenue ?—They would have to bear their share in the cost.
353
A.—4
98. And would that be an offset to the advantages they would derive from having an open market in Australia? —That would be one of the offsets. 99. You have not come to any conclusion as to whether the tariff in Australia would be likely to be a moderate one for revenue purposes, or a protective tariff?—lt might be anything. It is purely a matter of speculation. 100. In the event of there being a moderate tariff, our industries would suffer another blow, would they not, by the competition which would arise by the lower duty ?—I should say so ; from the competition of the factories in Australia. 101. Mr. Luke.} You seem to attach very great importance to the question of political independence ? —I do. I consider it of paramount importance. 102. Will not you be surprised to find that, in the list of the thirty-nine articles which are reserved for the Federal Parliament to deal with, taking them as a basis in connection with the Acts which were passed in New Zealand last session, only four of these Acts would have been taken over by the Federal Parliament : does that not alter your opinion ? —No; because, as I pointed out to you, we do not know what the Federal Parliament would be likely to do if New Zealand entered the Federation. 103. But have we not to deal with what they are likely to do ?—I cannot say what they are likely to do. 104. Do you think the Federal Parliament would be aggressive to New Zealand as against the other States ? —I do not think so ; but I think that very little interest would be taken in New Zealand by the Federal representatives, other than those from this colony. 105. But do you not think they would rather show a tender regard to New Zealand because of the distance ?—I do not think so. Ido not think there would be any vindictiveness or tenderness shown towards us, but simply neglect and indifference. 106. Do you not think they would be especially considerate to New Zealand in order to show that they were not vindictive ?—I do not think so. Ido not think we should assume that they would exhibit special consideration or vindictiveness, because I do not think that these factors would enter into their conduct at all in any appreciable degree. 107. Then, you stated that you thought the effect of federation would be depopulation and stagnation of trade ?—That is purely speculative. 108. Do you not think our superior climate would be a factor ?—Have we a superior climate ? As far as Auckland is concerned, it seems to me that this is a very inferior climate—it is a climate that saps one's energy, usefulness, and vitality. 109. But it is not inferior to Queensland, is it ?—I have not been in Queensland; but I would think that a steamy climate like Auckland is very much inferior to a dry tropical climate. 110. Then, you have no sympathy with the statement that we in this colony produce a physically stronger type of people than they do in Australia ?—I do not know what the south is like, but I think the climate of the north here is very enervating physically, and therefore mentally. ■ 111. Do you think that Australia would afford us a much larger field for our energies and a field for our legislative capacity, and also as a market for our produce and manufactures ? —I would imagine that Australia will absorb everything they can grow there, and I should say that they could grow more than sufficient for their own requirements, especially with increased areas of land, that are being called into cultivation every year. 112. Following up the question of Mr. Boberts—namely, that our yield per acre is so much greater than theirs —would not that overcome any disability there might be by reason of distance ? —I think not. 113. You think the effect of federation on our manufactures would be very disastrous ?—I should say so. 114. Mr. Reid.] I understand you are of opinion that the right of appeal to the Privy Council is taken away by this statute ?—I think so; but I believe there are very few men in the world who can intelligibly read that clause. It seems to me, however, that the effect of the clause is that we have to go to Australia instead of England. 115. Do you not think that the jurisdiction of the Privy Council is preserved?—l am aware that eminent lawyers on both sides contend one one way and one another in respect of this question. 116. Have you read that work of which Messrs. Quick and Garran are the authors? —I have read Mr. Garran's work, but I have not read the work to which you refer by two authors. 117. They hold that this right is not taken away ?—As you are probably aware, there are eminent men who hold the other view. 118. Can you tell me who holds the other way?—No, I cannot; but I judge, from my reading of the clause, that the appeal is absolutely taken away from the Privy Council in respect of certain specified questions, and, as far as private questions are concerned, that we have to go to Australia. 119. Are you not somewhat confusing the provisions in the 73rd section and those in section 74 ? I am speaking now of the private ultimate power of appeal under section 74 —that, instead of going to England, I read it we have to go to Australia. Assuming that my argument is correct, then I think we are at a disadvantage in having only a semi-local removal. 120. At all events, your conclusion is that the right of appeal is taken awa)' ?—-Assuming that my interpretation is correct, my reply holds good —that is to say, there is only a semi-removal from local influence, as of right. That is the removal to Australia instead of a removal to England. 121. Mr. Leys.] You spoke of federation as an ignoble surrender of our independence?— Yes. 122. Do you not think that is rather strong, considering that we would have the same 45—A. 4.
A.—4
354
voice individually or collectively as any other State? —Yes, that is quite true. There is no disputing the fact that now we have forty-two voices, and if we went into the Commonwealth we would only have six. We have now a whole voice, but in the Commonwealth we should have only, say, the seventh of a voice. 123. Thatf is in Commonwealth questions; but in State questions we should still have a complete voice, would we not ? —No ; I consider we would have no State powers reserved to us. The Act makes any law passed by the Commonwealth paramount. 124. Do you think the Federal Government are likely to enlarge their powers at the expense of the States ? —I do not think they require to enlarge their powers. I think their powers are now absolutely unqualified and unlimited. If it had been intended to reserve powers to the State the clauses would have been qualified accordingly; but, not having been qualified, it appears to me that the powers of the Commonwealth are undoubtedly paramount. 125. According to Mr. Luke, only four Acts that were passed in the New Zealand Legislature last year could not have been passed had we been in the Federation ? —I can only point out that clause 109 says that when a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid. Matters not expressly reserved for the Commonwealth to deal with are left out merely as a sop, but can be overridden by the sth, 105 th, and 109 th sections. It is stated that education laws are left to the States to deal with; but that is a pure fiction, because, as I respectfully point out, under the sections-already referred to, should there be any disagreement between the laws, the Commonwealth laws prevail; and therefore, in regard to education, if the Commonwealth make a law on the subject, it will supersede any law that may be passed in this State. 126. Do you think it is probable that the Federal Government will take over such functions as education ?—I should think it very likely. 127. Do you look forward to the gradual expansion of the States ?—By joining the Federation you are putting yourself in the hands of the Commonwealth, and the expansion of the individual is possible. 128. Do you regard that provision for equal representation in the Senate as an effective protection of the States? —I should say not, seeing that now, carrying the simile out, we have forty-two votes —that is to say, we have the whole of the Legislative Council vote for the benefit of New Zealand, whereas we will only have a seventh if we join the Federation. 129. Do you not think the tendency of the Senate will be to conserve the State rights ? —lt may or it may not; I cannot say. 130. It has been suggested that the more outlying States will be inclined to join together for mutual advantage: do you think there is anything in that ?—lt seems to me that the States on the continent have the most in common. We are isolated and remote. 131. With regard to these big public-work schemes that are looming ahead, do you think they are such as the Commonwealth will go in for more and more to our disadvantage ?—Yes, I think so. 132. Yet, do you think the Commonwealth Parliament would be so regardless of New Zealand's interest as to charge us for such works without giving us an equivalent ?—lt amounts to this : You put your head into the lion's mouth trusting he will not bite ; but he often does bite ; and it seems to me that by joining the Commonwealth we simply become a new joint in the kangaroo's tail to be wagged as and when he pleases. 133. Do you think the lands of tropical Australia will be taken over by the Government and developed ?—I cannot say. I cannot tell what the Federal Government will do. I can only point out that we give them power to do these things. 134. But you imply that the community of interest in Australia will tend to make them do it ? —I contend that, whatever the community of interest in Australia may be, we are distinct. 134 a. Do you think that the insularity of New Zealand is likely to lead to a distinct type of people in this colony ? —I know it is held by some New Zealand statesmen that there will be a distinct type created in time, but I have not been able to form any opinion on that. 135. Have you considered the question of coloured labour in Australia ?—I have not. 136. Do you think it is probable that the Federal Government will be moved to great military and naval schemes, making necessary the imposition of special taxation ?—I cannot see how a Federal great naval and military scheme can help us, because, if a great crisis occurred, it seems to me that the standing army raised or kept in Australia would not benefit us. We would especially require naval defence; but if we belonged to the Federation we would, I conceive, have to rely on an Australasian navy which would, I apprehend, be, relatively to the other navies of the world, insignificant. 137. You would regard special taxation for such purposes in Australia as being a disadvantage to us ? —I think so. 138. Hon. the Chairman.] •Do you consider that the right of appeal to the Privy Council is taken away by the Act, excepting upon constitutional questions ? —I am inclined to think so. 139. Look at section 74, "Appeal to Queen in Council": does not that seem to limit the power of appeal ?—lt seems to me to leave the whole thing in nubibus. It is left to the Parliament to decide. 140. But, if the matter is left in nubibus, how do you arrive at the decision that the right of appeal is taken away ?—I should say that the right of appeal is taken away. 141. Do you not think the Imperial Government would still be a protection to us, federation or no federation ?—lt may be that the Imperial navy would be withdrawn from Australasian waters if the Commonwealth formed a navy of its own. 142. In what period do you think it would be possible for the Commonwealth to establish a navy of their own ?—I should think that the expense would be so great as to make it prohibitive for them ever to do it.
355
A.—4
Petbe Virtue examined. (No. 130.) 143. Hon. the Chairman.'] You reside in Auckland ?—Yes. 144. And you are manager of the Northern Roller Milling Company?— Yes. 145. How long have you lived in New Zealand ?—Thirty-two years. 146. Have you resided in Australia?—l lived there when I was very young. 147. Will you give the Commission your opinion as to the probable effect the federation of New Zealand with the Commonwealth of Australia would have on this colony ?—I will furnish a few particulars referring to the trade of this colony with Australia which has come under my notice, and which I think will assist in proving that it is not to the interests of this colony to become a State of the Commonwealth, but I think a reciprocal tariff would work admirably. This colony has shipped to Australia a large amount of produce, sometimes owing to drought there, and more often to overproduction in New Zealand. I think, if the bulk of the New Zealand merchants were asked if they had benefited financially by shipping to Australia during the last fifteen years, I would be quite safe in anticipating their reply by answering " No." New South Wales four years ago was importing wheat, flour, produce, &c.; now she is exporting, practically closing her doors to our produce, and if we are to wait for droughts, which occur about every six years, it will be a blue outlook for this colony to go on overproducing for a drought, and even if one were to take place a tariff would not stop importations from America or elsewhere. Tasmania and Victoria are now supplying potatoes, &c, quite equal to what New Zealand can produce. My experience of consigning produce to New South Wales and Queensland over a period of fifteen years was a disastrous one. When a drought occurred supplies poured in from all quarters, causing a glut, and reducing prices of the imported articles below cost, as they were bought at an advance by merchants ; and even when shipped on farmers' account the results were likewise bad. We must bear in mind that once an Australian drought breaks it soon changes the aspect of the markets, and there is nothing more deceptive than a weather market. The Australian farmers have certain advantages in the shape of water-carriage to their shipping ports which our New Zealand farmers do not enjoy. I think our railage rates on produce are excessive; for instance, a fifty-mile New Zealand railage on wheat is 3d. per bushel; and yet you can bring the same article from the Bluff to Auckland, or send to Sydney, for less. Against the water-carriage it may be argued that the New Zealand farmers' yield of wheat, &c, per acre is much larger ; but I suppose it may be said, in reply to that argument, that the New Zealand farmer's land costs him considerably more per acre than the Australian's. Australia's shipping outlet consists of five large ports, which is an inducement for ships from all parts of the world seeking employment to make for any of those ports (more particularly Newcastle or Sydney), knowing that there will always be a load for somewhere, which at once puts Australia far ahead of New Zealand in securing lower rates of freight for either wheat, produce, wool and tallow, &c. If you will kindly refer to the southern shipping registers, I think you will find that the bulk of the sailers who loaded wool and grain for London were brought across from Australia with coal at ballast rates. How many ports has New Zealand compared with Australia ? Why, New Zealand is all front, side, and back doors, with heavy port charges, and vessels will never come seeking this way. What is the difference in population ? I think, if a return were prepared showing the amount of coal, bark, sugar, salt, timber, manures, wines, and fruit imported from Australia during the last three years, it would compare favourably as regards value to what we exported to Australia during the same period. No doubt before long there will be a large number of ordinary-sized sailers and steamers, only fit for carrying coal and timber, that have been employed carrying coal to South Africa and the Bast, making for Australia to get employment ; and it was their absence from Australian waters that caused the scarcity of tonnage and advanced rates of freight for coal and timber. At present the tonnage is keeping pace with the demand; but, if the tonnage is doubled, freights must fall for both coal and timber. Naturally there will be a glut of both articles in both colonies ; but if a cheap timber freight could be relied upon (without flooding our market with coals) it w T ould assist in meeting a tariff if it were imposed on New Zealand timbers by Australia. For your information, I would also like to place before you the following compilation, showing the world's harvest dates: — " January : Harvest is ended in most districts of Australia, and shipments have been made of the new crop. Chili, New Zealand, Argentine Eepublic. " February : Upper Egypt, India. " March : Egypt, India. " April: Coast of Egypt, Syria, Cyprus, India, Persia, Asia Minor, Mexico, Cuba. "May: Persia, Asia Minor, Algeria, Syria, Texas, Florida, Morocco, Mid China, Japan, Central Asia. " June: California, Oregon, Southern United States, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Hungary, Turkey, Boumelia, Danube, South Eussia, South of France, Danubian Principalities, Greece, Sicily, Louisiana (North and South), Tennessee, Virginia, Kentucky, Kansas, Arkansas, Utah, Colorado, Missouri. " July : Southern, Eastern, and Midland English Counties, Oregon, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, lowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, New England, New York, Virginia, Upper Canada, France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Switzerland, Italy, Eussia, Poland. "August: United Kingdom, France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, Manitoba, Columbia (British), Lower Canada, Hudson's Bay Territory, Denmark, Poland. "September: Scotland, England—Hops and. roots. America—Maize. Athabasca—Wheat, barley, &c. Sweden, North Russia, France—Beet-root and buck-wheat. " October : Scotland, America—Maize-crop. France, Germany—Vintage. " November : Australia (North), Peru, South Africa. " December: Australia (South), Chili, Argentine Eepublic."
A.—4
356
I refer to my experience by way of explanation. I was in the employ of the Bank of New Zealand and Estates Company for eighteen years, looking after their interests in several firms and managing trading companies. 148. Mr. Millar.] How do you think federation will affect the milling trade ?—lt would not assist it. 149. Mr. Beauchamp.] In respect to consignments, are you of opinion that there will still be large quantities of produce exported to New South Wales on consignment ?—ln regard to the market over there, when there is a likelihood of the potato-crop failing the farmers here put in a large amount of potatoes, but they also do the same in Victoria, and there is no outlet for New Zealand produce. I sent over 3,000 tons of potatoes in all at various times, and they took them outside the Heads and dumped them. 150. Australia produces something like 40,000,000 bushels of wheat against New Zealand's 9,000,000, and I also notice that flour, generally speaking, is cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand, so that with inter-free-trade would we not look for competition from the Australian flourmillers in this colony ?— Yes. 151. They could export the flour as cheaply to New Zealand as we can from Dunedin to Auckland ?—Yes, and they do. 152. That is the source of competition we would have to fear? —Yes. 153. Mr. Luke.] You referred to these large fleets of shipping that would apply for the carrying trade in Australia?— Yes. 154. Do you not see in that an advantage, inasmuch as we could put ourselves into communication with the various markets which we otherwise could not get at ? —lt would harm our coal trade, for ships would run down here from Newcastle with coal for 3s. to ss. a ton. They can take coal outwards from there for anywhere. 155. Are we not quickly overcoming our own wants, and require an outlet for our products ?— I think we are reducing our products; the acreage is less than it used to be. 156. You are speaking of one line of produce, lam speaking of exports generally: is there not a large market looming up in the East by reason of the opening-up of China and other places ? —No, I think not. We cannot compete against the low freights from Australia. 157. You do not think the more prolific nature of our soil and our larger yield will enable us to get over the opposition from the other side ?—We can ship butter and mutton much better than they can in Australia. 158. I see you exported from Auckland last year nearly six thousand pounds' worth of butter ? —Most of that would he for transhipment, I expect; no doubt to West Australia or the East. 159. A large amount of hides are sent out ?—We import hides from Australia now, and are still short of our requirements. 160. I see you export a great amount of maize to Australia? —Yes. 161. Will not that market be affected? —No; they only take it when they must have it. 162. But you have a steady market for maize now, have you not?—No ; the stores up here are full for six months sometimes. 163. From a producer's point of view you see no advantage in federation ?—None at all. The fault just now is overproduction, and if a tariff is put on the farmers will know that there is no outlet for that produce, and they will have to alter their farming to suit it. 164. Do you not think we will become very narrow in our views if we remain outside ? —I think we can manage all right. We go ahead here quite fast enough. 165. Does not federation give us possibilities that we have not now ?—I do not think so. 166. Mr. Leys.] How do wages and hours here in your trade compare with Australia ?—They are about the same. 167. How do you account for the low price of Australian flour?—lt costs less to mill Australian wheat. If the tariff was taken off wheat, as much wheat as flour would come in. 168. How would that affect the Canterbury growers ?—lt would affect them more than it would us in the North Island. 169. Do you think wheat would come in for milling purposes ?—I think it might come in at Dunedin, Wellington, or Auckland. 170. But do you think a large quantity of both wheat and flour would come into the North Island especially ?—Yes. 171. Hon. the Chairman.] In a return I have before me of the wages paid in the various Australasian Colonies it is stated that the flour-millers of New Zealand get from ss. to 10s. per day, and that in New South Wales they get from 2s. 6d. to 18s. 4d. per day ?—I suppose they employ more boy-labour. 172. In New Zealand the maximum wage is 10s., and in Australia it is 18s. 4d. ?—Boys are paid 2s. 6d., though, in Australia. 18s. 4d. must mean mill foreman ; if so, we pay at the same rate in New Zealand— i.e., according to size of mill. 173. You do not think there is much difference in the wages ?—No. James Pack examined. (No. 131.) 174. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?— Manager of the Onehunga Woollen-mills. 175. How long have those mills been working ?—Fourteen years in August. 176. How many hands are employed ?—About eighty-four. 177. How long have you been living in New Zealand yourself?— About seventeen years. 178. How would the woollen industry be affected in the event of New Zealand going into the Commonwealth of Australia?—We are so contented with our own local market in connection with the woollen trade that we would have nothing to do with federation at all.
357
A.—4.
179. Supposing New Zealand did federate, would you be able to compete with the woollenmills of Australia ?—Yes, if they make the same value of goods as we make. But I am well acquainted with the trade in Australia, and we must take into consideration the fact that there are thousands of people there and elsewhere who are wearing clothes which have been worn three and four times before. We make pure articles here ; they do not. 180. Do they use cotton ?—They use shoddy on cotton warps. 181. If they use wool all through you could compete with them? —Yes. 182. You could go into Australia?— Yes. 183. And you would not be afraid of their interfering with your trade here ?—I would not be a bit afraid if it was not for their shoddy trade. Supposing some thousands of pieces of these shoddy goods were put on our market over here, it would affect us. 184. Do you think the New Zealand mills would be tempted to go into the shoddy line ? — Decidedly not. 185. Do you think the trade here would be distinctly prejudiced by federation ?—I do. 186. Apart from the quality of the goods, have they in Australia any advantage over you in the hours of labour and rates of pay ?—-They have a little in the rates of pay, but not in the hours of labour, so far as I know. The lowest wages we pay here for children is lls. per week ; over there it is 6s. Bd., I think. 187. Mr. Leys.] You have come in contact with the working-population over in Australia : how do they compare with New Zealand workers in the matter of energy ?—Very much the same. 188. Do you think, on the whole, that the pay in Australia is much about the same as in this colony?—No, not on the average; it is better paid here. 189. Where was your experience ?—I was engaged in the Old Country to come to a place called Warrnambool. I was there seven years, and was then employed at the Yarraville works. That was almost a shoddy factory. I used to keep three sets of machines going on it. It is very detrimental to the general public that such goods should be allowed to be made, for you do not know who has worn these garments before. 190. Why do you not think New Zealand should go in for that class of trade if there is a demand for it ?—There is no demand for it here, nor even Victoria. They go in for it simply because they want a cheap thing. 191. Then, how would its importation interfere with the local trade?— Simply because people will buy cheap goods. They look well, but do not wear well. 192. Is there much cotton used in Victoria in woollen-manufacture?—ln one factory there is. 193. Have the mills in Australia any advantage in point of size—that is, in quantity of production ? —I do not think so. I think we produce more than they do. 194. Do you think they would be likely to have a surplus that they would want to clear in this market ? —Yes, I think so, because two of their mills have been standing idle for a very long time, and some one might take them up and work them. 195. Mr. Beauchamp.] Does not this shoddy undergo antiseptic treatment? —All the antiseptic treatment it gets is that an acid is sprinkled upon it to kill any vermin that it may be infested with. 196. It would not be sufficient to kill the germs of disease?— Some germs might remain in the clothes for years. I believe consumption is spread broadcast by means of this. 197. You think that with inter-free-trade we would have to face competition from this shoddy material ?—We are so thoroughly convinced and satisfied with our trade at the present time that we will not run any risk; we think it is premature, and want to let well alone. 198. Is the woollen industry flourishing ?—Yes ; they are working night and day. 199. Mr. Roberts.] Do you know if cotton has been used of late in Australia?— Yes, it is used every day. 200. I suppose you know that the price of cotton is about the same as that of low-quality wool ?—I know it is much higher than it was. 201. Do you think there is any quantity of shoddy made in Australia ?—I think there is a great quantity. 202. I suppose you know that a great many cheap tweeds are made here too ? —Yes, but they are made of pure wool. 203. But the quality must be very low for suits to be sold at 18s. 6d. a suit. There cannot be much quantity or quality there ? —They are of good quality and wear well, but only go 7J oz. to the yard. Arthur Cecil Whitney examined. (No. 132.) 204. Hon. the Chairman.] You are manager in Auckland of the Colonial Ammunition Company at Mount Eden ?—Yes, manager and attorney. 205. That company supplies the New Zealand Government with small-arms ammunition ?— That is so. 206. Do you know whether it supplies all that is used by the Colonial Government, or is some imported ? —There has been some imported, but the company is able to supply all that the Government requires. The amount that was imported was at the time an emergency order on account of the South African War. 207. Your company has an establishment in Australia, has it not ?—Yes. 208. Supposing New Zealand federated with Australia, how would the supply of small-arms ammunition be affected ?—I suppose the works here would be merged in the Australian works. We would take the works from here to there; we can get cheaper labour over there, and by conserving our operations at one point could produce at a larger profit. 209. Of course, the Government might have something to say to that ?—Yes; I am speaking, of course, on the assumption that the company had a free hand.
A.—4
358
210. Supposing that were so, would there not be certain difficulties with ammunition from Australia in time of war? —Probably the Commonwealth over there would see that they were well supplied first, and New Zealand would come last. 211. Assuming that they were willing to let us have an equal quantity, would there not be great difficulty and danger in having it brought over here ?—We would be open to danger by our transports being captured by ships of war. 212. Would there be any other disadvantage to New Zealand beyond what you have said?— Of course, there would be the loss of the industry to New Zealand. 213. How many are employed in the industry in New Zealand at the present time ?—Eightyfive. 214. What is the maximum number of hands you have had?—lol. Our busiest season is generally March, April, and May. 215. How many hands are you capable of employing, supposing the New Zealand Government took all the small-arms ammunition they require from the factories ? —That depends upon the quantity required. We have machinery to manufacture 4,000,000 rounds a year of '303, besides other ammunition. 216. At present you are supplying about 2,ooo,ooo?—About 2,500,000. 217. Are you prepared to express any opinion on the question of federation, apart from the particular matter I have asked you about ?—I have not studied the question enough to be able to express an opinion. 218. Mr. Roberts.] Do you not think the effect of federation, if carried out, would be to equalise the cost of wages all over? —It might. 219. So that it is just probable your company would not be in a hurry to remove to Australia until they found what the effect of federation on wages would be ? —That is so. 220. Mr. Millar.} Is your factory in Australia able to turn out the whole of the ammunition required for the Australian Colonies ?—lt is not at the present moment. We supply all the colonies but one. We are the only manufacturers of ammunition in the colonies, and we anticipate being made the Federal factory for the supply of small arms and ammunition. 221. Then, even outside the question of wages, you would centralise your work?— Yes; it would reduce the cost of production. 222. A certain portion of the labour here would either be unemployed or follow you over to Australia?— Yes. It would be the same in many industries—we would sink our identity, 223. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you employ mixed labour—male and female?— Yes. 224. What is the maximum wage?—£4 ss. for male mechanics, and 12s. to £1 10s. and up to £2 for females. 225. Do you not think that under federation there is a possibility of the factory remaining in New Zealand, and enlarging its output to meet the growing needs of New Zealand ?—That would depend upon what the New Zealand Government decides. 226. Would not the Federal Government insist on the factory being retained in this country? —Considering that New Zealand would have so small a say in the matter, probably they would not. 227. Would not it be to the interest of" every State in the matter of defence to put New Zealand in such a position that they would insist on the factory being in the Colony of New Zealand ?—Yes, perhaps that is so. 228. Is not it running a great risk that we should depend upon our supplies coming from Australia? —Yes. 229. Mr. Leys.] When you say that wages are cheaper in Australia, were you speaking from a comparison with what is paid in your factory over there and what you pay here ?—Yes ; and we find greater ease in getting hands over there than here. 230. Under the Commonwealth Act defence is a Commonwealth matter, and I presume New Zealand would have no say in determining whether your factory should remain here or be taken away? —Not unless a special condition should be made if federation takes place. Eev. John Chapman Andeew examined. (No. 133.) 231. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a clergyman?— Yes, of the Church of England. lam also a landowner andj.settler. I have resided in New Zealand since 1857. I was a member of the Provincial Council at Wellington from 1870 to the abolition of the provinces, and for six years I was a member of the General Assembly. 232. Have you given attention to the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth ? —Yes. The following are my views on the matter: A strong argument for the freedom of Corcyra (Corfu) from the mainland of Greece, recorded by Thucydides, is its self-sufficing position. Changes in facility of locomotion, and the many appliances of civilised life, have altered the relative positions of Corfu and Greece, and they are now, by the liberality of the British Government, united. But what was ages ago the relative position of Corfu and Greece is still that of Australia and New Zealand. We are too far off to be intimately united and virtually one country — as Wales and Scotland are with England. We are too small not to be overborne, if our interests clash, by the mass of the Australian Continent. By uniting ourselves to it we should put out of our own hands the solution of problems which we can, I think, best determine for ourselves — e.g., the question of free-trade and protection would pass beyond our scope. The position, the privileges, and restrictions on aboriginal and dark races will have to be settled in Australia for itself. Here we have admitted the Maoris to equal or greater privileges than our own. Exceptional legislation might be required by the Australian Federation if the Maoris are to retain their present equality with us. As for defence, if the Empire or New Zealand were in danger from outside enemies our position in the southern seas is a safe and dominant one, quite superior to that of Great Britain on
359
A.—4
the coast of Europe. Our silver streak is twelve hundred miles across, and beyond it is not an historic enemy, but our fellow-subjects and kinsmen. Australia, in case of foreign war, would, from self-interest, be obliged to aid us as much as if we were formally united to her, in the same way as Great Britain is to defend Jersey and the Channel Islands. The expense to this country of union with Australia would probably be not less than half a million sterling per annum. The benefits would be the gain of a small sum per bushel on oats, and perhaps some other products of our colder climate, provided the price of such articles should be raised by protective duties in Australia. We should also gain by union some 10d. a bottle on Australian wine, and more on brandy, and we should get tobacco cheaper. The loss to our revenue from all these sources would have to be made good by extra taxation of some sort on persons, many of whom neither drink Australian wine nor smoke, and are perhaps teetotalers. I came out to this country forty or fifty years ago hoping to establish a home for the children and grandchildren whom Providence might give me. I should be sorry to see them deprived of a particle of that independence we at present enjoy ; part of that independence would certainly, I think, be lost by a union with Australia. 233. Have you considered how federation would affect the finances of this colony ?—I have not considered it much in detail, but my impression is that it would lead to considerable extra taxation in the colony. 234. Are you a Free-trader or a Protectionist ?—-In either case my opinion would be the same as I have expressed in my address. As a matter of fact, lam a Free-trader; but if even I were a Protectionist I think it is far better that the question should be settled by ourselves, among ourselves, for ourselves, than by outside people who might outvote us in the Federal Parliament. 235. Do you think the question of free-trade in New Zealand would be more satisfactorily settled by New Zealand remaining a separate State or by its federating with Australia ?—I think it would be very much better settled in New Zealand by ourselves for ourselves. William McLaughlin examined. (No. 134.) 236. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are a farmer? —Yes, residing at Papatoitoi. I have lived in New Zealand thirty-eight years. 237. Are you acquainted with Australia at all?— Yes; I have been up country both in New South Wales and Victoria. 238. How do you think the agricultural interests of this colony would be affected by New Zealand federating with Australia? —I think we would be better left free by ourselves than be joined to the Australian Colonies. With good seasons those colonies can produce most of the cereals we can produce at a cheaper rate than ourselves, and in a bad season they must take our stuff no matter what the price is, and they have to pay the duty themselves if they put it on. Twelve years ago, during a very bad drought, I was up country four hundred miles from Sydney, and there the station-horses were being fed from New Zealand chaff and oats, which had cost the people £10 a ton, while in New Zealand the price was only £4 a ton. Apparently they were willing enough to pay the extra £6 in freight in order to keep their horses from starving. 239. Does it not occur to you that in the event of federation there would be a much larger market for New Zealand agricultural produce in Australia ?—I do not think so. 240. Can you see any advantage that would accrue to New Zealand from federating with Australia?—l can see none at all. We should lose our independence ;we are too far away, and would be left out in the cold. 241. Mr. Beauchamp.] You say you know some parts of Australia pretty well?— Yes. 242. Do you think that produce can be put into the market there at a cheaper rate than it can here ?—Yes; in South Australia they can make 4 bushels of wheat to the acre pay as against our 20—that is, at 2s. 6d. a bushel. 243. Do you fear the competition that would arise from the Australian wheat-growers in the event of federation ?—1 do not think it would make very much difference, because the price here is ruled by the Home market. 244. Is it a fact that a larger area of land every year is being brought into cultivation in Australia? —Yes, and here too. 245. Mr. Luke.] Is it the high price in New Zealand that requires the 20 bushels to the acre to make it pay? —No, but climatic influences. 246. Does 4 bushels to the acre pay the cost and leave a profit in the case of wheat ?—They keep growing it there, so I suppose it pays. Harvesting is cheaper there, because they can take a stripping-machine and at one operation put the grain into the bag. 247. What difficulty is there against our doing that? —Our wheat is too soft, and we could not use the machine on it. Our wheat requires to be put into stooks and stacks six weeks before you use it. 248. What is the average yield in the Auckland District ?—ln our district about 40 bushels. 249. Would not that give a considerable advantage as against the 4 bushels, or even the 8 bushels, in Australia ? —I think so. 250. In any case you -say we would not be able to compete against Victoria ?—We do not grow enough to supply ourselves. 251. But, looking to the future, when you can more than supply local needs, will you not then want an outside market for your surplus ?—I think England would be our market. 252. Would not the market in Australia afford us a better market than England ?—I do not think we can grow wheat as cheaply as they can in Australia. When I said that they require 4 bushels to the acre to make it pay, I did not mean to imply that they can only grow 4 bushels, because they average about 16 in New South Wales as against our 40, and in Adelaide the average has gone down to 2 J and up to 10 and 12 bushels. 253. Mr. Leys.] As a matter of fact, do they not sometimes export wheat from Australia to New Zealand now ?—We import from Australiajjbeeause we do not grow enough ourselves.
A.—4
360
254. So that we have no prospect of a market there ?—No. 255. Do you think the protective duties in Victoria have had much to do in excluding New Zealand produce from that colony ? —I do not think so, because I do not think that they require any of our surplus produce—either wheat, oats, or potatoes, which they grow at Warrnambool, in Victoria, better than we grow them here. In old times we sent potatoes there, but for the last few years I do not know of any having been sent to Melbourne. 256. In that case the repeal of the duties would have no effect ? —No. 257. From your visits to Australia, have you found that the Australians know very much about New Zealand affairs ? —Speaking of the general population, I do not think they do ; but, of course, the intelligent people do. But when you go up country you find that the people know very little of any other place beyond their own continent. 258. Did you find that they had a better knowledge of other States of the continent than they had of New Zealand ? —Yes. 259. You think there is a community of interest there that does not exist towards New Zealand ? —An Australian can talk to you about any of the Australian Colonies, but he cannot talk to you about New Zealand. 260. You think that this separation by sea is a very essential difference from a separation by simply a land-boundary ?—Oh, yes, very. Thomas Hadfibld examined. (No. 135.) 261. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you?—A bootmaker. 262. And you are the president of the Bootmakers' Union in Auckland?—l am not at the present time. I hold no official capacity now, but I did at one time. 263. Can you tell us whether the question of federation has been lately considered by that union ? —I cannot say it has been considered to any great extent, but I believe the feeling amongst the men is that they are afraid of the tariff question. That is the all-absorbing topic amongst them. 264. Are they opposed to federation on that ground?—l am not speaking officially for the union, but only giving the opinions of individual members with whom I have come in contact. 265. What is your individual opinion ?—That it is a very important question as a national question, and looking at it from beyond the point of our individual trade. I could not have ventured to come here had I not been summoned to appear. 266. Well, have you not formed any opinion on the matter as a national question ?—I cannot arrive at a very clear conclusion; but I consider we have capable men here in our trade equal to those of Australia, we have as good machinery, and I am of opinion that to do away with these tariff strifes would be a good thing. I am not advocating free-trade or protection, but to do away with the tariff strife between the colonies. It would be a good thing for the Australian and the New-Zealander to be one people. 267 Do you know that if New Zealand federated with Australia there would be free-trade between there and New Zealand ?—So far, I believe that that policy would be a correct one. 268. If there were free-trade between Australia and New Zealand, do you think the bootmaking industry in New Zealand could successfully compete with Australia ?—The great fear is Sydney, not Melbourne. 269. In the larger establishments in Australia we are told that they are able to specialise their work, and therefore to produce goods at a less cost and in larger quantities than New Zealand can :do you agree with that or not ?—I believe that is the case in Sydney; and, speaking for Melbourne, Ithink the wages there are as good as they are here. 270. Are you aware of how the trade in New Zealand is affected by goods imported from Melbourne ?—Yes; but I am prepared to say that I believe we are more affected by American goods than we are even by Sydney trade. 271. These goods come from America notwithstanding that you have a highly protective tariff, and, if New Zealand federated, is it not to be presumed that the tariff would be lower ?—Yes. 272. Then, if that were so, America could very easily compete with New Zealand ?—Yes, I am prepared to admit that as an industry we might suffer ; but, looking at federation from a broader standpoint —from that of the unity of the British people of these colonies—l think we should lose sight of our one little industry. 273. But are you any less a part of the British people or the British Empire by remaining an independent colony as you are now ?—■ No ; we are all under one flag, and in a sense federated with the whole Empire at present. 274. Then, I take it that you are in favour of federation ?—There are two great questions before the Australian Confederation that I would like the New Zealand people to watch —namely, the black-labour question and the tariff question. I think it would pay us well to wait and see how those two great questions are solved before we go further into the question. I advocate delay for the present. 275. Mr. Leys.} Have you worked in Australia?— No. 276. You do not know, then, how the wages compare with ours ?—I believe that they compare favourably with ours in the case of Melbourne, and are slightly lower in Sydney. 277. It has been said that Victoria has sufficient bootmaking machinery now to enable her to supply the whole of Australasia with boots : have you heard that ?—I would not dispute it. I think that New Zealand has more than enough to supply all she wants at the present time. 278. Do you think that the Victorian bootmakers, working on a huge scale and specialising, would send their surplus stocks to New Zealand ?—They would send their goods wherever there was a market for them.
361
A.—4
279. Do you think our industries, being comparatively small, could contend against that kind of competition ? —I do not think the tendency of the age is to absorb industries. They can generally manage to struggle on, and it is only a struggle to-day in New Zealand in the boot trade. 280. You do not think the tendency is to aggregate into large factories ?—As far as my opinion goes, wherever there is a very large establishment in America it takes the whole of the time to make these establishments pay. 281. Do you think that with our small population we can create these great factories and specialise the different lines ? —No, not at the present time. 282. Under those circumstances, do you think we could hold our own against such factories ? —They could not attempt it; and, as far as the boot trade is concerned, federation might affect it; but I look at federation from the broader national standpoint of getting rid of this tariff strife. 283. Is not England the best market for our produce ?—Yes ; not for New Zealand boots. 284. Do any New Zealand goods go to Australia?—l am not aware of any. 285. Should we not be able to introduce free-trade better if we maintained the control of our own affairs ? —I am not advocating free-trade, but uniformity between the colonies, so as to do away with tariff strife. 286. I understand you to say that you want to get rid of these tariffs within the Empire ?— The tariff strife ; and, by that I mean the strife between New South Wales and Victoria, which is constantly going on in these two small colonies. 287. That is a case of border duties, and does not affect us here. Do you think that other industries besides the bootmaking would suffer from the same cause—the want of population ?—I would rather leave other industries to speak for themselves. 288. Is there any specialising amongst the different industries here ?—The tendency is that way. 289. Is that found practicable with our small markets ?—No; orders are too small. 290. With regard to social legislation in New Zealand, do you think that what has been passed has been beneficial to the workers or otherwise ?—The men that I have talked with consider we have had advanced legislation here, and some are afraid that they might lose that if we federated, but personally I do not; the tendency is rather to go upwards. I think our social legislation has been beneficial. 291. Of course, you know that such legislation does not exist in New South Wales?—l do. 292. Well, if we federated, do you think we should be prejudicially affected through the lower conditions of labour there ?—I do not. 293. You think the fact that they are not under any labour restrictions would not make any difference to us ?—I am taking the promised legislation of the Commonwealth, and Ido not see that we have anything to fear from it, because we shall get those things passed in the Commonwealth Legislature—such as the Old-age Pensions, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which have been promised. 294. Po you not think that it is more difficult in a large population, such as Melbourne and Sydney, to enforce legislation of that kind, seeing there is a greater struggle for employment ?—I always consider that the larger the population—take Europe, for instance—the harder it is to get legislation passed. It is so in England, and many men come out to the colonies for that very reason. 295. In that case, is it not likely to be a long time before legislation of that kind can be brought into operation in Australia ?—We should look to the future of the British race, and to the time when we shall be one united people in these waters ; and I see great results which are likely to accrue through combinations, but disastrous results are likely to arise from division. 296. Do you apprehend that, if we do not federate, hostility will arise between Australia and New Zealand?—l hope not; but I cannot say what will be brought about in the future. I will not depreciate my brothers in Australia to the degree of believing that they entertain any animosity towards us. We are one under the same flag, and it is that sentiment we are constantly applauding. I believe our brothers in Australia would rush to our aid if we were invaded, and likewise we would go to their aid in case of necessity. In fact, there is already a spirit of federation in existence. 297. Do you not see any practical disadvantage in having to go so far away to get measures passed to benefit the colony ?• —A distance always involves certain difficulties; but I read some time ago that the distance is constantly decreasing, and certainly we are as near to the centre of government as some of the affiliated colonies. 298. 1 suppose you know that Western Australia was very reluctant to come in on that account ?—I think it is very necessary to be cautious as to how we proceed, and by exhibiting caution Western Australia did herself credit. 299. Mr. Luke.] What industries did you refer to as struggling now ?—To my own trade. 300. You have no knowledge of the condition of other trades in the colony? —I think the tailoring industry has a struggle also. 301. You think that under federation that struggle would be diminished?—No, I cannot say it would; but I want to see this tariff strife done away with, as it is absurd for a few of our people to put prohibitive tariffs against others. 302. How is it that, if these factories are too great in Victoria, the boot business has not extended itself to New South Wales, where there has been a free tariff so far ?—We have not been capable of doing it. 303. Do you not think that under federation that possibility would still exist ? — Certainly ; but, looking at the matter from the broad standpoint of the unity of these colonies, I should be in favour of it; but still I should like our Government to first ascertain what is likely to be the outcome of the struggle on the two important questions I have mentioned. 46—A. 4.
A.—4
362
304. You would prefer a reciprocal treaty rather than pledging ourselves to federation ? —I am thoroughly in favour of it. 305. Will you tell me what interests you think will be promoted by federation—looking to the future, and losing sight of how a particular trade-might be affected injuriously at present?— The strengthening of the bonds of a common people. I would not support breaking away from the Imperial authority for one moment. 306. Do you think that federation would help to bring about the early federation of the British Empire ?—I think that if we were federated at present it would be a step in the right direction, and one towards that greater federation we all desire. 307. Do you not think that two Powers existing in these southern seas might not bring Imperial federation about earlier than one nation knocking at the door, for instance ?—I cannot answer that question ; but I feel satisfied that the Imperial Government appreciates both of these countries. 308. Do you not think that we as a people have different aspirations, aims, and objects to the Australian people ?—I do not. 309. Mr. Beauchamp.] In what condition is your trade at the present time here ? —lt is not flourishing. 310. You are met with considerable competition from America ?—Yes. 311. And the protective tariff is 22-J per cent. ?—About that. 312. It has been suggested that the tariff which would be established by the Commonwealth might be about 15 per cent., in which case you would have still greater competition from the outside world, added to which you would have the internal competition from the other colonies through inter-State free-trade : do you not think that that would have a prejudicial effect on your particular industry here ? —I do not want my trade built up by that miserable process. lam not speaking for my fellow-workmen. Many of our men are half-starved now—under protection. 313. So that, viewed from the trade standpoint, you do not care what might happen to our industries under federation ?—I would not like to say that with regard to our industries, although they are small. I cannot believe that any of them would go down. 314. But with a lower tariff than the present, under inter-free-trade between the States, would not the competition be much keener ? —After all that is said about the Australian cheap labour we do not get our towns flooded by it, and, if this is such a wonderful place for the workers, it is a wonder they do not come over here. 315. Mr. Millar.] I think you said that you looked at this from a national point of view. I would like to know how you applied the word " national" :do you mean from the point of view of a New-Zealander, or from that of a Britisher ?—I mean looking at it from a broader standpoint than that of one individual industry. 316. Are you viewing it from the point of view of a New-Zealander?—Yes. 317. Can you tell me what practical benefit is going to accrue to the worker through federation ?—I am speaking from the national point of view. " Unity gives strength " ; therefore it would be beneficial to us as a people, and I think the workers would be benefited on the whole. 318. Do you not think that there is the makings of a nation in the country without an alliance with any other Power?— Yes, there might be ; but lam confident that if the whole of Australia were to propose to our Premier and to the New Zealand Government that they should come in under our Government, they would take it on at once. 319. You have been twenty-six years in New Zealand ? —Yes. 320. Do you know what has been done during that period for the wage-earners of this colony ? —Yes. 321. Have you seen anything of that sort in Australia for the last twenty years?—We are further in advance than they are. 322. Have you seen a copy of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act of New South Wales ?— No. 323. Coming to the question of black labour, you said we ought to wait before federating until such time as that question was settled ?—I think it would be wise. 324. Do you anticipate that there will be anything else but black labour in Northern Queensland ?—I am not a believer that the white man is going to dominate black labour also. As a worker, I say we need not be afraid that black labour is going to compete with white labour. A black man has as much right to live on this earth as a white man ; and those gentlemen who say that black labour is necessary, I hope will treat them as human beings, and not as slaves. 325. You admit that, as far as the tropical portion of Australia is concerned, black labour will have to be used there, or else the land will have to remain a desert ? —Black labour must be used in some portions of the earth; this is their home, and they ought to be treated properly. 326. Would you give them any special rights ?—I want them to have a good living, to be comfortably well housed, and not whipped. 327. Would you draw a hard-and-fast line over which the whites should not cross ? —Not at present. 328. If we federated, and Australia admitted black labour, you could not object to black labour coming here, could you?— Certainly not. 329. If it came here, what is it going to do ?—We have any amount of coloured labour employed on our vessels, and the British Empire has as many coloured people as white people under its flag. 330. How many British people do you find sailing under our flag now? —I cannot answer that. I do not believe that black labour will supplant white in this colony. 331. You still believe, in the interests of the colony, it would be advisable to federate ?—I stated, and I still hold the opinion, that it would be advisable for us as a colony to wait and see if
363
A.—4
the Commonwealth can settle those two important questions before federating. If they can be solved to the satisfaction of New Zealand, I should have no fear about New Zealand joining the Commonwealth. 332. What is your opinion as to the solution of those two great questions ?—I think wiser men than myself will have to settle those questions. 333. Do you think, if those questions were satisfactorily settled, that we ought to federate, independently of how it would affect the industries of this colony ?—lf it were a free-trade policy it would be all right, or if the policy of the Commonwealth Government continues as is now announced I do not think we should suffer very much. 334. If there were no work in this colony in those industries which will be affected by the tariff, what would become of those people who are depending on those industries ?—I am not assuming that. I could not assume that we should get no work if we federated with Australia. 335. The volume of trade would be reduced by the extra amount of stuff imported owing to the lowering of the tariff, consequently a certain amount of labour would be displaced : what is to become of that labour ? —lt will become absorbed in other channels. We have had too much labour in our industries for many years. Men have to go gum-digging because there is no scope for them in their particular industries. 336. I am talking about all industries generally : do you think it would be an advantage, from a national standpoint, for our population to be driven over to Australia ? —No; but you only assume about their being driven over. 337. Do you know that labour always follows the work, and that if the work drifts to the Australian Colonies from New Zealand the men would have to go to Australia after the work ?— Yes, of course they would. 338. And that reduces the population of New Zealand ?—ln times of boom they have gone to Australia and got work there. 339. And when any business gets into a certain channel it is very hard to attract population back again ? —Yes, I suppose so. 340. Therefore it would be a national loss to New Zealand if the trade were once diverted to Australia ?—I think I stated earlier that I have every confidence in the competency of our men and in the quality of our machinery at the present time. Of .course, our establishments are on a smaller scale. 341. And the larger the scale the less the cost of production ? —Yes, but ours will be larger in time. Samuel Vailb examined. (No. 136.) 342. Hon. the Chairman.'] What is your occupation?— Land agent. 343. Until recently you were president of the Chamber of Commerce in Auckland ?—Yes, up to the 27th February. 344. During your presidency, was the question of federation discussed by the Chamber as a body ? —Yes ; it came up incidentally more than once or twice, but was never thoroughly discussed. In my address on the 27th February I dealt with it more fully perhaps than it had been dealt with before in the Chamber of Commerce. 345. Was any resolution come to by the Chamber on the matter?—l really cannot recollect. 346. What is the conclusion at which you yourself have arrived ? —I am thoroughly averse to New Zealand entering the Federation. 347. Will you please give the Commission the reasons which have led you to come to that conclusion ?—I may say that I have studied this subject with, at any rate, all the care that I have been able to devote to it. I have here before me the Act, and I have watched the discussion, and paid all the attention I could to the subject, feeling it was one of the utmost importance; and I must say that the more I study the matter the more thoroughly I am opposed to New Zealand joining this Federation. I say so because I believe it would be very bad public policy. I think it would be a most fatal step for us to take to join a Federation that we could not by any possibility get out of, except perhaps by civil war, in which we should stand a very poor chance. I think that to join the Federation would have the effect of entirely destroying our national life, and that is a thing we should take the utmost care to preserve. I think that New Zealand would scarcely ever be heard of or thought of if we joined. I would again draw attention to the fact that in the first place the Act was to be called " The Australasian Federation Enabling Act," but now it is not even called " Australasian," but "Australian." So that it appears to me that if we joined the Confederation we should simply cease to exist as a separate community. I do not think we should even be a portion of Australia, but simply a dependency. I think if we joined this Confederation we could not possibly ever expect to produce any statesmen in this colony. I do not see how we could produce governing men here at all, for the simple reason, as it appears to me, that all the power is taken out of our hands. A perusal of this Act leads me to the conclusion that there would be nothing but country affairs, at the outside, left for our Parliament to deal with. If you turn to Part V. you will see that this Act takes thirty-five subjects, now dealt with by our Parliament, out of our command, including our control of the railways. I take it that after we join the Confederation we shall have no power to construct or extend railways. That will lie entirely with the Commonwealth Parliament. Then, clause 69 takes possession of the naval and military defence, marine matters, and some other items. Clause 72 takes away from us the power of appointing Justices and Judges, and clause 98 takes away from us the power to make laws affecting trade, commerce, navigation, and shipping. Well, I ask, if you take away all those powers, what is left to us as a people ? It appears to me that there is nothing at all left by which we may develop leading men. It seems to me to be absolutely certain that after all these things are taken from us it will be a question of a very few years when either our Parliament or the County Councils must cease to exist, as there will be nothing left for
A A
364
them to do. As I read the Federal Enabling Act, it strikes me that the Federal Government have power to legislate for still further things. We have no power to retain anything for ourselves. I think, as regards things of our national life, the position of Australia and New Zealand would be entirely different. If you look at the map of Australia, and bear in mind that it is proposed to fix the Federal capital somewhere in New South Wales, you will see that the most urgent necessity that will arise in Australia will be the connecting of the various States by railways with the Federal capital. When those States are connected there will be a vast number of Australians living within a few hours' ride of the Australian capital. They can be constantly meeting each other and discussing political and social problems. They will have all the elements there to develop national leaders and statesmen ; but where should we be ? Our nearest men would be at least thirteen hundred miles from the capital, and how could we possibly take part in things that were going on there ? It appears to me that we should drift back in every way, and that all our rising men would be placed at an enormous disadvantage. I think the net result would be that the Government of New Zealand must fall into the hands of the Australians. I think we should have little or no chance of sending leading men into the Federal Government. I think it would be a very long time before a New Zealand Premier would be there. It appears to me that the total effect would be to make New Zealand a dependency of Australia. I think that it would have another very bad effect—namely, that our men who could take any part in the government of the country must necessarily be professional politicians. Certain mercantile men and professional men in this country could not take any part, because of the distance and their inability to make themselves cognisant with what is going on. Then, again, so far as the immediate effect on New Zealand is concerned, a good many of us here in Auckland remember what was the effect of removing the capital from Auckland to Wellington. If the capital of New Zealand is to be removed not to " somewhere in Cook Strait," but to somewhere in New South Wales, what will be the effect on Wellington ? I think that that city would be pretty well ruined by the transfer. The immediate commercial effect on New Zealand would be something disastrous. lam speaking from personal knowledge of the effect of removing the capital of New Zealand from Auckland to Wellington, and I think the effect of removing the capital from Wellington to New South Wales would be even more disastrous. Another reason w T hyl object to New Zealand joining this Confederation is the question of the coloured population. 1 think that is a very important matter indeed. If my memory serves me right, one of the States joined Great Britain in the treaty with Japan. lam inclined to think it was Queensland, but lam not sure ; but, if so, how is it possible to get out of the difficulty of allowing Che Japanese to overrun the colony ? If it became one of the federated States of Australia, New Zealand clearly would be open to all the coloured population allowed to enter Australia. There are to be no State barriers, and the probability is that New Zealand would be overrun with Japanese. New Zealand, so my reading tells me, is very much the duplicate of Japan, and, I think, very soon we should be completely swamped by them. That alone is, I think, a reason for our not joining the Confederation as things stand now, and Ido not see how that position can be altered. Then, there are in Australia a great many other Asiatics domiciled there, and they would have the right to come here, and we could not keep ourselves anything like a white community. Then, in connection with this fact of the coloured people, clause 127 would deprive the Maoris of the franchise. That would be a monstrous injustice to inflict upon the Maori people. Coming to the question of finance, I object to entering the Federation on the grounds that the finance would be very much against us, and I think it would be increasingly against us. Clause 87 of the Act provides that for the first ten years the Federal Government is to have the right to expend a quarter of the net Customs and excise revenue. I call your attention to the word " net," which appears to me to throw the expense of collecting the Customs and excise on New Zealand, and I think the cost of collecting these duties from Australia would certainly exceed the cost of collecting them here. The cost last year was within a few pounds of £80,000, speaking from memory. Then, we have to bear in mind that after the ten years the Federal Government has the right to do what it likes with the Customs and excise, and, judging by our experience of the General and Provincial Governments, we may make sure that the whole of that revenue will be absorbed. Thinking it over, I feel sure that even the whole of the Customs revenue will not be sufficient to meet the requirements of the Federal Government, and other means of raising money will have to be devised. In this Act no limit of levying taxation is put on the Government. They may put on taxation to the utmost power of the people to bear it. Having some trifling knowledge of Australia, I feel certain that one of the very first things to be done there is to put down railways to connect the various States with the capital. It is quite certain that £100,000,000 will not construct the railways that are to be constructed in Australia. What benefit would we get from that ? We should have to bear our share of the expenditure, and when constructed the railways would work against us. It is quite clear to me that the Federal Government will immediately have to impose taxation over and above what their share of the Customs and excise will bring to them, and in all probability that taxation will be direct on land, and my experience leads me to believe that the taxation on land is now as heavy as the country can bear. I believe, myself, that the financial requirements of Australia for the next twenty years would be quite sufficient to crush us. That is just roughly and briefly my opinion of the way federation with Australia would affect us. The inducements that are offered to us to enter the Confederation are two—defence and free-trade with Australia. As for defence, for my own part I look upon it as nothing at all. Ido not regard it as worth being taken into consideration. In the first place, I may say that Englishmen, no matter wherever they are placed, will always be ready to help each other, federated or not federated. But lam quite satisfied about this: that in time of war, looking at the great area of Australia and the great interests there to protect, Australia could never spare any men to come down to New Zealand, and we would have to take care of ourselves. But, if federated, the great danger to us would be that a great many men would be drawn from here to protect Australia. I
365
A..—4
think we should act very wrongly in putting ourselves in a position which might lessen our powers of defence. Talk has been made about an Australian navy : If an Australian navy is constructed we should have to bear our share of the cost of that, but it would be another thing whether we would get a share of the help. We should Also have to pay our share of the cost of the Federal army. Then comes the question of free-trade : A good many people fear the loss of our export trade to Australia. Our export trade to Australia last year was 14 per cent, of our whole export trade; so that the export trade to Australia is really comparatively trifling. It is certain that Australia only buys from us what she is obliged to. There are two things that make Australia buy from us: (1) Bad seasons there, and (2) superior quality. Well, superior quality will always be paid for, and no protective tariff will shut it out. Now, I would like to call your particular attention to clauses 101 to 104 of this Act. To me they seem very dangerous clauses. Those are the clauses which set up the Inter-State Commission. I may tell you that, in conversation in Australia with an ex-Minister, when I mentioned this InterState Commission, he said, " You have put your finger on the blot in the Constitution." He said that the provision for the Inter-State Commission never should have been there. The Inter-State Commission is to have the sole right to say what is unreasonable and just. Of the composition of this Commission we know nothing, except that there are to be more than one. There is no provision for the different States being represented on this Commission, which is given the fullest and most dangerous powers ; and it is specially provided that there shall be no appeal from its decisions, except on questions of law. They would have absolute power over the New Zealand railways, and could fix whatever rates they think proper. I say that to give that power to the best men that ever lived would be most dangerous indeed. Perhaps my chief objection to our entering this Confederation I have left to the last. I object to it emphatically on the ground that my study of the subject leads me to believe that, so far from its helping on the federation of the English-speaking races, it would be an absolute hindrance to it. So far back as the 6th September, 1899—between that and the sth October —I published in the New Zealand Herald five letters on this subject. I think they were the first that appeared in Auckland on the question of federation. I then expressed this view as to the effect that it would have on the federation of the Empire. It appears to me as clear as can be that if we stand out of this federation with Australia we—that is, Australasia —would have two voices in the settlement of this question, instead of only one. If we go into this Federation we become in some sense part of Australia; but, if we stand out and do not join, then there will be the greater reason why the British Government should move in the matter, and bring about Imperial federation as quickly as they possibly can. This question of Imperial federation is of infinitely more importance to us than federation with Australia only. 348. You have spoken of this Inter-State Commission : their functions would be restricted to matters of trade and commerce ? —Yes. 349. But what, do you take it, would be the particular matters that they would have to deal with in trade and commerce?—l think they would have entire control of all matters affecting trade and commerce. 350. But they would be a sort of board of trade, would they not ? —I am sure Ido not know exactly what their powers would be. The whole question of the Inter-State Commission appears to me to have been slipped in in a hurry, and without any consideration. Clause 102 defines some of their powers ; clause 103 says how these people are to be appointed, and for how long they are to hold office, and the remuneration they are to receive ; and then clause 104 goes on to define some more of their powers. It is very bad drafting, and has the appearance of haste about it. Clause 101 says, " There shall be an inter-State Commission, with such powers of adjudication and administration as the Parliament deems necessary for the execution and maintenance, within the Commonwealth, of the provisions of this Constitution relating to trade and commerce, and of all laws made thereunder." 351. I suppose Parliament, when setting up the Commission, will have to state what the functions are ?—Do you not see that we- must always bear in mind that this Act is the Constitution, and it confers certain powers on the Commission, and that to take away these powers the Constitution must be altered ? 352. It would not be necessary for the Parliament to alter the Act to declare what are the functions of the Inter-State Commission? —One function here is defined : " But no preference or discrimination shall, within the meaning of this section, be taken to be undue and unreasonable, or unjust to any State, unless so adjudged by the Inter-State Commission." It is a most serious power to give them, and it is given in the Constitution. 353. You have spoken of free-trade between the States of the Commonwealth : how do you think that will affect the agricultural and pastoral interests of this colony? —I think, only to a slight degree, if at all. Australia only buys of us when obliged to, or because of our superior quality, and 15 or 20 per cent, will never affect either of those things. 354. We have been told that a large percentage of the exports of this colony are for the purpose of transhipment ?—I cannot say that I have ever gone into that. 355. You probably have not considered whether the balance of trade from New Zealand to Australia or from Australia to New Zealand is in favour of Australia or New Zealand ?—I know that our exports last year were £80,000 more than the imports. 356. Did that include specie ?—No. 357. What is your opinion as to how federation would affect the manufacturing interests of this colony ?—I have very little doubt that it would swamp our manufacturing industries. 358. What is your opinion as to how the raising of loans by the State Government of New Zealand would be affected ifwe federated ?—I do not think it would improve our position at all. The financial requirements of Australia during the next few years will be so great that it may
A.—4
366
depreciate their stock very much, and I think it would increase the cost to New Zealand of raising its loans. 359. A very large number of the electors of this colony are Free-traders : how do you think our standing out of the Federation would affect the bringing-about of free-trade with this colony ? —I do not think it would have any effect at all. It is a question we should have to decide for ourselves. 360. Mr. Leys.] You have met a good many New-Zealanders in your travels, have you not ? —Yes. 361. Have you not found that they are able to hold their own anywhere ?—I am in the habit of meeting all sorts and conditions of men, and, of all the men who come into my office to drive a bargain, for persistency commend me to the Auckland-bred man. 362. Why, then, are you so apprehensive that New-Zealanders will not be able to hold their own in the Federal Parliament ?—I do not say they would not be able to hold their own if they get there, but the opportunities of getting there are so small, and the opportunities of fitting men for the position would be so remote. 363. But we must return, proportionately, as many representatives as any other State, and, if New-Zealanders are the men you describe them to be, would not they count relatively more than one for one ?—I say that federation would destroy us nationally. We should not be equal to what we are now. 364. You do not think that the opportunities of playing a part on a larger stage would really extend to the borders of New Zealand ?—I do not believe we could play a part on the larger stage. 365. Of course, they would take part in the Federal Government of the whole of the Australian Continent ? —I think, situated as we are and at the distance we are from Australia, that our representatives there would not be our best men by a very long way. I think, for instance, that Wellington gets more of its best men into Parliament than Auckland does, and that position would be increased by sending representatives to Australia. We should not get our best men to go there. 366. What do you think would be the effect on the State Parliament ? —I do not believe there would be a State Parliament; I think it must cease to exist, for all its work will be taken away. Either the State Parliament or the County Councils must cease to exist. 367. Now, with regard to the proportion of the Customs duties, you notice that, although the Federal Government may take one-quarter of the Customs and excise duties, it is bound to return to the States the surplus not used : why do you assume that they are going to use up the whole of that £600,000 ?—Because my investigation of the subject leads me to the belief that one-quarter of the Customs duties of Australia and New Zealand will not nearly suffice for the wants of the Federal Government. They are aware of that. When I was in Australia they were already discussing the question as to how other taxation was to be raised. 368. From the information you gleaned while in Australia, what character of works do you think they propose to undertake ?—I do not think there was anything defined at all. They were very reticent about saying what was proposed. 369. Do you think, then, that the other States of the Commonwealth would surrender their powers without a struggle to the Federal Government ?—Yes. 370. Why? —If I had been in any part of Australia I should have been an ardent Federalist. I think they are quite prepared there to make any sacrifice that may be necessary. 371. But do you not recognise that there is such a difference of interest amongst the States as will cause them to maintain a struggle against the Federal Government ?—I think so. I think there will be a good deal of fight on some questions, and I have no doubt there will be a strong fight to Atain more power in the States, and there will be an effort made to reduce the number of departments that the Federal Government have power to take over. I certainly would fight for it if I were a member for one of the States. 372. When you said that the Federal Government are going to take over the whole of the Customs revenue, did you contemplate that they would starve the States out ultimately ? —I think what will occur is this : that the Federal Government will really take over as many items of government as are now controlled by the local Parliaments, and, having done that, they naturally require more revenue to carry out their functions. There will be very little left for our Parliament to legislate upon, and if they take over the work they must take over the funds. 373. Mr. Reid.] Even assuming that the Federal Government take over the whole of these thirty-nine articles, do you not think there will still be a great deal left for the States to do ? Take, for instance, the criminal law, the ordinary land-law, goldfields, taking land for public works, the ordinary administration of the railways—all these are left to the State Parliaments ?— I also notice that the Federal Government has power to take to itself the power to make laws affecting trade and commerce. 374. Then, think of all the local laws ?—That is what I say—it will leave us local work, and local work only. Most of them appear to be such laws as may be controlled by the County Councils. 375. I understood you rather to emphasize the fact that the local Parliament would cease to exist altogether?— What I believe will take place if we join the Federation is that the Councils will cease to exist, and the Parliament would have to take up the county work. Ido not think it would be a good change. 376. I understood you to assert that Parliament would cease to have any work at all?—I think what I said was that Parliament or the County Councils would cease to exist. 377. You do not compare the Parliament to County Councils ?—Not Parliament as it is now, but Parliament when shorn of its powers under the Federal Act. 378. A great many of the powers are concurrent, and would remain in the hands of the local Parliament ?—What appears to me, in the general reading of the Act, is that the power of
367
A.—4
the Federal Parliament overrides every power that the States exercise, and all that will be left to the States will be just so much as the Federal Parliament chooses to leave to them. That is the impression the reading of the Act conveys to my mind. 379. Did not our Provincial Councils constantly get increased powers from time to time ?—We know that the power vanished in the end altogether. 380. But in the beginning Provincial Powers Extension Acts were a constant feature of our legislation ?—So far as the Provincial Governments were concerned, they expired before I took any part in public affairs, and therefore I have not much knowledge of the powers, and what was done under the Provincial Governments. 381. Mr. Luke.] Are you aware of the number of Acts passed in the last session of the New Zealand Parliament ?—I know it is a very large volume. 382. When I tell you there were 110 Acts, how many of those do you think would come under the jurisdiction of the Federal Parliament supposing we federated ?—I suppose, the whole of them. 383. No; it has been shown to us that only seven of that number would come under the jurisdiction of the Federal Parliament ? —ls that so ? 384. That is the opinion of one well versed with the laws of New Zealand ?—Many of the writers on this Act have failed to notice Part V. of the Act, and have told us that all that will be taken from us is. Customs, lighthouses, and so forth. I do not know whether it is the same with this gentleman. 385. Do you not think the powers the Federal Government have under the Constitution would so tend to grow upon them that they would be very glad to relinquish some of the powers they have?—No; I think the tendency of modern times is centralisation. I think that is the curse of our day. 386. You have made railway matters a special study ?—Yes, I am credited with having done so. 387. You said that the Federal Parliament would take over the management of our railways ?—That is not what I meant to say. Speaking from memory, I think practically it is so— that the Federal Parliament will have the right of appointment of the people connected with the railways. 388. You do not think they are confined to the construction of new railways ?—No; I am sure their power is not confined to construction. 389. Why are you apprehensive that in the carrying-out of any national railway-construction New Zealand would suffer in the expenditure of public money for that purpose?— Because I think that they might very safely, and wisely, and justly maintain that the first consideration of all was the connecting of the various States with the capital; and they will outvote us certainly, and there is a great deal to be said in favour of the argument. 390. You said that you thought the effect of federation would be that we should not produce the high type of statesmen that we can do under existing circumstances ? —Yes. 391. Cannot you conceive that the larger field, higher purpose, and bigger body of people to deal with may cause us to produce a very much higher type of' statesmen than under the present conditions ?—I should expect that over in Australia where, as I say, the large mass of people have opportunities of travelling to and fro to the capital in a short time, that there they certainly will produce a higher class of statesmen than they have produced before ; but we do not share the same facilities, and therefore we cannot have the same development. 392. Do not our statesmen compare favourably with the statesmen in Australia?— Yes, I think so ; but the conditions which have developed them have been totally different from the conditions which you propose to bring about, and if those conditions which are proposed are brought about they will tend to dwarf men rather than to elevate them. 393. But will not the conditions which will help to develop the high type of statesman you refer to be also the conditions which will develop them in our own colony ?—I do not think so. Seeing that we should have so few great subjects to deal with, the tendency must be to dwarf men. 394. How do you account for the little interest taken in the question of federation in New Zealand ?—My experience since I have taken a part in public affairs here is that it is next door to impossible to arouse a public opinion on anything in this country. I think the reason is that here the people here are too well fed, too well clothed, and too well housed. I think a period of adversity in New Zealand would do us a great deal of good. 395. Mr. Beauchamp.] As compared with New Zealand, do you think there is any real difference in type in Australia in regard to the national character ?—I do not know that lam at all competent to answer that question, but my impreesion is that there is. I hold the theory, and have expressed it more than once, that the first men who found a community leave their impress on that community for all time. If you study our people in New Zealand, I think you will see that there is considerable difference between the Auckland people, the Canterbury people, and the Otago people, and I think this is entirely due to the men who first founded the different settlements. I think there was, again, a different class of men who founded most of the settlements in Australia ; and I think most certainly there will be a national type developed there different from ourselves. You have it also in the New England States of America, and in the Southern States, where you see a vast difference in the people, which has been inherited from their founders. 396. And that difference would probably become accentuated as time went on ?—I think so. 397. In making a calculation as to the amount we would be called upon to contribute towards the cost of the Federal Government, how did you arrive at your estimate?—By taking a fourth of the Customs and excise duties, and allowing a proportion of the cost of collecting them. It is net revenue that they have the right to take. I think the cost of collection under federation will be considerably increased, and that it will certainly not be so cheap to collect the Customs and excise duties of this colony from Australia as it is on the spot.
A.—4
368
398. And you have not gone further and made any calculation showing the amount the Customs here would lose by inter-State free-trade—by our admitting spirits and tobacco manufactured in Australia?—No, I have not. 399. To make good that contribution, and also that loss to which I have referred, it will be necessary to impose some sort of direct taxation, possibly by increasing the land-tax : do you think the benefits the farmers would derive by free-trade with Australia would more than counterbalance the increased taxation they would have to pay ?—I fear that they could not stand much more. 400. As regards our securities, I do not know whether your attention has been directed to the fact that the New South Wales 3J-per-cents have stood about £6 lower than ours : do you think that the anticipation of the Commonwealth borrowing largely has already had an effect upon the New South Wales securities ?—I think it is highly probable. I feel quite sure, myself, that federation with Australia would not benefit our borrowing-powers. I take your question to mean, would federation increase our ability to borrow at a low rate of interest ? Ido not think it would. I think it would have quite the reverse effect. 401. You cannot see any advantage in the Commonwealth being behind our loans?—No, not for many years to come, because I think the requirements of the Commonwealth will be so large that it will have the effect of depreciating other loans. They must have the money ; they cannot work that Commonwealth without going in for an enormous expenditure. 402. I think Mr. Barton has already said that they want £8,500,000 almost immediately? — That will keep them going but a very little time. That is an exceedingly moderate estimate. 403. Then, you laid great stress on the distance that separates New Zealand from Australia ? —Yes. 404. Do you think that twelve hundred miles of sea would operate injuriously in regard to our young men obtaining employment in the Federal Civil Service ? —Yes, I think it would, and that the Federal Civil Service would fall almost entirely into the hand of Australians. 405. You think the politicians there would be subject to local influence, to the prejudice of the youth of our colony ? —I think so. 406. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You gave us your opinion, Mr. Vaile, on the business capacities of young Auckland : well, if we were to remain as we are, what do you think would happen to the poor fellows from the less intelligent provinces of New Zealand?—l am not competent to answer that question; but I can assure you that the youth of this country are about as keen as any men I have known to do business. Ido not know whether soil and climate has to do with it, but the Maori is a " hard case " at a bargain. Matthew Anderson Clark examined. (No. 137.) 407. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Clark?—A merchant in Auckland. 408. How long have you been in business in New Zealand ?—Since 1868. 409. You are president of the Auckland Provincial Industrial Association ?—Yes. 410. How many members are there in that association ?—About seventy. 411. Have they collectively considered the question of federation?— They have not. 412. Will you please give us your individual opinion on the matter? —I have thought over this question a good deal, but I have not been able to get all the facts and figures that I should like to enable me to form a correct opinion on it; but my opinion is that, on the whole, for New Zealand to go into federation would be very prejudicial. I think that financially it would be a mistake, as the contribution that New Zealand would require to make out of the Customs duties would be a very heavy strain upon the finances of the colony, especially after the five or ten years have elapsed, at which time the Commonwealth has power to take all the Customs. My opinion is the same as Mr. Vaile's—that when the ten-years limit is over, that gradually the Federal Parliament will absorb the whole of the Customs revenue. As Mr. Vaile stated, we find that in the early days the Provincial Councils of New Zealand were to be allowed seven-eighths of the Customs revenue, but gradually, from time to time, the New Zealand Parliament took the whole of that seven-eighths from the Provincial Governments. Then, I think that, as many of the business arrangements of the Commonwealth are to be managed by the Federal Parliament, owing to our distance from Australia we would be neglected. I do not think that the general body of the Australian representatives would know anything, or care anything, about New Zealand or her requirements. We in Auckland have thought for many years, that we have a grievance even when we are separated by a two-days journey from Wellington, and that will be much more accentuated if the distance were four or five days, as it is in the case of Sydney from here. Then, as regards manufactures and industries, I consider that they will be very seriously injured, on account of the up-to-date machinery and large establishments that the Australians can run in the big centres, and which enable them to be manufactured more cheaply than most of our industries can. There are some few industries here that no doubt could hold their own, but for the most part they would be very much injured. Then, as regards the farmers, my own opinion is that they would not benefit so much with free-trade with Australia as some of them think. I remember the time when the farmers in Auckland were very much aggrieved at the millers here, because they imported practically the whole of the wheat which was consumed in the north from South Australia. At that time there was a very small duty on Adelaide wheat, from which Auckland Province got the bulk of its supplies. Then a duty was put on, and now the wheat comes from the South Island; but I think, if the duty were taken off again, it would again come in from South Australia, as one miller told me that Australian wheat was worth £1 a ton more than New Zealand wheat, and that the flour was better in the sense that it would absorb more water, and that a baker could therefore make so many more loaves from the flour made from the Australian wheat than from the flour made from the New Zealand wheat.
369
A.—4,
413. Have you given any attention or consideration to what would be the effect upon the manufacturing industries of New Zealand if we federated?— Yes; I might say that we employ about four hundred hands ourselves, and therefore it has been a matter of considerable importance to us, and we think that the industry all round would be very much injured by federation. 414. Why?—ln Australia they have large establishments, the very latest machinery, and can turn out immense quantities. They employ a great many more hands than we do, and can therefore afford to sell for less than where the establishment is only a moderate-sized one, and the management expenses are very nearly the same for a small business as they are for a large one. 415. Have you considered how it would affect the agricultural interests ?—I think that, on the whole, the agricultural interests have as much to fear from Australia as they have to benefit from it. As far as I can learn from reading the Australian produce reports, they have there everything they require in abundance. They export large quantities of wheat, and butter especially, as well as wool. 416. What do you think would be the effect on trade generally between Australia and New Zealand if New Zealand federated ?—Of course, there would be a large increase of trade between Australia and New Zealand, but whether it would pay New Zealand for the loss of revenue is a different question. 417. Would that interchange of trade be to the benefit of Australia or New Zealand?—Of Australia only. 418. Mr. Roberts.] You have not studied the Commonwealth Act, have you ?—I have read it two or three times. 419. You remark that here the factories are rather handicapped in being small establishments ?—Yes. 420. Do you look forward, in the event of federation with Australia, to the wages of the colonies becoming equalised?—l do not think they would. I think it would be very difficult to assimilate the wages under our Conciliation and Arbitration Act. 421. But do you not think that in the case of federation our Conciliation and Arbitration Act would probably find a place on the statute-book on the other side too ?—I doubt it very much. 422. Do you not think it is most likely that Australian legislation would follow the lead of this colony in such a direction as that ?—Yes ; but I think they would find it almost impossible to carry out the provisions of the Act. 423. Why more so there than here ?—Because Australia has very large centres, and I think it would be possible to evade the Act much more easily in the large centres than in the small ones. 424. Then, do you not look forward to the time when the wages would be equal, so that the industries here would not be handicapped to that extent? —I think the industries would be lessened here, and the cheap wages would draw the bulk of the trade to Australia; but, even if the wages were even, the fact of their larger establishments, and having a larger labouring-population to draw upon, would enable them to compete more economically for the trade than we could. 425. But, if the wages were equal to ours, could not a manufacturer here extend his establishment, and so produce as cheaply as they can on the other side?— Not at the present time. We find it very difficult to obtain skilled labour in industries such as shirts and clothing, whereas in Londonderry there are thousands of skilled hands idle. I believe the same thing would occur in large centres such as Sydney and Melbourne. 426. Have they the same difficulty in Australia in getting labour?—l do not know. 427. I suppose the conditions of labour are somewhat different ? —I do not know what they are now, but some years ago there was an inquiry, and it was proved that the state of things prevailing in the clothing trade in Melbourne was second only to what it was in the east end of London. 428. Mr. Millar.] Have you looked at this question from the point of view that there might be a lower tariff than now ? —Yes. 429. How would that affect the industries of this colony ? —There is a varying tariff now from 27 to 27£ per cent. 430. But even w"ith that tariff you imported into Auckland slops to the value of £3,713, and even if that tariff were merely 10 to 15 per cent. I presume you would get further competition ?— A very great deal more. Ido not think we could stand against a 10-per-cent. tariff. 431. You see that Mr. Lyne has outlined a 10- to 15 per cent, tariff?— With 10-per-cent. none of the industries could exist here. 432. You do not anticipate that we could compete with Australia if we had federation?—l do not think that many of our industries could. I think in our own particular industry we could possibly hold our own, because we have established it on a fairly large scale, and we have the machinery ; but with smaller industries I do not think it is at all possible. 433. Mr. Beauchamp.] Under inter-State free-trade, do you think we should have much competition from distributing-houses in Australia as well ?—I remember, when I was on the road, that nearly every house in Australia had two or three travellers travelling in New Zealand, and under the low tariff they did the bulk of the trade in some parts of the colony, especially on the west coast of the South Island. 434. With an absolutely free tariff, there would be a larger number of travellers from Australia, you think, here ? —Yes ; and the duties would be paid in the Australian Colonies. They have the advantage of the freight from England to Australia being much less than it is to New Zealand, therefore they couid quote a trifle less than New Zealand could on that account; and, again, the freight from Sydney or Melbourne to any part of New Zealand was for many years less than the freight from one part to another part of New Zealand. It was actually from Sydney or Melbourne less to any part of New Zealand than it was from Auckland to Dunedin or from Dunedin to Auckland. Ido not know how the Australian freight stands now, 47—A. 4.
A.—4
370
435. Mr. Luke.] You say that the centralisation of these large industries cheapens the production? —That is so. 436. There would not be many concerns in your line of business much behind yours in Australia ?—I do not know what there are in Sydney, but I know there are two or three factories in Melbourne each of which would be larger than ours. At times they go up to five and six thousand employes, and if the trades were centralised in Victoria or Sydney they would all probably rise to the same number. 437. I wish to ask your opinion, whether, under federation, we should not cheapen the cost of administration ?—My own opinion is that Governments always spend as much money as they can. 438. Do you think the manufacturers of New Zealand could not compete against those in Australia? —No. 439. Not even the woollen industries?— Some of them might; but I think, on the whole, they would be very much injured. 440. Do you not think the result of federation would be to raise the standard of social life, increase the wages, and reduce the hours of labour; and with those equalising conditions should we not be in a position to compete with the Australians ?—I doubt it, as they can always command such a large amount of available labour. 441. Do you know the hours of labour in Australia? —No. 442. Mr. Leys.] Have the labour laws raised the average wages in New Zealand in the clothing trade ?-—I do not think they have raised the wages very much. So far, they have equalised the wages. I think the wages paid now are pretty well the same in our factory as they were before. They have made a little rise in the case of some of the employes that were not paid the same wages before, but, taking it all round, the wages are pretty well the same. 443. Have they tended to prevent " sweating "?—Yes. 444. If they have not raised the rate of wages, why do you apprehend that the competition from Australia would cut down the wages here ?—Because I have always been under the impression that the wages are lower there than here for certain classes of labour. 445. Do you think the abolition of intercolonial duties would increase the competition from the mercantile houses of Australia ?—Undoubtedly, it would. 446. Do you think there is any risk of surplus lines being thrown on this market to the disturbance of trade here ? —Yes. 447. Would that be a benefit or a disadvantage ?—lt would be a disadvantage to the distribut-ing-houses here. It might be an advantage to the consumer. 448. Have you compared the Customs tariff of New Zealand with the tariff of the Commonwealth? —I have not gone into that matter. 449. Then, you have not formed any reliable estimate as to the loss to the Customs revenue through federation ? —No. 450. Hon. the Chairman.] I notice that woollens imported from Australia to Auckland increased from £3,777 in 1898 to £6,433 in 1899 : how do you account for that large increase? —it is impossible to say. Woollens is a very large item ; there are many classes in woollens. Albert Sanfoed examined. (No. 138.) 451. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Sanford?—A farmer and fish dealer. I appear here as a representative of the Tailoresses' Union. 452. How many members are there in the Tailoresses' Union in this city ?—I think the number of efficient members is about two hundred, and they mostly belong to the order-shops. There are two classes here, the factory class and the order class. They work under two separate logs, but since the last factory law came into operation the factory-girls have fallen off in their attendance, and they number now only about two hundred in the union. 453. Have the union as a body considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia? —They have not discussed the question properly, but only in an informal way. The union, I think, would be opposed to federation, because I have not heard one express an opinion on the question —and, in fact, they have not made up their minds on it. 454. What is your own individual opinion on the matter ?—As a private citizen, I am against federation. 455. What are your reasons for objecting to federation ?—We are a free people, and, speaking in regard to the fish trade, we have no duty against us on that item in Australia ; but, taking the farming industry, I feel confident, if there were no duty in New Zealand against Australia, that at certain times when there is no drought in Australia meat could be produced there at Id. a pound, and it would be preserved and canned and sent here and sold to the disadvantage of our farmers and graziers. The large tracts of country they have in Australia enable the farmers there to produce large quantities of stock, and I am sure that in times when they had no drought they could export meat here to such an extent- that they would be able to demoralise the whole of our financial obligations, and could swamp our markets with the surplus of Australian products. Ido not think we do much business with Australia, and I look on London as our market. The Australians only buy from us when they have a drought, but when they have a surplus we cannot do any trade with them. Therefore I think it would be a mistake to invest capital in this colony in farming in the hope of getting a good market in Australia only when"there is a drought there. We should rather cultivate intercourse with a country where we can depend on a market year after year. 456. Do you think it would be a benefit to New Zealand to federate because we would have more people to trade with ? —lf New Zealand federated it would be only in a social direction that we should benefit. Possibly New Zealand would be the piece of land on which rich speculators
371
A.—4
would settle. Certainly there will be an enormous value created in the different businesses—a monopoly value I would call it—because these people would have a large amount of capital to invest, which would crowd our people out. 457. Are you in favour of New Zealand federating with Australia or not?—l am not, because we would not be in the gamble. We might be in the position of slaves to Australia, as the power of the Commonwealth will be so great that cities will spring up there and attract our people from these shores. 458. Mr. Roberts.] You seem to be very much alarmed on account of a fear of the farmers being flooded out with stock from Australia during the good seasons there : is there any reason to fear that?—l feel sure that the meat-factories in Australia would swamp the New Zealand industry, and would shut up our canning-factories. We might get cheap meat for a short time, but it would simply crush the industry here. We would fall back in regard to cultivation, and then we would not be able to get any meat to export in times of drought to Australia. 459. Has there ever been any importation of meat from Australia?— Not much. 460. New South Wales has 64,000,000 sheep : why do you anticipate that there will be any importation of meat from there ?—Meat is retailed in Sydney at a low price per pound in good seasons, and it can be frozen there and landed here at half the price that is charged in the market here. 461. But they ship large quantities of frozen meat to London from Australia, so that the local price is largely regulated by the value of the meat in London ? —The price is really regulated by the markets of the world, but the carriage from Australia to here.is very short, and in that is my fear of a competition. 462. Mr. Millar.] You have had some trouble, have you not, in getting the Tailoresses' Union up to its present position ?—I have taken some trouble with it in the past in getting it under way. 463. I suppose the members of the union are afraid of the competition that would follow under free-trade?— Yes, they are. They feel that we have the power of legislating for ourselves here, and that if we go into the Australian swim we may lose our identity and not be able to continue our progressive legislation. Thomas Peacock examined. (No. 139.) 464. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—l presume lam asked here through my connection with various industrial and commercial undertakings in this city. lam a director of several companies. 465. Have you given any consideration to the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?—l have only thought the matter out in a general way. My opinion is that it would not be advantageous to New Zealand to join the Australian Federation. The chief reason against it is the great distance that intervenes between this colony and the Continent of Australia, with its bearing on the question of defence. I notice that some parties attach weight to the defence argument as being in favour of federation, but to my mind it is just the opposite, and for this reason : that in the event of New Zealand being joined to Australia it is to be supposed that the troops belonging to the Federation would be distributed through the various States, and it seems to me that, the States of Australia being contiguous one with another, and with complete railway communication, they would have in the matter of defence a very much greater advantage than New Zealand would have. Presuming an enemy to invade the Continent of Australia, they would be able to concentrate their troops upon any point threatened, while if such an event occurred in New Zealand we would have to depend entirely on the particular portion of Federal troops which might happen to be here; the distance involving a journey of nearly four days' steaming would prevent any concentration of troops from Australia. Then, again, it seems to me that our chief defence, not only here but in Australia, is the sea defence, and even with federation we would still be dependent on the Imperial navy for that, and we would be in no better position than we are now. In regard to the question of trade, it seems to me that, as we send the larger portion of our exports to England and some to America, the question is not very largely affected by what would happen if we federated with the Australian Colonies. In the case of our gold, coal, frozen meat, wool, agricultural products, kauri timber, and kauri-gum, there are very few of these that have much bearing on the question of our connection with Australia. Certainly, all our frozen meat and wool goes to England, and also the greater part of our agricultural produce and kaurigum goes to America. It is true that in Australia they do take some of our agricultural products, but only in times of drought or flood, when there is a shortage there; but even then sometimes there is a loss to the exporter. As far as our coal is concerned, our coal areas are of a limited character, and are likely to be wanted for our own requirements; and in the case of our kauri timber, in the event of our not joining the Federation they would still have to take the timber, as it is suitable for certain requirements in Australia, so that the consumer would have to pay any duty that was put on, and in the case of the Oregon timber, which competes with the kauri, there would be a duty against it also. 466. Mr. Leys.] Do you think there is a community of interest between the States in Australia that does not extend to New Zealand? —I think the mere fact of their contiguity is of itself a reason why there should be more community of interest there than there would be at such a great distance as this. 467. Do you think that would affect us injuriously in the Federal Parliament in regard to our ability to press our requirements upon the Government ?—The fact is that we would have a very small proportion of the representation in the Federal Parliament, and certainly the representatives of Australia would not enter into any discussion with regard to New Zealand with the same interest or knowledge that they would if it had reference to the Auscralian States. 468. Do you think the tendency of the Federal Government would be to increase its powers and to absorb the State powers ?—I do not apprehend that that would be the case.
A.—4
372
469. You do not apprehend that there is a likelihood of the States being ultimately absorbed ? —I do not think so. I think there will be scope enough for the States to exercise useful functions. 470. Well, do you think the Federal Government .are likely to take for their own use a quarter of the Customs revenue they are entitled to take ?—-I have not been able to go into the question of the cost of the Federal Government in detail, and my opinion is not of value on that point. 471. Did you, when in Australia lately, hear any views expressed as to the Federal works that are likely to be undertaken in the nature of public works ? —I did not specially. 472. In the event of the Federal Government undertaking such great works as trans-con-tinental railways and irrigation-works, do you think it probable that we should be saddled with a portion of the cost of those works?—lt is quite possible that such works may be undertaken in that great continent which would be of an advantage to Australia, but not so much to us. 473. And do you think it is likely that Australia would not recognise or make any allowance to New Zealand in that respect ? —Justice would, no doubt, lead them to make some recompense, but I question very much whether it would be recognised in full. 474. Do you assume it is probable that we should have to increase our direct taxation here if we federated?—l think it is probable. 475. How do you think it would affect New Zealand industrially and agriculturally ? —Not materially. Of course, if the taxation is increased, to that extent the people in the State are rendered less capable of spending their money in other ways. 476. Have you any knowledge of the industrial position of Australia—the conditions regarding wages and hours of employment ?—Only in a general way. 477. Would there be any advantage, from a commercial point of view, through federating? Would there be expansion of trade? —I do not think so, as far as I can judge. 478. Would there be any advantage in our commercial men being able to trade with the people over there ? —I do not think so. There is a very large export of kauri timber to Australia, but Ido not see how federation would be likely to increase the amount of that export. 479. If New Zealand were part of the Federation, and a protective tariff were in vogue, would our output under federation be expanded ? —To the extent that the American timber as a competitor would be taxed, it would. 480. Would there be any advantage to our commercial companies—l mean our insurance and banking companies -through federation?—l do not think so. Ido not see how federation would in any way affect such companies. 481. With regard to administration, do you think the colony would suffer through the great departments being controlled from Australia?—l have a distinct opinion that the distance from the source of power renders the administering of particular work less efficient. 482. Do you think there would be any saving in the cost of administration? —I do not think so. You mean in the way of Government expenditure ? 483. Yes?—l do not think so. 484. What do you think the effect on the State Parliament would be? Do you think the better men would be attracted to the Federal Parliament, and that our State Parliament would decline in consequence ?—I should not apprehend any danger on that account. 485. Do you believe we will get good men to take places in the Federal Parliament ?—I do not think it would be so convenient, and possibly it might lead to there being more professional politicians than if the Government were solely in New Zealand. 486. You think the men would not be so representative of the various classes as now ?—I think not. 487. Mr. Beauchamp,] Did I understand you to say that you thought the effect of federation on our industries would be prejudicial ?—No ; I did not express myself in that way. What I meant was that, so far as any export trade was concerned, I did not apprehend there would be much to do, as each of the States in Australia and our colony here would be quite able to manufacture for their own wants. 488. But, with regard to centralisation and specialisation in Melbourne and Sydney, do you not think this colony would be largely used as a dumping-ground for their manufactures ?—I do not think we should be harmed by them. 489. You think we should hold our own ?—Yes. 490. I notice amongst our exports to Australia: Timber, £36,550 in 1898, and £55,000 in 1899 : is that chiefly kauri ?—Yes; there is some kahikatea timber. 491. Kauri and white-pine are better than any timbers they can produce in Australia?— Yes, better for certain classes of works. 492. And, federated or not federated, they would still have to take that timber from us ?—Yes. 493. And it is therefore hardly likely that they would impose a heavy duty on those timbers? —If they did the consumer would have to pay it. 494. You have such a large domestic trade now that you are pretty well independent of Australia?— There is a large trade in the colony itself. With regard to the timber industry, viewed from the export aspect, the time will come when the kauri timber will be exhausted; it will possibly not last more than forty years, and, unfortunately, efforts are not sufficiently made to reforest the country. 495. Mr. Millar.] Did I understand you to say that you were not afraid of competition from Australia in regard to our industries ?—That is so. 496. Are you aware that at the present time there is a duty of 22-J- per cent., and that last year we imported ten thousand pairs of boots from New South Wales and Victoria ?—Yes. 497. Under free-trade, do you not think that number would be increased ?—I do not think so. We should be able to do as well as they do in Australia. There is a difference in wages, but there will be a levelling action in that respect. • ■
373
A.-4
498. Can they not produce leather cheaper than here ?—I do not understand why they should. 499. We have to import the tanning material, whereas they have a large portion of it at their own doors ?—Our Government have planted a large amount of wattle-trees with a view to providing material for tanning purposes.
Tuesday, sth Mabch, 1901. Alexander Bell Donald examined. (No. 140.) 500. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Donald?— Shipowner, island trader, and general merchant, residing in Auckland. 501. How long have you resided in New Zealand?—l have been in the colonies about thirtyeight years, principally in New Zealand, but I resided in Australia for about two years. 502. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?—ln a general way. lam strongly in favour of federation. 503. Will you be good enough to give the Commission your reasons for favouring federation ? —First, as the name implies, the Commonwealth means the well-being of the community at large, and if New Zealand federated it would be good for both Australia and New Zealand. And it will be a step towards the higher federation of all the English-speaking colonies, which will raise the people of New Zealand and Australia instead of lowering them. It would have a tendency to increase trade and to give more labour to the labouring-classes, and if for a time it affected special industries adversely it would only be for a time, because New Zealand must come to the front. We have got here all the advantages that Australia has, and more besides, and I see nothing to keep us from being able to compete in any direction with any part of Australia, My experience of the labour part of the question is that the difference in wages is not great. It has been stated here that there is a 25-per-cent. difference in the wages paid in Australia as compared with those paid in New Zealand, but I differ from that statement. In fact, there is no difference ; and, as far as the hours of work are concerned, from my experience I have not found anything to justify me in saying there is any difference in that respect. As a matter of fact, I think I am right in saying that the rates paid to heads of departments in Australia are from one-third to 50 per cent, more than what is given to heads of departments in New Zealand, and in the case of the general labouring-class, I think the wages there are on the whole quite equal to what they are here. I am not speaking without knowledge of this particular matter. Some years ago I purchased a steamer in Sydney, to which I made extensive alterations costing the sum of £5,000, and through having to pay for these alterations I found that it cost for labour as much in Sydney as the work would have been done for in Auckland, if not more so. Furthermore, the shipowners of Auckland find, when they want their vessels repaired, that it is preferable to bring them to Auckland and dock them here than to do the work in Sydney. It is cheaper to do it here than in Sydney; but if we want general shipping-gear, such as ropes and paints, we can get them cheaper in Sydney. This clearly shows that the general expenses are cheaper in Auckland than in Sydney. I, however, take up the higher ground that it is better to federate with Australia apart from the question of whether it is going to be good or bad for the special industries of certain people. Many people say that it is a mere matter of sentiment, but sentiment is at the bottom of the great affairs of this world. Sentiment has made England, and will make any nation. And, in regard to the cry that has been raised that the statesmen in Australia will not look upon us with favour or do justice to us, I say that the gentlemen guiding the destinies of the Commonwealth will have a far. higher idea of the duties of their high position than to try and take advantage of New Zealand, but will do justice to us. It will depend on the people of New Zealand as to who they send over there to represent them. If they send their best men over to look after the interests, those interests will have the careful consideration of Australian Ministers. On this ground lam strongly in favour of federation. 504. I understand you to say that you think one of the results of federation would be that there would be more employment for the working-men ?—Yes. 505. Would that employment be in Australia or New Zealand ?—There would be as much in New Zealand as in Australia, as there would be a general expansion of trade all round. 506. Do you think the manufacturers of New, Zealand would be able to hold their own against the larger concerns in Australia?—l believe in a short time they would, as we have the advantage of a good climate, good soil, good workmen, and shorter hours. I see nothing to keep our men from getting on, excepting that for a short time a few industries might necessarily be upset, but in the long-run they must regain their position. 507. I think you said that the heads of departments in Australia were paid at least 50 per cent, more than they are in this colony : if that is so, would the cost of government be increased to that extent in New Zealand by our joining the Commonwealth ?—My reason for saying that the heads of departments get more money there than they do here is because the merchants in Australia do a much larger business, and therefore can afford to pay more for the ability they get. 508. Have you considered what effect federation would have on the finance of this colony ?— No. It is an important matter, and it is one for financial experts to go into. 509. Have you considered how far our legislative independence would be interfered with by our joining the Federation ? —I have not gone into that phase of the question, but I am quite satisfied that the men at the head of affairs would do justice to us all in all those matters. 510. Mr. Leys.] You say that federating with Australia would probably lead to a higher federation : what do you mean by that ?—I mean that it will naturally be the stepping-stone for the federation of the English-speaking colonies with the Mother-country—that is the tendency of the age.
A.—4
374
511. Do you not regard the present relations between England and the colonies as practically a federation ?—I do not think so, because we want representatives in the Imperial Parliament, and that can only be brought about by the federation of all the colonies, of which we are one. 512. In what way do you think the federation of Australia would help Imperial federation?— It calls the attention of men to this particular phase of the question, and leads them to think and feel more strongly in connection with the federation of the English-speaking race. 513. Do you not think there would be some loss by the taking-away of so many powers now exercised by our Central Government and handing them over to a Parliament so many miles away?—l think the gain would be far more than the loss. I think the general community as a whole would gain in character far more than they would lose from a monetary point of view. The first principle of all good law is to form national character, and we should gain in that respect. 514. Prom your experience of colonial Governments, do you find that this high ideal prevails—in the matter of the distribution of public works, for instance ?—I must say I do not; but one cannot help saying that, to a certain extent, the feeling underlying all the social laws at the present time is to elevate the social condition of the community at large. 515. Do you think that, in the event of federation, and the Federal Government goes in for railway-construction and large works of that kind as they propose, we should be likely to get our fair share of such expenditure ?—Yes; and I believe business would increase all round, and it would be an advantage to us, even if we had to pay a certain amount of money towards the cost of those works. 516. Do you see any advantage in going away to Australia for works that we could undertake ourselves ?—Of course, we should have to forego some advantages, like all other nations. In an association of merchants every man cannot have his own way, and therefore, in the higher sense, in a community of small States, such as Australia and New Zealand, each cannot possibly expect to get all it wants. 517. With regard to post-offices, Customhouses, and lighthouses, which are immediately taken over by the Commonwealth, do you think that these could be better administered by the heads of departments in Australia than by the heads of departments here ? —I would not like to express an opinion on that point. 518. You have lived in Australia?—-Yes. 519. Did you find that they knew very much about New Zealand and its concerns as a people ?—I would not like to say they do. 520. Did you find that the Australian Press gave much attention to New Zealand affairs ? —No. 521. Did you find in the Australian papers daily reports of the affairs of the other colonies? —Yes. 522. Does not that argue that there is a community of interest and sentiment there that does not apply to this colony ?—To a certain extent it does ; and in the ease of people separated by sea the communication they would have would tend to bring that community of interest about, just the same as railway communication does in the case of people separated on land. 523. Have you considered that by federation we pass over to the Federal Parliament fivesixths of the government of this country with respect to many important matters ? —I have got sufficient confidence in human nature to know that that Government will do justice to this colony. 524. Do you not think that we might suffer through their ignorance of our requirements ?— Possibly for a time we might, but ultimately if you send good men from New Zealand they would be able to put their case in such a way that our interests would be properly attended to. 525. Mr. Luke.] Have you considered the question of bla,ck labour ?—Yes. 526. What effect do you think that might have on the northern part of Australia ? —I have been specially connected with the South Sea Island trade for the last twenty-five years, and I do a large business with the islands. I have been up and down a hundred times through those islands, and I have a pretty fair idea what that black labour means. 527. What is likely to be its social effect upon the community where it may be employed?—l am thoroughly convinced that if you are going to grow sugar and other tropical products it would be a very unwise thing for white men to attempt to do the labour, as it will tend to lower them instead of raising them up. 528. Practically, you think that the sugar-fields of Queensland cannot be cultivated by white labour? —No, not without degrading the white man. 529. Do you think, if black labour is admitted into Queensland, that it might in time overflow the boundaries and flood other districts ?—I do not think so. 530. Do you not think that there will always be this barrier against communication between the people of New Zealand and the people of the continent—l mean the barrier of the sea-distance ? —I do not think so. I think it will be to the mutual advantage of New Zealand and the people of the Commonwealth if we federate, as this barrier will be getting less every year. We are closer to Sydney than the western States are to Washington. It takes four or five days to get to Washington, while you can go to Sydney in three days by the mail-boat. 531. Is not the land communication on the American Continent more in favour of community of interest than the sea communication between here and Australia?—l do not think so. 532. Do you not think that there is a natural dislike to travelling by sea that will always exist? —There may be, but that can be overcome. 533. Would not that be the difficulty, that we would not get that proportion of the people of Australia over here that we would like to see ?—I do not think so, because when you had large boats running backwards and forwards the gain in both ways would be tremendous : instead of there being a few travellers, there would be thousands coming here. 534. But would not there be a much larger proportion of people coming from Australia to New Zealand if we were part of the continent, and had land communication instead of sea communication ?—Possibly.
A.—4
375
535. In carrying out large public works, do you not think that Australia would have a greater advantage than we should have ? —Possibly, if you look at the matter from the money point of view. 536. But do you not think that in the administration of public works we should suffer, and that the Federal Government would have no regard to our wants and necessities?— No. 537. You do not fear there would be any disadvantage owing to the small amount of representation we would have in the Federal Parliament as compared with the several States who have common interests ? —No. 538. You think we would develop a type of statesmen that could more than hold their own in the Federal Parliament ?—Yes. 539. You said, from your experience, wages were as high and the hours of labour as low in Australia as in New Zealand : are you quite sure of that ?—As I told you, I was there three years ago, and I am only speaking of that time. 540. We have had evidence that wages there are lower and hours of labour longer than in New Zealand : do you think that is wrong ? —Yes. From the evidence I have read in the paper I have seen it stated that wages are lower here than there, and it seems to be a sore point with some people ; but I speak from my own knowledge, because I have had to pay for labour in both countries, and as a shipowner I say that ships come and dock here and get all they want because the work can be done cheaper than in Sydney. 541. May not that be due to the fact that the proprietors of the works here make less profits than they do in Sydney ?—There may be something in that. 542. Can you answer this question : as to why New Zealand shipowners very often have sent to Sydney for the building of small steamers, and even for repairs to steamers, because they can get them cheaper in Sydney ?—No, I do not think they can do them cheaper ; we build cheaper here than they do in Sydney; it is only the engine part of the business that we cannot do as cheaply, because there is a heavy duty on machinery at the present time in New Zealand, and naturally, Sydney being free-trade, machinery is much cheaper than it is here. Engines and boilers are made cheaper there than here. 543. Does not that indicate that the wages there are lower than in Auckland ?—I do not think so. 544. Where does the difference come in ?—Because I presume that people here have not got the machinery to do it. 545. Do you not think that that condition of affairs would still obtain under federation—that they would have the superior machinery, the larger concerns, and the centralisation of works which would give the advantage as against New Zealand manufacturers ?—lt could only be if the New Zealand employers have got sufficient ability to cause them to do away with the old machinery and get machinery that is up to date. 546. Will there be the inducement for getting this up-to-date machinery : would not the volume of trade be too little to warrant it?—To a certain extent it would be, but in years to come that would be remedied. 547. Would not that exist under the Commonwealth to a greater degree than it does now ?— To a certain extent, yes; and to that extent we would should be at a disadvantage. 548. When you said heads of departments were better paid in Australia than in New Zealand you referred to the heads in commercial houses ? —Yes. 549. Not to the heads of Government departments ?—-No ; I believe they are paid rather less than others in Australia, but I would not like to say definitely. 550. Then, you think the social condition of the masses in Australia is quite as good, if not better, than it is in New Zealand ?—Yes. With regard to the salaries paid to heads of departments, when I was in Sydney three years ago I heard that one of the managers in Flood's office had made a speculation that morning that had earned £2,000 for the company. He could not do it in New Zealand under the same circumstances. 551. Would not that condition of things exist under federation as much as it does now?— Yes. 552. Mr. Beauchamp.] Are you a Free-trader? —Not exactly. 553. You believe in some protection being allowed to our manufactures ?—lf necessary, to a certain extent. 554. Do you consider, on the whole, that our manufactures in this colony are unduly protected at the present time ?—I do most decidedly. 555. In regard to our industries, do you think the bulk of them could survive the competition that would arise under federation from both Sydney and Melbourne ? —Yes. 556. Notwithstanding the fact that the industries are carried on on a very much larger scale, and also that probably in regard to the raw material, coal especially, they would be able to buy it much cheaper there taan here ? —They would buy coal cheaper here than in Melbourne. 557. But take Sydney or some port near Newcastle, we are informed that coal is quite 30 per cent, cheaper there than in New Zealand : do you differ in that opinion ?—Yes, I do. 558. You do not accept it as a fact that coal in Sydney is 30 per cent, cheaper than it is in this colony ?—I do not think so. You can get good coal here for about 12s. 6d. a ton. 559. We are told, also, that the raw material is conveyed cheaper by steamers to the main ports of Sydney and Melbourne than to any port in New Zealand, which gives the factories there a great advantage over us : is that right ?—To a certain extent it is. 560. You think the Australian industries could not prejudicially affect our industries ?—Not after a short time. My experience of our industries is that they supply an inferior article ; that is the tendency of protection. You take a rope that is made in New Zealand, and you will find it is not the quality they make on the other side. I am building a large vessel, and I have to send outside the colony to get rope for this vessel, because I do not consider that the rope they make here is sufficiently good as compared with what they make in Sydney and Melbourne.
A.—4
376
561. The majority of witnesses in this colony have expressed an opposite view, and stated that we produce a higher quality of manufactured goods than they do in Australia ? —I am speaking about articles imported into both colonies—for instance, hemp. 562. Do you say we do not produce as high a quality of goods here as they do in Australia ?— lam speaking of the things that are obtained from outside both countries. I believe our woollen goods are superior to anything they get in Australia. 563. But, generally speaking, you say we do not compare favourably with Australia in regard to the products that are common to both countries in connection with manufacturing ?—That is so. 564. Do you think that the basis of representation is equitable, seeing that the Maoris' votes are excluded and the women's votes do not count ? —Yes ; on those two grounds I think there is no disadvantage. 565. And you would favour our federating under the present Bill ?—Yes. 566. Mr. Millar.] I think you said you had experience of wages in Australia in regard to your particular trade : can you tell me what is the pay of shipwrights in Auckland ?—That is not my trade; lam a shipowner ; but I believe the wages in Auckland are about 10s. per day. 567. Are the dock dues heavier in Australia than in New Zealand?— Yes. 568. Do you find your own labour there?—-The dock people find that. If you find your own labour the dock people charge you 2s. a day. 569. Are you aware that the wages are only Bs. a day in Sydney ? —I am not aware of it; it is news to me. 570. Here is the official document of the Labour Department?— You will get shipwrights working here at Bs. a day. 571. The minimum there is £2 Bs. and the maximum £2 12s.?—When I was in Sydney a few years ago a friend of mine got some work done, and he was paying his men 12s. a day. 572. You are aware that this statement is made up from returns submitted by the employers ? —1 know what I paid when I was getting work done in Sydney a few years ago, and I can safely say it was not Bs. a day. 573. What would you pay for boilermakers and riveters in this colony ?—I do not know. 574. Have you any knowledge of what the charge would be.in New South Wales ?—No; I cannot say it has come under my special notice. 575. The Conciliation Board have fixed boilermakers' wages at 11s. a day?— Yes. 576. You admit that the dock dues are higher in Sydney ?—Yes. 577. And according to this statement the wages are lower in Sydney than in Auckland? —No. 578. And yet you say you can get work done cheaper in Auckland?—l say shipwrighting work. 579. What is the difference in cost, taking Auckland and Sydney ? —Generally, the expenses are greater in Sydney than in Auckland. 580. As far as the statistics go, the whole of the wages paid in New South Wales are less, on the average, than what is paid in New Zealand ?—I have been in New South Wales any number of times —sometimes two or three times a year—and it is news to me. 581. I think you said that federation would find more work for the working-classes in this colony :in what direction will that go?—I think as a whole, especially to the labouring-classes. It will stimulate trade, and will mean far more produce going and coming backwards and forwards between Australia and New Zealand. At the present moment Auckland ships a great quantity of maize over there every year, and if they put a high tariff on that it may have a tendency to keep it from going over; but with a free market the export of that commodity would be increased to- a large extent, and Bhe exportation of a great many other commodities would increase in proportion. 582. You have free-trade with New South Wales now? —To all practical purposes, yes. 583. What was the amount of maize exported from Auckland last year ? —I could not state that. 584. In three years it went up from £1,933 in 1897 to £24,509 in 1899 : is that an argument for the colony joining the Federation, even supposing the latter amount were trebled?—l do not bring that forward as an argument at all. I say that the great bulk of the labouring-population of the colony would be benefited by New Zealand joining the Commonwealth. It will give a great stimulus to trade, and the ordinary labouring-man will participate in that. If it gives competition to the flour-millers it will cheapen bread, and that will not be a disadvantage to the working-man or to any one else. 585. If the labouring-man cannot earn wages to buy that bread, what is to become of him ?— I say he will get more work. 586. Prom where ? —From the greater amount of products going between the two places. 587. Agricultural or industrial products ?—Both. 588. What manufactures do you think we could export from this colony to Australia?— That is a very difficult question to answer at the moment, because it would take a little time for each place to find out whac was best suited to it. 589. You state that production would be enormously increased, and that there would be an increase in labour: what industry strikes you as being able to export to Australia?— With cheaper freights and better facilities, the farming community would certainly be able to export considerably more than they are doing. 590. During all these years has there been any cheapening of the freights ?—Well, I think that would be one of the special things that the Government would take into consideration. If New Zealand federated with Australia the question would be bound to crop up of having better and more efficient communication between the two places, so that both trade and people could get back and forward more rapidly and more cheaply than at the present time. 591. That could be obtained by subsidy at the present time ?—That is questionable.
377
A.—4
592. How would it be obtained by the Federal Government taking it up ?—You would naturally expect that they would have more interest, if they were united to us, in making this particular piece of water between the two places closer than now. They would devise the best means of bringing us closer together. At the present time we are not united. 593. Do you think that a Federal Government sitting in Australia would take a greater interest in finding markets or increasing the trade of New Zealand ?—Without any Government at all it would come about. The Government need not necessarily bring it about. The two peoples being joined together would have that tendency. 594. As a business-man, where would you expect to get a market for your products : would you expect to find a market in a place that was growing and exporting the same things that you were growing ?—lt would all depend upon circumstances. It is not always the case that the market is full to overflowing with the things that it produces. 595. Well, if they are exporting they are not short, are they?— Not of that particular article. 596. You are aware that Victoria and South Australia export wheat ?—-Sometimes. 597. And that New South Wales is self-supporting ?—Sometimes. 598. If a drought came along and we were outside the Federation, where would she get her stuff from ?—With the facilities that steam communication gives now all over the world, it is difficult to state where they would get their stuff from. For instance, they are getting any quantity of flour from Canada now, and they are getting maize from California. When flour was at a considerable price any amount of it came from Canada to Sydney. 599. And wheat too? —Yes; under the circumstances it is wonderful what effect facilities have. The position I take up in connection with the increasing of trade is that the more facilities you give to places separated from one another the more expansion of trade will you have. 600. As a shipowner, and you knew that there were fifty ships lying at Calcutta waiting for freight, would you send up a ship there for freight?— Not very likely; it would be a very stupid thing to do. 601. Would you expect a farmer to send wheat to Victoria when he knew that Victoria was an exporter?— One would not expect him to do it. 602. Well, Victoria is exporting?— That is not the way to look at it. 603. You say federation is going to benefit the colony enormously ?—I said materially. 604. Well, I want to know where the colony is going to benefit ?—By the increased facilities for trade between the two places. 605. But if you had nothing to tr,ade with ? —lt would make trade of itself. 606. Would it make trade to any extent with Australia in wheat and oats, butter, and frozen mutton ?—Possibly. 607. How many of them ? —lt is hard to say at the present moment. 608. You know that the Australian Colonies are exporting all these items I have mentioned? —I will give you the instance of the South Sea Islands. I may say that, although it is a personal matter, I was the first one to run a steamer to the South Sea Islands. Mr. James Mills, who is a far-seeing man, said it would never pay, and I would lose everything. He was right, in so far as I lost a lot of money for the first year or two. What is the ultimate end? Mr. James Mills is running at the present moment steamer after steamer to all these islands. It is simply that the traffic has increased with the accommodation provided, and, instead of there being one steamer to take in all the islands, they have got a steamer running to almost every island in the Pacific. 609. What do the islands produce ? —Fruit, and all kinds of products. 610. Do we grow the same things to any extent in this colony?— Not necessarily so. 611. Therefore it is not a country which comes into conflict with our products. We ship stuff to them which they do not produce ?—Nevertheless, I say that business will expand between the two places if you give facilities for trade between two different countries. Even though the countries grow the same particular article, the business of those particular countries will materially increase if you give them facilities. That is the position I take up. 612. You think there would be a profitable market in Australia for the products we grow in this colony, and which at the same time Australia is exporting to the Mother-country ?—Not if you put me in a corner like that. I take it, as a general thing, that trade as a whole will materially increase if you give better facilities than at the present moment. I consider that the Commonwealth will give, and the statesmen you are going to send to help in the ruling over there will look out that they do give, facilities between these two places if they do federate. 613. I think you said that centralisation cheapens production ? —No, I did not. 614. Do you not think it does ? —I do not know. Personally, Ido not believe in what you call " cheap stuffs." I think it is a mistake. I would say most emphatically that if Melbourne, which is the producing centre of cheap goods in Victoria, prefers to produce cheap stuffs for its people, let them do it; it is a degrading business at best. We have something higher in view here than to lay ourselves out to produce the cheapest article. 615. You know the celebrated doctrine of thrift, which says, " Buy in the cheapest market " : should we do that?— Not necessarily, but, other things being equal, most decidedly. I believe an article is only cheap if it is good as well. It is not cheap if it is a bad article. I believe that the tendency of the worker should not be for cheapness. 616. But in times of economy the bulk of the people have to study economy and buy as cheaply as they can. Do you think it possible that, if our market were thrown open to the influx of the cheaper articles from Australia, our people would continue to buy the dearer article? —I believe we would find plenty of people here who would try to produce just as cheap an article as in Victoria or New South Wales. 617. They could only produce it, could they not, under the same conditions, the same hours of labour, and the same rates of wages?—l do not know; Ido not think that wages altogether are the factor in fixing the price of an article. It is up-to-date machinery and business capabilities, Wages are more a matter of detail. 48—A. 4.
A.—4
378
618. Is not the output a principal factor in it ?—Yes, to a great extent. 619. Take a fully equipped factory -vvith the latest machinery in Victoria: do you think it possible for a factory in New Zealand to compete profitably against it?— Personally, I do not trouble about that, for, after all is said and done, I do not think that a factory is going to make a nation. 620. Have not manufactures made Britain what it is?—l doubt it. 621. What has?— The noble men and women she has produced. It is character, not manufactures, that makes a people. If you cannot have character it does not matter if you have a country full of manufactures; it would ultimately fail. 622. Do you not think that character is largely affected by surroundings?— Most decidedly. 623. Have not the surroundings of the British been manufactures ?—Lately, decidedly. 624. Therefore manufactures have had a great deal to do with the character of the British race ?—At the present moment it has. 625. Is that not a high ideal to have before us ?—No, I do not think the making of cheap shirts and boots is a high ideal to set before us. 626. Is there no necessity to make cheap stuffs ?—One would think so. The whole idea is to compete with some cheap man outside. 627. But we have a barrier against that, and you are advocating the removal of that barrier?— Yes. 628. You are advocating that our people should come down to their level ?—No. I say there are other things to do in New Zealand than making cheap boots and shirts, 629. You are aware that all the land that has been put on the market has been over-applied-for—that they cannot find land for them all?— Well, I feel very sorry for New Zealand if it is so. 630. Take the land question : do you think the Government in Australia will take as much interest in settling the people on the land as the Government of New Zealand has done?— Yes, if you send the proper men over to lay the case before the Government on the other side. I have sufficient faith in human nature to think that the men who will be picked out to form that higher Parliament will have courage to do what is just. 631. I understand that you have not viewed this question from the financial point of view : you have no idea what the colony will lose financially?—l have not gone into that. 632. And you express no opinion as to whether it would be better for the various departments to be administered by the Federal Government or locally ?—No. 633. You also say that manufacturers for years to come would not be justified in equipping their factories with the latest machinery, because there would be no market for their goods ? —I did not say so. 634. I think Mr. Luke put that question to you?— No. 635. What do you say, then ?—Mr. Luke put a different question to me. He said that the larger amount of business doing over on the other side in certain lines would necessarily mean that they could put up larger plants—not that they could put up better machinery. With larger plants you could have a larger turnover. 636. You went on to say that our men could do the same thing ?—As far as putting up up-to-date machinery. 637. He also asked you if the trade justified putting up larger plants ?—On a smaller scale, I said, it did. 638. You also said you did not think the trade of New Zealand would warrant the putting-up of that larger plant?—lf you mean by that that it would be necessary to turn over three or four times the quantity, one would think it would not be wise to do it. 639. It would not be business ? —No. 640. You admit that in Australia little or no notice is taken of New Zealand ?—Comparatively speaking. 641. That is a fair idea of the opinions held as to New Zealand in Australia?— Not generally. I do not think that necessarily follows. I think a great many people in Australia have a high opinion of New Zealand. 642. From the problematical benefit to shipping—it depends entirely on the climate in Australia whether we will have a large market—you yet say it would be in the interest of New Zealand to federate?—l say it would be in the interest of the colony at large to federate with Australia. *643. Mr. Roberts] It has been estimated by people who have taken the trouble to make the computation that if New Zealand joined the Federation the loss from Customs, excise, and contributions to the Federal Parliament would amount to something like £600,000: in the face of that would you still favour federation ?—Yes. 644. Even at such a cost ?—Yes. 645. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] You know a good deal about the South Sea Island labour?— Yes. 646. Do you consider that there will be sufficient labour for the sugar-plantations in Queensland for the future from the South Sea Islands? —I really could not say to what extent they are likely to go on cultivating sugar in Queensland, but if they cultivate it much more than at the present moment they will possibly have to import coolies from Calcutta to supply the^labour, the same as they are doing at present in Fiji. 647. People have spoken constantly about kanaka labour, but I suppose that includes other South Sea labour : what I want to know is, can they look Co it for a permanent supply of coloured labour ?—Yes, I think so. 648. I thought it was failing ?—No ; but there are restrictions, and the whole thing is carried on differently from what it was many years ago. 649. Do these South Sea Islanders stay in the country, or do they go home ?—As a rule, they go home,
379
A.-4.
650. Then, you do not think there would be permanent settlement by these people in Australia ? —No. 651. Do you think the coolies would settle there?— Well, quite likely they would. 652. Do they stay ? —They are largely staying in Fiji. 653. Have the Chinese been employed in Queensland? —To a certain extent, I believe, they have. 654. Do they remain ?—A Chinaman usually remains until he gets sufficient money to enable him to go home and live in China. 655. Do you think sugar-planting could be carried on without coloured labour?— From my experience of the South Sea Islands I should say it could not. Thomas Taylob Masefield examined. (No. 141.) 656. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ?—An engineer and ironfounder. 657. In Auckland ?—Yes. 658. Is your establishment a large one ?—Yes. 659. How many hands do you employ?— Sometimes sixty or seventy. 660. Have you lived long in New Zealand ?—Forty years. 661. Are you acquainted with Australia?—No; I have never been there. 662. Will you tell the Commission how federation with Australia will, in your opinion, operate on the manufacturing industries of this colony?— From a manufacturing view of the question, I think, very detrimentally to all the manufacturing interests in Auckland. To my own trade it would. We have a small duty of 5 per cent., but a large class of our goods would have to compete against Victoria, where they have large protective duties. Wages in Australia are less than we pay here by 20 per cent. Materials are also cheaper there than we can gee them in New Zealand. Consequently we would be hampered to a certain extent by competition with the colonies, and I feel that federation would be more detrimental to us than any benefit we could gain from it. I think the Victorians would be able to place their goods in our markets here to the injury of our industries. In New Zealand we have four centres — Dunedin, Christchurch, Wellington, and Auckland. We are differently situated to Australia, where they have one centre for each State. Manufacturers there are able to dump down their oversupply goods in each of these centres here and get a good market in each town. This would militate very much against our manufactures in the several centres of New Zealand, and I think, taking every view of the question, federation would not be beneficial to the manufacturing interests of New Zealand. 663. Of course, under federation there would be intercolonial free-trade: how would that affect your manufactures?— Even then we would suffer from the cheapness of labour and material in Australia. 664. How about the larger establishments there : would they have any detrimental effect upon you ? —They would be able to compete better than we could in the manufacture of articles in our trade. 665. In the event of federation, would there be any inducement to manufacturers in this colony to remove their establishments to the other side ?—Manufacturers who are now suffering very considerably from slackness of trade would, I consider, have to go to some other place to work their trade in. Ido not think we would be able to compete in New Zealand against Victoria. 666. Do you not think that having four million more people to trade with would be an advantage? —If we could get products and labour at the same price we could manage, but there is 20 per cent, difference in the price of labour and material against us—coke, bar-iron, coal, pig-iron, are all cheaper there than here. We pay 10s., 11s., and 12s. a day here, whilst over there they pay Bs. to 10s. 667. Have you considered what prospect there is of the rates of wages in Australia being assimilated to those of New Zealand, either by Australia's being brought up or New Zealand's being brought down?—No, I have not. I think the large amount of surplus population in the way of labour in Australia will always keep wages lower than in New Zealand. 668. Have you considered the matter from any other point of view than that of the manufactures ?—No; only that from a financial point of view I think New Zealand would be better to expend her money in her own way. Ido not think there will be any beneficial effect from getting the Federal Government to expend the money in New Zealand. I think we will get more money voted for works in New Zealand by remaining as we are than if we joined the Federation. As a British subject I have no objection to federation, but on manufacturing and financial grounds I think it would be a mistake. 669. What is your opinion on the question of New Zealand retaining her political independence?—l think New Zealand would be better to keep as she is. 670. Mr. Roberts.] You seem to place great stress on the cheaper labour on the other side, and the lower cost of material on the other side, as being the chief handicaps?— Yes, that is so. 671. We have the evidence of men in the South that iron is as cheap here as in Australia?i— They get freights less to Australia than we do to New Zealand. 672. A man in Christchurch in a large way of business made the distinct statement that pigiron was as cheap here as in Victoria?—l think he is mistaken. 673. He also said that, though wages were higher here, the capabilities of our own men were higher ?—My experience is the other way. Good men go over there when there is regular employment. 674. Do you think the climate of Auckland is too near that of Australia to enable you to notice any difference ?—However that may be, the people of Australia work longer hours than we do. 675. This man said that he could get more out of his men in eight hours than they do .over in Australia ?—I do not think so.
A.—4
380
676. That is not your experience ? —They all work in closed shops, and are not troubled with the heat of the sun. Ido not think there is very much difference. 677. Mr. Millar.] I take it that you are afraid that as a manufacturer your trade will be curtailed if we federated ? —I am almost sure it would. Even now we are suffering from being very slack. 678. The shops would have to rely on repairs? —We could not manufacture any new articles. 679. Looking at it from the rising-generation point of view, would you then be able to turn out such fully equipped engineers ?—Not so well as if we manufactured new articles. 680. It would affect the rising generation to that extent that they would have to go out of the country to learn their trade ? —I do not think there would be employment for them. 681. From a political point of view you think it would be better for us to remain as we are, where the people have complete control over Parliament ?—I think we could get more value for the expenditure of our money. I think the Federal Government would not consider the interests of New Zealand so much as we consider them ourselves, and they would not know the requirements of the country so well as our own people do. 682. Mr. Beauchamp.] Did I understand you to say that trade was not flourishing in this part of the colony ?—No, it is not. Down South it is brisk. 683. We were told that on account of the briskness of the trade down South the manufacturers could not put in tenders for railway-trucks : did you tender for that job ?—No; I tendered for some dredges. 684. You are protected to the extent of 5 per cent. ?—Yes. 685. Are you subjected to competition from Australia?— Chiefly from America. 686. What class of goods come from America ? —All classes of goods. 687. Could you manufacture those goods here?— They could be manufactured here if there was inducement for the people to enlarge their premises and go in for the trade. 688. You have not the plant yet ?—To a large extent we have not. 689. Mr. Luke.] How do you account for the cheaper material in Australia compared with New Zealand?— Freights on iron are considerably less than to New Zealand, and other goods, such as coke, are cheaper. 690. But is not Australian coke landed here higher in pvice than coke made in New Zealand ?—No, it is cheaper in Auckland; but Greymouth coke is better than any Australian coke. 691. Do you find that a large amount of iron comes out in ships to New Zealand in the way of stiffening? —Very little. 692. Is it the case in Melbourne and Sydney?— Yes. 693. And that accounts for the cheaper freights ?—Yes. 694. When you spoke of 5 per cent, on machinery, did you mean dairying machinery ?— Yes; all kinds of machinery. 695. It has come under your notice that lower wages are paid in Australia than in New Zealand ?—I have not personally seen it myself, but men in my works have told me, and I have heard it from other people who know the colony well. 696. Do you think the Australian workman quite equal to the New Zealand workman?—l do. 697. Do you agree with the statement made by manufacturers in the South Island that, owing to the colder climate, a man can produce more in eight hours in New Zealand than he can in a longer number of hours in Australia ?—I do not think climate makes much difference. Wesley Spkagg examined. (No. 142.) 698. Hon. .the Chairman.] What are you ?—General manager of the New Zealand Dairy Association. 699. How long has that been established in New Zealand?— Fourteen years. 700. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—Yes. 701. Are you favourable to federation or against it ?—I am generally unfavourable at the present time. 702. Perhaps you would shortly state to the Commission your views on the matter?—As far as my own business is concerned, I think it would be an advantage. It would give us a larger market than we at present have, especially in the altered conditions of Australia. We have hitherto had a market in certain portions of Australia. If Queensland wanted butter we were able to compete on even terms with New South Wales and Victoria, except as regards the difference in freights, because the tariff in Queensland operated equally. That will be done away with now, and Australia will be one place with free inter-ports. If New Zealand does not join the Federation we shall be prohibited by the tariff from carrying on business with these places, so that in my own business there would be an advantage in federation, which would open Australian ports free to our produce. Apart from this, lam at present of opinion that we have more to lose than to gain by federating. My reasons are several. The financial aspect of the question, which has already been spoken of, strikes me as being a serious one. It appears that we shall have to hand over to the Commonwealth a large sum of money, with only a problematical return for it. Then, looking at the lack of community of interest, that also strikes me as being an objection. I understand there are large works in contemplation which must be taken up or controlled by the Commonwealth Government. Take, for instance, irrigation, the trans-continental railway, and defence : I cannot think it will be to our advantage to have anything to do with these things. The provisions for the defence of Australia will probably not be such as would be of service to New Zealand, and all these things I understand we should have to help to pay for. In the matter of irrigation, the result of the work for which the expenditure would be incurred would be distinctly detrimental to our own agricultural and pastoral interests—that is, would help to make Australia independent of our produce. These are serious matters which cause me to feel that, notwithstanding the personal interest and advantage which I should derive from federation, I ought at the present time to oppose it.
381
A.—4
I think it is possible, although I have no strong opinion in that direction, that the time may come when it would be an advantage to the colony to be more closely connected with the Commonwealth ; but should that time come I cannot see that there is a likelihood of any disadvantage to us from waiting until we know better what will be the influence of the new form of government upon these southern lands. It appears to me that it is always worth while to wait and consider when one is not sure. Now, as to who had better be intrusted with the control of the affairs of New Zealand, I think it is a mistake to delegate any portion of local government to people at a distance or who are not directly interested in or in touch with the requirements of a district. I believe in local self-govern-ment, and to delegate a large portion of our government to distant people seems to me at present to be an unwise step. I think federating with the Commonwealth would not hasten the federation of the Empire. I heard a gentleman who gave evidence a short time ago say he was of opinion that our joining the Australian Federation would be a step in that direction. I think not. I think if the people of Australasia were united in interests which were different from the general interests of the Empire we should have less desire for Imperial federation. Leaving the question of mere profit or loss aside for a while, there is one feature of this question which appeals to me. I believe that New Zealand has a mission among the nations of the world which can be better fulfilled by her being in a large degree self-controlled. I think we are a separate people placed aside in an island by ourselves, not wholly for ourselves, but providentially in the interests of the whole Empire and of the whole world, and I believe that we shall work out our destiny better separated for the present than if we were tied to the Australian Continent. Our experimental legislation, for instance, which has sometimes been an advantage to us and sometimes has not, has been an advantage to the Empire. Even our failures have been useful, because they have shown other people exactly what they ought not to attempt; and where we have secured successes these successes have been object-lessons to the other portions of the world. By retaining our independent position as an outlying section of this large Empire we shall best serve the Empire*and the human race as a whole. 703. You say that one reason why you might favour federation is because it would give you a better market in Australia for your productions'?—-I mentioned that as the one feature which would guide me in favour of our federating rather than others. 704. But your principal market for dairy produce is in London ?—Quite true ; but the English market and the Australian market come at two different seasons of the year, and the Australian market is a very important one for us to have. When the English market is closed the Australian market is generally open. 705. Would that same argument apply to other manufactures in the colony as giving them a wider market in Australia?— Our commodity is so directly the product of the soil that I hardly look upon myself as a manufacturer. I think it would not apply to manufacturers generally. I think federation with Australia would be a disadvantage to New Zealand manufacturers. 706. Some witnesses who have been before us hold that if the colonial manufacturers cannot stand in competition with Australia they should be allowed to go to the wall, and we should only cultivate manufactures which are products of the soil: what do you say to that ?—I am largely in favour of the survival of the fittest the world over. 707. You are a Free-trader?—l am. 707 a. Do you say, in reply to my question, that if these manufactures cannot stand in competition with the manufactures of Australia they should be allowed to go under ?—Yes. 708. Well, what would be the effect of that on New Zealand? Would it go back to a pastoral country ?—To some extent it would. Industries not suitable to the country would be checked, but that would not be finally detrimental to this colony. 709. But do you think the time will come when they will be able to stand ?—Yes, I think so. I think when large numbers of people come here it will be more convenient to manufacture articles required by them here in their midst than for the work to be done elsewhere. It will also be profitable then. 710. If the manufacturers cannot stand against Australia, what is the work of a large number of people to be ?—I believe our present position should be one of a large connection with the land and the natural products of the country. We have certain natural industries here —namely, the production of gold, flax, kauri-gum, and timber, and all these things are natural industries in regard to which we can compete against the world. 711. And you think that New Zealand would prosper through the cultivation of those matters which you have now mentioned ?—I think that following the natural productions of the country would always be an advantage to any country, and, of course, to New Zealand. 712. And you think the manufactures are not necessary to the mercantile welfare of New Zealand ?—I think that manufactures, as far as the requirements of the country are concerned, are distinctly an advantage to a country like New Zealand ; but I think it would be a mistake for us to attempt to manufacture, or to export to a country where they can manufacture cheaper and better than we can here. 713. But have you no fear that, with inter-State free-trade, the local manufacturers would be swamped from outside ?—I have no fear of that in the case of legitimate industries. 714. Take the clothing and boot trades : how about them ?—ln speaking of them I am speaking of matters I know very little about, but I should imagine that those factories would be able to hold their own against the world if they are properly planted here. I am told, for instance, that wool is cheaper here, and that of some goods a better article is actually made here. I have also been told that some kinds of manufactured woollen goods can be sent from here to England and be sold there to advantage. 715. Holding the views you do upon political economy, do you think that federation would be a distinct advantage to New Zealand ?—I have said it is better for New Zealand to remain as she
A.—4,
382
is—apart by herself, having autonomy, with no interference from outside." It is better, in the interests of the race, that she should retain that autonomy, and work out her own destiny as she is doing at the present time. As a Free-trader, I think any consistent movement in the direction of free-trade, as in the case of reciprocal tariffs for the whole of the Empire, would be an advantage; but free-trade throughout the world would be a greater one still. 716. Would you say that New Zealand should carry on as she is doing now?— Yes. 717. But it is carrying on with a highly protective tariff?—lf you mean carry on on independent lines, yes. lam not aware that absorption in the Commonwealth would assist New Zealand to become a free-trade country. I think rather to the contrary. For instance, the Customs tariff would be fixed by the combined colonies. The principal control would be in the hands of the Federal Government, while as we stand at present the question of taxation is entirely in our own hands, and we can adopt our own plans to find the necessary means to carry out the works we desire to undertake. Even if it is thought that protection suits us we can have that if we like. 718. Taking the whole of the States in the Commonwealth, can you say that their tendency is in favour of free-trade ?—I fear their tendency is generally in favour of protection. 719. If this is so, do you think New Zealand would be likely to bring about a policy of freetrade more speedily by herself than by being connected with the Commonwealth?— Certainly; more speedily by herself. 720. Mr. Leys.] Would not the first effect of federation on our manufactures be to lower wages if this free-trade policy were generally adopted?—l think so, in fictitiously supported industries; and, indeed, to close up certain manufactures. 721. And add to the struggle for existence?— Yes, for a while. 722. What would be the social result to the working-population of this lowering of wages?— W T ell, it might have a useful result in bringing the claims of the working-people very strongly before the country, and compelling some other provision to be made for them—something that would give better results for their labour. We have had instances here in Auckland City where a depression in trade has forced the people on to the land without any hurtful results to them. 723. Can you contemplate calmly the throwing-out of employment of the dozens of people now engaged in our factories ?—To do anything suddenly is generally an unwise thing; but, where an unnatural condition of affairs has grown up, distress to somebody is the price of getting back to right conditions. 724. In that case, so far as amalgamation with this Commonwealth affects our manufacturers, do you not think it would not be advisable for us to take such a step ?—I think not. 725. Do you not think that industries might be perfectly natural to a country, and still the conditions of outside competition—cheap labour more especially—may be such as to make that industry non-payable without protection?—l do not call to mind any example. 726. Take bootmaking, where we produce the leather in the country: do you call that a natural industry?—l think so. 727. Well, we have evidence from bootmakers all over the country that that industry would be destroyed through two causes —cheap labour outside, and great specialisation in manufacture, which is impossible in this country?—lf that is so, then you have a case where the protection should be withdrawn by careful degrees. I would remove needless support from industries that are natural to the place, but this should be done in a common-sense manner. I would take away the props carefully, to let matters readjust themselves as naturally as possible, and thus avoid inflicting needless hardship on people who have been taught by the system to look upon protection to their industry as a normal state. 728. I understand from your evidence that you are a believer in social legislation ?—Yes. 729. Is not the object of that social legislation largely to protect the worker?—lt is to give everybody fair-play. 730. Is it not to protect the worker against what we regard as unnatural and evil conditions which are brought about by excessive competition ?—Yes; to protect or deliver from wrong conditions, however they arise. 731. Do you recognise that the conditions of labour in many courtries are becoming unnatural?—No; the conditions are bad, but they are the natural outcome of surroundings produced by vicious laws or customs. Under proper conditions they would be unnatural. 732. Do you think the sweating conditions of labour in the east end of London unnatural conditions ?—Sweating is not natural in the best sense of the word, but it is the natural result—the complement to other conditions as they exist. 733. Supposing our clothing industry were shut up through the importation of garments made by this sweated labour, would you regard our industry as being destroyed through inadaptability to the natural conditions of the country or through unfair competition ?—We may have every sympathy with the people in London who have to work under such conditions, but we are unable to directly help them. Since these goods are for sale, it is a distinct advantage to us to be able to get them at the prices, and it would be better for us to give up making them here and devote our attention to something else in the meanwhile. 734. You think it would not be advisable to cultivate those branches of manufacturing here by establishing what we consider to be reasonable conditions of labour?—l would not give fictitious encouragement to the establishment of fresh industries. In respect of those already established, I would remove the support by degrees to minimise the hardship which would follow the effort to return to a right position, but I would have the definite intention of getting to free-trade, and of raising the needed revenue by natural taxation. 735. Can you refer to any country in the world whose manufactures have not been built up under protection?— Just at present, no. 736. With regard to the markets in Australia, do you think the agricultural interest would
383
A.—4
benefit by federation ?—I fear, taking it as a whole, the agricultural interests of New Zealand would ijoc benefit. For my business, I think yes; but for the agricultural interests as a whole, I think not. 737. Why do you come to that conclusion?—-. Because it will often happen in Australia that agricultural products can be raised more cheaply there than here. The work is done on a larger scale in some instances, and there are certain colonies that are better fitted than we are for the growing of certain products, and, excepting in seasons of drought, the production is larger than ours. 738. You think that the country, having such a large land area, must necessarily look to agriculture in the future as one of its chief sources of production ?—Yes. 739. And in that case our market must really be in countries where they have not such largo land areas?—l think so, or where conditions of climate, &c, are less favourable. I think we have a greater reciprocal interest in South Africa than we have in Australia. 740. Do you think there will be any difficulty in finding markets for our produce that might be displaced by a hostile tariff in Australia ?—I think not. 1 think profitable markets can be found in South Africa for certain classes of produce. 741. Then, you do not contemplate that it would be a serious thing to our agricultural interest to be shut out of Australia ? —I do not. 742. Mr. Reid.] I think you indicated that you are opposed to federation at present ?—Yes. 743. Do you contemplate the time when it would be profitable for New Zealand to join the Federation?—No; but I think, if such a time arrives, we shall find it has not been a disadvantage for us to wait. Ido not think there will be more difficulty in the way of our federating on advantageous terms then than there would be at the present time. 744. Are you prepared to indicate a time?— No. My judgment is that when I can take time to consider a question without the delay seriously prejudicing my position I ought to take that time. That is my attitude in this matter. 745. You do not think that the delay might be prejudicial ?—I think not. Delay might have the opposite effect, and actually bring to us a request from the other side to federate. 746. Would it not rather have an opposite effect by hardening things into a stereotyped condition which would be hard to remove ?—That is a possibility, but I do not contemplate it. 747. Are you familiar with the terms of the Commonwealth Act?— Fairly so, but not intimately. 748. You are aware that it lies with the Commonwealth Parliament to make terms and conditions ?—Yes. 749. Then, do you not think that it would be a disadvantage to New Zealand if she were to seek an entrance into the Commonwealth after delaying the matter—that the lapse of time would be a bar ? —I do not think it would. 750. Are you prepared to intimate any special conditions that we should stipulate for in the event of deciding to join ?—Unless special reasons arose, I would wait for communications to arrive from the other side, and be governed by circumstances. 751. Mr. Luke.] Have you thought of the black-labour question ?—Not seriously. 752. Do you think it is possible to carry on the sugar industry without coloured labour ?—My opinion is not worth much on this subject, but such as it is I give it : I fear this industry could not be carried on without coloured labour. 753. Do you not think that by admitting numbers of coloured people they might ultimately overrun the whole continent?—l can quite understand that might be the result, but I am not apprehensive that the consequences of having a large coloured population would be serious if they were governed wisely and justly, as such people will be aoverned some day. 754. Do you know the number of persons engaged in the manufacturing industries in New Zealand ?—No. 755. There are 49,000. Do you not think that federation would have the effect of dislocating a vast volume of trade, and that these 49,000 people being partly thrown out of employment would mean a very serious disaster to New Zealand?—A sudden dislocation of any kind would probably be a serious matter. 756. Then, you think it is to our interests to maintain these industries?— Yes. I answer your question in the affirmative; but I ask you to bear in mind the suggestion I made, that in making changes they should be made with the least degree of hardship to the people or industry affected. Retain the industries by all means, but put them on a healthy footing. 757. You stated that we ought to pause before we entered into the Federation ; but will not there always exist between the States of Australia a community of interest which cannot possibly exist as between them and New Zealand, and will not that always be a disadvantage to New Zealand? —Not necessarily. 758. You do not think the separation by twelve hundred miles of water is a disadvantage ?— Not for all time. 759. However long we may wait, that disability will always exist, will it not? —Always; but I do not think it is a fatal disability. 760. Mr. Beauchamp.] At the present time Ministers of the Crown are easily accessible in New Zealand : do you think we would be at very much disadvantage through the Ministers or representatives' of this colony being compelled to reside so far away ?—lt would be a great disadvantage. 761. Do you think that between the two countries there would be a certain interchange of products sufficient to warrant their entering into a reciprocal treaty ?—I do not. I think that the products of the two countries are too nearly alike for reciprocity of that kind. 762. Mr. Roberts.] Does your association export largely ?—Very largely ; mostly to the United Kingdom, where we have sent this year about 800 tons.
A.-4
384
763. I noticed that in 1899 six thousand pounds' worth of butter was sent from Auckland to Australia?— That would be the entry for the Customs duty; but the actual value would be very much more than that, as it is impossible to tell what will be the selling-value of these articles; so that the trade rate is entered up. £8,000 would probably be nearer the mark than £6,000. 764. I find that something like 11 per cent, of the whole of the butter export goes to Australia ?—I think less is going now than in the past, because the Australian production of butter is increasing yearly. 765. Then, do you not expect that with federation the exports from New Zealand to Australia would decrease, and the exports to England would increase ? —Not seriously. With inter-State free-trade there would not be any great increase. Anything sent to Victoria would be for transhipment under bond, and would not be for Victorian home consumption. 766. Do you think that the exports to Australia for last year, which show a considerable increase, are partly comprised of produce for transhipment in Australia?— Yes, for re-export to South Africa. 767. And would those remarks apply equally to New South Wales?— Yes. Alfred Stukges examined. (No. 143.) 768. Hon. the Chairman.'] You live at Otahuhu, and you are the vice-president of the Fruitgrowers' Association ?—Yes. 769. Are you a delegate from that association ?—No, I am giving evidence on my own account; but I might say that the association is the largest in New Zealand. 770. What effect do you think federation would have on the fruit industry of this country ?— It would be inimical to the best interest of New Zealand as a whole. The distance by sea is very great, and is a considerable difficulty, and also the fact that a large portion of the Continent of Australia will be developed by coloured labour, which will have a disastrous effect on social conditions, and also on manufactures carried on by white labour. Under these conditions the competition of Australia, if there were no barrier of Customs duties, would overthrow the industries here. Looking at the experience we had in the old provincial days, though I would not like to go back to that form of government, I cannot forget the fact that for years the North Island suffered through not receiving her fair share of public expenditure, and the same experience for the whole of New Zealand in a much more aggravated form would be the case if we became a State of the Commonwealth, because we should be governed from a capital in Australia. 771. Do you think the fruit trade would be able to survive against the competition of Australia without a protective duty ?—Ultimately ; though it would take a long time to build up our industry without protection, because, although New Zealand can produce certain fruits that Australia cannot, the grape industry to a large extent would be dislocated. A fruit-grower a few miles out of Sydney told me two months ago that he was praying for federation with New Zealand, because the New Zealand fruit-growers could not compete against the fruit-growers of Australia. Some witnesses, I notice, have stated that labour is higher in Australia than here; but I have a son at Mildura, and he writes to me to say that labour, for which we pay £1 10s. a week for here, is only £1 there. I have an orchard of 30 acres at Otahuhu, and my labour account is not le3s than £400, and more often £500, a year. 772. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I have heard it stated that the North Island cannot supply certain fruits to the South, and they have to be imported from Australia—such as lemons : is that correct ?— You will find in a certain time that the northern part of New Zealand can provide all the fruit New Zealand requires ; but, of course, you must remember that the industry is in its infancy, and it takes a long time to develop ie, but the North is capable of producing the amount required. 773. You never see a North Island lemon in the South Island?—l beg your pardon, I have lemon-trees growing at Otahuhu, and I ship lemons from here to Wellington, Dunedin, and Christchurch. 774. Mr. Beauchamp.] Are you of opinion that we can grow as good fruit in this colony as is grown in California?— Better. I am not giving you my own opinion, but of two brothers who are canning at Whangarei, and they say the quality of New Zealand peaches is very much better than the quality of the Californian peaches. 775. Is it true that, owing to the prevalence of the insect pest, we do not grow as good fruit as is grown in some parts of America ?—ln certain parts of America they can grow apples very much superior to ours. 776. But probably in New Zealand we can grow as good fruit as is grown in any part of America ? —As good as is grown in any part of the world. 777. And is our failure to do it in the past attributable to our neglect to pay sufficient attention to our orchards?— Not at all. The mistake is that we have planted trees not suitable to soil or climate, and have had to begin over again. 778. In the matter of fruit, can we compete with the Tasmanian ?—Yes. 779. We have been told that the people of this colony are not satisfied with the price they get for it : what is your opinion of that matter ?—I am of opinion that the volume of trade in New Zealand is very good indeed. 780. Are the people here satisfied wiih the amount of protection they have ?—Yes. 781. Mr. Luke.] Have you any jam-factories here ?—Yes. 782. Do you grow for the factories?— No. 783. Does fruit-growing for manufacturing purposes pay the grower?—l think so. We sell the surplus to the.jam-factories. 784. Would it pay you to grow specially for jam-making ?—lt would for canning purposes, and it might for jam-making. 785. You grow raspberries ?—No.
A.—4
385
786. What fruits do you grow ?—Peaches, plums, pears, persimmons, and lemons. 787. You do not export any fruit to Australia ? —No. 788. Still, some of their fruit comes here ?—Yes. 789. Is that island fruit or Sydney fruit ?—lt -comes from Australia, and we (Auckland) only get bananas and oranges from the island. Australia grows large quantities of fruit, and they must find an outlet for their surplus. In fact, they can make very little out of the large portion they send here, and it is only sent in the hope of getting a small profit, which they do not always get. 790. Do you think that under federation we could grow fruit and export it to Australia ?—No. 791. Mr. Leys.] What is the duty on fruit here ?—Jd. to Id. per pound. 792. Do you think that the import of fruit to New Zealand would increase if there were intercolonial free-trade ? —No doubt it would. 793. Do you think our fruit-growers could hold their own against the Australian fruit-growers if there were free-trade ?—lt would be a question of time, and meanwhile they would suffer very serious loss, until they grew fruit specially adapted for this colony in sufficient quantities and sold it at such a price as would keep out the imported article. They would have to grow fruit that the other colonies cannot grow ; for instance, they do not grow very good apples in Australia, but they grow good pears. 794. Does it not seem an extraordinary thing that a perishable product like fruit can be shipped here from Australia at a duty of from |d. to Id. per pound, and. compete with our own growers?— That is explainable by the fact that they only send at a time when we have sold all ours. California also sends apples here when our crop is done. 795. Do you think the effect of intercolonial free-trade would be to lower the price of fruit for a while here ?—I think so, for a certain number of years, because our fruit-growers would only grow those fruits which the climate was most adapted to. 796. Is there a large population dependent on fruit-growing in New Zealand ?—Yes, more especially north of Auckland. 797. Then, you would regard federation as likely to do a serious injury to the settlers in this part of the colony ? —I think so. 798. Mr. Millar.] Is the canning of peaches at Whangarei a large industry ?—lt is only just beginning. Eev. George Macmurray, M.A., examined. (No. 144.) 799. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your official designation ?—Vicar of St. Mary's Cathedral, Parnell. 800. I understand you have given some attention to the question of the federation of New Zealand with the Australian Commonwealth ?—That is so. 801. Will you be kind enough to let us hear what your views are ?—I may say'that, having lived for nearly seven years in Australia and nearly nine years in New Zealand, I know something of the matters which are involved in this problem, and, that being so, I feel I can unhesitatingly say it would be for the interest of Australia and New Zealand that we should federate. I think the problem is largely a geographical one. I believe there is little doubt that if New Zealand lay a hundred miles off the Australian coast federation would be carried by an overwhelming majority of the population. I believe if New Zealand were twice as far away as she is there would be no question of federation at all. I have here a map showing the maximum of ocean of the globe. New Zealand is very nearly in the centre of this hemisphere, and in that hemisphere Australia and New Zealand are practically isolated from the rest of the world. It seems to me that God and nature have said that these two countries are going to dominate that hemisphere if they are united, or they will quarrel if their interests are not one. It seems to me that there must be rivalries and jealousies between the two countries, which will continually increase if their interests are not united. Human nature being what it is, if the two countries have different interests, no matter how closely they are allied in language, race, and creed, they will quarrel, and that will be the future history of these two countries if their interests are not united together at an early stage of their history. All history tells us that no ties of kindred, race, or religion keep people from quarrelling if they have diverse material interests, and that the interests of New Zealand and Australia will be diverse as regards their influence in the islands of the Pacific there is no doubt if they are kept separate countries, with separate Governments; and I feel, whilst the nations are young there will be comparatively little difficulty and loss in binding them together into one great people, and thus preserving unity and peace in the future. I feel certain that if there is no federation there will be strife. Possibly, at first, only commercial and industrial strife, but there is no saying that there may not be worse still in later days. If questions of conflict arise between the two countries, how will they be settled? If the Mother-country interferes to settle them, will it help Imperial federation if she decides in favour of Australia against New Zealand—the stronger against the weaker; or, if for New Zealand against Australia, will it help to keep the Australian Commonwealth in the bonds of the Empire ? There seems to me to be danger to Imperial federation if the two countries are not federated. The Mothercountry is bound to try to prevent strife, and is certain to give offence when she decides in favour of either. I look upon the federation of the two countries as a help towards Imperial federation, though I have been told that members of the Imperial Government feel differently. I think that feeling, if it exists, is a remnant of the " divide and rule " policy that has well-nigh wrecked the Empire. In any problem you are much more likely to get a solution if the factors are few than if they are many, and the more equal the factors are the easier the problem is of solution ; and if you can resolve the question of Imperial federation into the federation of, say, three large Commonwealths —Canada, South Africa, and Australasia—you will have gone a long way towards helping forward Imperial federation, whereas the existence of a small factor like New Zealand claiming to have an equal voice with a great factor like Australia would imperil the solution of the whole problem. 49—A. 4.
A.—4
386
Then, as regards industries, I have read that a good deal of evidence has been given to the effect that the industries of New Zealand would suffer if we had federation, and that wages would be reduced. Now, it is twelve years exactly since I came to New Zealand for the first time from Australia. What struck me then as to the condition of the working-man in New Zealand was that his wages were lower than the wages of the working-man in Australia. 802. That was twelve years ago?— Yes; and to-day we are told that the converse is the case —that the wages are high in New Zealand and lower in Australia. It seems to me that the present condition of things in New Zealand is purely temporary. Twelve years ago Australia was wildly prosperous—at least, externally so—and at that time New Zealand was under a cloud of depression, and wages were very low. Things have changed. Australia went through a period of what is vulgarly called " a slump." New Zealand has had its seven years of plenty, and the work-ing-man of to-day is comparing his wages with those that are being paid in Australia at the end of a slump. It is not a fair comparison ; and I have no hesitation in saying that five years hence the relative wages in Australia and New Zealand will have very much changed from what they are to-day. And I think it is reasonable to suppose that that will be so, for this reason : New Zealand has a better climate, and has natural advantages that make it a much more desirable country for men to live in than Australia ; and if men in Australia know that they can get more comfortable conditions of life in New Zealand, and higher wages, human nature and the enterprise of the British workman are very different from what I believe them to be if the balance is not rectified by emigration from Australia ; but I believe that the Australian workman is confident that whatever advantage there is in New Zealand is only temporary. Again, I believe that the industries of the world are not going to be settled by any small community. I believe there is a period of great industrial warfare before civilisation, and the factors are large that are going to take part in that struggle—take, for instance, factors like Germany and America. And it is, to my mind, attempting the impossible for a little country like New Zealand to think it can isolate itself from the world and maintain a contest with the industries of the world; and I think the only chance that the New Zealand industries have of holding their own in the warfare of the future is that they should be identified with the Australian industries, and so bring a large factor into that strife which, as certain as to-morrow's sun will rise, will resolve itself into a fight for the commercial supremacy of the world. It has been said that we shall lose our identity if we federate with Australia. Have Scotsmen lost their identity by entering into the British Empire ? It is ridiculous to suppose they have ; and we shall not lose our identity. But we shall bring a factor into the Commonwealth which is sorely needed to make the Commonwealth a great success. New-Zealanders will have a distinct individuality — they will supplement the capacities of the Australian. It has been said that we should be overwhelmed by the voting-power of the Australians in the Australian Parliament, and that we should not get our fair share of the votes for roads, bridges, railways, and so forth; that we should not be able to maintain our own. lam afraid that is a very poor way of asserting the individuality of New Zealand, if she is not able to hold her own in a united British people. I think we have only to send Mr. Seddon over there, and, instead of Australia annexing New Zealand, we shall annex Australia. Our statesmen have an individuality and force of character that make them quite equal to the Australian statesmen, and I believe the peculiar circumstances of New Zealand would give her a weight in the councils of the Commonwealth that, as regards representation, her numbers alone would not justify her having. In the Commonwealth the great colonies of New South Wales and Victoria are bitter rivals, and New Zealand would be able to hold in her hand the balance of power between these two great colonies, and I believe she would have a largely predominant voice in shaping the course of the Commonwealth. Whatever the future may be, whether we federate or not, one thing is certain :we shall be influenced greatly by our one great neighbour in this hemisphere. Therefore it is to our interests to see that the course of the Commonwealth is one that will be satisfactory to our interests, and that its influence will be an influence for good. How can we secure that best ? By standing outside and looking on the Commonwealth with jealous eyes, or by entering into the Commonwealth? Surely the influence of New Zealand within the Commonwealth, if we believe New Zealand to be all we say about her, will be an enormous factor for good; and the benefit to the Commonwealth will be enormous. I believe that benefit would be shared in full by New Zealand herself. But one thing is certain: that the course of the Commonwealth with New Zealand standing out will be a different object in history to what it would be if New Zealand federated with it. And in this relation let me make reference to the question of coloured labour. If Australia becomes a country in which coloured labour is to a large extent used, we here in New Zealand shall not be able to get rid of the influence for evil of such a course, and, if New Zealand were in the Commonwealth, it seems to me that the possibility of coloured labour being allowed to any dangerous extent would be simply wiped out of existence. It is an open problem now, without New Zealand, what the outcome will be ; it would be a certainty, I think, if New Zealand were in the Commonwealth. Then, as to the Commonwealth Act, I say frankly I should infinitely have preferred to see appeals to the Privy Council, as the birthright of every Britisher, preserved ; but, still, I do not think that in itself ought to be a barrier to our entering into federation. Then, as to the other blot upon the Act, as regards the question of the aboriginal vote, lam not a lawyer; but it seems to me that, whilst we should not get credit for the Maoris in New Zealand when reckoning the number of representatives we should have in the Federal Parliament, yet, so far as my reading of the Act goes, I do not see why every Maori should not have a vote. It would mean that we should lose one representative, but it would not bar the Maori from voting for a member of the State Parliament. The effect would be to deprive New Zealand of one representative that she is justly entitled to, but that is so trifling a matter that I have no doubt it would be remedied at the earliest opportunity. So that the only permanent blot in the Act is that we should be deprived of full and free access to the Privy Council, but that, I say, is not sufficient to justify our standing out of the Federation.
387
A.—4
803. Have you followed the history of the Federation in Australia?—l took a considerable part in the initiation of the movement in a small way in my own district. I was one of the first persons in my district who took the question up. I spoke on a public platform, and tried to rouse the Australians to take an interest in it. 804. They wanted rousing ?—Yes, just as badly as New Zealand does to-day. 805. How was it that between 1891 and 1895 the Act prepared by Sir Samuel Griffiths was not taken up by the Australian Legislatures ? —They were just like New Zealand to-day over it. The uncertainty frightened them. They did not know what was going to happen, and the times were such that they thought it better to put up with the evils they had than to fly to others that they knew not of. 806. Even as late as 1899, when the Legislative Council of New South Wales declined to agree to the Federal Bill ?—That was owing largely to the local jealousies between Victoria and New South Wales. 807. You are of opinion that Imperial federation would be promoted by New Zealand joining the Australian Commonwealth ?—Yes, I think so ; and I think that the holding-together of the Empire will be seriously endangered by our not uniting our interests. 808. Is it not a fact that the Canadians are averse to any further development of the Imperialistic policy ? —Very probably at present. 809. Do you think it probable that the Commonwealth of Australia may evolve into an Australian republic ?—lt may or it may not, just as wisdom prevails in the councils of the statesmen at Home and at this end of the world. I believe nothing would bring about that result so quickly as an acute difference of interest between New Zealand and Australia, in which the Mother-country intervened to prevent trouble. 810. Now, assuming that an Australian republic did eventuate, and New Zealand had joined that Commonwealth, what would be the cost to New Zealand as regards Imperial federation ?—lt is impossible to say what the future would produce, but I believe that the factor of New Zealand in the Commonwealth would almost certainly prevent such a thing taking place. It would lessen the causes that might bring about such a possibility, and it would bring a factor into the Commonwealth which would always tell for maintaining the tie with the Old Country. 811. Do you not think the chances of Imperial federation are stronger with two nations in the Pacific ?—lf the two nations are somewhat equal in resources and population, possibly it might be so ; but with two factors which are so unequal, and which will be more unequal in the future, I believe it would not help that federation. 812. Are you looking at this question as merely of to-day, or with regard to the lapse of a number of years?—l am looking at it for the future, for lam sorry to say that I have no hope of federation to-day. New Zealand is too much asleep to her own interests. 813. What period of time do you define by the future?—l am not a prophet. 814. What do you think will be the probable population of New Zealand fifty years hence?— I suppose it might be three millions at the outside. 815. And in another fifty years after that?— Well, God only knows, Ido not; it is impossible to say. 816. But it would not be the insignificant place you speak of it as being now ? —lt is not insignificant now, because there are great potentialities in it, and it will not be insignificant then ; but it will be weak as compared with the resources and population of Australia. 817. Do you attach no importance, then, to New Zealand sacrificing her independence ?—I do not think she would do so by federating, when I believe that for everything we surrender we should gain an equivalent in the control of the greater body. I believe, if any weight is to be attached to heredity and better circumstances, that the New-Zealander will be best fitted to come to the top of the tree in the Commonwealth. 818. Do you think the manufactures of New Zealand will not be prejudicially affected by our joining the Commonwealth?—l do not think so. It is possible the immediate effect of federation might be dislocation to certain trades; that is inevitable. 819. But you think in the long-run it would be an advantage to many trades ?—I do, because New Zealand has an advantage of climate which will enable her to raise workmen better able to work, and she will be in a position to produce better work than the workmen of Australia. 820. I take it your profession does not enable you to study the financial and business questions so deeply as those engaged in them ? —As a clergyman, I am not supposed to know anything about business; but still Ido know a little, though Ido not profess to be an expert on such questions. 821. Then, if your view is the correct one, how is it that the majority of manufacturers throughout the colony do not express an opinion in favour of federation ?—I believe the reason for that is this : No man likes to face the prospect of an immediate shaking of his position, and there is no doubt about it that federation would introduce such widely different circumstances that there would be an anxious time for every manufacturer. 822. Have you considered how the finances of the colony would be affected by federation?— I am not a financial expert, but there is no doubt there would be a call upon this colony to pay her quota of the Commonwealth expenses ; but I believe she would get her full value for it, and I do not think for a moment that we should be sacrificing anything that we should not get a full return for. If you take as an illustration great States like those of America—supposing they were not federated, and were existing as fifty or sixty independent States—would any one deny that in order to join in a federation they would have to sacrifice much ? Of course they would; every State joining in the union would have to lose something to gain much. 823. You referred to the distance of New Zealand from Australia : does not that seem to point to the fact that nature intended New Zealand to be a separate colony ?—I pointed out on the map
A.—4
388
that these two countries were separated from the rest of the world, and the distance between the two was comparatively small. In fact, the people who talk about the distance as " twelve hundred objections to federation " are people who remember the time when it took twelve days to cross the Tasman Sea. It is now only a matter of three days,, and twenty years hence it will only be a matter of thirty-six hours to go across to Sydney. The inventions of last century, and the possible inventions of this century, will reduce the intervening distance to a trifle. 824. Can you refer us to any case in history in which any country separated by such a distance as we are has federated with another country ?—lt would be impossible, because twelve hundred miles in the ancient days would be an insuperable barrier. 825. Take ancient or modern history ?—What I say is that history teaches us this: that, however identical in race, language, and religion two nations may be, if their interests differ, nothing could prevent them quarrelling. 826. You think it would be to the advantage of New Zealand to federate ?—I do, unmistakably. There is one point I wished to speak about: that was the matter of defence. It has been said that the army of Australia would be of no value for the defence of New Zealand, inasmuch as it could not get here. I maintain that the true defence of these countries is on the sea, and not on the land ; and if Australasia is ever to hold her own it must be on the sea, and it would be impossible for a little country like New Zealand to develop a navy of her own for her own defence, but it might be quite possible in the days to come for the Australian Commonwealth to have a navy that would secure the defence of the whole Commonwealth. 827. Do you not think it would be much easier for New Zealand to be defended by the British fleet ?—Yes, for the present; but Ido not think we can expect the taxpayer in the British Isles for all time to find the money for the defence of Auckland and Wellington and New Zealand. As New Zealand grows she will have to find her own defence. 828. Mr. Leys.] Do you not regard the present federation of all the British colonies under the Empire as a substantial federation ? —lt is, in a very vague and indistinct way. It is as much as I should like to see at the present stage of the Empire's growth, but it is not a condition that can remain for all time. When New Zealand has five millions of people, and Australia has forty or fifty millions, it would not be possible to regulate a foreign policy by a Cabinet elected by the people at Home alone. We must shape something for the future by which the whole of the Empire will have a voice in the control of the foreign policy. 829. At present you do not look upon Imperial federation as a matter likely to come about in the near future ?—Hardly within the lifetime of the present generation of men, but I think it will come in a generation or two. 830. You spoke of New Zealand and Australia looking upon each other with jealous eyes : could we not go on in a perfectly friendly way under our own Constitution ?—Two or three times lately little questions have arisen which chow how quickly jealousy may be aroused—about who is to be managing representative of these colonies on the cable directorate, or something of that kind, and at the present time there is the agitation for the annexation of Fiji and other islands; and I think if the Commonwealth of Australia were not so absorbed within itself at the present time it would look with very jealous eyes upon any such policy on the part of New Zealand. These two countries, either unitedly or separately, are going to dominate the Pacific, and if they are not united rivalry and jealousy will set in. 831. If our interests by reason of our geographical situation are essentially diverse, would the quarrel be more serious if we were tied up in the Federation than if we were separate ? —lt would make all the difference if we were in the Federation, for it would be to the advantage of both to extend their influence. If we are separate we shall want to have a large area in which to sell our goods, and Australia will want the same. If we are united there would be no cause of jealousy or hostility, because both would have the same interest in these islands. 832. You lay very little stress apparently upon this division by sea : is it not a fact that at present the division by sea prevents anything like a common public feeling between New Zealand and Australia ?—Yes, it does, because we have nothing to make common opinion between them and us. I have never met a New-Zealander who has lived a number of years in Australia who is not heart and soul in favour of federation. 833. West Australia is very much further away from Sydney, we will say, but is it not true that there is far greater interest taken in the affairs of West Australia in Sydney and the other centres than is taken in New Zealand ?—Yes, that is so, and for several reasons. There is a considerable amount of Sydney capital invested in the West Australian mines, and where the treasure is there will the heart be also, and naturally the Sydney people take an interest in the place where they have invested their money. That is not the only reason. I believe that the somewhat distinct and definite attitude of the New-Zealander towards Australia on the matter of federation makes the Australian feel that the New-Zealanders do not want to have anything to do with them, and they let us alone. But let us once have united interests and you will see the growth of that feeling at once. 834. Was not that lack of interest in New Zealand affairs and communion of interest in Australian affairs noticeable before ever this question of federation became prominent ? —I do not think so. My experience of Australia was that an Australian, prior to the advocacy of federation, was a Victorian, New South Welshman, a Queenslander, and my impression of seven years there was this : that the separation into separate colonies was creating strong barriers between these different States, and I believe those barriers would have grown and multiplied if federation, by the mercy of God, had not come to break them down. 835. Is it not a fact that the border duties and the overlapping of one colony with another had as much to do with the bringing-about of federation as anything else ?—lt had a good deal, because it led a great many Australians to realise that the fictitious divisions between men who ought to be
389
A.—4
brothers ought to be broken down, and that it would be for the good of all to have them broken down ; and that is what we want to teach the New-Zealanders. 836. Was that not a condition in Australia which does not exist with us ?—-We have not got the fictitious boundaries in New Zealand such as existed in Australia. There is that difference. 837. Is it not true that all the colonies of Australia are greatly interested in the development of large tropical areas? —Yes. 838. Does that not give them a community of interest in a Federal Government which can develop those areas? —That is so. 839. Does that not create a national interest for Australia in which we have no share at all ? —No. We have no direct share in it; but if we are going to annex Fiji and ocher tropical islands we shall have precisely the same problem, and it will be much better for New Zealand and Australia if the whole question of tropical interests can be dealt with by one Power. 840. You have already noticed that the whole question of northern tropical Australia is a moving factor in Federal politics ? —I have. 841. Do you not think that one of the first measures undertaken by the Federal Government will be a scheme for the development of northern Australia?—l do not think it will come at first. It may, of course, but lam not quite competent to give an opinion. It is not likely to be taken up at an early date on a large scale. 842. Have you not noticed that Mr. Barton has already announced it as part of his programme?— That coloured labour will be put out in ten years. 843. And also the construction of the trans-continental railway and the development of central Australia? —I understand he has made that statement. 844. Can you suggest any course by which these works can be carried out, except from the Customs duties levied on the whole of the colonies ? —I do not know where or how they will carry on the works, but it is quite certain that Australia will have to be developed, and it is also quite certain that the Federal Government will have to take its share in that development ; but I am perfectly certain that New Zealand will always get her full share of the revenue. I believe that her representatives will be able enough to take care that New Zealand will always get her full share of the expenditure that she is entitled to from the Federal Government. Money will have to be found for great operations, and I do not expect to see Wellington and Auckland joined much sooner than under federation. We are very slow in our growth in many ways, but Ido not see why the Federal Government should not take that work in hand, and give us a trunk railway from the roadless north down to Wellington, and by doing that give us our fair proportion of the moneys that would be expended on railway development throughout the Commonwealth. 845. If those moneys are to be raised on our own security, could we not do that kind of work as well, or better, ourselves?—lf the only question at issue was the development of the country by railways, probably we could ; but it is not the only question at issue. It is a subordinate question. I am satisfied we would be at no disadvantage by being in the Commonwealth on that score. 846. You think that the politicians would have community of interest, and that five-sixths of the voting-power in the Federal Parliament being Australian would be no bar to our getting justice?—l believe the New Zealand representatives would be quite powerful enough in the Commonwealth Parliament to secure justice for New Zealand. 847. Well, now, with regard to administration : already the Federal Government are taking over the Post Office, the Customhouse, Marine, Defence, and in all probability they will take over other departments: do you believe that the administration with regard to New Zealand matters can be as efficient with the heads of departments in Melbourne or Bombala, or wherever the Federal capital may be, as when the administration is in New Zealand itself? — Well, I am a great believer myself in decentralisation, and I think there are many things that probably would be better attended to if the area of operations was not so large; but at the same time I feel that the trade between Australia and New Zealand, if federated, would become so enormously great that it would be to the interests of Melbourne and Sydney people to look after the lighthouses and other things necessary for trade, and they would compel a right administration in New Zealand just as well as the New Zealand representatives would. I look forward to an enormous development of trade between the two countries, and that in itself would make it certain that the Melbourne and Sydney people would use their own influence at the back of the New Zealand representatives to see that such things were not neglected on the New Zealand coast. 848. Is it not a fact that the articles both countries produce are very much on the same lines; and, if so, of what is this trade to consist between the two countries?— Well, it is a curious thing that even in countries where the articles are the same there is an interchange of commodities at different times and different seasons. I remember once in Australia I went down to Warrnambool, a great potato district, and I found them importing potatoes into Warrnambool. The markets were such that it suited the merchants to do it at that time. You must remember this : that Australia is a country which has not got great areas of agricultural country close to her great cities. They are oftentimes at great distances from the cities, and the cost of railway freight to carry the goods from those districts down to the great cities is no less, I am sure, in many instances than it would be from Auckland, Wellington, or Dunedin. I believe you could carry goods as easily from any of the ports here to the large cities over there as they could from many of their own agricultural districts. 849. Is it not true that they are large exporters now of every kind of agricultural produce ? — That is so. 850. Is it not a fact, then, that they are not only able to produce for themselves, but to export at a price that will pay transit to Europe and distant markets ?—lt is true, for instance, that at times you will find South Australia exporting large quantities of wheat, and at the same time that
A.—4
390
Brisbane, on the other hand, is wanting wheat badly, and it is just as easy for Dunedin to supply Brisbane as it is for South Australia. Districts in Australia that need these things could get them as easily from New Zealand as from their own continent, provided there were no Customs tariffs. 851. That is, assuming the shipping facilities were the same ? —Yes. 852. But is it not the case that, although we had the same opportunities to supply Queensland, we have never been able to have the same shipping facilities, because of the number of lines that are trading between the Australian ports and these places ? —The reason of that, of course, is that the larger centres of Australia have had more capital and more people travelling about the coasts, but I am perfectly certain that with the development of population in the future we would be able to compete with those lines—not just at once, but in the not distant future. 853. I judge from your remarks about administration that you are rather doubtful whether there might not be some loss to the colony through administration from Australia : is that correct ? —You cannot be perfectly certain about everything of this kind, and in such a question we can only be guided by probability, and I think it is possible that there may be a certain amount of loss. I am perfectly certain that if we were once in the Federation we should not want to leave it, in spite of certain difficulties that must naturally arise. 854. Is it not true that in the United States great differences arose owing to the diverse interests of different States?— Yes, and through much tribulation the United States grew into a great nation ; and I believe it is because of our prosperity in New Zealand at the present time that we are not applying ourselves to this problem in the way we ought to. The interests of New York State, of California, or of Florida seem different, yet they are bound up together for the benefit of all. 855. Do you not think that similar rival interests might arise between New Zealand and Australia? —No. But I think it is quite possible that, if we are separated, one day brother shall be shedding brother's blood. 856. Do you not think that discontent might arise in a distant province like this ? —No, because I think that the distance will be annihilated by the progress of scientific and engineering discoveries. 857. But will the community of interest in Australia, the common interest which one State has with another there, be annihilated ? —I think that those interests will grow, and that community of interest between New Zealand and Australia would also grow if the two countries were federated. Of course, if there is a wrong-headed man at the head of affairs it is possible to make mischief, but I do not think it is likely. 858. Mr. Luke.] You said you thought Australia was asleep on this question until they were aroused : do you think the agitation in favour of federation in Australia was got up by the politicians there?—l think the people got educated up to a higher ideal, and they began to realise that to become citizens of a great Commonwealth was a nobler thing than to continue to take part in petty parish politics. I believe the movement was one that arose from the initiation of men who had no irons in the fire, and no selfish interests to gain by federation. I think it was largely the outcome of the thinking people of the community educating the country at large, and it was not a movement that was undertaken or begun by the politician. 859. Can you conceive a condition of things that would not be only agreeable to Australia, but equally agreeable to us ?—I think that in a large country there will always be local interests that will always remain local. If you go to any large Commonwealth you will find that there are interests that will always be local, and others that will be general. Go to Germany, and you will find there are Prussian interests that will always be Prussian, while there are Bavarian interests that will always be Bavarian. 861. But in each of these Commonwealths they are tied together by bonds that are coterminous ; but do you not think in our case the distance is rather a disadvantage ? —I think, in the same way it would be an advantage, because I look on twelve hundred miles of sea as a good substitute for a great railroad, and certainly it is no great barrier. 862. But shall we not develop characteristics that will always keep us apart from the people of Australia,?—l think we shall develop characteristics which will supplement the characteristics of the Australians, and that their characteristics will supplement ours. I think it would be a very pitiful thing to have a community in which men were all alike, and impelled by the same motives. 863. You do not see any danger, morally or socially, arising from the employment of coloured labour?—l do not at all desire to see coloured labour brought indiscriminately into any country. If it is absolutely necessary to develop the tropical parts of Australia by coloured labour, I should hope that the utmost care would be taken that the coloured labour should enter only for a time, and should not be a reproductive factor in the colony. 864. Would it not be difficult to restrict and limit that labour?—l do not think it would be, as it exists at present. 865. Will not New Zealand stand very much in relation to the Commonwealth geographically as Great Britain does to the Continent of Europe ?—Yes, geographically, if you put back the wheels of time for five hundred years. 866. But taking the wheels of time as we may anticipate them for the next fifty or hundred years ? —As I said before, I look on the sea as a convenience for the carrying-on of trade rather than as a barrier. 867. You referred just now to the fact of Australians having invested largely in Western Australian mines, and that where their treasure is there their heart is also : is it not a fact that the Australians have hitherto invested their money freely within the continent, or what is now the present Commonwealth, and is not that a strong argument that they will in the future find investment for their money in those industries in New Zealand? —If New Zealand was in the Commonwealth under similar laws and similar conditions, the Australian will invest his money where he will get the best return for it, whether in New Zealand or Western Australia.
391
A.--4
868. But will they not have opportunities to invest their money under the Commonwealth in New Zealand that will pay them better even than in the past ?—That may be so. 869. And is it not a fact that they have not looked to New Zealand or even tried New Zealand as a market for investment?—l remember years ago when I lived in Australia, and I spoke to persons on the question of New Zealand, I was met with a great deal of ignorance about the country; but at the same time there was a feeling of insecurity in the minds of people that their investments might be threatened here by the laws that were being passed. 870. Does not that strike you as being rather unsound in the face of the fact that our Consols have stood higher for a time than those of any part of Australia? —My experience of Australia was at the time when New Zealand's prosperity was at the very lowest ebb. At that time there was no comparison between the relative prosperity of the two countries, and there was a feeling that New Zealand was a country that was going to be developed very slowly. 871. Eeferring to these great public works which the Federal Government propose to undertake, such as trans-continental railways and irrigation-works, in which we would not have the same interest as Australia, do you not think we would be at a disadvantage in this respect, as we should have to contribute towards the cost of those works without getting any adequate gain in return ?—I do not really think so, because, as rational men, the Australian statesmen would feel that it was only right that New Zealand should get her fair share of the moneys that were being spent for the development of the Commonwealth. It would be to the interests of Australia that New Zealand should be developed, and I believe you would get your fair share. 872. You do not think any system of reciprocity would be a fair substitute for the acceptance of the Commonwealth Bill at the present time ? —I do not think you would get it; and, if you did get a treaty of reciprocity between New Zealand and Australia, the trades that are now objecting to federation because of their interests being at stake would still suffer. You cannot get reciprocity and at the same time get protection for ordinary industries. You must give as well as take. 873. Then, you would be prepared to accept the present Commonwealth Bill?—I would, with an expression of regret that the appeal to the Privy Council was not to be maintained in full, and also the hope that the clause would be altered which does not allow Maoris to be counted and so give to us a fair representation. 874. Supposing we marry and disagree, would the opportunities of divorce be offered to us, do you think ?—I believe facility of divorce is the curse of the colonies, and it would be the curse of the nation, too, if it were possible to dissolve ties at will. 875. Mr. Beauchamp.] Then, you can recognise no analogy between Newfoundland and Canada and Australia and New Zealand, and you said that since Canada federated no strife had arisen between her and Newfoundland?— The conditions there differ to a very considerable extent. It is quite possible for Newfoundland to have a growing trade with the Old Country or with America, neither of which are very far away, and nothing has arisen in the time to cause strife; besides, the disproportion between Canada and Newfoundland is so great that it would not be advisable for Newfoundland to assert itself should any cause of strife arise. The great question there is the French fishing question, and in that Newfoundland has the sympathy of Canada, and that has done a great deal to prevent strife. 876. We are connected by ties of blood with Australia, and do you not think we should receive the same sympathy or assistance in the event of any trouble arising between ourselves and people outside ?—I value unity before sentiment. I believe that we should get sympathy and perhaps assistance, but I do not think they would be so certain or effective as what we could depend upon if we had federation. 877. Are you apprehensive that the feeling exhibited lately will not continue ?—I feel perfectly certain that it will continue and will grow if there is wisdom amongst the leaders of the Government at Home and in the colonies, but I can quite conceive causes of friction that would create trouble. 878. With a view of meeting these cases of friction, is it not a fact that there is a very strong disposition evinced now on the part of the Imperial authorities to call to their aid representatives of the various colonies throughout the Empire ?—That is so. 879. Supposing the Commonwealth of New Zealand were represented in the Imperial Parliament, would the Imperial combination enable us to make our wants known ; and do you not think we would be able to smooth out and alleviate causes of friction to which you have referred?— What I fear in the future is making the Mother-country the arbiter in any possible dispute that might arise between us and Australia—where one may be pitted against another. That is, to my mind, a very serious danger. I believe that if our interests were one we should remove all the difficulties ourselves without appealing to the Mother-counry. 880. That would mean separation from the Mother-country ? —I do not look forward to that, but I look to this federation as a step towards a closer union with the Old Country. 881. With inter-State free-trade, admitting from these colonies everything free, but taxing the goods of Britain, do you not think that would cause some friction between the Mother-country and her colonies?—lt has not in the past, because England has adopted the policy of free-trade, and she has never complained of her colonies putting on Customs tariffs against her goods. 882. Mr. Millar.] I think one of your reasons in favour of federation is that you fear there might be trouble in the future otherwise ?—I do. 883. What would cause the trouble?— There are many things ; wherever there are rival industries and rival interests it is sure to come. For instance, the very policy that is in vogue at the present time—namely, the idea of New Zealand federating with the islands ; whether there is any truth in it or not, I see in it the germs of possible trouble. 884. You are aware that nothing can be done without the sanction of the Imperial Government, so that there could be no conflict between New Zealand and Australia on that question ?— It would arise between the Commonwealth and Great Britain, which is what I want to avoid.
A.—4
392
885. Do you not think conflict could arise in matters of trade ?—Practically, yes. 886. Would not the same conflict of trade arise whether we federated or not?—No, for this reason: that there would not be any contest as to whether Auckland or Sydney should get the greater part of the island trade, because Sydney and Auckland-would be put on the very same footing, and the best man would win. 887. Do you not think it is probable that the solution of that question will be that Great Britain will put both the Commonwealth and New Zealand on the same terms ?—I do not quite see how that is going to happen, if it is true that New Zealand is aiming at being the head of a great federation of the islands of the Pacific. If she has any responsibility over these islands she will reap corresponding advantages, and these advantages to us will be disadvantages to Australia. 888. Have you gone into the question of what effect federation would have upon the bulk of the people of this colony—that is to say, those dependent on manual labour ?—I look upon any advantages in the price of wages of trie working-man in New Zealand at present as purely temporary, but I am perfectly certain that in five years that advantage over Australian workmen will not exist. If there is any advantage it is owing to a condition of things which obtained in Australia a few years ago, and to the fact that New Zealand is now on the top of a period of prosperity ; but New Zealand is not always going to remain on the crest of a period of prosperity, and the Australians are not always going to remain industrially weak. 890. If this is so, how comes it that the social legislation and development of our people during the past twelve years has been very much greater than that of Australia?— That has arisen from a good many causes, and one is this : that during that time Australia was going through the greatest financial crisis in her history, and consequently she was not in a condition to make reforms in industrial legislation. New Zealand has been prosperous, and she was in a position to do it. 891. Has not Victoria been prosperous during the last five years? —She has been emerging out of her troubles, but any one who knew the position she was in twelve or fifteen years ago, and seeing the position she is in now, can see that she has made very little progress for some years past. 892. About fifteen years ago there was a great boom in Victoria, was there not ?—There was a very great inflation for a number of years. 893. But they are recovering from that and getting on again now ?—Yes, they are pulling themselves together. 894. So that, as they will send the same men to the Commonwealth Parliament as have administered the State Parliament, do you anticipate they will show any greater hurry in matters of social legislation than has been the case during the past five years ?—lt is not perhaps possible for any man to answer that question who has not any personal contact with the iaw-makers in Australia. 895. Have you any idea of the value of our manufactures in this colony ?—-No. 896. It is, roughly, about £13,000,000 per annum, while the value of the Australian trade to this colony is about £1,250,000. Would you consider that it is in the interests of this colony that these manufactures should be sacrificed for the sake of, say, double the trade of £1,250,000 we have with Australia?— That is assuming that the manufactures of New Zealand would be injured, which I deny. lam perfectly satisfied that they could hold their own, although possibly some might suffer; but you cannot acquire a great advantage without some sacrifice. 898. If that is your opinion, how comes it that, with a 22f-per-cent. duty on boots, Victoria can now find a market in New Zealand for over £8,000 of her manufactured boots?— Boots and candles are two things that probably would suffer. 899. Bootmakers from Victoria go over to New Zealand and say they will not work here, because they say they can make more money in Victoria ? — If that is so I shall have to lose my opinion of the bootmakers of New Zealand. 900. Do you think that the clothing trade could compete as against Victoria ?—I think in the long-run it would, as I believe the climatic conditions here are in favour of New Zealand, and in the long-run the New-Zealanders would hold their own. 901. Are you aware that they have a Wages Board in Victoria that fixes the wages?—l do not know anything about it. 902. Would you like to see girls here turning out mole trousers at 9fd. a pair ?—I should be very sorry indeed for New Zealand to go into the Commonwealth if it produced such a condition of things. 903. Can you prevent it ?—We shall have a good voice in it. 904. But the voice, you know, is not so powerful as a vote in Parliament. Do you know that the Chinese are largely employed in the furniture trade in Victoria ?— Yes ; and it will be the duty of the Commonwealth to prevent any development of Chinese industries in Victoria, and I should like to see New Zealand exercising her influence in the same direction as part of the Commonwealth. 905. But they are English naturalised subjects, and how can you affect them ?—You might easily prevent any increase or development of it. 906. But, as far as the furniture trade in Victoria is concerned, they are rapidly knocking out the white tradesmen ?—As a matter of fact, the Chinaman is competing with the European in the trade; but I think there is a better chance of the Commonwealth passing legislation in favour of the white workman if New Zealand is in the Commonwealth than there is if she is out of it, and if New Zealand remains out, and Chinese labour multiplies and increases in Victoria, depend upon it the workmen here will also suffer. 907. Do you think that New Zealaud could compete with any industry in Great Britain at the present time without a tariff?— No.
393
A.-4
908. Well, Australia is as much ahead of New Zealand in regard to her manufacturing facilities as Great Britain is ahead of Australia: is not that so ?—lf that is so, all I can say is that Ido not believe you will be able to erect any fictitious barrier by tariffs around New Zealand that will keep up the wages here. You will find that Australia has spent large sums in bringing the best machinery into operation, and she will be able to compete with New Zealand more and more, and the nearer we get to the same conditions when we shall be forced to use the same machinery and apparatus the better it will be for New Zealand workmen in the long-run. 909. If that is your opinion, how can you explain why America has been able to hold her own against the world, and to make herself self-contained?— Because her factories are so large that she is now able to almost dominate the world ; but if she had remained divided into fifty or sixty petty States she would not have been able to hold her own against the world, or anything like it. Hardly one of the American States could live independently of the other States ; commercially that State would go to the wall. 910. Do you think that if America took off her protective duties now she could compete ?—I do; and I think they will come off before long, because America feels now that she is strong enough to dominate trade; and I also feel that in that great commercial and industrial warfare that is coming the only chance New Zealand would have is to be a member of a great Commonwealth, and then she would be able to stand a chance of existence in the competition with America. 911. We have a very keen competition from Great Britain, America, and Germany in boots now: do you think the condition of this colony is going to be improved if the duty of 22-J per cent, on boots is reduced, as Sir William Lyne has stated that, in his opinion, the Federal tariff will be from 10 to 15 per cent.?—l do not know what the Federal duty will be, and I do not think that Sir William Lyne is able to estimate it. He is a member of a free-trade colony, the Premier of that colony, and therefore in that free-trade colony he speaks of a 10-pei-cent. duty as a high protective duty, because he probably might not otherwise get a seat in the Federal Parliament ; and therefore I think he has overestimated what is likely to be the effect of federation in reducing tariffs. 912. Mr. Barton says he requires eight millions and a half from Customs revenue, which would mean a loss of over half a million to us ; and, if that takes effect, would it not seriously hamper industries in New Zealand?—l do not believe it would in the long-run, because we should have the advantage of going to a larger market without a tariff against us. 913. What market would you go to? —There are many markets in Australia that would be open to us. 914. Do you imagine we shall find a market in Australia?—l do. 915. Does Victoria, with a tariff against them, still find a market here?— Yes; in boots, candles, and furniture. 916. And in machinery ?—I have spoken to an engineer, and he said he was not much afraid of Australian competition. 917. Do you anticipate at any time the abolition of the States ?—No, I do not think it possible. 918. Do you think it is likely that the Federal Government, after having legislated on the thirty-nine subjects they will have the power to legislate on, will then attempt to get the full control over the State Parliaments and Governments ? —That is a matter of opinion. I think it possible that we shall not have Governors of the same useful class as we have had perhaps, and I think it possible that the power of the States may be decreased ; but I am also perfectly certain that there will always be a sufficient amount of local interest and feeling to prevent the absorption of the States, or their being wiped out of existence. 919. Have-you any knowledge of the old provincial days here?—No ; I have only read about them. 920. Do you not think that history is likely to repeat itself in that respect ?—I think that the wiping-out of the provinces was a very good thing indeed. 921. Do you think it would be a very good thing for Australia ?—Which? 922. To wipe out the States?—No, Ido not, because it is a different thing altogether. Your provinces were so small that they could not carry on their finances, and I think it is a good thing to have fairly large States under a Central Government, especially where their interests are in common. 923. I think you said it was a high ideal in Australian people which caused them to federate ? —Yes. 924. Was it a high ideal that caused the New Zealand people to federate ?—-It was to some extent a part of the influence. In every kind of action which is taken in regard to great reforms you will find a large number of motives coming into operation, and one motive which actuates a number of persons does not actuate others; some in every community have a high ideal of citizenship. 925. But was that the dominant idea which brought about federation in Queensland ?—Of course, the conflict which existed between the northern part of Queensland and the southern entered largely into the question; but at the same time Ido maintain that a very large number of the very best citizens in Queensland were actuated by the desire to be citizens of a great Commonwealth rather than of a petty State. 926. Had the franchise nothing to do with it—that the Federation promised to grant a wider franchise ?—lt may have, but my knowledge of Queensland in the last few years has not been very extensive. 927. Was not the dominant factor in causing Victoria to federate the fact that she had developed her manufactures to such an extent that she had to look to outside fields to profitably employ them ? —No doubt it was a considerable factor; but again I say that the origin of the 50—A. 4.
A.—4
394
movement was to promote the idea of being citizens of a larger Commonwealth as a nobler and higher thing than being citizens of a small State. 928. That was Mr. Deakin's idea ; but, so far as the people of Victoria was concerned, there was something more than that in their reasons for -federating ?—I am perfectly sure the people of Victoria were actuated by mixed motives, some noble and some selfish, just as we in New Zealand are looking at the question from the selfish standpoint of how it affects us. 929. Do you not think it is possible to look at the matter from the standpoint of the greatest good to the greatest number ?—Yes. 930. You think that, independently of the sacrifices we might have to make financially and socially, we ought to federate ?—I do. 931. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] You spoke of a possible quarrel between Australia and New Zealand in the future : do you assume that the British Empire would be broken up ?—No, I do not assume that; but, of course, it is possible, and cannot be put out of consideration in contemplating the future. I was looking forward to a condition of things when the population and the resources of New Zealand and Australia would become so large, probably equal to that of another country, that it would be absurd to expect that the fleet of the Mother-country could be depended on for our chief defence. 932. I speak of a quarrel between them : surely they could not quarrel to the point of war as long as the Empire existed, because they would not be allowed to go to war? —They would not be allowed to go to extremities as long as they were parts of the Empire, but what I feared was that if a subject of quarrel arose between New Zealand and Australia so great as to arouse the tempers of the people of both countries, and the Mother-country attempted to decide the question in favour of either, it might lead to the disruption of the Empire. 933. Might not there be another case—that a sudden cotip d'etat on the part of one might be prevented by the other if there were two great Powers in these seas?—l think the best way to prevent any coup d'etat either on the part of one or the other would be for them to combine. 934. With regard to the fleet, you spoke of an Australian fleet: do you think that as long as the Empire holds together there would be a separate Australian fleet ? —I think that at no great distant date there will have to be some arrangement or agreement between the Mother-country and Australia as to the naval defence of Australasia, as the present relations will not be permanently satisfactory. 935. It was stated very succintly a few weeks ago by a naval officer that the battle in defence of the British colonies might be fought in the English Channel: is this question of an Australian fleet a practical one ? —lt is, because I am perfectly certain that when the Commonwealth contains thirty or forty millions of people they will not be content to simply pay their quota towards the expense of one fleet that will be governed exclusively from the Old Country, and therefore it will be necessary that there should be some arrangement by which Australia should have its own fleet provided for it. I cannot understand the present conditions in regard to naval defence existing, say, a hundred years hence, whereby Australia pays a small sum of money to the Mother-country, and the Mother-country is left solely responsible for our naval defence. 936. Hon. the Chairman.] You said, in answer to Mr. Millar, that you had not thought much about Queensland lately ?—Yes. 937. What has that arisen from ?—lt has arisen from the fact that I am afraid I am much too busy a man to be able to attend to all the things I ought to. 938. Has it not arisen from your being so far distant from Queensland ?—I think that, human nature being what it is, we always take a greater interest in that which is nearest than in that which is far away, and that will be so always. 939. Do you not think that if we joined the Commonwealth they will take little interest in us at this distance ?—I think that if we found they gave little thought to us we should assert ourselves so very vigorously and strongly that we should not be overlooked. James Milne Mennie examined. (No. 145.) 940. Hon. the Chairman.] How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Since 1869, when I came over from Victoria. I run a biscuit- and jam-factory and a confectionery-factory in this city. 941. How long did you reside in Australia before you came to New Zealand?— Two years. 942. Will you give the Commission your opinion as to whether New Zealand should or should not federate with Australia?—l have given the matter some thought. I was in Australia three months ago, and had a talk with a good many business-men about this matter, and I came to the conclusion most decidedly that New Zealand ought to stand on its own footing, and not federate with Australia at the present time. I found that the Australian people knew very little about New Zealand. 943. Do they take much interest in New Zealand ? —Very little indeed ; even intelligent commercial men, from whom you would expect better things, know very little indeed about us at all. I am satisfied that our interests run in a different channel to theirs, and the time is not ripe for amalgamation. 944. In your opinion, how would the manufactures of New Zealand get on if we federated? —I think, for a considerable time they would be most adversely affected, inasmuch as the factories in Sydney and Melbourne are on a much larger scale than ours, have better machinery, cheaper freights from the Home-country, and more command of raw material; they have larger markets at their doors, and they would be able to dominate the smaller factories of New Zealand. I found the universal desire in Australia was that we should federate ; and when I asked why, only two reasons were given to me —one was that they might erect a hostile tariff against us, and shut the door to our oats, maize, bacon, and hams, and the other reason was that we should have the assistance of the Commonwealth in defence matters.
395
A.—4
945. Did they say why that would be beneficial to New Zealand ?—No ; when I asked them, that was all the opinion I could get. I showed them that the balance of trade was against them, and that we were dependent on the Mother-country for the consumption of our products, and they agreed with me. Then, again, the Australian Colonies grow pretty well the same things that we do, and export the same produce that we export. 946. Have you considered this question from any other standpoint than that of trade ?—Yes ; I think it will militate very much against our finance, as, for example, we should have to contribute a very considerable sum of money to the cost of the Federal capital. They are going to build a very fine city, I understand, at Bombala, and New Zealand would have to contribute a large sum towards that expense without receiving any advantage. 947. You are against federation ?—Most decidedly, as we should lose the power of selfgovernment which we at present possess, and that would be a great disadvantage. I woxild be in favour of a military federation for defence purposes. 948. Mr. Leys.] How would it affect your own particular industry?— Take the jam industry : It might be within your recollection that tenders were called for the supply of jam for South Africa. Myself, amongst others, worked together to tender for that. We tendered as a matter of form, but we could not compete with New South Wales, which has cheaper sugar, fruit, and labour. If we had no protection at all they would be able to command a good deal of our market. 949. Would that injuriously affect the fruit-growing industry?— Yes, to that extent. In the matter of flour it would affect us in the same way. Only that we have a protection of £1 per ton, New South Wales could send flour here now, and that would affect the farmers, and also our milling industry. 950. As a practical business-man knowing Australia, do you see any direction in which New Zealand trade can be extended by federation ? —I cannot say I do. They are ahead of us in most manufactures. • John Wiseman examined. (No. 146.) 951. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—A manufacturer and importer. 952. Residing in Auckland ?—Yes. 953. How long have you lived here?— About thirty-seven or thirty-eight years. 954. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating or not with Australia ?— Just in a casual way. 955. What is the conclusion at which you have arrived ? —I think federation, theoretically, would be a very nice thing if we had no manufacturing industries to consider ; but when we take those into consideration I think we would have everything to lose and nothing to gain by federation. 956. Have you studied the Commonwealth Bill at all ?—No, not in detail. 957. Why do you think we have everything to lose from a manufacturer's point of view ?— Because Ido not see how we could possibly compete. The larger centres will naturally accumulate larger factories, and capital will be more available. Freights also are more in favour of the larger centres. The larger centres will have every advantage over us. 958. Are your manufactures protected in New Zealand ?—Yes. 959. What is the tariff?—2o per cent, added to invoice, and 10 per cent, ad valorem. 960. Does your opinion extend to other manufactures besides your own ? —Yes. 961. You think they would be injuriously affected too? —Yes. 962. Are there any advantages that occur to you that would accrue to New Zealand through federation ? —lt might check experimental legislation a bit. I think we are going a little bit too fast. 963. Do you think you would have any advantage in having four million more people to trade with ? —No; I think we would not have an outlet for New Zealand. Of course, our trouble at present here is not having a large enough population ; but I do not think there is a chance in our own line of business of doing trade with Australia. 964. Are you a New-Zealander ?—No; but lam a colonial—a Tasmanian. 965. What is your opinion as to New Zealand sinking her independence?—l think it would be very regrettable. I think we are peculiarly situated, and we have a beautiful country ; but at the same time we may become limited in our ideas. I think that larger countries produce larger minds and larger ideas, and greater progress. In one respect federation would tend to improve us in that way ; but there are so many disadvantages connected with federation that I am decidedly of opinion that we would be better without federation. 966. Mr. Millar.] I think you said you thought the large territory created larger minds in business ?—Yes. 967. Has not your experience been that these larger aggregations produce monopolies and trusts ?—You refer to America ? 968. Yes ?—But still they are great. 969. Like conditions produce like results ?—That is so. 970. There is a possibility, if we entered into the Commonwealth, and having that larger centre to work upon, that our industries might be controlled by two or three large syndicates ?— That is so. 971. That would not be an advantage?— Not to New Zealand. I think that would eventuate in Australia. Geoege Low examined. (No. 147.) 972. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?— Settler and small-fruit grower. 973. And you are president of the Birkenhead and Northcote Fruit-growers' Association?— Yes. 974. Is that a large association?— About 125 members,
A.—4
396
975. Have they considered the question of federation as a body ?—Yes. 976. And what is the conclusion at which they have arrived ?—They passed a resolution, " That the president be instructed to state to the Federation Commission that the views of the association's members are adverse to federation with the Australian States; that they consider it would be injurious to the industry and most inexpedient at the present time." 977. Was that carried unanimously?— Yes. 978. You agree with it personally ?—Yes. 979. Well, now, what was the reason that prompted you to arrive at that resolution ?—Freetrade with the other colonies would flood the Auckland market with fruit and destroy our industry. 980. They were afraid of competition with the other colonies ?—Yes. 981. Have you considered the matter except as affecting trade in this colony ?—No. 982. Have you read the Commonwealth Bill ?—Yes, I have read it. 983. But you do not care to express any opinion upon it ?—No. 984. You personally, and the society which you represent, are averse to federation ? —Yes. 985. Can you see any advantage which would arise to New Zealand through federation ?—No, I cannot. It is too big a question for me to consider. 986. Mr. Leys.] Are there a large number of small settlers in New Zealand dependent upon the small-fruit-growing industry ?—lt is our principal trade. 987. Besides those, is it not a fact that there are hundreds of other small settlers throughout the north similarly dependent upon fruit ? —I do not think they are exactly in the same position. They have other things that they go in for—cattle and sheep. But here it is all fruitgrowing, mostly strawberries. The northern settlers as a class go in considerably for fruit-growing, but as a rule they are mostly concerned in agricultural and pastoral pursuits. 988. I suppose your profits are not very large now, are they, from fruit —you have a pretty acute struggle ? —Yes. 989. If this competition came, would it be very serious to you ? —lt is the general opinion that it would be, but, of course, I cannot say. Herbert Dearsley examined. (No. 148.) 990. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ?—A boot-manufacturer. 991. And you are president of the Master Bootmakers' Association ?—Ex-president of the Auckland Association. 992. Is that a large association?—lt represents the whole of the manufacturers here with the exception of one firm. It represents thirty manufacturers. 993. And employing about how many hands?— There are about a thousand people interested. 994. Has your association collectively considered this question ?—Yes, briefly ; and I have a statement which I would like to submit to the Commission. It is as follows: " The representatives of the boot- and shoe-making industry of Auckland object to federation with the Australian States for the following reasons : (1.) We believe that federation will mean a reduction in the Customs tariff of this colony to a considerable extent, and, as under existing duties we find it not only difficult but impossible to keep out the imported boots (not only from England and America, but from Australia), we are convinced that the trade will be seriously hampered and contracted by the increased competition. While it is generally conceded that, t alue for value, the New-Zealand-manufactured article is the cheaper in the interest of the wearer, yet our competitors can produce goods that for style and appearance are quite equal to our own goods; and the difficulties against successful competition are, first, the much more favourable conditions of labour laws, being almost entirely free from the exacting restrictions from a manufacturer's standpoint. (2.) The leathermarkets of Australia being in a much more advanced state, manufacturers are able to obtain all their requirements in the local market, thus preventing the necessity of carrying a large stock of the raw material. (3.) The competition of machinery also affects us detrimentally, as all New Zealand machinery has had to bear a duty of 25 per cent., and consequently all our plants are loaded to that extent. We also believe that from a social standpoint we have nothing to gain by federation, but shall be placed at a considerable disadvantage, from the fact that the conditions of life and labour are much more favourable to the worker in New Zealand than in the sister-colonies. And from a political standpoint federation is inimicable to the best interests of our people, from the fact of the comparatively small representation of our colony in the Federal Council; the insignificant minority of six out of thirty-six votes in the Senate, and fourteen as against seventy in the Lower House, would mean a certain loss of all those advantages which have come to us as the result of our progressive legislation." 995. Do you wish to add anything to that ?—Except that I indorse all that is there. I think, from a national standpoint we have the elements of a nation in New Zealand. With federation I think we would be likely to lose our identity. I think that, so far as New Zealand is concerned, it is a maritime country, more so than Australia, and our physical conditions are somewhat different. I think we are more likely in the future to work out our destiny on different and perhaps higher lines than the Australian people would do. 996. Do you think there is any danger in our being separated—danger to either of the communities? —No, no great danger. 997. Do you think we would be able, as a separate colony, to carry on successfully?— Decidedly. 998. Have you considered the matter from any other aspect than that of trade ?—Socially, I think our conditions are of a higher order than what they are in Australia. 999. Do you think our mental condition is likely to be improved by our being associated with Australia in the Commonwealth ?—No ; I think otherwise. 1000. Why? —They are on a lower plane than we are, and, being in the majority as far as legislation is concerned, they may hinder our progress.
397
A.—4
1001. Have you lived in Australia?—l have been in Australia. 1002. From what do you judge when you say they are on a lower plane than we are? —I would not like to say that; but I think there is a lower strata of humanity in Australia than in New Zealand, the result of large crowded cities. 1003. Does not that arise from the aggregation of numbers there ? —Probably; but I think the climate might have something to do with it. 1004. Mr. Beauchamp.] A larger number are employed in the boot-and-shoe industry here than in any part of the colony ?—Yes. 1005. What is the condition of the industry here?—l could hardly say it is flourishing, because of the importation of goods at the present time. We are suffering now from importation from Australia and America. 1006. The importation from America has greatly increased during the last twelve months ?— In the last three years it has greatly increased. 1007. Do you consider you are turning out as good value in boots as those imported from America ?—Yes, if you take the wearing capabilities into consideration. 1008. The leather here is as good as theirs ?—I think the leather tanned here is not as good. They are more advanced in some of the finer leathers than we are. 1009. As regards the conditions of the people who work in New Zealand and Australia, do you think their conditions of life are not quite as favourable as ours ? —Certainly not, as far as I am able to judge. 1010. Mr. Luke.] Did I understand you to say that you paid duty on all the machinery that you used ?—22 per cent, on the machinery, and per cent, on the great bulk of the material. 1011. Have you any large tanning business around Auckland? —Yes, there are some fairly large establishments. 1012. Does the leather tanned in New Zealand wear as long as the imported leather ?—Some of it. 1013. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the social and industrial legislation of New Zealand has, on the whole, been beneficial to the community at large ?—I should say so, especially to the workers. 1014. Has it seriously hampered industry ? —lt has in a degree, especially in respect to the operation of the Factories Act. We are at a decided disadvantage here at the present time in respect to girl-labour. In Australia the factories are simply filled with boys and girls. Here the great difficulty is to get them at all, and we cannot employ them at all unless they are over a certain age. That, I think, is quite right. 1015. From the employes' standpoint, you think the restrictions are wise ones ? —Well, as a whole, 1 think they are wise, and perhaps in the long-run they will be beneficial to the bulk of the people. It does hamper business in a certain degree. 1016. Has it prevented the expansion of industry within the colony ?—No, I think not. 1017. Well, assuming New Zealand federated, what would be the effect upon your industry? —I think we would get the surplus stocks from Australia dumped down into New Zealand. 1018. Do you think that any large number of the workmen employed now would be thrown out of employment ? —I think that they would suffer. • 1019. In what way ?—Through lack of employment by the fact of more boots being imported. 1020. Do you think that the competition would lower wages ?—Yes. 1021. Do you think that part of our population would be compelled to go over to Australia to seek work ?—Yes. 1022. You think, then, that the effect would be to cause a decline in the New Zealand towns? —Yes. Peter Bdwaed Cheal examined. (No. 149.) 1023 Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—Mining engineer and surveyor. 1024. Have you resided long in New Zealand?— Thirty-six years. 1025. Are you acquainted with Australia at all ?—No. 1026. The mining industry is important in this part of the colony, is it not?— Yes. 1027. In addition to gold, what else is there here?— Coal and copper. 1028. And there are silver-deposits in the Barrier ? —Silver is mixed with all our ores, but in the Barrier it is mostly silver. 1029. Have you considered the question of federation of New Zealand with Australia?— Yes; I have gone into the subject as thoroughly as I can, and as the vice-president of Liberal Association I have delivered an address upon the subject. 1030. Will you please tell us the conclusions at which you have arrived on the matter ?—ln the first place, I have looked upon the question as a whole, and, so far as I can see, federation in the world has not been a success. It has been mentioned by those in favour of federation that the union between England and Scotland has been a success, but I have never heard any one say that the union between England and Ireland has been a success. Norway and Sweden are not a very happy family, and the German States Ido not think are quite happy either. In Austria, again, we find such a condition of things that there will be chaos when the present Emperor dies. If I were an Australian I would go in for federation heart and soul, because I do not think they can ever become a great nation until they are federated, because of the different fiscal policies. At the same time, had these different colonies not broken away from the mother colony of New South Wales, we should never have heard the word " federation," and it would never have heard of New Zealand. Australian federation is a union of Governments, and not federation. When we did away with Provincial Governments in New Zealand we really became federated. I have gone into the matter from the position of the workers, and I am satisfied it would lower the status of the artisan and the working-class throughout New Zealand, because I know they would have to com-
A.—4
398
pete against Chinese labour. In travelling to Napier some time since I had a conversation with a gentleman from Australia, and he told me he thought that federation would help to flatten out our manufactures. He said he had seen Chinese-made furniture, manufactured in Melbourne from kauri, for sale in Queen Street, Auckland. The timber had been grown here, sent over to Melbourne and manufactured, had paid the 22£-per-cent. duty here on manufactured articles, and was competing against the locally made article. If we go in for freetrade they could, with their Chinese labour and longer hours, swamp us, and I do not think our artisan class should have to compete against Chinese labour. A young fellow who was a French-polisher in Melbourne assured me that on several occasions when he left work at night he did not expect work on the following day, as there was no made-up furniture in the place ready for polishing, but when he arrived in the morning the shop was full of stuff that had been made up at the Chinese factories, and was there to be polished. All ,the rest of the work on the furniture bad been done by Chinamen, and these articles were sold as English-made furniture. I do not think we would benefit in any way by having our artisans and workers competing against labour of this class. The only effect it could have would be to destroy our industries by reason of combinations and trusts. I notice, in looking through the Bill, that they have the right to deal with old-age pensions and conciliation and arbitration laws; and if the Commonwealth make a law on the same subject the Commonwealth law must prevail, and ours must go. There is a danger in that, I apprehend. I look at it in this light: that, so far as I can see, our richest and best customer is Great Britain. We do a trade with Australia of something like a million and a half, and they send nearly the same amount back to New Zealand. If by federation we were to lose £400,000 a year the game would not be worth the candle; and that is what I can see is the position in which we would be placed. Ido not think that sentiment has anything to do with the matter at all. The question is not a philanthropic one, but a political one. When we realise that New Zealand would only have fifteen votes in the Federal Parliament against Australia's seventy votes, I feel sure that New Zealand on every question would go to the wall. Ido not believe there is such a thing as political justice. For many years the majority of members in the New Zealand House were from the South Island, with the result that they got two millions and a half more spent on railways than was spent in the North Island, and last year twice as much was allocated to the South Island as was allocated io the North, in spite of the fact that their trunk lines are finished and ours are not. If we go to Australia we will be in the same position. We should be third in the list of contributors; but, looking at it from the political point of view, I do not think we would have anything like justice done to this colony. With regard to defence, I think we would be better off if we went in for a defence scheme of our own, and not put ourselves in the hands of the Commonwealth. That is one of the matters that the Commonwealth must control, and if we are in the Commonwealth we will be ruled by an Admiral and a Commander-in-Chief over in Australia. I think if both New Zealand and Australia were attacked at one time we could not expect much help from Australia, although we would have to pay a great deal towards the expense of a defence scheme. A Commonwealth navy would act very much against New Zealand. The ships would be kept in Australian waters, and, as they 'have large docks of their own there, they would not require to be docked here. If we stick by the Mother-country our interests will be looked after better. Personally, I think I would rather rely on the protection of the' British navy than the protection of any Commonwealth navy that might be organized. The difference of freights between England and Australia and England and New Zealand gives Australia a great advantage over us, and with New Zealand as a free port to them they could land goods here at a cheaper rate than we could hope to compete against. • I believe that a white Australia is impossible, and that the northern parts of Australia can never be inhabited by white men as far as labour is concerned. Look at Tasmania's chances since becoming part of the Commonwealth. When Mr. Dickson died they asked that some one from Tasmania should be put into the Cabinet. The reply was that if an eighth Minister was appointed they should receive consideration. This, to me, points to the fact that, unless we had a strong man like Mr. Seddon at the head of affairs, New Zealand would not have much chance of getting a man into the Cabinet. Taking it all round, lam satisfied that the Australian people have a great deal to gain from New Zealand joining the Federation, but we have a great deal to lose. New Zealand has three Ms —mining, manufactures, and mercantile marine. In manufactures I think it should be the duty of the Government to bring into use the amount of power that we have running to waste in the various rivers and streams of the colony. There is no reason why the various waterfalls of New Zealand should not be harnessed and made to supply electric power for the industries of the centres. Then we might be able to make headway against Australia. It is estimated that the Huka Falls will give 33,000-horse power, and between the Huka Falls and the Auiwaniwa Falls in the Waikato Eiver 150,000-horse power is estimated. I believe the power to be obtained from the waterfalls of New Zealand will run into some millions of horse-power, and that will enable us to compete against Australia in manufactures. We should build and man the fleets of the Pacific in the future, for we have the coal, lime, and iron, and Whangarei will be the " Black Country "of New Zealand in the future. From climatic conditions we will differ in the future from the native Australian, and I believe that in the future New Zealand will be to the Continent of Australia what England is to the Continent of Europe to-day. lam heart and soul in favour of Imperial federation, and I do not think it is necessary for that federation that we should federate with Australia. With your permission I will read one or two paragraphs from a paper which I contributed to the New Zealand Illustrated Magazine in April, 1900. In that paper I said : " Every interest of our colony would suffer, present and prospective, and our best interests are opposed to the proposed alliance, which means neither absorption nor protection, but would only mean an embargo on our political, social, and economical development. Let us stick to our insular independence and work out our own destiny, and, together with Australia as a Com-
399
monwealth, strive after the federation that will embrace all the English-speaking nations in a bond of unity without uniformity, but all making for the peace and prosperity of the race. ... A closer union between Great Britain and New Zealand would be the outcome of a federated Australia, and this colony working out its own destiny, without being entangled in a bond which might hinder her progress and lead to strained relations rather than to closer ties. What we require to strive for is an Imperial zollverein—a commercial union between Great Britain and her colonies and dependencies, under the most-favoured nation clause —which will strengthen the bond of unity more effectively than the mere sentiment of patriotism or united defence, and in which case a federated Australia can stand shoulder to shoulder with a free and unfettered New Zealand in a closer bond of unity than federation with Australia could possibly produce." 1031. I was going to ask you if you have gone into the question of how colonial finance would be affected by federation ?—lt seems to me that, as the largest portion of our revenue is from the Customs, if that is to be handed over to the Commonwealth, and if they have power to take 25 per cent, of it for the next ten years, it would have a great effect upon us. It would prevent us undertaking public works which are necessary. 1032. You refer to the federation of England and Scotland : that was not a federation, but a union ?—Some of those who were in favour of federation harped a good deal upon that union as being a federation. 1033. But there is only one Parliament ?—Yes. 1034. What is your opinion as to the ultimate effect federation will have on the parliamentary system in Australia? —I think it will tend to centralisation. 1035. Do you think there is a possibility of the States being abolished ?—I think it will come to that. 1036. Have you considered how the agricultural interests in this colony will be affected by federation? —It has not been part of my duty to go into that matter, but, from what I can see, it would do more harm than good to agriculture, because at the present time we can only compete against Australia in oats. 1037. Would the mining industry be affected in any way by federation?—No, I do not think so. New Zealand miners are thought very highly of, and they always gain high rates of pay if they go over there. 1038. Gold is worth its value anywhere ?—Yes. 1039. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think that under federation there would be larger possibilities in the development of industries, such as those of iron and coal ?—I think if we federated Australian capitalists would buy up these places and work them, and 1 think it would be to the detriment of our workers here. 1040. Do you not think the demand would be so small in New Zealand that we would not be able to work them profitably?—At the present time that is the case; but if we ever go in for large shipbuilding works, with these large deposits of iron, it might pay the Australians to come over here. 1041. You think that if we do not join the Commonwealth we might still be able to supply them with manufactured iron ?—-Yes, in time. 1042. Do you know of the iron-deposits at Parapara?—Yes. 1043. Do you know of any large investments of mining capital in New Zealand?— No. 1044. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you consider the Maoris being restricted from voting a blot in the Bill ? —Yes ; and so also is the clause that says that where female franchise prevails the votes are to be divided. 1045. Do you think that the provision for creating new States in various parts of Australia would tend to adversely affect Nsw Zealand ? —Yes ; it would reduce our votes. 1046. Do you consider the power to be conferred upon the Inter-State Commission objectionable ?—Yes.
Wednesday, 6th Maech, 1901. John Henky Upton examined. (No. 150.) 1047. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you?—A stationer. 1048. Eesiding in Auckland ? —Yes. 1049. How long have you been living here ?—Thirty-five years. 1050. Have you held any public offices in Auckland ?—I was Mayor, Chairman of the Board of Education, and have held certain mercantile positions. 1051. The Commission want you to tell us, if you will please, your opinion as to whether New Zealand should join the Commonwealth of Australia or not, and your reasons for your opinion ? That is a large order. I really have no very positive opinions. Indeed, I was rather sorry to be asked to give evidence, and would rather answer any questions put to me. I would just say in a few words that I think, on the whole, that if I had to give a vote I would vote for federation. I think it is a great and noble ideal of national life, and we must either stand out or go in ; and if we stand out we must suffer some evils, however little we may know of their character. To adopt Mr. McMurray's metaphor of the family, I think that if we do not federate we shall be in the position of the poor relation outside, with the poor relation's disadvantages. I think that the tendency of our national life in New Zealand is to a certain parochialism or narrowness, and that would be corrected if we joined in a great scheme of federation. We have to make our choice, and Ido not think there is any hurry. There are two great questions Australia has to deal with, and in which we have not the same interest as Australia. In one we have no interest at all, and in the other
400
A.—4
we have. One is that of the coloured labour. I think, before New Zealand joined, Australia should have settled the Queensland difficulty. The other thing is that before many years they must have settled the question of free-trade or protection. That would affect us. I think if we adjourned the proceedings for five or seven years we would be just as well off, and I think we would be just as welcome then as now. 1052. Do I take it you are in favour of waiting?— Yes. 1053. But, supposing you had to vote "Aye" or "No " now, what would your vote be?— I think the drawback so great to voting " No " that I should vote " Aye " ; but I should vote in the dark. 1054. You think that New Zealand is to be compared to the poor relation outside ? —I think so. 1055. You think that New Zealand has not a wealth of natural resources?—l think New Zealand is rich, but it is small also. 1056. Do you mean in population or area?— Both. 1057. So far as population is concerned, do you not look forward to New Zealand within the next fifty years carrying a large population ?—One does not like to answer that positively, but, as far as as one can see, just now there is no immigration. We have to rely on natural increase, and that may not be very much. 1058. A policy of immigration may be decided upon by the Government in power at any time? —There has been no material immigration for some years. 1059. Taking a retrospect for the last sixty years, do you not think that the Colony of New Zealand has made wonderful strides in that period ?—Sixty years ago there was practically no colony. To double one is a great proportional increase, but it only makes two. Ido not think, after all, it has been much, when you look at Canada. 1060. Have you considered the question of New Zealand forfeiting her legislative independence by joining the Commonwealth ?—Yes ; I admit that in certain matters. 1061. Have you considered also how local administration would be affected, having regard to the distance of Australia from New Zealand ? —I apprehend there must be always large local government. The tendency of New Zealand is to restrict local government, and" I think the tendency of federation would be to enlarge it. 1062. The centre of the Federal Government would be twelve hundred miles away at least ? —Yes. 1063. Does it not occur to you that that fact would work against the local administration of Government?—l do not think so; Ido not see why it should. 1064. Have you considered how the finances of the colony would be affected by New Zealand federating with Australia?—No, I have not. This colony's finances resolve themselves into two parts —the power to get taxes out of the taxpayer, and the power to borrow. 1065. I mean as to the loss of revenue that would accrue to New Zealand by federation, and how that loss would have to be made up?— Much as it is, I consider it to be a detail. It is'not essential. 1066. Do you not consider that revenue is essential to the carrying-on of the work of the Government ?—I mean that it is not essential to the question of whether we should join in the Federation or not. 1067. Did you read Mr. Eolleston's evidence?—No; but I have spoken to him, and know pretty well his views. 1068. He favoured federation in respect to certain matters of general concern, leaving the local autonomy of the different States untouched : do you think that preferable to the general federation proposed now ? —I understand that under federation local matters would be untouched. 1069. Have you read the Bill ?—I have only glanced at it. 1070. Are you aware of the thirty-nine articles in respect to which the Federal Government may legislate upon? —Yes. 1071. And that their laws, if they conflict with the laws of the State, are paramount ?—Yes, I understand that. 1072. Having regard to that, do you think there is very much left for the State Parliaments to legislate upon ? —Oh, I think so. 1073. Have you any fear of the State Governments being obliterated and the whole matter merged in the one Federal Government ? —No ; I think we in New Zealand are in greater danger of that now. I think we are in greater danger of losing our local self-government than under federation. 1074. How can we lose it now ?—I think the tendency is to do everything from Wellington. 1075. That is in the colony. But has it not occurred to you that there may be a merging of the States in the Federal Government, and the abolition of the State Governments, as was the case of the Provincial Governments in New Zealand?—l should hardly think so. I should not fear it. 1076. Do you think there would be an advantage in having intercolonial free-trade?— Yes, if we could have it. 1077. But you would have it if you federated ?—Yes ; and I think that is a matter on which we should wait and see how it can be worked out. There is a difference between Victoria and New South Wales on that head. 1078. If we joined the Federation we should undoubtedly have intercolonial free-trade ?—Yes ; but exactly how that would be adjusted with the Commonwealth duties I do not know. 1079. They would be abolished ?—Yes ; and therefore I would wait for a few years and see how it would be adjusted over there. 1080. They would be absolutely abolished between the States ?—I would wait and see the effect. We do not know at present. 1081. You would not go in at present ?—No ; I am for delay.
401
A.—4
1082. Do you think there would be any advantage in having four million additional people to trade with? —I think so. 1083. What are your opinions as to the mental condition of the people of New Zealand being elevated by being incorporated with the Commonwealth of Australia ? —I think that is the main argument for federation. It will enlarge our ideas. 1084. Do you look forward to the advent of Imperial federation ?—That is a very large term. I do not quite know what it means. 1085. I was going to ask you if we were not in an Imperial federation now ? —The Home Government do a lot of things for us now, and we have many advantages, but they do not consult us in anything. 1086. Supposing we are a component part of the Empire, have we not the same chance of enlarging our ideas as we would by joining the Federation ?—■Nβ, not until we are given some share in the government of the Empire. 1087. Mr. Beauchamp.] I understood you to say that, although you counselled delay, if you were asked to vote to-day you would record your vote in favour of federation ? —I did not say how I would vote in a referendum, which is a mere expression of opinion ; but if I had to vote for the thing to be carried out or not I would vote for it. 1088. In a primary vote would you vote " Aye " ?—I do not think I would. 1089. You see by this morning's paper that the Government have an intention of submitting this to a referendum on the 31st March in the census-paper; what way will you then vote ?—I would like to see the question first. 1090. If it is " Aye "or " No," how would you vote ?—I look upon it as an academical subject, and would vote " No." 1091. Mr. Leys.] Has not the tendency of Central Governments in Federations been to grow in power, whilst State Governments declined?—ln some respects, I imagine, yes; but I do not know sufficient about America to say that. 1092. Is it not really the tendency of Governments, having superior powers, to exercise and increase those powers ?—I believe that to be the natural tendency of mankind. It is true of democracy as it is of tyranny. 1093. Well, then, why do you anticipate that there will be an increase of local government under federation ?—Because I think, as things are at present in New Zealand, local government is being completely wiped out. There is a good illustration to be noticed in the newspapers at present. A little dispute has occured in a mine at the Thames, and the Government has been brought in. Surely we can settle a dispute without bringing the Government in. 1094. Is it not a fact that the mining leases are really held from the Government direct—that they are Crown lands held under certain conditions ?—I presume they are, but Ido not know. 1095. In that case, is not the Government directly involved ? —I do not think so. This is a matter of taking down a certain amount of quartz and crushing it. 1096. Do you know anything of the conditions under which the mining leases are held in Australia? —No. 1097. Do you know anything of the systems of local government in New South Wales ?—No. 1098. Or in Victoria?— No. 1099. I suppose you know, for instance, that their educational systems are entirely central in their character, and that they have no Boards of Education as we have in this colony?—I thought they had Boards ; but I see here that they are going to do away with Boards, apparently. 1100. Do you not think there has been a tendency to multiply Boards unnecessarily in New Zealand, and that there may be a reaction ?—Do you mean Education Boards ? 1101. No ; I mean local government Boards ? —There has been a tendency to multiply Government or society nominees, but I do not think there has been a tendency to multiply administrative bodies. 1102. You do not think there has been too much dovetailing of local government—too many bodies doing very much the same work —in New Zealand?— Perhaps that is inevitable in a new country, but I do not think the tendency is to increase that. 1103. But that tendency that you notice to decrease certain local bodies : may it not be that we have outgrown the needs of some of these bodies ?— J do not think it is necessary to decrease the Boards of Education. I think that is a serious blunder. 1104. But it has not taken place, and we may scarcely assume it will take place ?—lt has been stated. 1105. Officially?—Semi-officially, certainly. 1106. Well, now, with regard to the question of finance, you are aware, of course, that the Federal Government takes charge of the Customs and excise duties ? —Yes. 1107. Do you not think that that will seriously cripple us in the development of our own resources ?—No doubt questions of that sort are very serious difficulties to consider, and I do not think a casual witness like myself can offer an opinion. An opinion can only be offered by experts after a careful consideration of the whole question. I have not been and am not able to give it that study. 1108. Assuming that the statements to the effect that something like £500,000 will be thrown upon the direct taxation for State purposes are correct, how do you think that would operate upon the industries and commercial prosperity of the colony ?—lt is really quite impossible for me to answer. The broad financial effect of federation would be for the good of the country. We should be able to borrow money cheaper. New South Wales has better credit than New Zealand even now. 1109. Are you quite sure ?—Yes. 1110. Are you not aware that New Zealand bonds are quoted £h per cent, higher than New South Wales bonds? —Not in December. I have here Faithfull, Begg, and Co.'s stock-list, and 51—A. 4.
A.—4
402
that is not the case. In December last New South Wales 3-per-cents, having to 1935 to run, were at 99 to 101; New Zealand 3-per-cents, having to 1945 to run, were at 97 to 99 —a difference of 2 per cent, in favour of New South Wales. That 2 per cent, may to some extent be accounted for by the payment period of the dividend. Take Canada, which is federated : their 3-per-cents on the same day, to run to 1938, and therefore on an exact par with ours, were worth 100 to 102. That is to say, that New South Wales were worth 2 per cent, better than ours, and Canada were worth 2 per cent, more than New South Wales. 1111. What is the date of that quotation ?—January, 1901. 1112. Is that the beginning of January ?—I imagine it is. It was probably issued on the Ist January. 1113. That would be prior to federation taking effect ?—Federation has not taken effect yet. 1114. Yes, on the Ist January ?—Well, that would really prove my argument. 1115. What inference would you draw if you learnt that as soon as federation took effect New South Wales 3£-per-cents fell to 102, while New Zealand 3£-per-cents stood at 108? —New Zealand 3-J-per-cents at the present time stand at 104 to 106, to run to 1940; New South Wales to run to 1924, stand at 103 to 105. 1116. Those are not the latest quotations ?—Of course, the payment of the dividend may have some effect, but if you look through any sharebroker's list you will find that New South Wales stock has stood higher than New Zealand. 1117. Have you heard that during last month New South Wales placed five millions in Treasury bills at 4 per cent. ?—Two millions and a half they have. 1118. But on the London market ?—They were floated at 99 on the London market. 1119. Does not that indicate great uncertainty in their finance?—lt is very difficult to say. I will give you a fact that happened here. lam a member of a board of trustees that had to make an investment the other day. One was the purchase of Auckland City 4-per-cent. debentures. The trustees took up a few thousand, and we wanted more. Some of us thought they could be got in England better than here, and, in fact, double the amount have been bought in London at a price that pays from £4 2s. to £4 12s. per cent, as against £4 per cent, yielded by the identical debentures taken up here. The inference is that money is cheaper here than in England. The rate of mortgage in England is very much the same as in New Zealand. 1120. Here are the cable quotations of London, Ist March : New South Wales 3J-per-cents, 1918, £102 15s. ; New Zealand 1940, £108 ?—There is a difference of twenty-two years there in the currency. 1121. That is true ; but, of course, when you quote those figures that you have been quoting you have not taken that into account —in that general statement that our stocks were lower than New South Wales ? —■Aβ a matter of fact, the quotation you have read is the same as in the book. 1122. £102 155., that is not the quotation in the book?— 102 to 104 in December. 1123. That implies a fall?—No, they are the same. 1124. What quotation have you for New Zealand falling in in 1940 ?—-104 to 106. 1125. They are now quoted at 108, so that, whilst New South Wales stocks have been stationary, New Zealand stocks have risen 4 per cent, in two months ?—You cannot compare bonds with a difference of twenty-two years in the currency. If a person wishes to make an investment he might think 3-J per cent, more or less doubtful for a short period, but good for a long one. 1126. Would not this inference have the same force in January as in March ?—I do not know what the circumstances are. 1127. How do you account for that rise, then, in New Zealand stocks?—l would rather wait till I see them in the book. Ido not admit it for a moment. 1128. You do not admit the correctness of the cables ?—I do not admit that there has been any material change in the price of New Zealand securities in the last three months. 1129. You do not admit that ?—No, not until I see it in the book. 1130. Have you considered the effect of federation on the industries of New Zealand ?—I think, in the long-run, if our industries are to subsist aud flourish they must do so on their merits, and if we are to build up a wall and shut ourselves off from the world we shall suffer disadvantages quite as great as going into open competition. 1131. But, seeing that under a policy of protection certain industries have been built up and employ a great many thousands of working-people, would you think it expedient to remove that protection immediately ? —lt is a very large question. I think really, from what I can see, that it would be very much better for New Zealand if more attention was paid to the favouring or furthering of agricultural interests than industries. At the present time, so far as Auckland is concerned, we are suffering from want of labour. 1132. Do you assume, if a large number of mechanics were immediately thrown out of employment by the removal of the tariff, that they could be immediately absorbed in the country ? —No; any change is a serious thing, but it is not a thing to be afraid of, provided we can see our way reasonably to do it. We have gone too far in one direction. I think our greatest industry and the most profitable is agriculture. 1133. As a matter of fact, do not the exports show that there has been an enormous development both in the agricultural and pastoral industries of the colony ?—Undoubtedly. The real industry of the colony is agriculture. We can grow mutton and butter as very few countries can. 1134. Have you considered federation from the point of view that it would transfer powers from the Government of New Zealand to a Legislature in which we should only have a onesixth voice ?—Nothing really good is without its drawbacks, and, whatever federation is, that is one of its drawbacks to us. 1135. Have you noticed that already seven out of the nine members of the Federal Cabinet are lawyers ?—No.
403
A.—4
1136. Do you think that indicates that professional and commercial men cannot devote themselves to politics ? —I did not know that was the case, but I think it very likely. This is only the first Parliament of the Federation, and. as the establishment of the Constitution was very much a question of law, I suppose it attracted the -attention of lawyers more than other men. I think that would account for that fact to some extent. 1137. You think it does not rather indicate that the Government has fallen into the hands of professional politicians ?—I do not think so. 1138. As against this surrender of control over our own Government, do you see any real practical advantage in the way of administration?—l am inclined to think there would be advantages of administration, as our Government as at present constituted troubles itself too much about the small matters of life. They interfere too much with the departmental administration, and I am in favour of more local government in this colony. 1139. Would you then be in favour of transferring the public lands and other departments which would still be under the control of the States to the Federal Government ? —I should hardly think that. 1140. Well, in regard to the administration of such services as post-offices, telegraphs, lighthouses, Customs, and marine, and probably railways, do you think those services would be better administered in the public interest from Australia than from a centre in New Zealand ? — Putting railways out of it, I imagine that posts and telegraphs could be as well administered from one place as from another. 1141. Do you think there would be no disadvantage in having the heads of departments at such a distance ?—I do not think so. There is necessarily a large amount of devolution in the post-office, and the State is really forced to decide the great questions of policy, like the pennypostage. 1142. Hon. the Chairman.'] You spoke of the interests of the settlers being neglected : are you aware that, in regard to exports of produce for the year 1899 as against 1898, there was an increase of £315,656; and that in agricultural produce in the same year there was an increase of over half a million ?—I did not know the particular figures. I was aware there was a great increase, but I even thought it might be larger. 1143. Mr. Leys.] I suppose you know that the only means of revenue available for the States, apart from their share of Customs, would be by direct taxation ? —Of course, direct taxation would be necessary. 1144. If the financial exigencies necessitated doubling the land-tax, how would that operate upon the agricultural and farming community generally ?—Well, that is hardly a question to be answered offhand ; but I should think that, even if direct taxation were required, doubling the landtax would be a very clumsy proceeding. I should be inclined to put a good deal more on income. The land in New Zealand pays at the present time as much taxation as England paid when she fought Napoleon's war: the mortgage-tax of Id. in the pound is equivalent to Is. 10d. on income with money at 4-J- per cent., and this is precisely the tax England paid after she had fought Europe for years, and had incurred a debt of £800,000,000. 1145. Then, I judge that you do not think there is much scope for direct taxation ?—I think there is scope to increase the income-tax, but I do not think that that tax is in proportion to the mortgage-tax. The land-tax is out of proportion ; the tax on mortgages is grossly unfair, even aa compared with the tax on income. James Heney Mackie examined. (No. 151.) 1146. Hon.- the Chairman.] What are you? —A public accountant and auditor in Auckland. 1147. Are you the secretary of the Fruit-growers' Union? —Yes. 1148. Is that a large body ?—-It represents some one dozen associations, including in all five or six hundred fruit-growers. lam simply an official of the union, and Mr. Sturges, who is the vice-president, gave you the official evidence on the matter yesterday. lam also the secretary to the Auckland Provincial Industrial Association, and I conclude it is in that connection that I am called here. I may also say that for a great part of my life I was engaged in the carriage-building industry, which I left some years ago. 1149. So far as the unions in which you are concerned are affected, have they met and discussed the question of federation ?—Not specifically. I think there would be a divergence of opinion on this subject. 1150. Will you give the Commission your own opinion on the matter? —I am inclined to think that we should wait and see what will be the outcome of the movement going on in Australia at the present time. There is already a conflict of opinion growing up there, and until we see how the questions that have been raised there are settled we shall do no harm by abstaining from joining the Federation. 1151. Are you prepared to express an opinion as to how the fruit-growing industry in this colony would be affected by federation ?—Experts express the opinion that it would prove adverse to our grape-growing industry ; the general opinion of growers is that it would kill that industry, and possibly injure the wine industry. 1152. How do you think manufacturers would be affected ?—Certain manufactures that we can carry on fairly successfully would be very seriously affected at first. I spent several years in Australia, and was connected with manufactures in Victoria. I have also some knowledge of similar industries in New South Wales. There is a large disparity between our manufactures and theirs, and for that reason it would be advisable to wait until we see how the Commonwealth Government goes to work. In New South Wales the carriage industry, which is carried on to a very large extent, comes into competition with the imported articles. The cost of construction in that line is lower than in New Zealand, and there is an inferior class of work done. In Victoria wages are
A.—4
404
higher, and the class of work is very much superior; but then they do not have to compete with the imported article, as they are protected. 1154. Can you tell us what advantages are likely to accrue to this colony from federation ?—I believe one advantage would be the broadening of one's ideas, and that it would improve the status of our public men, as they would come into touch with men of wider experience and larger ideas, and thereby advance the possibility of progressive legislation. At the present time, on account of our insular position, we are very cramped, and what applies to the individual applies to the people as a whole. While lam in favour of federation, I should prefer to wait until we see the result in Australia. I am in fayour of re-establishing the system of selected immigration to this colony, as I consider it would be better than federating with Australia. A larger population would mean that our industries could be extended, we should have a larger market for our produce, and in every way it would be better for the colony. 1155. Mr. Leys.] From your observations in Australia, can you tell us whether the manufactures there are more largely developed than in New Zealand ? —Much more. 1156. Does that give them an advantage in respect to production ?—Yes, it does, because it benefits the individual for one thing, and by maintaining an industry which is more or less natural to the country it would keep out importations that may be created largely by cheap labour. 1157. Does it enable them to produce more cheaply than we can ?—Undoubtedly. 1158. You said that labour was cheaper in Australia than here ? —Cheaper in New South Wales than in Victoria. 1159. Is it cheaper in New South Wales than in New Zealand?—ln carriage-building, I believe, it was not so. 1160. Do you think the effect of intercolonial free-trade would be to draw some of our workingpopulation to Australia? —I believe our better-class artisans would move to Australia. 1161. Mr. Beauchamp.] While advocating immigration to this colony, have you considered what would be the effect upon the workers of New Zealand of the introduction of an extensive system of immigration?—l do not think you should lose anything by it, as it would depend very largely on the discrimination exercised in regard to the class of people we brought here. 1162. You do not think it would have the effect of lowering wages ?—I do not think so. There seems to be now a dearth of labour for agricultural industries. James Aggers examined. (No. 152.) 1163. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A bootmaker, and secretary to the Bootmakers' Union. 1164. How many men are associated with that union ?—Over two hundred. 1165. Have they considered as a body the question of federation ?—Yes ; they consider that federation with Australia would be detrimental to the bootmakers of New Zealand, and especially of Auckland. 1166. Were they unanimous in that decision ?—Practically; one or two may hold opposite views. 1167. Do you agree in that decision?— Certainly I do. 1168. Why do you think it would prove detrimental to the bootmaking trade?— Through the imported work that would come in through having free-trade with Australia; and if it would be bad for the manufacturers it would be worse for the men. 1169. Is the bootmaking industry in New Zealand a flourishing one now ?—Fairly so. It is about stationary. 1170. Does not America compete very seriously with your industry now?—lt does. 1171. What do you think will be the probable tariff in Australia under federation?—lt is only a matter of speculation, but we believe the tariff will come down 7 to 12 per cent, lower than the New Zealand tariff. 1172. What would then be the result to your industry?— Utter ruination. 1173. Have you considered the effect of federation from any other aspect than as affecting your own industry ?—I believe we would surrender our independence as a colony, and I object to that. 1174. Mr. Roberts.} Given a 15-per-cent. Federal tariff on boots, what would be the effect on your industry ?—Two-thirds of it would be wiped out, and the boots imported would be an inferior article, as we make a better article for the money than the imported. 1175. Is not the most serious competition in the boot trade from America?— Yes; and I believe there has been a good deal of late from Victoria. 1176. Mr. Millar.] Apart from the question of how your trade would be affected, do you think that the social condition of the workers in this colony would be considered to the same extent by a Federal Government as it is by the Parliament we have now?— Certainly not. 1177. You are aware that during the last ten or twelve years very little progress has been made in Australia with regard to social legislation ?—I hardly agree with that opinion. 1178. Certainly, with regard to Victoria they have done a little ; but, taking the trades right through, have they made any progress at all in that direction ?—ln our own trade in Victoria they have introduced the minimum wage, and that has had a good effect on the trade. 1179. Do you not think it is more likely we should get legislation of an advanced character more rapidly by remaining an independent colony than if we joined the Federation ?—Certainly we should, because we are now nearer our members and Parliament than we would be if the Parliament were in Australia. And you would only have fifteen members there. 1180. Do you think there would be much opportunity of seeing them, considering the colony would be divided into fifteen electorates ?—Very little. 1181. Mr. Beauchamp.] Why do you say Auckland would be more affected in respect to your trade by federation than other places ?—Because 1 know the conditions in the trade here, but not in the South.
A.—4.
405
1182. Under the present tariff of 22£ per cent, you can just hold your own, I understand?—lt is a difficult matter even to do that. 1183. But if any reduction were made upon the present tariff you think it would prove injurious to your industry ? —As far as I can understand, with only a 10-per-cent. reduction on boots in Sydney the wages fell 40 per cent. 1184. And at the present time are wages in your trade lower in Australia than in New Zealand?— Yes. 1185. Are the hours of work about the same ?—Yes. Gboege Alexander Coles examined. (No. 153.) 1186. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a boot-manufacturer in Auckland?— Yes. I have resided in New Zealand about nineteen years, and am the president of the Auckland Boot-manu-facturers' Association and vice-president of the New Zealand Federated Boot - manufacturers' Association. 1187. How many members are there in it?— About twenty-five manufacturers, employing between eight and nine hundred hands. 1188. Is your association in favour of or against federation? —We had a meeting on the question, and we passed a resolution against federating. The reasons were given by Mr. Dearsley in his evidence yesterday. The meeting was one of manufacturers and workmen. 1189. Have you considered the question apart from the aspect of its effect on the manufacturing industry? —Yes. At first I thought it would be a very good thing, but during a visit I paid to Australia recently I found that the social conditions in Australia were far inferior to our own in respect to the manufacturing interests —perhaps they are better in otfher respects —and the competition was so keen that unless a man had a very large capital behind him he was out of the running, and the condition of the workers was far inferior to that of anything I have seen in New Zealand. I have not seen so much distress since I left the Old Country as I saw in New South Wales and Victoria. Although the minimum wage in Victoria is 2s. a week higher than here, the conditions under which the people work there are totally different, as the log rate is 40 per cent, lower than in New Zealand, and the earnings of the men are based, of course, entirely on the log. The consequence is that our men are able to earn the minimum wage on a very much higher log rate, and take matters more easily. I also think we should lose, by federating, that individuality of character "we at present possess. In climate we have the advantage, as the Australian worker — I refer more particularly to those in Sydney—is, by reason of the enervating climate and the conditions under which he works, practically worked out at forty-five to fifty, and that is what we do not want to see in New Zealand. 1190. Does your evidence upon this point apply only to the bootmaking class?—l think it affects all classes of society. New Zealand would not be able to compete with Australia without a duty in respect to the bootmaking trade, owing to the smallness of our population and the larger factories in Australia, and the specialisation practised in the industry there. If I were in business in Melbourne or Sydney I could carry on that business with much less capital, as I could purchase all my requirements on a Monday morning, in either Sydney or Melbourne, for the week, while in New Zealand one has to purchase the raw material six or nine months beforehand, and that requires a large capital. 1191. Then, probably you do not agree with some other witnesses who think that the mental condition of the New-Zealanders would be improved by association with the Australians ?—I like to speak from experience, and I must say that many of the workmen who come from the other side are not up to the standard of the New-Zealanders. 1192. Do -you not think it would be a benefit to the New-Zealanders to be associated with the larger population of the Australian Commonwealth ?—No, Ido not. If the communication were by railway there would be a feeling of brotherhood between us which is impossible in the case of a long separation by sea. I believe that New Zealand is sufficiently large to be a self-governing colony, and she should retain her independence. 1193. Have you considered the question with regard to the financial aspect of the matter?— Yes; and I think we should be outvoted in the Federal Parliament, and therefore affected injuriously. 1194. Mr. Boberts.] You emphasize the very high scale of wages here as being the chief handicap you labour under ?—No doubt it is a large factor in manufacturing, but the cost of our raw material is also a very serious handicap, and we can only turn out very small quantities of goods. Larger factories and output and confinement to one or two lines would mean a considerable reduction in the cost of production. 1195. Are your hands constantly employed here?—No; in our factory the hands are pretty constantly employed, and last year they lost no time at all, but that was owing to our making a very high class of work. 1196. If you can buy your raw materials in Sydney, would it not be much better to buy them there than to import them direct from Home ?—You are loaded by the intercolonial freight, and therefore it is cheaper to import from England and Germany. 1197. But the intermediate freight would not be very much?— Sufficient to load the price of the goods; and you have the shipping-charges. 1198. Still, it is the fact that you can buy more cheaply there than here?—lt is the local leathers I was speaking of. 1199. Still, if things are so cheap, there is no reason why you should not go there and make your purchases ?—lt would not pay us. The raw material is a great deal dearer than in Sydney, and we do not make the lines here that they make in Australia. 1200. What is the largest number of lines you turn out in any one factory here ?—About three hundred.
A.—4
406
1201. As compared with the number of lines turned out in an American factory? —They manufacture in four only. One house turns out 20,000 pairs a week. My son is in a factory in Chicago which turns out 10,000 pairs a week, and they only make six lines in that factory. 1202. And you think that specialisation would take place in Australia ? —lt is taking place, and that is the only way they can compete against the imported goods. 1203. You think they are experiencing the same competition from American boots in Australia that we are having in New Zealand ? —ln Sydney ; but in Victoria they are shut out by the high tariff. 1204. Have you considered the quality of our leather as compared with that of Australia?— We import American leather very largely. 1205. Are you unable to get leather of high quality here ?—lt does not pay our tanners to make it, because the Americans have brought the specialisation of leathers to the highest pitch, and have got the production of leathers entirely in their own hands. 1206. With regard to the leathers you work up here, do they compare well with the leather produced in America?— Very favourably. 1207. Mr. Luke.] Do they work by wage or under the log in Victoria ?—I am glad you asked that question, because a great many people have got an idea that if a man is paid £2 a week he does all he can to earn that £2; but, unfortunately for the man, he does not. Take the position to-day: The Arbitration Court fixes the weekly wage of all operatives in New Zealand at a minimum of £2 a week, or 10d. an hour; but it also fixes a log, which anybody can work under, and that is the log that is 40 per cent, higher than the Victorian log, which is higher again than the English and American log ; and if you give the men in New Zealand £2 per week they produce you about the same amount of work as if paid by piecework logs, which handicaps the manufacturers in New Zealand. 1208. Notwithstanding working under the log, they can still claim the minimum wage ?—Of course, you have to pay them the minimum wage; you have to start at that. 1209. Do they earn under the log anything over and above the minimum wage ? —You are not supposed to know anything about this log, but the men work by it. I might give a man £2, £2 55., or £2 10s. a week, and that same man does you so-much work under this log, which is a prohibitive log; he will make that £2 10s. or £2 ss. worth of work, but no more. 1210. Then, the question of the higher wage in Victoria does not help the manufacturer at all if they worked under the New Zealand log ?—lf the men here were to adopt what we call the Australian log —which I have in my hand—then we could compete with the Australians, but, although we pay our men the same minimum wage, our men work under what we call the New Zealand log, which is 40 to 50 per cent, higher. Under the American log, taking a military boot made for the army, the operation of putting the upper on the sole, and the sole on, comes to 10d. In New Zealand that would cost us 4s. under our log. In another boot —a machine-sewn boot— named the " McKay," the two operations in America cost 10d., here 2s. 6d. Supposing you paid your men a minimum wage of £2 10s., they would make you so-many pairs, and on the piece they would get 2s. 6d., whether they make more or not; so the consequence would be that at the end of .the week you would find you would have paid really 2s. 6d. a pair for that operation. 1211. What is the difference between Australia and New Zealand?—l have not worked it out, but I think you will find that the Australians can pretty well now make you a boot for the same price you can get it made for in England. 1212. Mr. Leys.] Does any manufacturer in Auckland work under the log?— Not that I know of. 1213. What do you assume a good workman can make at log rates?—lf he likes he can make from £3 10s. to nearly £4 a week. 1214. But the manufacturer prefers to pay £2 ?—We could not pay log rates. 1215. If, as you say, the workmen are really working on the log, although nominally on wages, what better are you off?—We have to use machinery, and that is where the small manufacturers are handicapped. Machinery must be put down whether you are willing to do so or not. 1216. It is really a limiting of the output ?—Yes ; that is the trouble they have in England. The English manufacturers are suffering in exactly the same way on account of the limitation of the output. 1217. Hon. the Chairman.] How do they get over the difficulty? —They have not overcome it, and that is why there are so many American boots coming into England now. 1218. Mr. Millar.] Do I understand you to say that the Victorian log is 40 per cent, lower than the New Zealand log ?—Yes. 1219. Are you aware that there are a number of factories in this colony working under the log? —No. There is no factory in New Zealand working on that log. 1220. How long is it since they went on weekly wages ? —A little while ago. 1221. Do you know anything about Dunedin ? —Yes. 1222. Are they working there now on a weekly wage?—As far as I know, they are doing so all over the colony in the federated associations. 1223. You say that £2 is the minimum wage here, and £2 2s. in Victoria?—-Yes. 1224. Are you aware that Victorian bootmakers have been drawn over to New Zealand?— Yes. 1225. How long do they remain ? —A very short time. 1226. What is the reason for their going back to Victoria ? —They do not like the class of work here, and cannot earn as big wages as they can in Victoria; and under our log our men could earn just as much if they liked, but they will not. 1227. What is the average wage of the bootmakers in New Zealand now ? —Our men average from £2 to £3 10s.
407
A.—4
1228. I mean all over the colony ?—I could not say. 1229. You do not consider £2 an excessive wage ?—I do not consider it enough for a skilled man. I could earn more than that in the Old Country. I would not work for it myself. Thomas Hodgson examined. (No. 154.) 1230. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Hodgson?—Manager of the Northern Bootfactory. 1231. How many hands do you employ?— About eighty. 1232. Will you tell us, please, your opinion as to how the manufacturers in New Zealand would be affected by federation ?—ln my opinion, the bootmaking industry would be affected, but how far it is impossible to say without further evidence and experience. At present there are about four thousand operatives in the trade in the colony, and I think it will be found to be the largest industry in the colony; therefore it requires special consideration, as it has done in the past. We have already met with the competition that has been mentioned from America, Australia, and the United Kingdom. It is true that there has been a large increase in the American imports in boots and shoes, and with that personally I am not displeased, for we know that competition is the life of trade ; and, while it is true that American goods are coming into the colony, and into England and Australia, they are bringing with them their object-lessons. I find, on making comparisons with respect to the American boots and shoes coming into New Zealand, that they are all of a high-class nature; they are twice the value of those coming from the United Kingdom, and therefore it shows that there is a demand in New Zealand for a finer class of goods, and that the people here are prepared to pay the price for such goods. At the same time, lam happy to say that we are in a measure meeting some of the competition from America. Aheady we have made an advance in respect to getting up a good article of better value, but to do that we have had to take advantage of the American raw material and machinery, and with these advantages we are making some progress. At the same time, if we were to join the Commonwealth we should find the competition under free-trade from Australia very great, and we could not be expected to hold our own with the Australians, although we have done so hitherto. I am afraid the trade would suffer. We have also to consider that allied with the bootmaking trade is the tanning trade, which furnishes the raw material for the bootmakers, and that industry would suffer with the other in the event of the colony federating. I estimate that two-thirds of the leathers worked up in boot-manufacturing are of local production, and we cannot tell how soon under federation we might lose, through its exportation, the value of this raw material which is at present used in the colony. In regard to the ability of the local bootmakers, Ido not put them in second place. In regard to the competition we have to meet from the Australian Colonies, it is true that wages in Sydney and Melbourne are lower than here ; therefore they have that advantage, and the advantage of longer experience is capital to them. I think those are the main features in the boot-and-shoe industry. 1233. Have you regarded the question from any other standpoint ?—-I have followed the evidence, and read and thought a good deal on the matter, and, as far as I am concerned, I am not prepared to vote for it immediately. I would require still further experience, for the simple reason that at the present time taere is great conflict in Australia in regard to the tariff. It is proposed now by the Victorian journals to set up a 15-per-cent. tariff on leathers. That would affect us. If we stand out it would help us, because we could use more of our local leathers. 1234. You know that federation means intercolonial free-trade ? —Yes. 1235. If we go in, could New Zealand hold its own ?—Not all its own. 1235 a. You say " wait" ?—Yes. 1236. What is to be gained by waiting ? —We are now making progress in meeting this competition. Goods are coming from Australia, and they are of a character that some have pleasure in selling, but others have no pleasure in selling or doing anything else with them. 1237. Do you anticipate that the protection put on by the Commonwealth will be higher than the New Zealand tariff?— 7 or 8 per cent. less. 1238. Would your industry be able to stand against that reduction ?—Yes, I contend we could, though it would affect other industries. We should still be able to hold a proportion of our business in competition with other colonial manufacturers or competitors. But, speaking generally, New Zealand would lose a good dea.l of its boot-manufacturing. It would then be left for those who remain to work to the best advantage against outside competition. 1239. Other industries would be affected, you think?— Yes, I think so, prejudicially. It is a question of tariff. 1240. Your opinion is that New Zealand should wait ?—Yes. 1241. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is any Australian leather used here ? —Yes. 1242. What is the duty on that ? —ld. per pound to 6d. per pound. 1243. Under federation this would come in free ?—Yes. 1244. How would that affect the bootmakers in New Zealand?—lt would be against them. 1245. Why ?—Because Australia being the larger consumer would have the benefit of our raw material free. Michael Flubscheim examined. (No. 155.) 1246. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—At present I am living as a private gentleman, writing books and pamphlets. 1247. You are resident in Auckland?— Yes, in Eemuera. 1248. Have you been long in New Zealand ?—Three years. 1249. Have you lived in Australia at all?—No, only passed through. 1250. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?— Yes. 1251. Have you studied the Commonwealth Bill?— Yes, in its general features. 1252. What is the opinion at which you have arrived as to New Zealand federating with Australia or not ?—I am decidedly against it.
A.—4
408
1253. For what reason ? —My reasons are of two kinds—commercially and financially on the one side, and economically, socially, and politically on the other. From the financial and business point of view, I am confident that under present conditions we should import a great many more goods from Australia than we could export there, so that the financial balance would be against us, and we should run into debt with Australia. Ido not believe in that principle which is often advanced by Free-traders —that goods are paid for by goods, and that importation necessarily entails corresponding exportation. Though we shall have to buy a good many industrial products, it does not at all follow that Australia will buy a corresponding quantity of New Zealand products. They could just as well buy these elsewhere, and we should have to run into debt for the balance in the form of mortgages, bonds, or in some other way. From a political and social standpoint, lam entirely against federation, because there are several reforms which I think necessary for this country which are bound to come, and which would be retarded perhaps for decades if we were included in this larger union, as contemplated. I have noticed in Switzerland, where I lived for a number of years, that some of the most important political reforms, which have made their way in the worfd originated not in the Central Government, but in the cantons. Having proved practical there, other cantons took them up, until they finally were adopted by the Confederacy. If we federated we could not go in for currency reform, land-nationalisation, or some other important reforms, on our own account; whereas if we go on in our way the time will come when the Commonwealth of Australia will adopt what we have found to be practicable. 1254. Have you considered how the revenue of the colony would be affected? —The revenue would be unfavourably affected. 1255. How about the Customs revenue ?—That would be greatly affected. We ought to have a higher tariff than we have now. 1256. Do you think that the distance we are from Australia would affect us in any way ?—lt would affect us, and so make federation unadvisable. If we were a country united by land the distance would'hot make so much difference, because in case of war we could not so easily be cut off from one another. 1257. Do you think that federation is a good thingfor the Australians themselves?— Certainly, it will benefit them in so far as it hurts us, because they will sell a great many more goods to us than we shall sell to them. 1258. Mr. Leys.] You have given a great deal of study to industrial and social questions, and have written a good deal upon them, have you not ? —Yes. 1259. Can you detect, from your observations of New-Zealanders and Australians, any marked difference in the aspirations and character of the people? —I have not noticed any. 1260. Do you think such marked tendencies are likely to arise through our insularity ?—I think that white labour is sure to be more permanently employed here than over there, especially in Queensland. 1261. Do you think that the fact of our insularity as contrasted with Australia, which is a continent, will have any effect on the character of the two places ?—No ; I consider Australia much in the light of an island, too. 1262. Do you think that the concentration of population in the large cities of Australia as distinct from the diffusion of population in the smaller centres here has any bearing on the federation question ? —Certainly, I think it is one of our greatest misfortunes to have these great aggregations of people in cities. One of the greatest benefits of New Zealand is that it really has no large cities. 1263. You think that is an advantage ?—Yes. 1264. How -do you conclude that the social reforms in New Zealand would be retarded by federation ? —Well, we have practical proof in the stage we have reached in both countries. We have made a beginning of land-nationalisation, for instance—with the addition, unfortunately, of a 999-years tenure without any revaluation, but that no doubt will soon be changed. But, anyhow, we have made a beginning of land-nationalisation, and there is nothing like that in Australia. Something in the line of the single-tax has been begun over there, but I do not expect much from that, anyway, although I think it works in the right direction. Then, in the currency question, nothing has been done there or here either, but it is easier for a population of 800,000 to be taught the real influence of the question than a population of four or five millions. The reason I came to New Zealand was that I thought I might do some good by spreading my views on currency and land reform. 1265. You look upon New Zealand as a good place for experiments?— Not experiments. A man who has become absolutely convinced as to the practicability of a reform does not regard it as an experiment. 1266. But have you not modified your own views as to the matter of land-nationalisation ?— No, not since I got them nineteen years ago. 1267. You have modified your individualism very much ?—Yes. The American trusts and the British co-operative movement have taught an important lesson in the direction of socialism. 1268. How do you account for the fact that Australia does not take up these reforms, seeing that the franchise is the same ?—There is more difficulty in moving larger bodies of people than small bodies. Climate also may have something to do with it. From a general point of view, and having studied New Zealand as well as I could during the three years I have been here, I am convinced that New Zealand is a much better field for social reform than Australia. 1269. Mr. Luke.] You have had considerable experience in manufacturing ?—Yes ; I had a factory and employed a thousand hands': 1270. Did you find that centralisation cheapened production very much ?—Yes; you can only specialise by having a large market. 1271. Do you think one effect of federation on New Zealand would be that the larger concerns of Australia could manufacture cheaper and send into this market, and cut out the local producer ? — There is no doubt about it.
409
A.—4
1272. You have carried on manufacture in a small way in New Zealand?—l was one of the directors in a soap-works at Petone. 1273. You do not think, from a manufacturer's point of view, that federation would be advisable ? —Decidedly not, though there may be exceptions in the case of a few specialties. William Jaevis HackEe examined. (No. 156.) 1274. Hon. the What are you ?—-A retired merchant. 1275. Living in Auckland ? —Yes, for the last two years. 1276. I understand from your communication to the Commission that you have given a good deal of attention to the question of the Australian Commonwealth ?—I have, and with your permission I will read through my notes on the subject. 1277. Are you in favour of or against federation?— Decidedly in favour of it. 1278. Will you state your reasons ?—I think it is only fair to the reasons that I should state my credentials. First of all, this question is more or less one of self-interest. As far as lam concerned, my bread and cheese depend upon English Consols, and English Consols are not affected by federation in any way. I am a much-travelled and retired London merchant, where for many years I carried on the largest business done in colonial produce. I arrived in the colony some twenty-one years ago, and since then my colonial experience has been that of surveyor, prospector, retailer, wholesaler, manufacturer, land agent, and auctioneer; whilst for three years I ran a hospital, for three years a farm, and for three years a newspaper. For the past forty years I have been a political student, and so described myself in the census of 1880. Owing to old age and infirmity lam now an arm-chair philosopher. The prosperity of this country rests absolutely on the prosperity of its producers ; and that prosperity depends on finding a profitable market for their produce. No class of men work half as hard, as long, and for so little remuneration as pur farmers, settlers, and country workers. Through the spring and summer months I, as one, have worked for sixteen hours daily out of each twenty-four hours. I have risen at 3 a.m. to churn the butter, taken it—a fine quality—early to the store, to get a return of 4d. to sd. per pound, paid in dear and inferior goods. I have carted my produce—vegetables, fruits, &c. —to the chief town, fourteen miles distant, to find that there was no market for them. My neighbour, a large farmer, has given me as many cart-loads as I could use of the finest eating-potatoes to feed my pigs and stock upon; their sale not paying cartage. I have seen thousands of tons of grand potatoes left to rot in the pits for the same reason. A very few years ago the finest wheat was unsaleable at Is. 6d. per bushel; ditto oats at Is.; ditto eggs at sd. per dozen; and so on : through all that the farmer grows and produces. Here, now, in Auckland, apples, tomatoes, vegetables, and fruits generally are not fetching bare cost of cases and carriage. Notwithstanding, and not understanding, all this, our town workers and factory-hands are loudly protesting against any opening of new markets for the very men whose prosperity alone can lay a firm foundation for the superstructure of their manufactures : surely a midsummer madness as great as if they refused to allow their own stomachs to obtain food. At present New South Wales takes our produce to the value of about £1,350,000 out of about eleven million pounds' worth. Were this shut out and thrown back upon our hopelessly overladen home markets it would spell ruin. With our temperate climate, grand soil, plentiful rainfall, proximity to seaports, and cheap water-carriage, we should, under federation, find all that we need as a market for our produce. Then, and then only, are we justified in pushing on land-settlement. Whether we federate or not, our own large manufactories are bound to close up the smaller. Only those able to specialise their work to the utmost, and to constantly replace their machinery with the newer and still newer and up to date,-can hope to survive. But those survivors, as always the fittest for their purpose, with their men living in a healthy and bracing climate, with the thermometer in the workshops ranging for nine months out of the twelve months from 60° to 80°, would not only hold their own against dwellers in a sub-tropical climate working in a temperature of 80° to 100°, but compete with them in their own markets. Terms and conditions of labour will undoubtedly in the very near future be the same throughout Australasia, based on the most advanced at present existing— our own. This is sure and certain. Though our selfish greed refuses to permit the Chinese to keep " China for the Chinese," the overwhelming majority of all Australasians will demand and maintain a " white man's " Australasia. Whilst I was penning those words the cable told us that Mr. Barton, the Premier of the Commonwealth, was promising the white settlers in the district of that great centre of the sugar industry in Queensland (Bundaberg) that kanaka labour would be abolished. If any labour other than that of the Teutonic race is necessary, thousands of hardworking, decent Italian peasants, now perishing in their own valleys and hillsides through diseases caused by semi-starvation, and thousands of whom now flee to South America, could be imported to the sugar-growing and tropical parts of Australia at less cost than kanakas ; and gladly do the work, better and so cheaper than the kanakas, for a term of years, at the expiration of which time they should be entitled to a grant of land, when they would not only grow sugar, but olives, grapes, mulberries, and numerous other valuable products, and, when grown, convert them into oil, wine, silk, &c. : and here let me point out to our prohibition friends that no nations are so sober as those which manufacture their own light wines, and use them a,s their chief beverage—as instance Spain, Portugal, Italy, and France until her vineyards were destroyed by disease. They would also manufacture for themselves, and for export, vermicelli and their beloved macaroni, with a plentiful supply of which they would be, as its Italian name indicates, makarios —blessed, happy. Already up the Clarence River, when the sugar-cane harvest is in full swing, and the gathering of it in is let out in small contracts, neither black nor yellow labour can compete with the white ; whilst in Queensland itself the German and other white settlers harvest their own cane themselves on their sections, and take it to the mills. Exit the great coloured-labour bogey. 52—A. 4.
A.-4
410
Now let me turn for a few minutes to the evidence of our manufacturers, miliers, merchants, brokers, and agents, and what do we find ?' Why, that it is tainted —I do not say wilfully—at its very source by self-interest—or, rather, what they think (mistakenly, I believe) to be self-interest. Nine witnesses out of every ten have their own axe to grind, and in eight cases, or more, out of every nine it is a town axe. We look in vain for the evidence of the men on whom, if we get down to bed-rock, the whole prosperity of the country depends—the producer; he is hidden away in his shell —that is, his farm—and, like the mollusc itself, he is inarticulate ; nevertheless, he is the man that pays for all. The very slave-owners, for their own sakes, looked after the welfare of their slaves ; whilst our town slave-owners, although absolutely dependent on the country workers, are utterly callous in providing for their maintenance, let alone their comfort. Our manufacturers and merchants hold the field, and possession is nine-tenths of the law. With energy and more up-to-date methods they can well hold their own, whilst the enforced adoption of the new and better methods would immediately benefit the consumer. The ostrich when in temporary danger buries his head in the sand, not because he believes that he thus becomes invisible —he is not such a fool—he leaves it to his unfeathered brother biped to formulate that silly theory—but because he knows that it is his one vulnerable spot : in a healthy industry its infancy is its weak spot, and may need the temporary shelter of a protective duty or a bonus ; but to keep it for long thus artificially covered would as surely choke and throttle it as would the sand the ostrich in like case. Where are the great manufactories and prosperous artisans of heavily protected Melbourne ? I will tell you : They are now flourishing in free-trade Sydney. We hear a lot about the open door for China, and are anxious for an open door throughout the world, whilst we keep our own not only shut, but locked and barred, with a chevaux de frise. And now let us clear our minds of the cant about reciprocity. Messrs. Barton, Reid, and all the leading politicians of the Commonwealth have plainly said that it must be one thing or the other—federation or exclusion. At present, if we federate, the markets of five millions of large consumers lie open at our very doors, are ours if we will—five millions that will soon be ten, twenty, and, by the end of the century, forty millions. The door once closed against us, the growers of Tasmania and parts of temperate Australia will grow the produce that New Zealand can supply now, and for ever afterwards hold those markets. Once we secure them we can hold them, for twelve hundred miles of water-carriage costs less than two hundred miles of land-carriage. Eemember now, and consider it ere the door closes, that the drivers of the federal coach have said, and emphasized it, that there is to be no riding on the back step for New Zealand ; it must be inside or nowhere. I know that there is some suffering in times of transition : that well-known crustacean, the lobster, has a ticklish time to go through when he is changing his shell; but, once in his new and commodious quarters, do you think he is sorry that he has shifted ? I am satisfied that, the change once accomplished in our case, the results would prove equally satisfactory. 1 have none of the qualifications of a Jeremiah or Cassandra, but it is perfectly clear that a season of depression and low prices is about to set in throughout Europe. I will tell you why if you wish. The first stormy petrel of the coming depression, the fall in wool, has already alighted upon our shores : the one thing that will enable us to weather the coming storm is the open shelterage of the great neighbouring continent; if we make that refuge impossible, then God help New Zealand. The great Commonwealth showed a kindly consideration for the least and youngest of her members, West Australia, and would doubtless help us, too, over our period of transition. The old stock arguments against the federation of the United States that were refuted, and which 120 years of federation have proved were groundless, are all being trotted out again. Canada and Germany bear living testimony to their falsity. Newfoundland is a splendid living witness for New Zealand of the ruin and misery that have befallen a large colony, rich in natural products, that held aloof from her federating neighbouring continent, Canada. All the specious pleas now being raised against our federating were raised in the six Australian States, and were met and overcome. Carping critics there always will be; any fool can find fault; but it is not these men that do the work of the world, except after the fashion in which the drag draws the coach. In this world nothing is perfect or without its drawbacks, and federation is no exception ; but the balance of good over evil, all history teaches us, is enormous. Our present consumers cannot take the half of our products now, and that half at miserably unremunerative prices, and not one-fifth of what, with markets, we should produce ; it is inhuman to induce men to go upon the land to bring the fruits of their strenuous labour to markets already overstocked. Let the Government send the presidents of all the trades and labour councils, with an equal number of picked producers, over to investigate the question on the spot, and I am confident as to the result. Under federation Auckland would awake from its slumbers, and so would the whole of this large and fertile province. A dozen smart business-men from the other side, backed by Melbourne and Sydney money, would literally revolutionise the town and province. Factories and markets would spring up everywhere, mining would be developed, the canal from the Manukau to the Waitemata would be cut, making this one of the great waterways of the world, and the coal brought by water from close at hand—the Mokau—would make Auckland another Newcastle, and the roadless north, with its infinite possibilities, would be developed. The minds of the people, also, would be developed and get fair-play, and perhaps this would be the greatest benefit of all. I feel certain that if we hesitate to seize this opportunity to federate we are lost. One more point I want to emphasize, and that is this : Formerly 67 per cent, of the recruits who presented themselves for the army were accepted. In Manchester last year, of 12,500 who offered themselves only 1,000, or 8 per cent., were accepted. That is to say, that in three generations of factory-life, instead of 67 per cent, of recruits being accepted, Manchester was only able to pass 8 per cent. That shows what factory-labour does for the people. 1279. You mean that factory-work tends to degeneration ?—That is so.
411
A.—4
Alexandee Dewab examined. (No. 157.) 1280. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ? —A mining engineer, and in my early life I was a builder and cabinetmaker. I have been thirty years, in New Zealand. 1281. Have you lived in Australia at all?— Yes; I spent twenty-four years there, and was intimately associated with the early progress of Victoria, New South Wales, and Queensland. 1282. Have you read the Commonwealth Bill?— Yes. 1283. Are you in favour of New Zealand federating with Australia or not? —I am in favour of it. I arrived in Melbourne forty-eight years ago, resided in the Australian Colonies twenty-four years, visiting nearly all the colonies, and am intimately acquainted with the capabilities of each State. I have resided twenty-four years in New Zealand, ten years following my profession and ten years merchant and shipowner. I have visited every town of importance in New Zealand, and am intimately acquainted with its capabilities. From an industrial and commercial point of view, I unhesitatingly recommend federation with Australia on the following grounds : New Zealand produces, on an average, nearly three times as much per acre as Australia ; hence if we had an open door we would have a large increase in our export of grain. When the abundant rains and regularity of the seasons become known, capital would flow in, and every acre of suitable land would be purchased and put into cultivation. The Geelong Woollen-mill was opened in 1864 and the Ballarat in 1871. These prospered and paid dividends till the New Zealand mills commenced and sent their products to Victoria and New South Wales. They could not compete with New Zealand. The two Victorian mills were stopped, and had to get 30 to 35 per cent, duty put on to enable them to continue. This stopped the export of our goods to Victoria. New South Wales closed their mill, and now our woollen manufactures are known all over that colony. The partially opened doors into New South Wales enabled us to export to them £1,118,699 in 1899. This includes £92,145 for coal, which New Zealand could produce if our mines were well designed and effectively managed. While our export to Victoria was £412,822 only, owing to excessive duties—oats, 3s. per 1001b., or about Is. 2Jd. per bushel; cheese, 3d. to 4d. per pound; butter, 2d. to 3d.—if federation were to take place and an open door existed to the five colonies the trade would be immense. New South Wales' success is owing to their sending their experts all over the world to acquire the best means of tanning leather and machines to make boots. They now tan all their own skins, and import from Victoria, Queensland, and New Zealand. The manager of one of their factories informed me that a man and boy can machine 200 pairs of boots in a day. They defy the world. New Zealand exported last year hides to the value of £41,036, and 5,017,265 skins. If these were tanned in the colony, and the enhanced cost and duty saved, we could compete with New South Wales. With improved machinery and our choicest timber we could manufacture and export furniture with profit. Last year we exported 50,425,741 ft. of timber, and only received 7s. 7fd. per 100 ft. for it. If manufactured into furniture we would get a return of over £2 per 100 ft. There is no timber in either Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, or Western Australia suitable for cabinet-manufacture. With an open door we could more than compete with Australia notwithstanding Chinese labour. During 1899 11,116 tons of kauri-gum were exported, realising £607,919. If this were manufactured into varnish it would realise £6,000,000, and provide labour for many men and boys. An open door into Australia would give an immediate consumption of 300,000 gallons, with a rapidly increasing quantity. There is no water-power available in New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, or the southern part of West Australia. The water-power in New Zealand exceeds that at Niagara, is better distributed, and is ample for all agricultural and manufacturing purposes, which will materially reduce the cost of manufactures and agricultural products. With these natural advantages Australia cannot compete with New Zealand in any product. It has been stated to you that no New-Zealander would be likely to gain the honour of being Premier to the Commonwealth, but this is not borne out in the case of Prince Edward's Island, which is separated from Canadian mainland, and whose President has already held a high position in the Canadian Cabinet, and three of its native-born have been Governors of two of the States. I hand in a table of the export of New Zealand oats, &c, to Australia: — Oats— 1898. Bushels. Victoria... ... ... ... ... ... ... 100,350 New South Wales ... ... ... ... ... 439,250 Cheese— £ Victoria... ... ... ... ... ... ... 3,984 New South Wales ... ... ... ... • ... 43,832 Australia ... ... ... ... ... ... 57,984 ButterVictoria... ... ... ... ... ... ... 11,907 New South Wales ... ... ... ... ... 29,651 Australia ... ... ... ... ... ... 57,003 1899. Bushels. Wheat, average yield per acre in New Zealand ... ... ... 32-76 Oats, „ ... 39-56 Barley, „ ... ... ... 36-73 Maize, „ ... ... ... 43-95 1284. You stated that the exports to Victoria had practically ceased on account of excessive duty ?—Yes. 1285. Is it not a fact that Victoria produces agricultural produce very largely and exports it ? —They produce about one-third per acre of what we do. 1286. But have not they more than sufficient to supply their own wants ?—Some years they have.
A.—4
412
1287. If that is so, whatever the duty may be, it would not affect the produce going from this country ? —lt would affect it in this way—because they cannot compete with us; and if we had an open door, and it became a question of what part of the Commonwealth could produce articles cheaper than other parts, then where the cheapest article could be produced would be the place where the product would be derived from. 1288. You mean that if we produced cheaper than they did our products would find a sale in Victoria and theirs would not? —Yes. As one man in New Zealand could produce as much as three in Australia, they would use their land for other purposes. 1289. You have told us that, in your opinion, our manufacturing industries could compete with the Australian successfully ?—I am sure we would, and that in time we would occupy the foremost rank. 1290. You are not the first gentleman who has told us that, but I have been struck with this fact: that it has been principally those who are not engaged in trade or manufacture who told us that, and that those who are personally engaged in trade and manufacture, or the majority of them, have told us the contrary?— Yes. 1291. Well, are we to take it that they do not know what is to their own interest?—l think, when you have a person who was never out of New Zealand giving you an opinion on these matters, he cannot be a judge of the capabilities of Australia. 1292. If it be true that the New Zealand manufacturers could successfully compete with those in the Commonwealth, might not we reasonably expect to find all the manufacturers anxious for federation ?—There is a large number of our manufacturers in New Zealand who only study their own surroundings, and they have not taken the wide view I have taken of the colonies. They have not travelled and studied how they could compete, and consequently their ideas are dwarfed. It would be well if some of them were sent abroad to examine what is done in other places, and when they came home they would hold different views on these matters. 1293. Mr. Leys.] Do I understand you to say that the competition of our woollen-mills had shut up the woollen-mills in New South Wales ?—Yes. 1294. Are you under the impression that a large quantity of our woollens are now sold in New South Wales ?—I am sure of it, from personal observation. 1295. Would you be surprised to learn that the total amount of our exported woollen goods to New South Wales in 1899 was only £5,427? —I do not know" what that export has been, but I know it is four years since I was there, but that then I was informed by storekeepers that they imported our blankets and tweeds as cheaply as they imported them from England, and were in high favour. 1296. Do you think that that amount represents anything like the imports of New South Wales from England in respect to woollens ?—What was the import the year before ? 1297. In 1897 the woollen piece-goods exported to Australia from New Zealand was £7,606 ; in 1898, £6,859 ; in 1899, £6,981: what do you say to that ?—That shows that, as far as Victoria is concerned, our woollen export has been closed up completely. 1298. No. In Victoria in 1899 there were piece-goods to the value of £1,265 and about sixtytwo pounds' worth of blankets imported from New Zealand ; and we have the evidence of the Kaiapoi Woollen Company that their idea of starting a branch in New South Wales was carried out, but that they closed it up because they did not receive sufficient encouragement in the shape of a market. In view of these figures, do you still think it reasonable to say thac the export of our woollen goods has shut up the woollen-mills of New South Wales?—l say that at the time that they shut up it was owing to the fact of New South Wales having taken off the duty on most articles of English manufacture, and very likely those importations have pushed out ours to some extent; yet the Kaiapoi people have a large warehouse in Sydney stocked with these woollen goods. 1299. Can you mention any other item of manufactured goods that goes into New South Wales from here, although there is free-trade there ?—I do not think there is any other that can be put in. We have sent furniture in; a firm in Auckland furnished a house in Sydney with kauri furniture quite recently. 1300. Would you be surprised to learn that, notwithstanding our heavy protective duty on furniture, considerable quantities of furniture are coming into this colony from Sydney ? —I am quite prepared to believe that. 1301. In that case, how do you suppose we can send furniture to Australia?— There is no question that if we stay out of the Federation the factories in Australia will take the lead, and will leave us in the background; but if we federate we have the raw material already in the colony, and capital would come here and establish large factories such as they have in America, which will supersede the factories we have here, and by reason of the large output and cheaper cost of production which would then be the case we should be enabled to export largely. 1302. You have been very closely connected with mining : what effect do you think federation would have on that ? Would it affect it beneficially or otherwise ?—I do not think it would affect it. 1303. Mr. Beauchamp.] You think that federation would mean an increased demand for land in New Zealand : why ?—Because our land produces three times as much as the Australian land, and any person who is able to produce from his land three times as much as any one else is more than likely to purchase land so as to command the market. 1304. But is it not a fact that the demand for land at the present time in New Zealand exceeds the supply ? —I do not think so. It may exceed what is offered to the public, but it does not exceed the demand, because we have got millions of acres in the north which would be available if we had a railway through it, and there are millions also in the south of the Auckland Province that are not yet under cultivation. 1305. Is it not a fact that land in Australia is very much cheaper than it is here, and that the cost of cultivation and harvesting is very much lower than it is in New Zealand ?—I do not see
A.—4,
413
that that should be a feature at all—what a man pays for his land —because the land in Australia might be put up to a fictitious price. You must look at what a man's labour can produce; and if New Zealand can produce three times as much to the acre as Australia—and in some cases it is five and six times as much—will not that country dominate the other? 1306. Would you consider that South Australia, producing only 7 or 8 bushels to the acre, can compete satisfactorily against New Zealand in the London market ?—We do not send much into the London market now. South Australia may send its wheat there, because it cannot get a higher price nearer home. South Australia with its level lands can cultivate at a smaller cost than we can, but, as to sending it abroad, I do not know that they have any advantage over us. 1307. Well, if we can produce three times the quantity of wheat, why do we not ship wheat to the London market ? —lf you look at the production of wheat in the colony you will find that some years ago we produced something like an average of 8,000,000 bushels per annum, while in 1898-99 we produced about 13,000,000 bushels. For 1899-1900 we produced 8,581,000 bushels. The production of wheat is about one-half what it was, and the reason why it fell off is because wheat fell in the London market from £2 18s. to £1 Bs., and our farmers could not produce it at that price and make it pay, so they had to increase their frozen-meat export instead. 1309. Does not that look as though the farmers had been able to turn their attention to something which has paid them very much better than the growing of wheat?— Yes, they had to with wheat at £1 Bs. per quarter. 1310. Would you recommend the New Zealand farmers to give up the production of meat, for which they find a profitable market in London, and turn their attention to wheat, out of which they can make nothing ?—I do not recommend that; but I believe the increased area of land which would come under cultivation through federation would provide us with sheep for freezing, and also with wheat, and it would not detract one particle from the production of wheat in New Zealand if we put more cattle on our lands, because the increased population which New Zealand would then carry would take all the agricultural produce that we could grow, and leave sufficient to profitably export. 1311. As regards kauri timber, is there not a very profitable market for that timber in Australia at the present time?— There i 3 a fair market if we choose to export balk at ss. 6d. per 100 ft. 1312. Must not they have it ?—Not exactly. They will have it if you choose to sell it to them at 7s. or ss. 6d. per 100 ft., as you did last year. Then no doubt they would have it; but I think we are sacrificing the natural products of New Zealand by selling our timber at that price without gaining any equivalent. 1313. You would recommend us to keep our timber here instead of shipping it to Australia?— If federation is assured I would recommend that our timber be conserved and made up here, and if any man had the matter in his own hands he would certainly keep the timber here instead of selling it at 7s. 7-|d. in Australia. 1314. If it is a fact that Chinese labour is very largely used in making up furniture in Australia, how could our people compete with them when we only employ white labour here ? —lf we had the machinery we could manufacture furniture at such a rate that no Chinese labour could compete with us. 1315. Therefore you do not fear the competition from black labour if given up-to-date machinery ?—Certainly not. 1316. Has not furniture been already made in this colony from kauri timber ? —Yes. 1317. Is any furniture made from that timber exported ?—I think so. 1318. You expressed an opinion that kauri-gum made into varnish should bring something like £6,000,000 into the colony?— Yes. 1319. Where do you think we should obtain a market for that varnish ? —ln Australia, where we have the prospect of a market forty times larger than we have here. 1320. How is it that the export trade has not developed more rapidly in regard to the making of varnish ? —Because we have no proper manufactory here, and our manufacturers have to buy their articles at a high rate, and they have not the means to manufacture anything like the quantity they would if they had an export market for it. They must have appliances, and there must be capital, and a connection, before they can make the manufacture profitable. If we federated there would be, I take it, a duty against outside importations, and that would assist our trade, because we have the natural product, and all we want is the capital and the market to develop it. 1321. But, in regard to that product, would you recommend us to depend simply upon our intercolonial trade ? —Certainly not; but I would recommend that our internal trade should be cultivated and developed the same as it is in the United States, where each State is allowed to send to one another free of duty any article that can be produced cheaper in one State than another —that is to say, any natural product that can be developed in any particular State is allowed to be sent all over the other States free. 1322. Mr. Millar.] You have stated that, in your opinion, under federation our industries would increase?— Undoubtedly. 1323. Assuming we had free-trade with all the colonies, how comes it that, while we have free-trade with New South Wales now, and have had it for some years, we have not been able to develop an export trade in our manufactures with that colony?— Our exports to New South Wales have been £1,118,000, while under federation that would be very largely increased; and we know that in the case of Victoria, where we had a very large market before they put on their tariff, it has fallen off, and practically ceased, since that tariff was put on. 1324. What falling-off has there been in our exports to Victoria during the past ten years?—l do not know, and I cannot speak of what is being done, now, but I can, from personal experience,
A.—4
414
of twenty years ago, because I was in business there then, and I know that our exports before the tariff was put on were very considerable. 1325. Have you any idea of the value of New-Zealand-manufactured articles to-day ?—No; statistics show that. 1326. The total value of the export trade to Australia is about a million and a quarter, excluding gold, and the value of our manufactures is thirteen millions : that being the case, and the bulk of those manufactures is to be injured by federation, would you still advocate it?—■ Certainly. I say if we had the open door to the whole of Australia we would do an immense trade. 1327. Seeing that Victoria and New South Wales are gradually increasing their productions, do you still insist that there is going to be a good market for us there ?—ln certain products our trade might be diverted, but, on the whole, I say that the open market will be an immense advantage to us. 1328. If you can produce at one-third the cost that Australia can, how comes it that oats in New Zealand stand at Is. 7-J-d. the bushel and in Victoria at from Is. sd. to Is. 7d. ? —Victoria has got a duty of Is. 2Jd. a bushel. 1329. Does that alter the selling-price ? —Their oats are about 2s. 6d. 1330. No ; Is. sd. to Is. is the market quotation to-day ?—Perhaps that is inland. 1331. No; the price in Melbourne ?—lf your statement is correct, then our oats, if shipped there, would only realise to the New Zealand shipper 2^-d. 1332. Would that pay any man to ship oats there?—l admit that they have done a great injustice to our farmers in imposing this duty of Is. 2-J-d., and the price they are paying for oats ought to convince us and them of the necessity of federation. 1333. Supposing that duty were taken off, how many of our farmers could take advantage of that market at Is. sfd. to Is. 7d. ?—Their oats are not as good as ours, and it takes about 20 bushels more to make a ton of oatmeal than it does of ours. They have to import our oats to make oatmeal in bond and send it to the other colonie9 duty-free. 1334. And they can get New Zealand oats in free now for milling purposes, can they not?— Yes, for manufacture under bond. The profit to the legitimate exporter to Victoria of oats is the difference between the duty of Is. 2Jd. and the price you say oats are in Melbourne, Is. sJd.—3d. — a good argument for federation. 1335. Supposing it were free ?—I know a great many millers over there who say they cannot make oatmeal without our oats. 1336. They do not pay any duty on meal manufactured in bond ?—No, that is so. 1337. They get their oats in without any payment at all in duty?— They get their oats into bond, and they import and take them into the country as well, because it pays them better to have our oats. 1338. Do you consider yourself a better authority on what would suit the Victorian farmers than their leading country newspaper?--Certainly not. 1339. Will you be surprised when I tell you that the Argus says you can put on any duty you like, and New Zealand cannot compete with the Victorian farmers? —That is nonsense. The Argus must qualify that by something else. 1340. Coming to cabinetmaking, you said that you believed that with improved and up-to-date machinery we could compete with Chinese labour?— Yes. 1341. Have you seen a cabinetmaking-factory in the colony?— Yes. 1342. Working with machinery ?—Yes. 1343. Which one?— The Tonson Garlick Company, and one in Wanganui. I brought furniture over to New Zealand from Melbourne. 1344. lam talking about the trade in New Zealand: do you know of any establishment in New Zealand where cabinetmaking work is done by machinery ? —There is a certain amount of machinery used. The present mode of working does not satisfy me, because it does not give the result it should. 1345. Have they not acquired in Dunedin the latest plant that is available ?—No. I cannot say what is in Dunedin. But if you can tell me what machinery they use I will give you an opinion. For instance, what planer do they use ? 1346. I cannot say ? —Then, I cannot give an opinion. . 1347. You are aware that the Chinese cabinetmakers have pretty well wiped the European cabinetmakers out in New South Wales and Victoria?—l do not. I know that in New South Wales the English manufacturers are working side by side with the Chinese. 1348. Do you think you could establish a factory here to-day which could compete with the other side ?—I think I could design a factory that no Chinese labour could compete with. 1349. Do you not think you could get sufficient money if it is profitable ?—I have to leave it now to those who have got more youth and energy to do it. I have retired from that work now. 1350. Briefly summed up, you favour federation no matter what its cost to this colony is ?— No; I never made any assertion of that kind. 1351. Under what conditions do you approve of federation : is it to be the greatest good to the greatest number ?—Yes. 1352. Under these conditions you favour federation ? —Yes. There may be some little difficulty for a time; but I believe our natural products would overcome every difficulty in the way, and bring us out at the top of the tree. I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that. 1353. Hon. the Chairman.'] You said that you have lived in Queensland? —Yes. 1353 a. Can you tell us anything about the black labour ? Do you think it is possible that the sugar industry can be carried on successfully by white labour? —I think it can, and I think it will be. I lived there about four years ago, and I was through a sugar-growing district, and was the
415
A.—4
guest of the manager. The view of the manager there was that they would|do away with black labour as soon as possible, because it was the dearest labour. White labour will do more work and give better returns than black labour. 1354. Within what period did he expect they would be able to do away with black labour ? — He said, as soon as they would get sufficient white population to warrant the work being carried on. 1355. Do you think, from your knowledge of the country, that successive generations could live there ? —I think they could ; but, of course, they would have to be young men who went into the country and got acclimatised. 1356. You know that in India young people are sent home if their parents can afford it ? — Yes. 1357. Do you think that children could live in Northern Queensland, and thrive ? —Yes. I have seen as healthy and sprightly children in Queensland as anywhere, even in the far north of it. John Chambees examined. (No. 158.) 1358. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ? —lmporter, more particularly of machinery and goods connected with mining. 1359. You have lived a considerable time in New Zealand ?—Thirty-six years. 1360. Are you acquainted with Australia at all ?—Yes. 1361. Have you lived there ?—No ; I have visited there at different times. 1362. Will you give us your opinion as to whether New Zealand should federate with Australia or not ?—I find that a most difficult question to answer. There are so many good reasons on both sides, but I have come to the conclusion that the balance is in favour of our not federating. 1363. Perhaps you will give us the reasons on both sides if you could ?—I do not think, considering the distance we are from Australia, and Australia's preponderating part in the partnership, that it would be to our advantage to federate. We are too far off to take up our proper position. If we had federated with Fiji and the whole of the islands it would have been better. Still, I cannot see, as a New-Zealander, that it is to our advantage to join with Australia. 1364. Do you mean it would be to the advantage of New Zealand to join a federation consisting of Australia, New Zealand, and Fiji ?—No; it would, be more reasonable to federate with the islands. 1365. You say that distance is one disadvantage : what other disadvantage would there be ?— Ido not think we need fear labour coming here from Australia; I think that New-Zealanders are quite able to hold their own. New-Zealanders say they would rather work for less money in New Zealand than in Australia, and I have heard it said that they would rather be here ; but men we have trained ourselves, and who have gone away, have done very well in Australia, and I find there is a demand for New-Zealanders in Australia. 1366. The question would be the rate of wages ruling in the two countries ?—I do not think there is much difference. Take engineers: they are paid just as high in Sydney as in Auckland. The company I am connected with pay higher wages than we do here. 1367. What is your opinion as to New Zealand manufacturers competing with the manufacturers of Australia under federation ?—I think we have as large an amount of natural products in the shape of coal, iron, and lime as they have. I think we could manufacture iron as cheaply here as anywhere. 1368. You have had considerable personal experience in reference to the iron-deposits at Parapara ? —Yes. 1369. They are very rich iron-deposits?— One of the finest in the world. 1370. Will you explain how it is that these deposits are not worked ?—There is not sufficient demand for iron in New Zealand to warrant the establishment of a factory, which would mean an outlay of at least £100,000. 1371. Is it not a fact that a company from Australia had a lease of that property before you were interested in it ?—There was a company interested in it, but I do not know where they came from. 1372. They did not work it ?—No. . 1373. And, as a matter of fact, no one has worked it systematically ?—No; there was not sufficient demand in this colony to warrant the outlay of capital. 1374. That deposit is well-known in Australia?—l expect it is ; it has been advertised a good deal. 1375. Can you account for its not being worked by a company from Australia ? —They have plenty of iron-ore in Australia, about a hundred miles from Sydney. 1376. Is it want of capital or the price of labour here, or that the raw material can be imported from Europe more cheaply ?—No, Ido not think it is from any of those reasons. I think it is merely that there is not sufficient market for it. As much could be made here in a couple of months as would supply New Zealand for a couple of years. 1377. Then, it is worthless?—No; it will come in yet. There is coal within four miles, and lime right alongside. 1378. All the elements required for the manufacture ? —I firmly believe that that will be worked before long. Parapara iron rolled into sheets would make first-class sheet-iron. I believe pig-iron could be made there as cheap as anywhere ; but what will stop development there is the enormous expansion of works in America. 1379. Have you considered the financial aspect of the question ?—Yes. I do not like it. 1380. By reason of the extra taxation that will be necessary ?—Yes. 1381. Can you tell us any advantages that will accrue to New Zealand through federation?— Yes.
A.—4
416
1382. What are they ? —I will give two instances, boch for and against. When in Queensland I was offered the agency for Queensland beef, and I said, " You cannot compete with New Zealand." At the time there was a mob of cattle coming along, which would be worth £5 or £6 a head here, and the manager said they had been bought for £1 ss. a piece. Then, at another time, when there was a drought in New South Wales and Victoria, and wheat and fish were going over from New Zealand, Victoria put on a duty of 3d. per lb. 1383. Do I understand you to say that Queensland beef can be landed here at a cheap rate ?—I think that is very much against federation. 1384. Cheap food would benefit the people ?—No ; we would lose by it. 1385. Are there any other reasons you can give us for or against federation that have occurred to you ? —Well, in favour of federation, I think we could hold our own in manufactures. Our minerals are as good, and we can do as much—-in fact, more than they can in Australia, and the prices are as low in New Zealand as they are in Melbourne and Sydney. I have gone through the latest Australian iron-trade catalogue, and it shows the prices to be lower in New Zealand than in Australia. Pig-iron is just about the same, and the freights from England to New Zealand are a little lower than to Melbourne and Sydney. That has been contradicted, I know ; but here are the figures for it—lst February of this year. Here are the shipping notices of the Tyser line, New Zealand Shipping Company, and the Shaw-Savill Company respectively, and all show the same : Pig-iron, bar-iron, bars, and rods, 18s. 9d. freight to New Zealand ports ; £1 and £1 2s. to Melbourne and Sydney. So that it is slightly in favour of New Zealand. 1386. Do I understand that you are against federation ?—Yes. 1387. Mr. Roberts.] We had one of your ironfounders here who said that the freights to the other side were very much less than they were to New Zealand, and that pig-iron could not be bought here anything like so cheaply as in Australia ?—That is the reason why I brought these lists. I think there are as good ironfounders and moulders here as you will find anywhere. They are making castings now at as low a price as we can import them at. There is a duty of 20 per cent, on most of the goods that are imported. 1388. Mr. Millar.] Do you think that by federation we would get a much larger market for our agricultural products than at the present time ? —I think that some people would gain a good deal by federation, and some would lose; but the balance would be against us. 1389. Mr. Beauchanvp.] At the prese*nt time I think the bala"nce of trade as shown by the last returns is slightly in favour of Australia: assuming that to be the case, do you think it is likely, in the event of our not federating, that the Commonwealth will put a heavy tariff on products exported from this colony ? —I do not expect they would. I think the better course for us would be to try and arrange a treaty with the federated States. Federation is too close a partnership altogether. 1390. Are you of opinion that the value of the commodities passing between the two countries would warrant the two countries entering into a treaty ?—Yes. 1391. In respect to the various iron-foundries, how do those in New Zealand compare in size with those of Australia ? —Those of Australia are larger. 1392. Mr. Luke.] You were saying that coal was as cheap and as good here as in Australia ?— I was referring to the coal at Parapara. 1393. Have you not had direct experience in trying to deal with these deposits at Parapara?— Yes. 1394. Why could you not make it a success ?—lt did not pay. After I gave it up a company attempted to do things that were impossible. You cannot make pig - iron except in large quantities. 1395. Was not the number of hours a factor in your failure to produce ? —No. 1396. Would not federation rather help an industry like that by giving you a larger market ? —Yes; that is one of the things in favour of federation. A joint demand from Australia and New Zealand might warrant large works being put up there. 1397. And some time in the immediate future these deposits will be worked ?—I do not think it will be very long before they are. 1398. You raised the question of freights, Mr. Chambers : is it not a fact that up to the last year or two pigs, bars, and plates could be purchased very much cheaper in Australia than they could be brought out for from Home to New Zealand?—Up to a year or two ago. 1399. The difference has since taken place because of the unsettled state of the markets at Home ? —No ; I think it is more due to the freights. 1400. Do you think we can attach much importance to these published lists of freights ?— We pay hundreds of pounds every month according to the lists for freight. 1401. Is it not a fact that pigs, bars, and plates often come out to big ports at a nominal rate of freight ?—That happens all over the world at times. 1402. But does it not often happen that pig-iron is brought out for stiffening ?—Not so much now as before. Ships have water-ballast now. 1403. Up to the last year or two, and within the last year, there were cases, do you not think, where pig-iron was brought out at a nominal freight ?—I do not think there is very much in that. 1404. You have no knowledge as recent as last year whether pigs and bars were brought out as ballast ?—I have no knowledge of it. 1405. You were saying that the manufactures of New Zealand were quite as good as those of Australia ?—Yes. 1406. That is, in the matter of workmanship ? —Yes. 1407. But there is generally a prejudice against the locally manufactured article?—l have suffered from it myself. 1408. That comes more from ignorance than from anything else ?—lgnorance and prejudice.
417
A.—4
1409. The manufacturers of New Zealand, whether we federated or not, would hold their own against those of Australia?— Yes. 1410. Mr. Leys.] Do you not attach any importance to the larger output cheapening an article ?—Not much. I was in a large factory in the United States, and a man there will turn out three times what a man will here or in Australia. They work longer hours and much harder. 1411. Is it a fact that the Americans can sell their surplus much cheaper in the colonies than they can in the home market ?—Certainly. If you go to places in America and ask the price of tubes for New Zealand they will knock off 20 per cent. 1412. Do you not think that those big factories in Australia would apply that very principle to us under federation, and ship their surplus to New Zealand?—l think it wants a bigger trade than that. 1413. I am not referring to the iron industry, but to bootmaking and similar industries ?—We have hedged our industries round with tariffs and Acts of Parliament, and so on, and are in rather a false position. 1414. Of course, you look at this very much from the standpoint of a Free-trader?—l do. 1415. Is there any duty on iron in Australia?— No. 1416. If there is no duty federation will not help such places as Parapara in any way ?—No ; the market is open to us now. 1417. I understand your objection to federation generally is that you object to handing over the control of affairs to a distant Parliament ? —That is so, generally. Of course, there are a great many other questions raised too. We are dependent upon Great Britain now, and if anything happened to that country now we would suffer more than Australia, because they take such a large percentage of butter, and so on. We have got all our eggs in one basket. 14] 8. You think an effort should be made to open up other markets ?—Yes. Jesse Kino examined. (No. 159.) 1419. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?— Commercial agent and accountant, residing in Auckland. I am a Londoner, and have been here twenty years, and was for thirty years in Australia and Tasmania. 1420. Have you studied the Commonwealth Bill and the question of federation?—l have. 1421. Will you give the Commission the conclusions at which you have arrived in the matter ? —I think my ideas on this subject may be best communicated to this Commission by reciting extracts from an address given by me to the members of the New Zealand Natives' Association on federation on the 30th August, 1899, when this colony had an opportunity of joining the Union as an original State, adding events that have since arisen. The indolence of the Government in keeping the people of this colony in ignorance of possibly the greatest political movement in British history outside Great Britain itself, and one that may throughout the century now entered upon find no parallel in magnitude in the world—this irreparable blunder of the Government will doubtless later bring that odium on the actors they deserve, that will be historical, and blight records that might otherwise have been good. I desire first to point out the commercial advantages of union. An unsuccessful federation does not exist. On the other hand, boundless advantages have resulted to all; even to one, where bloody compulsion had to be resorted to. I would indicate the Motherland as a parent of wealth and strength, and these colonies as her offspring of seven, already with a goodly heritage, inspired by the motto " Unity is strength," resolve for profit, protection, and economy to band together. This, then, is exactly the case of federation. To grasp the idea of unity, I would have you note what advantages would accrue to the proprietors of, say, our banking institutions were they to amalgamate, in which case the expenses would decrease enormously, the business would be more profitable in consequence, and better control and efficiency would be assured. In the same way unity of provinces would result in emerging from the narrow limits of provincialism into the wide domain of national life, and in this case with vast possibilities. Our united population over our vast area is but four millions, or one-tenth of that of Japan, whose possessions are no larger than New Zealand. If, then, Japan can sustain forty million people, what is the sustaining-power of this vast Commonwealth ? A mere handful in the world's millions now, with a boundless catalogue of productions from these the richest areas of God's earth, yielding a million sterling of gold every four weeks, and imports and exports equal to that great nation Eussia, with its hundred and twenty million souls. Permit me to read from a cable-' gram dated Sydney, 2nd March, 1901 : "The returns from the various States show that the trade of the Commonwealth last year aggregated £141,137,000, being an increase of £690,000 over the previous year." I would ask you to add our figures, then we realise what New Zealand would be part and parcel of, and, isolated, again look on our figures. That eminent man, Cardinal Moran, has put it in a nutshell that the struggle is " Patriotism versus Interest." Success of the former means unbounded advantage to the latter. No great political change can take place without a measure of suffering, and that is why interest is struggling against the movement in a small selfish way; and, whilst the greatest sympathy and consideration should be shown to any disarrangement of the fortunes of the few, later to be set right, they must fall out on the march meantime. It is only this insignificant section that can offer feeble resistance, and were lin this set I might of necessity sink patriotism in self-interest; but against the unit there is a hundred, and patriotism succeeds, as it did in West Australia, against political obstruction. Before this Commission will come the anxious manufacturer of the set I name, fearing that " whilst the grass is growing the horse is starving." Natural industries must have a bold future ; the day for bolstered industries has passed. We boast of our splendid country and its resources ; we are vain of our manhood, with equal tools and such splendid opportunities : all this is vain boasting if we succeed not. Let me effectively answer Sir John Hall's twelve hundred reasons why we should not federate— viz., the mileage to Australia—by the words of that greater man, Sir Lyon Playfair, who says, " Dis53—A. 4.
A.—4
418
tance is now annihilated by the cable, fast steamers, and the canal. There is but one market — the world. We can cable transactions with the Antipodes in a few hours." Which statement is most worthy of acceptance ? Do we not each morning read the events that have happened the day before at the other extremity of the world at our breakfast-table? Have we not had it demonstrated that Sydney is but three days three hours distant, and is therefore nearer Auckland than the southern part of New Zealand ? Within the Commonwealth itself, is there not four times the distance from Westralia to be covered to reach Sydney? Why, then, do the opponents of this great movement cling to this absurdity? I say it is because their cause is so hopeless, an utterly selfish one. I would point out that producers, both in New Zealand and Tasmania, being insular, have undoubted advantages over the Australian farmer, who is inland so far that the average distance from the great centres cannot be less than two hundred miles. The farmer cannot compete on even terms with a two-hundred-mile railage-freight against a twelve-hundred-mile watercarriage ; thus the farmer, say, in New South Wales is at a positive disadvantage in his own and all other markets against New Zealand. These two colonies can therefore beat him not only in his own market, but in all the other four markets at their command, for the freight from port to port must be paid, in addition to carrying the produce from long distances inland to port of shipment. The island farmer must beat the continental. It must result that the gains, apart from greater fertility and greater yields, to New Zealand will be much larger for New Zealand produce with six open ports than with one —but, unless we join soon, with none. If free-trade Sydney is compared with protectionist Melbourne in farm-produce imports from New Zealand, it will be found how valuable to our farmers the trade would be even now, and ever increasing with the enormous expansion in the future, with the latter and other closed ports open to us. Opponents will tell you that New South Wales and the other States now export largely. This is correct. The wheat yield is greater in Victoria alone than that of New Zealand, but certain of our produce finds a market, as our exports disclose, notwithstanding. I regret this is a blind so often used, yet the fact remains. We have to face this question : Are we to lose our second-best customer by standing out of federation, which even now, per capita, is more to us than that of London, and which market has enormous possibilities? Are we to be like an equal competitor, California, to knock at the door for orders ? When the Australian finds it more profitable to grow the potato he will discard the merino. Like in England the various localities, such as Sheffield and Manchester, find their natural seat of respective trades, so will trie same be repeated here. We can house, clothe, and feed the Commonwealth unobstructed. Our forests contain building-timber, and timber for furniture of most beautiful grain, an industry yet to be expanded. Our wool— unlike the merino—is of a kind that gives New Zealand a market in Australia over local productions ; and to what proportions must this trade grow, properly handled, with a large united population ? What value is a manufacture to a country that has to be bolstered to the loss qf every customer ? What hope is there for such even against any barrier in the future, federation or no federation? How can the weak here stand against the great houses, ever expanding in magnitude like America, at the very door of New Zealand ? Opponents say, Will you depopulate New Zealand by extinguishing these unprofitable undertakings ? The answer is that, admitting the boast that New Zealand has such natural advantages, and that the growth of the Commonwealth will be great—which means prosperity —the population, increasing by leaps and bounds, will require to be catered for in many new ways. Let us consider our local chances. Go into an ironmonger's shop, and you may count on your fingers the number of articles made in the colony. Under federation, with population, we can make all the rest with coal and iron. How impossible without. Mr. Chambers confessed to our rich iron-deposits being unpayable because of the want of population. Go into every store-house in every department of trade, and you will see the future openings for enterprise. Will not the trade-marks " Onehunga," " Mosgiel," " Kaiapoi " stand against shoddy in our woollen manufactures ? And if we push the trade doubtless we will create a Manchester, and of the varied stocks now imported by the draper many will doubtless be made within the Commonwealth when population makes such establishments profitable. The opportunity is given for New Zealand to embrace this trade, seeing that over the barriers of protection New Zealand woollen goods find their way into Victoria, notwithstanding that woollen-mills are established there. Depopulation is more likely to take place by New Zealand standing out of federation. The full roll of the Commonwealth is only that of America a hundred and ten years ago, and an exodus will most likely take place from New Zealand unless she can take a hand in setting this vast machinery in motion. Need we fear with coal, iron, wool, farm produce, and power ? If America can increase twenty-fold in a century, what is likely to be the increase in Australasia? With the rapid progress of the world in our time, and the means of travel, what took America so long to make its numbers up should take these colonies but a few decades. The greatest bogey opponents have set up has been a few Chinese furniture-makers. The makers of furniture for four millions of people fear this handful of men, whose number cannot increase, but with growing population will soon be quite out of sight. The strong determination to guard these fair lands from the " yellow agony " and " Mongolian horror " is evident, so that anxiety on this score is at rest, for we all have before us the black blot of America, and Australasia will not have it. I can conceive of no man who should be happier than the worker under the changing condition of affairs, whose position is absolutely secure, even more so than in the- safe custody of our grandmotherly Government —assured, all along the line, of future prosperity by natural laws of supply and demand, insuring good-will between capital and labour; federation at once serves him the best, and, unlike the farmer— a fixture—he can take up his kit, and be off to the best market for his labour. A reliable witness, Mr. Chambers, has stated that men in the iron trade are even better paid in Australia than here, although workers get here as high as 15s. per day. Think, workers, of the services required in building up the Empire ! Think of the great activity in shipping and in all ramifications of trades ! Any one who followed the struggle of the last campaign in Sydney should have a full grasp of this
419
A.—4
matter. The question of cost was threshed out by a committee of three, Messrs. Bruce Smith, French, and McLaurin, acknowledged high financial authorities. Two of these gentlemen opposed federation—therefore are unlikely to underestimate —because of Sydney being rejected as the capital, and because of too great a surrender by New South Wales. But, as to cost, their report gives £260,000 as the new expenditure under federation, but they raised it to £300,000 a year. This latter sum was acknowledged by the last Convention, and the Chairman, Sir Richard Baker, of South Australia, in his final remarks, stated that his colony would have to face an expenditure of, say, £30,000 a year as its share, but on the other side the savings on loans would be £35,000 per annum, or a gain of £5,000 a year to South Australia. The statement of account would be thus :— Dr. Cr. New expenditure ... ... ... £30,000 | Savings ... ... ... ... £35,000 Gain ... ... ... 5,000 £35,000 £35,000 Against the research of these eminent men of figures, we have those of the chairman of our Chamber of Commerce, who stated to this Commission that the cost to New Zealand alone would be something like £600,000. This is the sort of nonsense opponents make public to the detriment of the cause. Now, which statement is to be accepted ? Note, new expenditure arises, if any, by a more important body administering, vice a number of smaller bodies surrendering, certain departments. The statement of an enormous expenditure in Australia in which New Zealand cannot benefit is one to be corrected. I would remind you that the great City of Melbourne is built on a square mile, and the freehold is exceedingly valuable, and the territory New South Wales has to provide, Crown lands free of cost, is an area of 100 square miles. Melbourne is a fair comparison to the future Federal city; and, that being so, it is clear that, with territory a hundred times that of Melbourne—all the property of the Commonwealth —the enormous value of this estate may be put at even greater than the continental railways, and New Zealand would have one-seventh interest in this. This possession alone will many times cover any new expenditure by the united States in this matter. The next great expenditure will be, say, on a trans-continental railway, and we New Zealand people desire to know our position. I regard New Zealand as the drawing-room of the Federal habitation, and that these long-distance railways will only be used by passengers of means. From top to toe of New Zealand, look where one will, one sees a thing of beauty, the loveliest under the canopy of heaven ; and, in keeping with this, a climate throughout all any one can desire. I count these railways, then, as the greatest feeders to our own, and that the New Zealand quota of cost is small compared to the advantages. Moreover, the Australian railways are admitted to be a splendid asset for the entire indebtedness of the colonies; and this is because, being continental, railways are a monopoly, and a tariff can always be made to keep them payable. Again, they go at a speed that enables them to move freight and passengers profitably at a price lower than any other artificial means on land. 1 think I have clearly shown that the bogey of cost is a myth. I have stated that federation will be the greatest gain to the worker. I now say that he will have the greatest voice in the Government, for he will have a vote for both Houses of Parliament, and with his numerical strength he should dominate. I may also remark that all the property taken over for the use of the Commonwealth will be paid for; therefore the States will have a substantial sum for this property parted with. It has been said tl»at New Zealand will lose its identity ; but how does it follow that we will ? In State affairs all States should be able as now to do as well, and should do better by giving more attention to internal requirements. In Federal matters—a higher department—the management and control should be better. Does Britain suffer by the expanse of its administration ? Have we any reason to distrust "that great Council? Will not, then, the Federal Parliament take second place in the grading ? I take it that the State Parliament will be the next in the scale, then the City Council, Borough Council, and Road Board in their order. Which of all these grades are most to be trusted? The highest, as a matter of course. Having a few to send to the Federal Parliament, is it not natural to select our most illustrious men ; and will not all the States do the same ? Is it to be doubted, then, that this community of best men will not aim at even a higher ideal in association? The tyranny of the majority does not apply in such a Council. We send a member to Parliament and he is but a unit in that Council. The position is identical, be it in New Zealand or in Australia. But in the higher Council the representative is more independent because of the wider extent of his constituency, and he is less likely to be influenced, or canvassed, as are our members of Parliament. Our characteristics are the same here as in Australia ; we are the same blood. We are not marked, as at Home, by dialects. New-Zealander, Australian, and Tasmanian all speak alike, and the only difference I can see is that we in New Zealand are more provincial, the Australian more cosmopolitan, and it is this narrow provincial spirit that is doing so much damage to the most glorious cause ever promoted in the Southern Hemisphere, or likely to be. In the best interests of New Zealand, I urge it by all means to enter the Commonwealth on any terms of admission that may be asked. 1422. I understand from what you have already said that you are in favour of federation?— Yes. 1423. And you give as a reason that we should be associated with a larger number of people— that is one reason ?—Yes. You also say that the manufacturers would be benefited, because they would have an increased number of customers ?—An increased market. 1425. I understood you to say you were an accountant ?—Yes. 1426. You have been present and have heard a lot of the evidence that has been given by the manufacturers here in Auckland ?—I have.
A.—4
420
1427. And there has been generally a consensus of opinion on their part that their manufactures would be injured by federation ?—Yes, that is so. 1428. To whom should we pay more attention —to men who are engaged in manufacture, or to a professional man who is not engaged in trade answer to that is that the persons who have come before your Commission are people who consider that they will suffer in their business, but I think that my travels through Australia enable me to see a great deal more ahead than some people. 1429. Whom do you think we should pay more attention to—those engaged in trade and manufacture, or the professional man who gives an opinion on trades and manufactures?—An onlooker at a game of cards knows how to play the game better than an individual player whose attention is concentrated on his own hand. In this sense the manufacturer thinks only of his own, and does not take the broader views. 1430. If the manufacturers are likely to benefit as much as you represent, how is it that they are not clamouring for federation ?—My own idea is that decentralisation works a good deal in the matter. We have four large towns in New Zealand—Dunedin, Christchurch, Wellington, and Auckland. Take, for instance, the boot trade, which is really a languishing trade : They—the boot-manufacturers—have a great many factories in New Zealand, and they multiply in a greater ratio than if the business was centred in a place, say, like Melbourne. 1431. Well, on that score, would not a business in Melbourne have an advantage over these decentralised businesses ?—Certainly. 1432. Well, how could the boot-manufacturers in New Zealand hope to compete against the larger concerns in Australia?— Unless they were assisted they could not compete, because on the principle of the greatest good to the greatest number the boot trade would have to go to, say, a place like Melbourne. 1433. Then, you admit that they would be prejudiced by federation?— Yes, but it is a languishing business. 1434. Do you feel competent to express an opinion on the woollen trade—as to how that would be affected ?—I think you will find that New Zealand woollens find their way over the barriers and do business in Victoria. 1435. With one exception, the woollen-manufacturers who have been before us tell us that they cannot compete successfully with the Commonwealth ?•—On even terms the woollen trade must succeed, in my opinion. 1436. Have you considered how the agriculturists will be affected?— Yes; Sydney, as a free-trade port, has taken our goods, and will continue to take our goods. I had a transaction with Sydney in maize some time ago. At that time Sydney wanted maize, and it came from California also at the same price that we could put it in for from here. This could not happen under federation ; New Zealand could supply the Commonwealth. 1437. What else could we supply them with? —Maize, potatoes, Nelson hops, &c. If we were within tjhe charmed circle, California would have to pay the duty. 1438. You think our agriculturists could compete with Australia?— Yes, certainly. 1439. Is it not within your knowledge that Victoria is a large producer and exporter of agricultural produce pretty much the same as we produce ?—Yes; she raises more wheat than we do. 1440. How about oats?—l do not know about oats. The Commonwealth is only in its infancy, and we have got all the growth of ages to consider. 1441. You think it is in the best interests of New Zealand to federate with Australia?— Yes, rather than get isolated. 1442. Do you believe in federation in preference to a reciprocal- treaty ?—I am a Free-trader, and, of course, welcome free-trade. Eeciprocity is known to be impossible. 1443. Mr. I think you said you believed in the greatest good to the greatest number? —I do. 1444. Do you think that the greatest good is going to accrue to the greatest number by federation ?—Certainly. 1445. What constitutes the greatest number in this colony?— The workers. 1446. Can you show me any benefit the workers can derive ?—Yes; they will have more work under federation—more opportunities for work of all descriptions. I think this Commission is wasting time. The time is past for getting in on even terms as an original State. It becomes a matter of business now since the Ist January, 1901. 1447. Could you come down to anything more definite, and state what particular class of workers of this colony you anticipate would receive a benefit from federation, putting aside all sentiment ? —On a hard commercial basis we admit that the New Zealand worker is as good as the Australian worker. There is equality there, and with a larger sphere the New-Zealander would succeed. 1448. You state that che boot trade would go to Victoria?—No; I only cited that as an instance of a languishing trade. 1449. You said that concentration over there always hampered our trade over here ?—Yes; better machinery and larger businesses. 1450. And bootmakers would have to go over there to get work ?—Yes. 1451. That would mean the depopulation of New Zealand?— Yes, to a certain extent. 1452. That industry employs 4,600 men in the colony now?— Yes, in an unsuccessful trade. 1453. Do you think that New Zealand could compete with the large factories on the other side in the clothing trade ? —As man for man ? 1454. No ; man for man, concentration, capital, machinery, and having a large population to work upon?—l regard the men as equal, and I regard the machinery and a large trade as giving advantages that cannot be obtained through a restricted output.
421
A.—4
1455. You admit that in large centres of population such as Melbourne and Sydney there is ability to concentrate?— Yes. 1456. Labour must follow where work is ?—Yes. 1457. That means the gradual drawing-away .of our population to Australia ?—lt does not matter whether you are in the Federation or not, that must arise. Workers will go to the best market for their labour. 1458. But have not we to battle against that outside competition at the present time to enable us to carry on industries successfully ? —I rather think it is the other way. Ido not know whether they are successful or not. 1459. There are fifty thousand hands employed in the factories now, showing a steady increase since 1884: how would they be affected under federation ?—Under federation we should increase the numbers, because we do not stand still under federation; we have a larger market. And we should not get any greater advantage by standing out of the Federation. 1460. These industries have a value which enables them to compete and employ those hands, and you yourself have admitted that by concentrating in the large centres on the other side these factories have an immediate advantage ; but directly the barrier is taken down which protects these people here, the people in Australia will get the advantage, and how can you say federation will be an advantage to New Zealand ?—Why should not some businesses come over here ? Take the iron industry here : There are valuable deposits here and in New South Wales. There the facilities for manufacturing and the magnitude of these deposits have drawn a large ironmaster, I understand, from England, and he will employ, it is said, four thousand hands; and why should not we get our iron trade developed in the same way ? I consider we should obtain an immense trade, and that therefore we have nothing to lose by federation. 1461. Is not what you state a still further proof that the tendency will be to concentrate all the large industries in those centres of population in Australia ?—Not exactly, because they would be started here, as our deposits are quite as valuable as theirs. 1462. Do you not think that the men would drift away to where the work is?— Not from here, if our resources were developed. 1463. You do not think for one moment that that ironmaster who is starting in New South Wales is going there from any question of sentiment ?—He is going to make a business. 1464. Is it not because he can manufacture cheaper there, and will have a larger market around his own doors ?—He establishes his industry where he thinks he can make the greater profit. New Zealand had not declared herself, therefore he could not domicile here. 1465. You believe that the drawing-away of our population to these centres would be beneficial to New Zealand?—l say I consider that had New Zealand gone into this thing in a proper way she would have been the drawing-room of the Federal habitation, and for this reason : It is a jewel upon the earth ; it is also highly productive, and the land here can produce enormously more per acre than Australia can. Railways are going to be made, and the question has been asked, How is New Zealand going to benefit by a trans-continental railway? Well, continental railways pay, and this railway must feed our railways ; the wealthy will travel over this railway, and those with means will come to this beauty spot, and our tourist traffic will be largely increased ; and therefore I consider we shall get all the benefits arising from joining the Federation. 1466. You say that for the sake of having these advantages New Zealand would be compensated for the loss of her independence?—l say, if we have a splendid country like this, and it cannot hold its own in regard to any particular industry, then the sooner that industry is closed up the better. lam a Free-trader. I might point out that the dairy industry did not exist as an export ten years ago in Victoria, and since then, under bonus, there has arisen a very large export in that item. And in the butter trade and cheese trade we have developed a very great industry, and, notwithstanding Victoria's production, these products are finding their way into Victoria. Then, take the kauri timber: We cannot use some of our timbers at all, because we have not got the population nor the people to trade with. 1467. But, as far as the kauri timber and gum are concerned, they have to be put on one side as not being permanent industries, have they not ?—Yes ; they must go. We are to make our best living out of the soil, and in that respect I consider that federation would benefit us. 1468. As we are only a young nation, is it possible for us to emulate Great Britain in the matter of free-trade ?—Yes ; not fence the country around. 1469. Was not Great Britain fenced around until such times as she developed her industries ? —Yes ; but if you look at the Press telegrams of a day or two ago you will see that Australasian exports are equal to those of Eussia. 1470. Cannot our public men, or the men who are likely to go into public life, not be as broad-minded by simply remaining in New Zealand as by belonging to the Commonwealth?— Certainly not. 1471. Despite the fact that England, which is about the size of New Zealand, has produced some of the ablest men living ?—That has been since they have had their extended policy. 1472. It has been a matter of development? — Certainly; but not by fencing a country around, and preventing its becoming a nation. 1473. Has not America become a great nation by being fenced around ?—Yes; but look at its size, which is just what we want. 1474. When we have such an object-lesson, why do you advocate that we, who are but a young nation, should take this fence down and throw our markets open to the competition of the whole world ?—I am not talking like that, because there are expenses to be met, and it will cost the Commonwealth about 3s. 6d. per head to meet them. As to the expenses of the Federal Government, here is what three eminent men, Messrs. Bruce Smith, French, and Dr. McLaurin, say: " The cost of the Federal Government will be something like £300,000."
A.—4
422
1474 a. One witness stated before this Commission that £600,000 will be the cost for this colony alone ?—Mr. Bruce Smith, who is, to my knowledge, a man of figures, said it would cost £260,000, but, allowing for a margin, he put it up to £300,000. 1475. Have you thought of a Federal tariff of 10 or 15 per cent. ?—lt would be more than that. 1476. Mr. Lyne says from 10 to 15 per cent. ?—l2-2 is the percentage they fix on as necessary to obtain the seven millions. 1477. There will be probably 15 per cent, protection from the first, and it may increase later on, which will mean a considerable loss to this colony : how do you propose to make that revenue up ?—You save on the State departments taken over. 1478. But it does not reduce the interest on our debts or public-works expenditure. Have you considered the matter from the point of view of a 15-per-cent. tariff?— No. 1479. Do you not think it is rather rash when they say the loss will be only £300,000 ? You think that unless federation is going to bring about the greatest good to the greatest number you would not federate ? —Certainly not; but if it meant an exodus of the worker in languishing industries it will leave the farmer here. 1480. There are 30,000 farmers in New Zealand, and 50,000 persons engaged in manufacture? —Yes; but they depend on the farmers for the means of sustenance —the wealth-creators of New Zealand ; see exports. 1481. But the workers consume all the farmers grow, do they not ; and if the farmers lose the population they lose their best market ?—I do not consider our population would go away under federation. 1482. Hon. the Chairman.'] Is there anything you wish to add to the evidence you have given? —Yes; I would like to conclude the balance of my statement. But before that I would like to answer the question put to me with reference to what weight should be attached to my evidence as against that of a manufacturer in reference to manufactures. My answer is that the manufacturer is equal to his rival. Therefore, with machinery as good, he has the same market: the advantage lies at the home of the raw material. For instance, in an industry I, with others, have just established, having the raw material here, it is contemplated invading Australia, because this is the home of the raw material. Natural industries will stand ; " hothouse plants " will not. It matters not whether we federate or not as regards the manufacturer. With the Commonwealth, like the United States, at our door no barrier will keep out certain goods, and the position must get worse and worse. It is common to apply the " starch method" — i.e., selling to outside markets at and less than cost. Take, for instance, a tariff of 25 per cent, on boots—in other words, boots per invoice, 10s. to 12s. 6d. : Owing to the superior leather, machinery, and " method" mentioned, the local maker cannot compete, and the protection is ineffective. If such is the case, federation or no federation, it cannot live. It would be better, therefore, to be federated, and, in the sense of the greatest good to the greatest number, the number of half-crowns that the workers can save on boots will be a gain to them. I am the workers' advocate. I believe in high wages because of the comfort of my fellow-man and of the increase in the workers' numerical spending-power. It would be, however, against the worker for me to side with his straining capital beyond interest-earning power or a proper share of profits ; depression must come to the worker and to the community as a result. Under federation the working-man is going to have a long and prosperous career, it matters not whether New Zealand joins or stands out. A nation has to be built up, and workers must build it. Depopulation must for a time result, and those remaining in New Zealand will be highly paid. Eventually this splendid colony will carry a vast population. The labour legislation originated in this colony is magnificent, and in gratitude many a worker will cast his vote against federation. But the worker, unlike the manufacturer and farmer, who are fixtures, is a Bohemian, and, as there will be probably a city built in which the Government expenditure alone, it is estimated, will amount to over £2,000,000, there is some work ahead for them. The Chinese-made furniture is a bogey, and will be a decreasing drop in the bucket. The Chinese will not increase ; in any case, that is a matter that can be regulated. Queensland joined with its eyes open, and on the understanding that there should be no black blot, and the north voted stronger for federation than Brisbane; therefore the majority regard it more important to be in the Federation, even at the cost of the loss of the sugar industry. I think, therefore, it will be found that the sugar and tropical trade that cannot be worked without black people will be done amongst the black people at the islands. It is erroneous to think that Quensland relies on sugar in its northern districts. I have relatives further north than the sugar districts who have large herds of cattle, and droughts have only slightly interfered with them; bad markets have been far worse, and as population increases this difficulty will disappear. Queensland, further, has splendid prospects with regard to the merino, as it has been found, contrary to expectation, that in the hottest parts the wool retains its quality. Mining, too, is a great industry. Therefore Queensland, being about the richest State in the Commonwealth, can surrender its sugar industry, and in course of time the islands will do this trade. In this great combination, with the advantages of the progress of the world, in our time the Commonwealth will grow to the size and importance of America. As quickly will rise our navy. New Zealand, at a cost of one-seventh of the total, will necessarily have the best of the bargain in this important matter. Decentralised and insular, it will require as much attention as the four chief cities of four States, and these will supply nearly all the cost. Australia is continental, and in consequence a navy is less useful. That defence is a most serious matter may be judged seeing that Manila reposed for ages in blissful ignorance of danger. New Zealand isolated might find itself in a like position. Australia, like Britain, would do her best; but she, like Britain, may be, too, engaged with the enemy. It is now a matter of business, not of natural love and affection, seeing New Zealand has been so indolent over the most important matter of the century; and now that
423
A.—4
a Commission is set up, the dominant partner, the producer, is little heard, but the manufacturers are welcomed in great numbers, and, admitting their inability to stand rivalry, yet boast an equality with men of the same blood ; the bogey of a few Chinamen they set up as an excuse. Federation or no federation, there looms ahead a nation. How_will they survive that? Industries bolstered with a high tariff serve their country ill, as proved in Victoria. It not only destroys revenue, but also does tenfold injury to the community ; and, as an advocate of the greatest good to the greatest number, I say that heavy duties result in the reverse.
Thursday, 7th Maech, 1901. Eobeet Hall examined. (No. 160.) 1483. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ?—A farmer. 1484. Living where?— One-tree Hill, near Auckland. 1485. How long have you resided in New Zealand ?—Fifty-two years. 1486. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—I have, but I hesitate about expressing an opinion on such a great question. 1487. What is the opinion that you hold, and what are your reasons for holding it?— Seeing that New Zealand did not enter the Federation in the first instance, and had nothing to do with the framing of the Bill, I think it would be wise to stand aloof for a time and see how it works in Australia. It may in the future be well to go in. 1488. Can you tell us any advantages that occur to you as would have been likely to accrue to New Zealand if she had entered as an original State ?—I suppose it would have led immediately to a similarity of laws and a uniformity of tariff, which would be advantageous. 1489. How would it affect the agricultural interests ?—Of course, what affects the producer affects the colony. 1490. Take the producers as a class: how would they be affected by federation ?—I think, doubtfully. Surplus produce has to find a foreign market, and the markets in Australia are very limited. The values of the exports from New Zealand must be fixed by the values in other markets, chiefly London. 1491. Will there be any advantage to the manufacturer through federation?— There should be in the long-run, but it will be a hard fight for him. 1492. On the other hand, do any disadvantages occur to you as likely to arise through New Zealand federating?— Probably there are dangers looming in the distance. Some may say that the greater States of Australia may overshadow New Zealand, and that in the future the northern portions of the continent may be overrun by coloured people. These are matters which may raise difficulties in the future. 1493. Do you then anticipate trouble from the coloured labour ? —I think it is probable in the remote future. 1494. Your opinion is that New Zealand ought to wait ? —lt would be wise to wait and see the developments in Australia, seeing that New Zealand stood out in the first instance. 1495. Mr. Leys.] You have had a good deal to do with local government ?—Yes, I have had a fair share. 1496. Do you think the local administration could be so 'efficient with the heads of departments in Australia as with the heads of departments here ? —lt is very difficult to give an opinion. Certainly there is much need for local government throughout New Zealand. 1497. Do yau find a difficulty in getting reforms even with the Government here ?—Yes. 1498. How about if the Government were in Australia?— That is a problem. John Brown examined. (No. 161.) 1499. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—Director of a good many companies carrying on various industries in this town. 1500. Have you been living here for long ?— About thirty or forty years. 1501. Have you lived in Australia at all?— No. I have visited Australia frequently, and lived a month there at times. 1502. What is the nature of the industries you are connected with ?—I am local chairman of the Kauri Timber Company, chairman of the Northern Milling Company, chairman of the Paper Milling Company, and managing director of the Direct Supply Company. 1503. Then, you have a large knowledge of the timber trade of this colony?—I have a fairly good knowledge. 1504. Will you tell the Commission your opinion as to how that trade would be affected by New Zealand federating with Australia ?—I think that on the whole it would be affected beneficially if federation takes place, because we do an enormous trade with Australia now. Probably the timber industry is amongst the largest in New Zealand, and this province in particular exports large quantities of kauri to Melbourne, Sydney, and Adelaide, and there seems to be an idea in Australia that there will be a duty placed on timber very soon, for, I suppose, revenue purposes. We assume that because during the past six months immense quantities have been shipped over, and they are apparently filling their yards before the impost is put on kauri. I have conversed with timber merchants there, and, whilst there is no certainty in the matter, they still believe that that will take place. 1505. How will the paper-milling industry be affected ? —lf we had intercolonial free-trade I do not think it would be affected very much. If Australia or the Commonwealth threw open their ports to the trade of the whole of the world, and had no protective duties, it would have a very crushing effect, but with intercolonial free-trade I do not think it would materially affect us.
424
A.—4
1506. How do you think the manufacturing industries in the colony would be affected generally by federation ? —I do not think the effect would be so prejudicial as people believe, for, while Australia has larger manufactories than we have, ours will have opened to them a larger market of four million pushing and driving people, which would compensate for the other disadvantage to a large extent ; and, while their manufactories are larger, still with up-to-date plant in any line here I think that we could compete with them, because, though our affairs are smaller, I have always looked upon the success of any industry as being due to the close supervision of the employer of the labour, and in New Zealand we have more supervision than there is in the larger industries of Australia. The wages question I consider is fairly well balanced, and I do not think it affects the question one way or the other. 1507. Do you think the manufacturing concerns of this colony will be able to successfully compete with the larger ones of Australia ?—Of course, I consider that there are certain things that would have to be adjusted to the circumstances; but, against that, if the Australian people could bring their goods here and sell them at a lower rate it would benefit the whole of the people in New Zealand, while any special industries affected would deal with a comparatively small number. 1508. Have you any fear of the interests of New Zealand being overlooked through being so far away from the Federal Government ?—No ; I have that belief in the honour of the gentlemen of Australia to believe that we will be fairly and honourably dealt with, and that our distance from them would tend to give us that attention, because any injustice perpetrated would be so resisted by a compact colony like this that they could not long carry it on. The very fact of being twelve hundred miles away would be an argument in our favour. 1509. Are you in favour of federation ? —Yes ; but, as we have not joined as an original State, I would counsel, as a matter of prudence, that we wait the results in Australia. 1510. For how long?—lt may be a considerable time. My own opinion is that New Zealand will not federate for a considerable number of years, but I believe that if we did federate it would lead to a great push forward in the prosperity and stability of New Zealand. 1511. But you counsel waiting in the meantime ?—Yes. 1512. Mr. Roberts.] Do you think the flour-mills here would not suffer under federation ?—I do not think we would. We have probably the largest mills in New Zealand. I know there is a fear among millers generally that the competition from Australia would affect us materially, but personally Ido not think so. There is no reason why the Australian mills should do better than we can. 1514. We are told that the wheat in Australia gives better flour?—l think that is more an idea remaining from the olden days. I think now that we have got suitable mills that that is somewhat of a myth. 1515. You believe that Australian flour made from New Zealand wheat is as good as Australian flour made from Australian wheat?— That is my opinion. 1516. Have you exported paper from your paper-mills ?—We have had no necessity to do so yet. We have only been running for twelve months, and up to date have sold all that we have made. It is a growing industry, and we are getting a fair share of the Province of Auckland trade. 1517. But to enable you to compete with the imported article you have to work twelve hours a day in your mill ?—There is no necessity to work twelve hours. We work eight-hour shifts. Many mills run for the twenty-four hours a day, and, in all probability, in the near future we will work twenty-four. 1518. You.are working twelve hours now because of the competition?—No ;it would not pay to start and stop every eight hours. It would be more profitable to work all day and all night than to work eight or twelve hours. 1519. How long do you think it will be before New Zealand ceases to export kauri?— There are great differences of opinion on that question. My own estimate is that in twenty years' time kauri will be a scarce commodity. Kahikatea and rimu will, I think, ultimately take the place of kauri in the export trade. 1520. You believe that when kauri gives out rimu will come in and take its place ?—Largely, yes. 1521. So that you look upon the timber-export trade as permanent? —Yes. 1522. Mr. Beauchamp.] What sort of paper do you manufacture ? —Wrapping-paper mostly. 1523. To what extent is that protected?—£4 per ton. 1524. What effect would inter-State free-trade have on the industry ?—I think we could hold our own with intercolonial free-trade, but we could not live with free-trade to the world. In the Federation we could compete fairly well with Australia ; but let us become a nation like Britain, and throw our ports open to the world, and it would kill our industry. 1525. Supposing, instead of a duty of £4 a ton, the duty was reduced to £2, do you think you could still compete with the outside world ? —I have not considered it like that, but it would make it somewhat difficult to compete, certainly. The Americans have a greater command of the raw material than we have, and I think it would militate greatly against our success. 1526. Would not there be greater abundance of the raw material in the large centres of Australia than in New Zealand?— Yes; but we can, if we choose, import the raw material at very nearly the same price. We do not do it, but we have tried to import, and find that we can do it. 1527. With regard to flour, is not flour cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand?—lt is supposed to be cheaper, but really it could not be sold cheaper here on account of the freight. 1528. Do you know that, even with the present duty and transit-charges, a certain amount of Adelaide flour is being imported for mixing purposes by the bakers in this colony ? —That will
425
A.— 4,
always take place. They have fancies, but whether there is anything in them or not I cannot tell. I know there is no trouble in placing all the flour we make at prices very much above the imported article. 1529. You think it is prejudice only that compels bakers of small goods more particularly to import Adelaide flour ?—I think it is fancy. 1530. Have you seen a test as to which would turn out the greatest amount of bread?— No. I have seen tests made of flour from different mills in the colony, with the result that Auckland flour proved the best in the colony. 1531. Federation, you say, would not benefit the timber trade?— Yes, it would. 1532. In what way?—l take it we would have a large influx of people here—commercial people, and people with push and go in them. In Australia I have noticed a woful ignorance as to the capabilities and. resources of this "colony. With federation they would know of our resources, and capital would come here and develop our resources, 1533. Does not that ignorance display an absence of interest by the Australians in New Zealand affairs ? —True; but I take it the same thing occurred in the Home-country with regard to a small speck like New Zealand. Australia so overshadows us now by its size and capabilities that they do not take us into account at all; but I think if we became part and parcel of a great nation an influx of capital would take place. 1534. Mr. Luke.] How do the wages in the industries you are engaged in compare with those of Australia in the same lines ?—So far as I know, they are very similar. 1535. Are the hours of labour more ?—That lam not so sure about; but I take it, if federation takes place, there would be no backward move. 1536. You think the social conditions of the working-class in Australia are quite equal to those in New Zealand ?—Outside the submerged lot you find in all towns, I think the working-men of Australia are in as good a condition as in New Zealand. Our distance by sea ought to keep us free from the substrata of undesirable people. 1537. You do not think the surplus manufactures would affect us here ?—No ; I think we have as good men as they have in Australia, and if we have capital to put up plant I have no reason to fear any undue competition except in certain lines. 1538. Supposing terms were arrived at with Australia, would you rather favour a reciprocal treaty instead of federation ?—Yes ; one of my main objects in thinking it would be better to wait is that of prudence. Ido not like to go further than there is necessity to. What lam afraid of is that the Commonwealth may enter upon an absolute free-trade policy. That would be ruinous to us if federated, and I would like to see the move in that direction before I think it would be judicious to join. 1539. Mr. Beid.] What do you mean by absolute free-trade?— For instance, if they throw their ports open to the whole of the world without import duty. 1540. Of course, you are aware that there must be free-trade between the States of the Commonwealth ?—lntercolonial free-trade, yes. 1541. Do you think there is any danger of having absolute free-trade with the world ?— Mr. Reid and Mr. Barton are stumping the country now. One is a Free-trader and the other is a Protectionist, and it is not quite certain to which side the pendulum will swing. 1542. Is that the reason of the prudence that suggests itself to you why we should not enter at present ?—I look at it from a business point of view. If I have an opportunity to sit and quietly watch I am a better-posted man, so long as I have an opportunity later on of joining. 1543. When these matters are settled you think New Zealand should attempt to join the Commonwealth ? —Yes. 1544. Are you aware that it lies with the Federal Parliament to admit new States?—l have not gone through the Bill. 1545. It is a fact that the Parliament has the admitting of new States, and it is in the power of the Commonwealth to impose conditions on new States coming in ?—We would have representation on the same conditions as to population as the other States have, and I take it that the class of men we would send would be on a par with the best men there. 1546. Do you think we should insist on entering if the conditions were unfavourable to New Zealand ?—I have always taken a superficial view of the matter. If I thought there was a likelihood of our joining within a year or two I would make it my business to go into the matter. 1547. Do you not think it would be easier to get in now than after things get consolidated in the Commonwealth ?—Yes; but at the same time you would have less idea as to how the cat was going to jump over there. 1548. You regard it as business prudence?— Yes. 1549. Mr. Leys.] Is there any timber in Australia that could replace our kauri and white-pine ? —We had several Sydney timber merchants over here three months ago, and they were unanimous in declaring to me that they could to a large extent replace it. They have been able to acquire kauri and American timber for many years at so low a rate that they have not opened up large forests in North Queensland. I believe there are large forests there which, though not so good as kauri, would to a large extent replace it. 1560. You do not know whether it has come into the market yet ? —Only on a comparatively small scale. One of the merchants told me he was putting up a plant to work it in view of a duty being put on kauri. 1561. Is it not the case that Victoria, though highly protected, admits our balk kauri in free ? —Yes. 1562. Do you think it likely that the Commonwealth will be more protectionist than Victoria ? —Yes. For the sake of the New Zealand workers we export as little as possible of balk timber. We run the mills and saw the timber, and employ hundreds and hundreds of men who would otherwise be idle. 54—A. 4.
426
A.—4
1563. Do you send that timber into Victoria despite the tariff?— Yes, we do now ; it is free just now. 1564. You do not seriously apprehend that the kauri-timber trade will be seriously affected by non-federation ?—lt will be seriously affected if they put a duty of Is. Bd. a hundred on sawn timber. 1565. Do you think it probable, seeing the policy that has been adopted by Victoria, that such a duty will be imposed ? —The very fact of the large quantity of extra timber that we have sent just now shows that they fear some action of that kind over there, and these timber merchants who were here said it would take place. 1566. You have had a good deal of experience of the furniture trade ?—Yes. 1567. Have you come into contact with cheap Sydney furniture imported here ?—Yes, a little. There are suites of chairs at prices cheaper than we could do them at, but in the ordinary lines of manufactured furniture we get next to nothing shipped from Australia. 1568. What is the extent of your present protection ? —25 per cent. 1569. If that cheap furniture can be put in here with that protection, do you not think that under intercolonial free-trade large quantities of such furniture would come in ?— Not unless eastern labour was employed ; and I take it that with good appliances, and with timber on the spot, and with the knowledge we are now gaining in regard to manufacture, we would not be at all afraid about supplying Australia with considerable lines not made up. 1570. New South Wales is at present free-trade as far as furniture is concerned : have you ever exported to New South Wales ?—We have never made any attempt. The demand has not been good, and it is a long way off to handle the furniture. 1571. Apart from the Chinese who may be employed in Australia in the making of furniture, would not the employment of large numbers of boys affect the trade ?—Yes, quite true ; but I am assuming that under federation the labour laws would be universal in Australia and here. With the present labour laws it would be impossible to compete with Australia, or unless the labour laws in Australia were put on an equal footing to ours. Then we could compete on fair terms successfully. 1572. But I mean meanwhile, is it not a fact that you are restrained in regard to conditions that they are not restrained in ?—Yes. 1573. Is it not also true that, notwithstanding for many years an agitation in New South Wales in favour of getting certain labour laws, they have not succeeded yet in passing those labour laws ?—They have been trying to get them lately. 1574. But they have not succeeded ; and why do you assume that they will succeed immediately the Federal Government assumes control ?—I take it that New Zealand workmen will never lose the lead they have got in respect to labour legislation and the conditions they now possess, and they would very soon imbue the Sydney workmen with the same ideas, and it would be a matter of a short time before labour laws similar to ours were passed. 1575. But are you not aware that they have had a larger number of labour representatives in the New South Wales Parliament than we have had in New Zealand, and still they have failed? —I think they have had, from what I hear ; but I take it that, on the whole, they are more of a conservative community. I look at the matter also in this light: that, even if Australia can send its products to this colony at a cheaper rate than we can export them to there, we can also produce articles at a cheaper rate than they can ; and in that respect the whole of the colonies would obtain the advantage of cheaper goods, whether it is a matter of flour or furniture, and whatever each colony can produce cheaply the other colonies would have to take, and so we shall have interchange of cheap products. 1576. But would you think it a benefit if such cheap products were the result of sweating?—l take it that sweating would become an impossibility. 1577. Would you think it desirable to bring our workers into competition with sweated labour? —No. I think the law would very soon prevent the possibility of sweating. 1578. But do you not think that there is a chance of our industries breaking down before these laws can be passed ? —Federation might militate against them for a short time, but I do not think it would be for long. The great bulk of the Australian workers are on a par with our own, and it is only the " submerged tenth," that comparatively small number, that would affect the stability of our concerns here. 1579. But do you not think there is a greater difficulty in bringing such laws into operation where there is a large amount of surplus labour constantly pressing for employment ?—Yes. 1580. Therefore in the large cities, like Sydney and Melbourne, even if they had those laws, would it not be very difficult to bring them into operation or to raise the standard ?—Very likely. 1581. You spoke of the woful ignorance of New Zealand affairs in Australia : do you find the same ignorance prevailing with regard to Australian affairs ? Would the people in Sydney know as little about Western Australia as they would know of New Zealand ?—I think they did until circumstances changed to bring Western Australia prominently before both the Melbourne and Sydney people, and another thing is that I think the Melbourne and Sydney people migrate and change about very much more than they do in New Zealand. 1582. Would not they also know more about the people of Queensland? —I think they would. 1583. Do you not assume from that a community of interest between the people of Australia that does not exist between the Australians and the New-Zealanders ?—They have really magnificent lines of steamers, atfd by-and-by that community of interest, if it is not a power now, will become a power in the case of Australia and New Zealand. 1584. Do you not think that in the large area in the north of Australia, which is common to Queensland and South Australia, they have a community of interest that can never exist between Australia and this colony ?—I fail to see why under federation it would be so. I believe it would come very soon, although there is not a community of interest now.
427
A.—4
1585. Do you not think the Federal Government will have to undertake the development of the northern part of Australia to a very large extent in the interests of all the Australian States ?— Yes, I do. 1586. How can we share in any benefit arising'from worke that might be undertaken for that purpose ? —We might not directly share in the trans-continental railway or in immense irrigationworks in Australia, but I take it that any honourable body of men such as are likely to be at the head of affairs would not spend our money on reproductive Australian works without giving us justice in some other way. 1587. Without being intentionally unjust to New Zealand, is there not a danger that in a Parliament where five-sixths have a common interest the one-sixth lying outside may suffer ?—I believe if men like Mr. Seddon went over they would hold their own, and that after a while we should get gradually a great deal more than our share, 1588. With regard to Australian flour, have you had any personal experience of that ? —No. 1589. When you expressed the opinion you do about the relative value of Australian and New Zealand flour, I suppose you would not set that opinion against the opinions of millers and merchants who have dealt in both articles ? —I would not as a rule, but in this matter lam guided by the opinion obtained from the best source. My opinion is from a miller who ought to know, and does know, and therefore what I have got from that source I believe to be correct. I know that our southern millers in a body are against federation, because I believe they think it would hurt their trade. 1590. But if the whole of the southern millers were of one opinion, and your informant was of a different opinion, which would you be inclined to take ?—My informant. 1591. Apart from the value of the flour, do you not think it is likely that Australian wheat would be brought into the North Island for milling purposes?—Of course, that would depend upon the price. I think we would give the New Zealand wheat the preference if we could obtain it as cheaply or cheaper than the Australian. It is simply a commercial transaction—taking it at a price that would warrant the transaction. 1592. Is it not the case that large quantities of Australian and Californian wheat were brought into this part of the colony before the duty was imposed?—At one time, I believe, large quantities of wheat were brought in here before a supply could be depended on from the South. 1593. Is it not also the case that, in spite of the duty, a considerable quantity of Californian wheat was brought down to the Northern Roller Mills ?—Not lately, and not since my connection with it. 1594. But prior ?—lt might have been. 1595. Hon. Major Steward.] I think you stated you would prefer, under present circumstances, that New Zealand should wait and watch events before committing herself; and I understood you to say that your reason for waiting now was that you wished to see what would be the financial policy of the Federation ? —Yes. 1596. I understand you would vote against federation if the fiscal policy developed into freetrade, and thereby admitting Australian products into New Zealand free, and enabling them to compete on equal terms with our produce ; but if, on the other hand, there were only intercolonial free-trade, and protection as against the outside world, you think it would be to our benefit to go in ?—I do think so. 1597. Supposing the tariff as fixed by the Commonwealth were less protective than the tariff that we now have in New Zealand— : that there was a large deficit in the revenue required and now raised through indirect taxation, and it then became necessary to double or treble the land- and income-tax, would you think that under those circumstances it would be advantageous for us to go in ? —lf for revenue purposes taxes must be imposed, then I think their imposition should be on goods coming from abroad ; that would, to a large extent, assist us in manufacturing here. 1598. I agree with you ; but what would be done is this : Supposing the tariff of the Commonwealth brought in a sum less by, say, £700,000 or £800,000, as far as our share is concerned, of what we are raising now under our present tariff, and we had therefore to raise that amount by increasing the land- and income-tax, do you think then that your industry would benefit by our being in the Federation or not ?—I would be quite prepared to risk any extra taxation, because I believe the benefits accruing from federation would far more than outweigh any possible disadvantage. 1599. Hon. the Chairman.] What timbers beyond jarrah and ironbark are imported into New Zealand from Australia ?—I do not know that there are many other timbers, excepting the gums. I think ironbark and jarrah are the only two. 1600. Besides kauri, are not many of the New Zealand timbers largely used in Australia?— Yes ; white-pine, and some of our fancy woods, and also some rimu. 1601. What fancy woods?—Totara, mottled kauri, and puriri; but that is a small amount. 1602. Does much Australian cedar come here?—We did import it for furniture-making, and sometimes for window-fixings and shop-fittings, but not to any very great extent. 1603. Mr. Leys.] You are largely concerned in the mining industry, are you not?— Yes. 1604. Do you think that would be affected one way er another by federation?—l am inclined to think, as the Australian people are a speculative people, that they might be inclined to help to develop some of our mines. 1605. Is there anything to prevent them doing that now ?—I do not know that there is, excepting that they are not identified with us very closely. 1606. But they are just as near to us as tcr Western Australia—in fact, considerably nearer: would that not make a difference ?—The attractions in Western Australia are greater than we can offer. 1607. Is it not the case that they have tried New Zealand mining, and some of them have burnt their fingers?-- No doubt about it, very much so.
A.—4
428
1608. And it has had rather a deterrent effect ?—Yes. 1609. But generally, I suppose, you do not see that federation would have any great influence on the mining industry ? —I do not. Abthue Guyon Pubchas examined. (No. 162.) 1610. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a doctor of medicine?— Yes; I am a member of the Eoyal College of Surgeons, England, and a clergyman of the Church of England. 1611. How long have you resided in New Zealand? —It is fifty-six years since I landed here. 1612. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia? —I have considered it as carefully as I am able to. 1613. Have you studied the Commonwealth Bill?—I have. 1614. Are you in favour of New Zealand federating with Australia or not ? —I am decidedly against it. 1615. Upon what grounds?— Upon grounds which will probably appear somewhat vague to members of a mercantile community. I have listened as carefully as I could to the several examinations which have gone on here, and my reasons against federating will be entirely different from the commercial arguments used against it. My lot in life was decided in the year 1833, when I was only twelve years of age. It was decided then that my work should be in New Zealand, and in order to fit me for that work, as at that time there was no idea of a colony, I on my father's suggestion learnt everything I could that was likely to make me useful out here, and therefore I have had a great deal to do with many things quite outside either the medical profession or my clerical work. I wish people to feel that my life has belonged to New Zealand, and that, although an Englishman by birth, I am a New-Zealander by choice. I believe that the Divine Father gives nations their dwelling-places and sets them their boundaries, by His Providence acting through human agency. The British nation, to which we belong and of which we form a part, has been streaming out into lands partly unoccupied in a wonderful way, taking root and filling the lands so rapidly that many territories are practically occupied by our people. Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are in a real sense the abodes of distinct branches of our nation, and now each of them enjoys the right of autonomous government under the sovereignty of the British Crown. Of these Canada only has any arbitrary boundary, each of the others being bounded by the sea. The physical conditions of each of these three territories are in many respects remarkably different, and cannot fail to impress upon their inhabitants traits of character which will lead to the development of clearly marked differences .between them. The composite stock from which most of the inhabitants have sprung will have new differences introduced by the admixture of other elements derived from the people with whom they are brought into contact. The result of all these interacting forces will surely be the production of different types of our race, and in due time the Canadian, the Australian, and the New-Zealander will become as strongly marked in character as the Celt, the Saxon, and the Teuton. It is even likely that the common English tongue will undergo modifications which may lead to considerable diversities of speech. We can and do heartily rejoice in the union of the various colonies of British North America and Australia respectively into the two great States of the Dominion of Canada and the Commonwealth of Australia, each having its own Government, as integral parts of the world-wide Empire. We believe that a great and noble work lies before them, and we wish them the fullest success and the greatest glory in the accomplishment of their high destiny. But we also believe that a similar great and noble work has been intrusted to the people of New Zealand, and we rejoice that, although our territory is not of great extent, it is indeed a goodly heritage, and wonderfully furnished with the material things necessary to make it the abode of a free and happy people who shall in no way disgrace the fair fame of our forefathers. Our numbers are still small in comparison, but they are growing steadily from day to day : — Up on the mountain's breezy side, Down by the ocean's rolling tide, Under the shade of the forest deep, Out on the plains where the night-winds sleep, Here and there, all over the land, Gathers and grows our island band. New Zealand is but young—barely sixty years old—-but it is a vigorous and healthy offshoot from the old stock of our fatherland. Full and free self-government has been conferred upon us under the sovereignty of the British Throne. Under the glorious Pax Britannica we dwell securely, and are at liberty to do our share in building up the nation to whose charge this goodly country has been committed. We owe it, then, to all our people to do the work intrusted to us with brave and trusting hearts, not as time-servers or Mammon-worshippers, but as true "patriots" in the fullest sense of that high and holy word, loving our patria— our fatherland, our motherland— with a pure unselfish love. With this true love in our hearts we shall honour fatherhood and motherhood; we shall cherish brotherhood and sisterhood; we shall cultivate true manhood and womanhood; and childhood will be duly tended and trained. How, then, can we for a moment entertain the thought of giving up so great a trust ? How can we be guilty of the baseness of betraying our country —of selling our birthright for any paltry selfish consideration ? Our brothers in the Australian Confederation have done wisely and well in uniting under one great and powerful Government. Our fullest sympathy, our best and heartiest wishes, will ever be with them. Should occasion arise our sons will be ready to stand shoulder to shoulder with them, and, if need be, to die for them, as theirs and ours together have been doing for the relief of our fellow-citizens of the Empire in South Africa. We look for the fullest and freest intercourse with them in all good and lawful ways, as good and honest neighbours rejoicing in each other's prosperity, sympathizing in times of adversity, and ready to work together for the common good. But our spheres of duty are not the same. Our destinies are different. Our con-
429
A.—4
ditions of life vary greatly. Continental and insular dwelling-places cannot be alike. Life in tropical regions must be unlike that which is natural in temperate latitudes. Nor can ethnical differences be ignored. In New Zealand we have a remnant of a highly intelligent, brave, and capable people who are fellow-citizens with us of tha great British Empire, and have been admitted to the full privileges of that noble citizenship, and therefore have equal rights to defend and equal duties to fulfil. But we are free from the difficulties and dangers which have to be faced by the Commonwealth of Australia. Surely this consideration alone should be sufficient to cause us to maintain our insular freedom. I pass by all considerations of trade and commerce, and so-called widening of ideas and scope for lawful ambition, not because such considerations are to be despised, but because they ought not to be allowed to weigh against the far higher and nobler considerations I have thus all too feebly attempted to set forth. I am aware that I might have reasonably referred to the abundant material advantages with which New Zealand has been so wonderfully endowed; but they are becoming so well known to all intelligent students of the subject that I think further reference is unnecessary. I will only add that I trust our people would sooner die than give up one jot of the freedom that God's good providence has bestowed upon us. Our duty is clearly and certainly to hand on this sacred trust to our children for all generations to come. So mote it be. George Henry Powley examined. (No. 163.) 1616. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a manufacturer of clothing and shirts'?— Yes. 1616 a. Have you lived long in New Zealand?— All my life—fifty-three years, excepting seven years when I was in the navy. 1617. What is your opinion as to New Zealand federating with Australia?—l have not studied the question in its abstract form, because it has been only a new idea, and for the last nine months I have been away seeking a certain amount of pleasure. I have only thought about the matter as bearing on my own industry. 1618. As regards your own industry, you must have some opinion as to the effect of federation on it: what is your opinion ?—ln my opinion, federation with Australia would have a deterrent effect on many industries, particularly on my own. 1619. Why do you think that would be so ?—ln the first instance, we manufacture a considerable quantity of goods from New-Zealand-made tweeds and shirting; and none of these, to my knowledge, are sent out of the colony. I do not know that any manufactured article is sent out, but some of the raw material, in the way of tweeds, might find its way to Australian markets ; if so, a very small quantity. 1620. Can you say what the effect would be on other industries besides your own?—l could not. 1621. Have you considered how it would affect the agricultural interest?—l believe it would affect it in some cases beneficially. In regard to export-of oats and wheat it might prove beneficial. 1622. What is your opinion of the sentimental view as to New Zealand parting with its political independence?—l believe in the principle of New Zealand for the New-Zealanders. I believe we have to carry out our own destiny, and I feel that we are capable, as a young nation, of holding our own in this part of the English world in regard to the industries that pertain to the colony. 1623. You think that New Zealand is capable, as a country, of maintaining a large population ? —I do. 1624. Do you think it would be better for New Zealand to endeavour to get a reciprocal treaty with Australia rather than to federate?— That possibly means an interchangeable tariff; but I am decidedly against federation, and will give my vote without any hesitation against it. 1625. Mr. Millar.'] You have been considerably increasing your works lately, have you not ?— I have been gradually doing so for the last fifteen years. 1626. Do you think that with federation there will be any possible chance of your finding a market for your output in Australia ?—I do not think so; in face of the way the clothing trade is carried on in my particular industry in the Australian Colonies. 1627. Mr. Beauchamp.] What effect do you think intercolonial free-trade would have upon your particular industry ? —I think it would have a very sorryeffect on the clothing and wearing-apparel' trade, more particularly for men and boys, on account of the way that industry is carried on in New South Wales, because clothing and other tweeds would be admitted to New Zealand from there to our serious detriment. 1628. That being so, it would throw a very large number of men and women out of employment ?—I feel sure it would; or else it would mean a coming-down to the sweating process in respect to wages, which would be hardly compatible with our present conditions of existence and our past experience. 1629. To what extent are you protected under the present tariff?— The duties range from 10 to 25 per cent. 1630. So that if New Zealand federated, and the tariff under the Commonwealth were to range from only 12| to 15 per cent., you would suffer in a double way—from the competition from outside the Commonwealth, and from the competition from the different States of the Commonwealth?— Yes ; and also from America, and Continental and English markets. 1631. Is there any quantity of American-manufactured stuff coming into this colony now? —In the way of clothing, only to the extent of the one or two articles which are called " denims," a species of cotton material. They are worn by all classes of mechanics, navvies, &c, and they are cheaper than the ordinary tweeds. 1632. Mr. Leys.] Can you tell us how many people are employed in clothing and shirt making in Auckland?— Between six and seven hundred. • 1633. Do you think many of these would be thrown out of employment if intercolonial freetrade were in vogue ?—I think so.
A.—4
430
William Edwabd Lippiatt examined. (No. 164.) 1634. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ? —Nurseryman and fruit-grower, and the official representative of the Auckland Fruit-growers' Association. 1635. How many members are there in that association ?—Four hundred. 1636. Have they considered the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ?—Yes ;it was considered at the conference. At that conference I read a paper which so met their ideas that they asked me to represent them. 1637. Did they come to any conclusion on the federation? —Yes; they were against federation. 1638. And they asked you to put their views before the Commission ? —Yes ; my views are set out in my paper. 1639. Will you kindly read it ?—" The question of federation with the other Australasian Colonies is the most momentous question which this colony has yet had to face, and will probably have to be settled one way or the other at no distant date. Advocates of federation tell us there Lire numerous examples of successful Confederations, such as the United States of America, the Dominion of Canada, and the German Empire, but they do not give us any example of a country, occupying the peculiar geographical position of New Zealand, federating with distant neighbours across the sea. The different States which compose the Federations named above have boundaries which are coterminous, and they are separated by no natural barriers; whilst New Zealand, on the other hand, is completely isolated by twelve hundred miles of sea from the nearest of the Australian Colonies. Her position, indeed, is somewhat similar to that of the Sandwich Islands, which were recently annexed by the United States, and which it is proposed to admit into the American Union ; but whether this will be a benefit to them remains to be seen. There cannot be the slightest doubt, however, that a federation of the five Australian Colonies forming the mainland, and probably Tasmania as well, would result in immense advantages to all; and, as this Confederation will have to be brought about sooner or later, it is surely better to effect it as soon as possible. Tha advantages are self-evident. The telegraph- and railway-lines of one colony pass into those of the other. Would it not be a great hindrance to intercolonial trade if the various colonies had a different railway-gauge, so that the rolling-stock of one colony could not pass into the other, thus causing the extra expense of transferring goods from one train to another? Then, again, a colony like Victoria, with a high tariff, has to watch not only its seaboard to prevent smuggling, but also the whole of an extensive land frontier. All goods from neighbouring colonies must be delayed, examined, and the duty collected. What vexatious delays must take place, and what unnecessary expense to the colony. With federation all this would disappear. Then, if there were federation in Australia, the Federal forces could be hurried in a day or two to any part of the continent threatened by a foe. The heaviest artillery could be moved in the same way, and these movements could be executed with more than twice the speed with which any naval force opposed to them could move from place to place. Australia would indeed rise from the position of a number of small colonies engaged in commercial warfare with one another to the dignity of a nation, and as such would have a larger voice in the affairs of the Empire. All this admits of no doubt; but when we come to New Zealand we surely find that the effects cannot be the same. We all know what an encouragement to commerce telegraphy has been—how business-men can through its means rapidly learn the state of distant markets and rapidly transact business. But New Zealand will derive no new gain from federation in this respect, as the cable rates to Australia will always be higher than the overland telegraph rates which Australia will enjoy. Then, again, how can we gain any railway advantages such as Australia would gain by "federation ; or what good will a Federal army be to us? If New Zealand were the point of attack, are we to suppose for a moment that troops would be sent over here from Australia? No, indeed. If the Federal army were divided amongst the various colonies our contingent would be isolated, would be able to do little by itself, and would probably not exceed our present Defence Force. As regards naval defence, we are likely to be better off without federation, for in any case the warships would be supplied by Great Britain ; but with this difference: that without -federation England would appoint the stations of the various warships, whilst with federation the Commonwealth would decide where the ships should be stationed. Now, since 71J per cent, of our trade is with Great Britain, that country is far more likely to protect us than Australia is, with which our trade is inconsiderable. Uniform postage rates are a matter of arrangement, and can be arranged just as easily without federation as with it. It therefore appears that in the postal, telegraph, railway, military, and naval departments we have nothing to gain by federation. Federation, of course, means free-trade within the Australian Colonies, and when all Customs duties are removed we must expect to have a fall in the price of many articles ; tradesmen, not being able to obtain the former prices, will give the producers less, and that means that the price of labour or wages must fall. The consumer therefore, although he will obtain many articles at a lower price, may find the gains more than balanced by a fall in his wages. Hitherto the various Australasian Colonies have given most attention to pastoral pursuits, and agriculture is but in its infancy. Thus, in New Zealand, out of ten and a half millions' worth of exports in 1898, over seven millions' worth consisted of animals and products of animals. Mineral products came next with one million's worth ; then forest products with three-quarters of a million's worth; whilst agricultural products occupied a fourth place with four hundred thousand pounds' worth. In the future, however, this sta.te of things must be considerably changed. Forest products will vanish from any important place, and as population becomes denser land will become more valuable, and will have to produce something more valuable than a sheep or two to the acre. This means that agriculture proper will gradually displace pastoral pursuits, not that the latter will entirely disappear, for large tracts of land in this country will never be fit for anything but sheep-grazing, but that all the suitable land now
431
A.—4
given to grazing will in time be brought under agricultural crops. This tendency is already to be seen in the breaking-up of the large runs in the southern part of the colony. Now, if we look to Australia we shall see the same thing occurring there. In times past they quite ignored agriculture, and the climate encouraged them to do so. The greater part of New South Wales, much of Queensland, and the interior of Victoria are subject to periods of drought, which make agriculture so uncertain that we cannot wonder at its backward state. Seasons of drought which would not do any material harm to the flocks would destroy all agricultural crops. When farmers did put in a crop they spent the smallest amount of labour on the land, and seldom put any manure into the soil. They considered that it would be bad enough to lose their crops without losing the manure as well. Now they begin to perceive that the more perfectly the soil is worked the better it will retain its moisture, and that a good condition of the soil, with manuring, will give the crops a start which will enable them to stand the drought better. They have also found that the Murray Eiver and its extensive tributaries, which traverses almost the whole of the drought-affected region, lends itself in an admirable manner to irrigation-works. The success which has attended these works at Mildura will doubtless stimulate agriculture, and make it one of the mainstays of Australia; and thus we will have a neighbour possessing immense areas of agricultural land, and producing every kind of crop found in tropical or temperate zones, and having probably cheaper labour than ourselves. We shall therefore find no market for our farm produce in Australia unless in seasons of drought, and are likely to have our markets glutted with Australian produce. Now, it will be well to consider in detail the climatic conditions and the adaptability of each of the Australian Colonies for fruit-culture, and to point out the effect which each is likely to exert on our fruit industry if federation be adopted. The immense Colony of Queensland —six times and a half the size of New Zealand—lies mainly within the torrid zone, and is capable of producing every description of tropical and sub-tropical fruit. The colony is not so subject to drought as other parts of Australia, and bananas, pineapples, oranges, lemons, and cocoanuts flourish luxuriantly, and are exported to this colony as a supplementary supply to the island fruit. Now, although we cannot locally produce most of this class of fruit, yet the importation into this colony of quantities of cheap tropical fruit must have a bad effect on the sale of our locally grown fruit, for a large section of the public is forced to buy the cheapest fruit without respect to the kind. Coming to New South Wales—three times the size of New Zealand—we find a country possessing a dry and warm temperate climate, subject to drought, which" becomes worse the further we go into the interior, but capable of being extensively irrigated by means of the Murray and its tributaries. Parts of the coast lands, however, receive abundant rain. This colony is admirably suited to the production of oranges, lemons, apricots, tomatoes, and grapes, the latter flourishing in the open, and being cultivated in immense quantities in the southern part of the colony. Grapes are sold in the market as low as Id. a pound, and under federation could easily be placed on the market here at Id. to 3d. a pound—a price which would sweep out of existence the local production of grapes, to say nothing of the probable wholesale introduction of the dreaded phylloxera. We should not be able to keep Australian grapes out on the ground of Australia being an infected district, for Australia would doubtless urge that phylloxera had already appeared in parts of New Zealand, and would further insist that fumigation would be sufficient to meet the case. But it certainly would not, for the egg stage through which phylloxera passes could not be destroyed by prussic-acid gas, or by any other fumigating agent which would not at the same time destroy the grapes. Here, then, is a danger which threatens the very existence of one of our rising industries. Passing to Victoria, which is about equal in size to New Zealand, we find a climate more suited for the ordinary English varieties of fruit, and not much affected by drought, except in the northern districts, where irrigation might be practised with advantage. The soil is very fertile and capable of producing all the ordinary fruit, such as apples, pears, peaches, plums, cherries, tomatoes, &c. The portions adjoining New South Wales also grow vines extensively, and manufacture wine. Victoria, therefore, would be in the field in competition with our common-fruit crops. South Australia —nine times the size of New Zealand—possesses a fine climate and a large area of level and fertile land in the southern portion of the colony. The country is also free from the drought which affects the rest of the eastern colonies, and is capable of producing the common English fruits as well as the vine. Large areas are so level that carried on with the smallest expense possible, and the natural fertility of the soil produces abundant crops. Western Australia—nearly ten times the size of New Zealand—is at present a very slightly developed colony. Much of the interior is a barren desert, but a large area in the south-western corner receives abundant monsoonal rains, and is capable of producing all the common English fruit. The railway running eastward from Perth to Coolgardie will some day be connected with the trunk line joining Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, and Adelaide, and then West Australian produce will easily be poured into the eastern colonies, or through them into New Zealand. Last of all, Tasmania is strikingly like New Zealand, both as regards climate and the surface of the country, and is capable of producing exactly the same products. Tastnanian apples are well known, and the Tasmanian growers have shown considerable enterprise in opening up a market in London for their produce. We see, therefore, that Australia can equally well produce any fruit which will grow in this country, and, owing to her larger population and immensely greater area of good land, she can produce them in such quantity as would swamp our markets. The time taken now by the fast steamers is so short that even the most perishable fruit can be sent from Sydney, Melbourne, or Hobart in shorter time and at less freight than fruit can be sent from Auckland to Dunedin. Furthermore, local fruit-growers can derive no consolation from the hope that they will obtain good prices for early fruit, for, owing to the drier climate of Australia and the higher temperature which large land masses always attain, fruit ripens in Australia about a month earlier than here. A reference to the market reports will show that by the Ist December the Sydney and Melbourne fruit-markets are stocked, and when prices fall there the surplus fruit is being exported here, and during the whole of December every steamer from Australia is bringing thousands of
A.—4
432
cases of fruit, and this in spite of the present duty. Under these circumstances, if federation came to pass, the duty would be removed, and this would have the twofold effect of encouraging an increase in the quantity sent, together with a fall in the price, so that the result would be disastrous to our local fruit trade. That this is not mere speculation can be seen by an examination of the quantities of fruit exported from Australia to New Zealand in 1898. Thus, of dried fruits paying 2d. a pound duty, over 1,000,0001b. weight was sent here; of fresh fruit paying Id. a pound duty, 750,0001b. weight; of fresh fruit paying -Jd. a pound duty, nearly 750,000 lb. weight; and of free fruit, 5,000,000 lb. weight. Furthermore, this importation of fruit from Australia has been increasing in spite of the duty at an alarming rate, for in 1893 the total quantity of fruit of all kinds imported from Australia and the islands was 8,000,000 lb. weight; whereas in 1898 it was 21,500,000 lb. weight, of which certain colonies, in round numbers, contributed the following : — New South Wales— Lb. Apples and pears ... ... ... ... ... 378,000 Apricots, plums, and other stone-fruit ... ... ... 271,000 . Other fruits ... ... ... ... ... ... 2,750,000 Lemons ... ... ... ... ... ... 270,000 Victoria— Apples, pears, plums ... ... ... ... ... 230,000 Lemons ... ... ... ' ... ... ... 90,000 Other fruits ... ... ... ... ... ... 1,100,000 Tasmania — Apples ... ... ... ... ... ... 450,000 Other fruits ... ... ... ... ... ... 160,000 Dried fruits from all the colonies ... . . ... . 1,060,000 Fruit from the islands ... ... ... ... ... 9,000,000 The New Zealand fruit industry has its main centre in the Auckland Provincial District, and it is here, therefore, that federation would do the fruit industry the most harm. The returns for 1898 show 22,600 acres in orchard and 350 acres of vineyard, and of this total Auckland possesses nearly all the vineyards and 9,500 acres of the orchard, which is not far short of one-half of the total. Wellington has 3,800 acres; Canterbury, 2,700; Otago, 2,300; Nelson, 1,800; Hawke's Bay, 1,200 ; and the other districts only an insignificant amount. Not only is the largest quantity of local fruit produced in the Auckland District, but we must remember that Auckland is the nearest New Zealand port for the tropical fruit of Queensland and of the islands of the Pacific, and that, if Onehunga Harbour be ever improved for large steamers, then Auckland will also be the nearest New Zealand port to Sydney, the principal Federal port, with its oranges, lemons, tomatoes, apricots, and grapes. Fruit is therefore likely to be poured from all sides into Auckland, and the market glutted, to the great loss of the local growers. The question of federation is therefore a most momentous one for us, and, if accomplished, is likely to sweep many young and rising industries (such as vine-culture) out of existence. We had better pause and reflect before we take a step from which there is no receding. A federation of Australia alone can hardly do us any 'harm. New South Wales is the only colony which has not already a protective tariff against us, and the Confederation is not likely to increase the tariff against us just for spite. Our main trade is with the Old Country, which takes 71£ per cent, of our total trade, and is likely to continue to be our chief market for a long time to come. In times of drought Australia will have to take our produce, and at such times she would see the folly of a high tariff against New Zealand produce, for if we got lesa for our goods her consumers would pay a higher price for the article, and therefore Australia would do herself as much injury as us. It is hard to see how we can suffer any injury by being left out of the Australian Federation, and if we should see a clear gain by joining the Federation, then we know that a provision has been made for our doing so at any time. It is all nonsense to say that because we do not join as an original State, therefore we will not join on as good terms. We ought, therefore, to pursue a policy of observant waiting—noting the effect of a federation of the other States upon our interests —making a treaty of reciprocity with Australia, or having preferential duties, or, if we see a clear course, federating. Let our motto be ' Festina lente ' —that is, ' Hasten slowly'—for we cannot go back if once we take the step." 1640. You are against federation ?—Yes ; and the association think that federation would be most detrimental to the trade of the province. It would crush it out of existence. 1641. Mr. Beauchamj).} Where did you get the figures that 71| per cent, of our total trade is done with Great Britain ?—From the " New Zealand Official Year-book " for 1899, page 267. 1642. From the figures we got down South it appeared that 7 or 8 per cent, went to Australia and the rest went to England. You said we could not produce on equal terms with Australian fruit ?—The industry here is in its infancy, but now a great impetus has been given. In Waerangi they are growing fine grapes on the poorest land in the colony, a result attained by scientific spraying, which, if generally adopted, will make viticulture one of the most important industries in the colony. 1643. Have you had experience of fruit-growing ?—Yes, ever since I was a boy. 1644. In which country ?—ln New Zealand. 1645. You have had no experience in other countries?— No. 1646. Then, you do not know whether the fruit grown here compares favourably with the fruit grown in California ?—I consider the apples grown here are equal to any which I have seen imported from California. 1647. You would advice us to wait and see the result of the experiment in the Commonwealth before we go in?— Certainly. 1648. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] It has been noticed that, though lemons grow easily here, the south has been dependent for the most part on imported lemons : how is that ? —I think that has been
433
A.— 4
the case, but it is not likely to continue for long. Even in my district alone there are 30 acres of lemons coming into bearing this year, and the estimated crop is a thousand cases. 1649. You think there will be cheap freights for bringing them down?— Hitherto the Union Company have charged lower freights from Sydney to Dunedin than from Auckland to Dunedin, but soon we will be shipping thousands of cases from here. The whole of the land of the north is suited for lemon-growing. 1650. I understand from you that there is likely to be a considerable increase in fruit-growing ? —Yes, in the near future. William Francis Buckland examined. (No. 165.) 1651. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A solicitor, practising at Cambridge. 1652. How long have you lived in New Zealand?—l was born in New Zealand. 1655. You were a member of the House of Representatives ?—Yes, for six years. 1654. Will you give the Commission your views on the question of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia ? —Yes. I may say I represent the Waikato Farmers' Association. They number something like four hundred of the leading farmers in the district. 1655. Have they met for the purpose of considering this question? —They met at a large meeting and the matter was discussed, and I was appointed delegate to come here and express their views. ' 1656. Do your views coincide with theirs? —Yes; nineteen out of every twenty of the Farmers' Club are very strong Federationists. 1657. Very well, will you give us the grounds on which they support that view ?—They look at it in the light that the agricultural interest is out and away the largest in New Zealand. The manufactures of New Zealand are all more or less in infancy and spoon-fed. The way that we look on the industries is rather due to the way the industries look on this question, and from considering their evidence I consider there is not a single industry in the colony that could exist if it were not very largely State-aided. No industry could exist if two or three more of the same magnitude arose. It is quite evident that if we have our supply doubled we have our fruit trade rumed, unless we have at the same time our population doubled. I may say that, though a solicitor, I have gone in for fruit-growing, and we are taking every opportunity of sending fruit down to Wellington, and doing the fruit-growers there out of all the early sixpences we can. It seems that the fruit-growers seek to shut out the island fruit, which is an excessive example of the dog-in-the-manger business. The agriculturist never minds how many of his neighbours ran a few hundred sheep or cattle. He is never alarmed in that way ; and we think that there is great danger before the colony if we do not join the Federation as soon as possible. It is only in human nature that if we hang back for four or five years the Australian Colonies will drive hard terms with us. There is no need thinking we are going to have reciprocal tariffs. Unless we are prepared to go forward and take share and share alike, I think we will find they are quite human beings enough to take advantage of the situation, and inflict certain terms on us that we will not like. Apart from that, we think that for two great reasons we should federate. In the first place, we should federate for the protection of various industries that some think will be ruined if we do federate. We think, at the rate we are going here, that the time will arrive when it will be almost a criminal act for any one to interfere with the single earnings of any one in New Zealand. If we stare putting our skilled artisan against the whole of the world, we must go to the wall at once. The Australians will say they are not going to allow our goods to go in there free unless we allow theirs to come in here free. If we federate we have a slight chance of fighting that question, because we will become part of a great nation out here; and in any case we would have intercolonial free-trade with ourselves, and in any trouble we would have a larger market, and I am never prepared to admit that we are not fit to take our part with any other nation on the face of the earth. Ido not believe that Australia would overrun us or disturb us in any way. I believe we would hold our own in every respect, and we need not be afraid of the Australian produce. England is practically the only outside market, and once that market is closed we are nothing—merely a speck on the. ocean. We have not got the population to eat one-hundredth part of what we grow. It is to protect that and to get the largest possible market that we are anxious for federation. The other great question is the question of a foreign foe. If we stand out I think, myself, that the time will come when such an attack will take place, and we must be open to it. If we belonged to the great Australian Commonwealth we would certainly gain the sympathy of the great Mother-country in joining, and we would gain the sympathy of the Commonwealth and have the whole of their men to fight for us. There is no use telling me that the armies would be split up and there would be no one to help us. Touch one of us, and you touch the lot. I feel that in the matter of defence alone it is absolutely necessary we should join. If we do that we become part of a great Power, and no foreign nation would come down and attack us. If we do not join and we are by ourselves they might make an attempt on us, and Australia would not come over to help us. Exception has been taken to the Civil Service, but I believe that instead of the Civil Service being weakened it would be vastly improved on what we have now, on account of its being conducted from outside of each colony. Promotion then would be by merit only, and everybody would have some hope. A man then would not belong to the Civil Service of New Zealand, but to the Civil Service of the Federal Empire. 1658. Hon. Captain Russell.] What do you mean by the Federal Empire?—l mean the Commonwealth. If we all join together we would form a strong power here, which would increase as time goes on. We think that federation would strengthen our chances of forming our industries on sound bases. They are at present at the beck and call of the New Zealand tariff. Industries must not think they are grounded on the high tariffs ; they are dependent year by year on the New Zealand Legislature. If we were part of the Commonwealth we would have our manufac55—A. 4.
434
A.—4
hirers competing with Australia, and it would enlarge their views and improve them very much. We also feel very much in regard to the fish industry. We feel that New Zealand waters abound in fish, and that we could do a very large trade in fish with Australia, for Australia is very deficient in fish; but if we started the industry and did not join the Federation they would put on a high tariff and prevent us. We think, also, that if we admitted wine in free it would have a very beneficial effect upon the people of this colony. I think that every country is intended by nature to grow that thing that is best suited for it, and if federation is going to ruin the hothouse growing of grapes, then the hothouse-grape trade must go. In growing oranges here we must not hope to compete with Sydney oranges or the islands. They are not the same orange, neither are the lemons the same. 1659. Hon. the Chairman.] What do we produce that Australia does not produce in agricultural produce ? —I reckon our soil is richer than theirs, and we can grow more to the acre. I think we could send over oats there sometimes but for the duty. 1660. Do you think we could oust the Australian oats? —I think we could get rid of some there just now. 1661. For home consumption or for transhipment ?—I think, for home consumption a good deal. 1662. As a politician and a member of the Legislature you have probably taken some interest in the colonial tariffs: what do you imagine the Federal tariff will be ?—I imagine it will be a moderately protective tariff. 1663. That being so, how would it affect the finances of this colony?—I think the finances of the colony would come out right. I am a Free-trader, and I think we support a great many industries for which we may as well hand the money to the Government in the way of direct taxation. 1664. If the Commonwealth modified the tariff, would not the revenue of this colony be lessened very considerably ?—The tariff would probably be more on tobacco and luxuries ; but I think it might be lessened to the extent of £200,000. 1665. We have had evidence of a loss of £168,000 : have you considered that ?—Yes, I have considered sugar. We would gain an advantage indirectly. 1666. You referred to the Civil Service: you are aware that the Federal Government have already taken over the Post and Telegraph Department ?—Yes. 1667. You are aware also that, after considerable difficulty and delay, the Post and Telegraph Department was classified in New Zealand ?—Yes. 1668. Whatever advantage will accrue from that classification would be lost to New Zealand under federation, would it not? —No, Ido not think so. There would be classification in Australia too. It would come, most certainly, if desirable. 1669. Do you look forward to Imperial federation?—l do. 1670. Do you think there is any chance of a Federal republic being formed in the Commonwealth of Australia? —As against England altogether? 1671. An independent republic? —I think at any moment a turn may alter everything, and we may be thrown on our own resources. 1672. Then, if it is possible that an Australian republic may be formed in the Commonwealth of Australia, do you think Australia would contemplate with equanimity New Zealand forming part of the republic?— Yes ; we would be the pleasure-ground of that republic. 1673. Hon. Captain Bussell.] On the question of defence, you think it is essential that New Zealand should federate ? —I think it is almost absolutely essential. 1674. So long as New Zealand remains part of the British Empire, will not her main defence be by sea rather than by land ?—The defence of both Australia and New Zealand would be almost absolutely by sea. 1675. So long as New Zealand remains part of the British Empire, would not her naval defence be as strong, whether we federated or not ?—Only so long as the navy was strong. 1676. Do you contemplate England losing her maritime supremacy ?—I do. 1677. How do you contemplate sending troops from Australia to New Zealand and from New Zealand to Australia ? —By our own navy. I think we may have a navy out here that would avoid the disaster that might come to the British navy at any time. 1678. You think that the British navy may be destroyed, but that we may have one that might withstand ? —I think they may be in a tight corner and not be able to spare any ships for us, and therefore we should have our own. 1679. Have you read up naval strategy at all?— No. 1680. You realise that the defence would take place on sea and near the centres?—l realise that history says that the time must come when England's power must fail. 1681. For practical purposes you do not see any immediate signs of it ?—Yes ; I think it would take very little of the application of our system of dealing with internal troubles to create dislocation of the Empire. 1682. You think that in case of the separation of Australia from the Empire it would be to New Zealand's advantage to join Australia? —I think that Australia will not be separated from the Empire, except on conditions that will make it imperative on New Zealand also to disjoin herself. lam thoroughly loyal; I wish you to understand that. 1683. If it was possible for a foreign Power to land ten thousand men in New Zealand, do you think they could do any permanent damage?—l think we could manage ten thousand. I would not be afraid of twenty thousand, but I am afraid of their coming here and shelling our ports. 1684. And you think that under federation we would be able to defend our ports?— Yes. 1685. You seem to anticipate, apparently, some probability of England abandoning her policy of free-trade and excluding our raw products?— Yes; I think that is possible within the next twenty years.
435
A.—4,
1686. On what do you base that supposition?—On the growth of parties, and especially the Labour party, in England. 1687. Would you describe England as a manufacturing or producing country ?—Manufacturing. 1688. Do you think a manufacturing country could exclude raw products ?—I think they would do any foolish thing that they think would benefit them. 1689. Ron. Mr. Boiven.] Do you not think that, if England gave up her free-trade policy, the chances are that it would be for the purpose of entering into preferential tariff treaties for the benefit of the British Empire ?—lf the British Empire was standing it would. 1690. You seem to base your views on the collapse of the Empire?—l base my views on what I see going on in the world. 1691. You were asked by Captain Eussell whether you thought we would be obliged to follow the Commonwealth if she disassociated herself from England?— Yes, or be annexed by some country. 1692. All on the assumption that the British Empire collapsed?— Yes. 1693. Mr. Millar.'] Do you think, in the event of such a thing taking place as you anticipate is possible, if a Power was able to conquer England it would not very soon make short work of England's dependencies? —I think it is very likely, but I do not say that England need be conquered. All a Power need do would be to keep Britain's fleet engaged near home, and then send a roving fleet out here. 1694. Would not the present arrangement to keep so many of the fleet here still exist ?—Supposing England could not carry it out, there would be an end of it. 1695. Do you think that England would withdraw its men-of-war from New .Zealand?— Not unless under great stress. 1696. How many years do you anticipate it would be before Australia had a navy of her own that would be any protection ?—I think that the first navy the Commonwealth provides will be a very fair navy. 1697. Which, in your opinion, is the best market for the farmer—his domestic market or his export market ?—The export is the best we have got now, because if it were not for the export all •produce would be half the price. 1698. Assuming that all your produce went to England, would that make any difference in the value ?—lt would make no difference, because England can take a great deal more than we can send now. 1699. How is it you see from time to time the price of meat falling owing to the values in the London market ? Is not the domestic market better for our produce ?—For part of our produce, but not for the main staple products. 1700. Do you not think that the larger the population you get here, and the more you make yourselves self-contained, the better it is from a national point of view for this colony?— Certainly, supposing you could get the different manufactures on something like a sounder basis than they are now. 1701. But you know that it takes a little time to work up any industry ?—I know it does ; but unfortunately the people do not assist each other as they ought to, because they will buy in the cheapest market instead of encouraging local industry. 1702. Do not some political economists always advocate buying in the cheapest market ?—The Auckland people do, anyhow. 1703. Mr. Beauchamp.] With the object-lessons we have had in South Africa during the last eighteen months, do you think, in the event of any foreign nation being able to elude the vigilance of the British navy, that foreign cruisers could land a suflicient force in Australia and New Zealand to enable that nation to occupy either of those countries ?—Supposing, of course, that our fleet was beaten ? 1704. Yes ?—I think we were very lucky in getting our troops landed in South Africa. If we had had to fight a people that had a navy it might have been different, but in that case they had not one seaport, or one man-of-war on the ocean. Had they had one ship on the ocean there might have been a terrible disaster to our troopships. With one ship about it is exceedingly difficult to send a large army across the seas. 1705. With the fleet that England is likely to maintain during the next few years, do you think it is possible that any foreign Power could send out a sufficient number of men to Australia and New Zealand to be able to succeed in effecting, and maintaining, a landing ?—I think we may yet have to make greater sacrifices on account of the fleet. 1706. But, assuming that that nation succeeded in landing her men in Australia or New Zealand, do you think we would be conquered?—l think they would be a long time doing it, but we would have to be well prepared for them. 1707. Do you not think that we in New Zealand are in a better position to defend our country than the Transvaal was?—l do not think so for a moment. They had been arming for years and years, and here we have not got enough arms. 1708. But have not we a much larger number of able-bodied men?—We have not got sufficient arms and ammunition. 1709. Are not we improving our Volunteer Force ?—You are, very slowly. 1710. Have you considered the financial aspect of federation?— Yes. I consider the Federal Government would probably stick to the whole of what they are allowed to, and hand us back the balance. I also believe we shall only thoroughly understand our position when we do get our balance back, but we do not understand in now. 1711. What amount do you reckon that to be?—lt is 25 per cent, under the Act. I reckon that they will want 25 per cent, for general purposes.
436
A.—4
1712. Do you think that £500,000 would be an exaggerated estimate'? —If I were managing the Commonwealth I would take all I could get for that purpose. 1713. Supposing they took £500,000 per annum, what effect would it have on the colony in regard to making up that amount? —It does away with your surplus. 1714. Do you consider it right to take that surplus?—lt is there only in name now. lam afraid that in doing away with the surplus you are doing away with your finance ; but we ought to understand our position, and that is a thing we.do not understand yet. 1715. Would you advise our accepting the Act in its present form ?—I advise you to go in for the advantages you will get from it. 1716. What is your opinion ag to the exclusion of the Maori vote from the count under clause 25 of the Act ?—I think we have excluded that race before. We have not allowed Maoris to vote for white men, and if we had allowed them to vote in the past for white men they would have been allowed to vote under the Commonwealth Act. We have not counted them in our own census as Europeans. 1717. Have not we improved the status of the Maori during the last few years'?— Only with reference to representation. 1718. Also with respect to the female population, I suppose you notice that the total number of votes is divided by two where women's votes are recorded ?—I did not notice that there was any difference in that respect. 1719. Would you consider that equitable ? —I think, as far as that goes, we ought to include aliens, where naturalised, in counting voters. 1720. That is so ; but where women's votes are recorded and women are enfranchised the total number of votes is reduced by two : would you regard that as a serious blot upon the Constitution ?—I should regard it as a blot which ought to be removed afterwards, but I do not think it would be sufficient to stop us going in. 1721. As to appointments to the Civil Service, do you think that the youth of this colony would have as good an opportunity of obtaining positions in the Federal Civil Service at this distance as the youth of Australia, through being able to bring influence to bear on their local politicians?— Yes; I think that those who deserved it would, but probably the favoured ones would have the best of it at the start. I think the meritorious ones would win in the end, and that friendship would not be allowed to count. 1722. With intercolonial free-trade, have you considered the effect on the sugar industry in Fiji ?—I can see the effect it will have on the sugar industry in respect to labour in Queensland. 1723. With inter-State free-trade it is to be assumed that we would get the whole of our sugar from Queensland, is it not?—No doubt. 1724. Do you not think that that would have a very bad effect on the Fiji trade?—lt would be a case of live and let live. The effect on Fiji might be serious; but at the same time they would have to put up with it, and therefore I do not think we ought to consider that effect, having in view the larger one of the advantages of federation. 1725. You would be prepared to sacrifice Fiji for the benefits of federation generally ?—lt is something like patriotism. It is sweet for one to die for his country, and in this case we ought to ■consider the general good of the whole. 1726. Mr. Luke.] Are you aware of the number of persons engaged in the manufacturing industries in New Zealand, because you seem to attach no importance to the manufacturing industries?— You are starting on a wrong assumption. I attach the greatest importance to the manufacturing industries, but I said that the sooner they were placed on a basis of being only partly helped by protection it would be better for them, and they would become stronger. 1727. Do you think it is possible in a small country like this to specialise as they do in the large centres of Australia?—l think the probability is that you would rise to the occasion and establish manufactures in other countries. 1728. Do you think there would be inducement ? —What is the inducement now to specialise ? 1729. Practically the local demand we have without the interference of outside operators. Do you think that the local feeling is in favour of a local-made article as against an outside article ? —I think that with a certain sestion of the community there is that feeling, but in some there is only one feeling, and that is " cash." 1730. Have you thought of the social conditions of the workers in Australia as compared with the conditions of the workers in this colony ?—I have been in Australia, and the conditions seem to me to be about the same. 1731. Do you think the wages and hours of labour are about the same ? —Wages are entirely dependent on the amount of protection you have. Where you have protection you have high wages. 1732. You do not fear any serious consequences as the result of federation from the infinitely larger concerns of Australia as compared with those of New Zealand ?—I believe New Zealand would benefit both in regard to her workmen and employers. 1733. Mr. Leys.] You seem to lay very little stress on the value of the home market: can your farmers at present supply the Auckland market with meat entirely ?—I do not think they could, perhaps, sending a lot away like they do. 1734. Do they export a large amount of frozen mutton from Auckland?—A good many lambs, some mutton, and a lot of beef. 1735. Is it not the case now that there is still a large room in the Auckland District for the production of meat for the Auckland market ?—lt is not that we export it, but other districts do. Napier and Taranaki and the West Coast do a very large amount of export, and they have also been sending their stock up here. 1736. But do we not get it from the West Coast always by sea?— Not to anything like the extent we did, because the freezing-works monopolize the production. It is impossible to stop them from doing so.
437
A.—4.
1737. Who is it that consumes that meat unless it is the manufacturing population of Auckland ?—They are not all manufacturers. There are a lot of other people who are not manufaoturerers who also consume some of it. 1738. What do you suppose the population of Auckland would be if it were not for its manufacturing industries?— Probably only half what it is." 1739. Assuming that it shrank to one-half, where would your market be ?—Half of it would be here, and the other half we would have to look for elsewhere. 1740. You have had a free-trade market in New South Wales for some years, have you not? — Practically free-trade. 1741. Have you any idea of what the export of grain to New South Wales has been ?—Yes ; it is a very heavy sum, I think. I think we do a trade with Australia of about a million and a half. 1742. But from this district?—£6o,ooo perhaps would cover it. 1743. Would you be surprised to learn that the value of the whole amount, excluding wool and tallow, sent away in 1899 from Auckland in the shape of animals, produce, and agricultural products was only £46,900 ?—No. 1744. And of that sum £24,500 consisted of maize?—l was aware that we were sending a lot of maize, and I remember the time when Sydney sent maize here. At that time maize was 6s. a bushel, and we were not growing it, but now we can send it at 2s. and make money out of it. 1745. Can you conceive that, under any system of tariffs the Federal Government might impose, we would do less business than we do now ?—They might shut out that £46,000. 1746. Would that hurt us ?—lt would to the extent of £46,000. 1747. Perhaps you might not hold that opinion if you look at the items, because a great many are probably only for transhipment?— Probably. 1748. With regard to fish, what is to prevent the development of the fish industry now? Is there a duty against it in Australia ? —There is. 1749. Do you know how much ?—I am certain there was, because they stopped our men from sending fish to Melbourne by putting on a heavy duty. 1750. Do you not know that fish is not too well supplied in Auckland ?—lt is not supplied as it ought to be. 1751. Is it not the fact that our fisheries are not nearly so extensive as we have the right to expect ?—I think our fisheries are not so extensive as they might be ; but there is always plenty of fish for sale in town. 1752. If the fish could be profitably caught and sold, what is to prevent them being exported to New South Wales now ?—I think at the time they knocked the export off we were dealing with Melbourne ; but Ido not see any reason why fish should not be caught for export now. It was some prohibitive arrangement about landing which prevented them continuing the trade. 1753. Hon. Major What are your Waikato agriculturists growing?—We depend upon beef, mutton, wool, butter, and on certain classes of grain. 1754. Do you think the position of the agriculturists of the Waikato would be affected under federation ?—Yes ; they would be benefited. ♦ 1755. So far as regards the beef, the mutton, and the butter, can you not always get a market for these articles in London ?—I believe that a lot of our butter will find its way to Australia under federation which does not go there now. 1756. But does it not find a good paying-price in London ?—Yes ; but if we get a better price in Australia it would pay us better to send it there. 1757. But, still, there is always a market for that article of produce there?— Yes, a certain market. 1758. As regards wheat, do you sell it all locally, or do you export much ?—I should think it is all sold locally, and used by the Auckland millers. We only get from the mill-cwners the export price, and if they could import it for a quarter less they would not buy our stuff at all. 1759. It used to be asserted that the South Australian wheat in particular is a very profitable wheat, and is used in making flour more so than our own wheat: is that so now ? — i think the South Australian wheat is a better-developed wheat. It is drier ; but the farmers do not have such large crops as we do. The South Australian climate is very suitable for wheat-growing. 1760. Given that the price of flour is the same, and that you can turn out better flour from a ton of Adelaide wheat than you could from the Auckland wheat, do you not know that the baker would buy the Adelaide flour because he can make more loaves out of a ton of it than he could out of yours ? —That is so. 1761. Do you not think that if you put your man on even terms with the men in the other colonies he will turn against you, and you would lose your local market ? —I think wheat of that good description would go to a better market. 1762. Do you grow oats extensively?— For oaten hay only, and not for the purposes of shipment. 1763. Then, oats may be dismissed for the purposes of argument?—-Yes, excepting that if we can induce the southern people to grow oats and send them away it uses their land up, and prevents them growing things that we can grow. 1764. Boiling it all down, you think that you would gain in respect to some of these articles of produce, such as beef, mutton, wool, &c, if you were under a free tariff, as against being in an isolated position, and having to contend against inter-State tariffs?—No, I do not take up that position at all; lam not one of the manufactures who come here and blow of the small amount of goods that they can manufacture. We should gain as a whole by putting the colony upon a better footing. We improve ourselves and our market generally ; we do not wish to say we are going to gain at the expense of other people, but we consider that, it would be better for. the colony as a whole.
A.—4
438
1765. You are aware that one-fourth of our revenue amounts, in round figures, to £500,000? —Yes. 1766. Do you know the amount per head that we raise by way of Customs revenue now?— Ido not; but it was laid down by Sir Julius Vogel as part of his policy that you ought to raise £2 12s. 6d. 1767. Well, it is practically now £2 17s. Id. ?—That is rather high. 1768. The Commonwealth revenue amounts to £2 os. 2d. per head, and if the eight millions and a half that Mr. Barton says he will require to raise were raised it would mean £2 ss. Bd. per head. If that were applied to New Zealand we should lose about £1 per head on a population of 500,000. If that were the case, would you still be disposed to advocate federation ?—I think I should attempt retrenchment, and I think I could retrench to the extent of £470,000. 1769. You seem to hold a very strong opinion in certain eventualities : do you say it might be better for New Zealand for defence purposes to be connected with a Commonwealth of Australia separated and so far from us by sea ?—Yes. 1770. Have you thought of what the cost of a first-class battleship comes to ?—About a million of money. 1771. Do you think that anything less than ten or twelve ships would be sufficient for the defence of the various ports of Australia as well as those of New Zealand ? —You would want at least that number. 1772. Is it conceivable that, within any reasonable period of years, the Commonwealth is going to be in a position to spend that sum of money ?—-I think it is perfectly conceivable. All we have to do is to borrow it. 1773. Do you think they would be disposed to borrow it for that purpose? —I do. 1774. Hon. the Chairman.] We have had it stated that, in event of federation and of intercolonial free-trade, New Zealand would be swamped with cheap meat from Australia: do you think that would be so?—I do not for a moment. 1775. Have you any fear of the States Governments being absorbed by the Federal Government, the same as the Provincial Councils here were absorbed by the General Government ?—No. We shall always have a very live Government in the States. John Fawcus examined. (No. 166.) 1776. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—A mechanical engineer, in the City of Auckland. 1777. Have you lived long in New Zealand?— For thirty-four years. 1778. Do you attend in any representative capacity ?—I am here to represent the Trades and Labour Council of Auckland. 1779. How many members are there in that association ?—There are ten unions, aggregating five hundred members. 1780. Have you discussed the question of federation ? —We have in a limited degree. 1781. What is the opinion of the members?— Opposed to federation. 1781 a. And you agree with the resolution at which they arrived ?—Yes. 1782. Was there much division of opinion *amongst them ?—None whatever. It was unanimous. 1783. Will you kindly state the ground on which they arrived at the decision?—At the outset we desire to express our admiration for the splendid piece of democratic legislation contained in the Commonwealth Constitution, which reflects credit on its framers, being a monument of statesmanship, and going far to maintain our colonial tradition of being the advance guard of the world in political reforms. There is an apparently harmless clause, evidently an amendment to the original draft Bill (I refer to clause 7) of Part 11., which was given to Queensland —as a sop, no doubt, to induce her to join as an original State, for it allows her the special privilege of subdividing the State for election of Senators into divisions if she so chooses ; and she may determine the number (not exceeding six in all) for each division. We look upon this with suspicion, and a blot on the Federal Enabling Bill, because we think it was pandering to the supporters of coloured labour. T4ie remote possibility of such ever getting a foothold in New Zealand, both on social and economic grounds, the wage-earners dread, just as much as they do the bubonic plague. Coming to the matter of our manufacturing industries, we believe it would mean death to such of our industries as boots, jam, candles, clothing, which have cost us so much in fostering. Even our muchcherished woollen industry would suffer, due to shoddy goods being admitted free ; besides, with New South Wales having seven times as many mills for a start in competition would place us at serious disadvantage. While admitting that the numbers of those engaged in pastoral and agricultural pursuits, whom we gather federation might benefit, are greater than those engaged in manufacturing, the former being 106,000 out of a total of 293,000 bread-winners, yet it behoves us to consider well before we federate what are the prospective possibilities for us becoming a manufacturing community, with abundant raw material at our door, of coal, timber, wool, hides, kaurigum, &c, not forgetting the probability of utilising our unlimited ironsand. Eemembering what has been done in the treatment of refractory ores in the Waihi district, it cannot be thought that science will fail to discover means to extract the mineral so as to make it a profitable and marketable article. It is a hopeful sign of the progress of our manufacturing industries that the last return shows an increase in value for the year of £124,000. And by no means the least factor to our commercial and industrial greatness is the abundant and well-distributed water-supply in New Zealand. In the north we look forward to our Waikato Falls and the Manukau Canal being harnessed for motive-power. One thing we deem absolutely necessary to be done before industrial or commercial distinction can be obtained for New Zealand—that is, the Government shall largely extend technical education to the commercial and scientific training of our boys. In this respect, relatively to New South Wales, we are wofully behind, as you will find, gentlemen, should you inquire in Sydney. Should we join the Federa-
439
A.—4
tion, we hold — judged by the light afforded from past legislation in the Australian Colonies, save South Australia — that our social and labour legislation would not only be retarded, but there is a danger that it would be retrogressive. In this direction we think we have everything to fear and nothing to hope for. In explanation as to our fear re legislation, let me refer to clauses 108 and 109. The first-named clause gives power to the State to retain, alter, or amend existing laws, such as naturalisation and aliens, invalids and old-age pensions, conciliation and arbitration ; but clause 109 gives power to the Commonwealth, should it enact similar measures, to alter the existing laws of a State so as to make them harmonize with the laws of the Commonwealth, which means that our advanced social and labour legislation will be brought down to the level of Australian ideas. Due to free-trade in the Commonwealth, there will be a tendency to centralise manufactures, say, in Melbourne and Sydney, and, as our exports to the colonies are far in excess of our imports, vessels, rather than return in ballast, would accept very low freights ; anyway, timber-vessels from here could without loss take one-third less freight, say, from Melbourne than go from there to Newcastle for coals. There is another reason why we object to federation at present. We have no idea what may be the nature of the tariff on goods corning from abroad. We do know there is a numerous free-trade party on the other side, and until we gather how we are likely to be affected it would be impolitic to join. In conclusion, we consider that, as we did not join as an original State, our wisest course is to leave the question of federating alone at least for five years. Then we shall have the light afforded from experience to guide us to at least a safer conclusion. Already we are branded as experimentalists, but no existing Federations—Switzerland, New England, or Canada—have tried it with twelve hundred miles of ocean between their States, and we draw the line at this experiment. 1784. Then, you and your council are decidedly opposed to federation ?—Yes. 1785. Mr. Millar.] Have you given any consideration to the coloured-labour question ?—Yes. I am quite satisfied that the sugar-plantations could be equally as well worked by white labour as by coloured labour, and better worked. 1786. How far north do you think the white labour would be capable of working? —I have been as far north as Rockhampton, and I do not think the temperature there at any time exceeds that at which a white man can work. In my early days, as a I have been in the engine-room when the temperature stood at 120 degrees for four'or five days and nights without varying 2 degrees. That was in the Bast. I have had experience of both coloured labour and white labour in China, in the position of engineer, and my experience gathered from that is that the white man could do the work as well as the coloured man. One white man is as good as three coloured. We had to have three times the coloured labour to the white, and that makes the difference. I am perfectly satisfied it is only a matter of £ s. d. in respect to carrying on the sugar industry in Queensland by coloured labour. I might also give the statement of Sir Samuel Griffiths, ex-Premier of Queensland, who expresses a similar opinion. 1787. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Have you had any experience in sugar-growing? —None. 1788. Do you know any country in the world where white labour has been able to engage in the sugar-planting business? —No. 1789. It is standing the work in a warm climate without change that knocks men out, and you know that in the case of the engine-room a man comes up into the fresh air occasionally. We should be glad to know whether the sugar industry can be carried on by white men, but you have not had any absolute knowledge of that business ?—None whatever. lam only speaking of similar conditions as regards temperature, and a comparison of coloured labour with white labour in the engine-room with the thermometer at 120 degrees. 1790. Hon. Captain Bussell.] In the course of your travels or in the course of your reading have you met with any country in the world now or in past history where the Anglo-Saxon has been able to labour on the sugar-plantations in tropical regions and to reproduce his race ?— Ido not. So far as my reading goes, there is nothing in history to show why he should not under those conditions move, live, survive, and prosper, or that there are any conditions in that respect that he could not live under. 1791. Will you illustrate your belief by instancing any country where such a thing has been done?— One illustration I have in my mind is the West Indies, where for generation and generation the white man has lived and worked. 1792. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] It is black labour in the W T est Indies ?—Yes ; and there is European labour also. 1793. Hon. Captain Bussell.] But they do not do the work, they oversee it?—So far as the particular industry is concerned, I must answer in the negative—that I do not know of any country where the white man does that kind of labour. 1794. As you have given the answer in the negative, does not that go to prove that tropical Australia will have to lie desolate or be occupied by a coloured race?— No. I have answered that question according to my light, and I say that, given the white man receives a fair wage, he can exist under those conditions and can do the work. That is my answer. 1795. But you cannot illustrate a case in point?—No ; but I might add that it is questionable in my mind whether there is any record wherein the opportunity has been afforded to a white man to work under those conditions, simply because the dark labour has been taken in preference, being cheaper. 1796. If you take Western Africa, you will find there the remains of a Eoman civilisation, where there are now no traces of a white race : how do you account for that ?—lt may have been a coloured civilisation ; but I cannot account for it, and Ido not think anybody else can. It may have been from a totally different cause—through the people, if they were .Romans who left those remains, not being adapted to the climate. 1797. Then, you anticipate the time when all tropical Australia will be occupied by white people ? —I do sincerely.
A.—4
440
1798. Then, supposing tropical Australia is occupied by Europeans, will not they differ in type in the course of a hundred or two hundred years very materially from the New-Zealanders ?—I think they will. 1799. Then, under those circumstances, which should you say would be the most able to compete in the labour-markets of the world? —Judging by the evidence, I should say the NewZealanders would. 1800. You think that we have great powers of development in respect to the iron industry?— I do, in the future, and for the reason I have stated—judging from the result at Waihi in treating the refractory ores. 1801. And you think the great motive-power of the future will be electricity, which we shall have in great force in New Zealand ?—Yes. 1802. Then, why are you afraid of the competition of Australia?— Because I do not believe that we have arrived at that condition wherein we are able to compete; but lam speaking of the present, not of the future. 1803. You have not considered the question from the aspect of the remote future at all?—I admit I have not. I have only looked at the immediate future. 1804. Simply from the standpoint of to-day ?—Yes, of the immediate future. 1805. Will you try to project your mind forward for, say, a hundred years hence?—l could not possibly do it. 1806. Not as to what the result will be in regard to the manufacture of goods at that period? —No, I could not. 1807. The Commission has to, and we want to get assistance?—lt is not given me to look so far into the future, but I think if the Commission deals with this question from the point of view of twenty years hence it will be doing very well. My suggestion is that we should leave the question alone for five years, and see what the result of federation is on the other side.
Feiday, Bth March, 1901. James Hume examined. (No. 167.) 1808. Hon. the Chairman.] Where do you reside?—ln Auckland. 1809. How long have you lived in New Zealand ? —About forty-two years. 1810. What is your occupation ? —I am manager of Bycroft Company, millers. 1811. Is that a large concern?—Oh, yes; there are two mills in Auckland; ours is not the largest. 1812. What is the business?— Flour-milling. 1813. Will you tell us, please, your opinion as to whether New Zealand should federate with the Commonwealth of Australia or not?— From a milling point of view it appears to me that federation would not suit New Zealand, certainly not this part of it, as wheat can be grown in ■Australia in large areas and at less cost than in this colony. In New South Wales the area under wheat during the last three years has been rapidly increasing, and this year there is a large surplus for export, although the crop does not appear to have been particularly good per acre. But the fact of a rapid increase of production in face of the abnormally low prices which have ruled during the same period points to the probability of New South Wales and Victoria, not to mention South Australia, becoming very large wheat-producers in the near future, with an increasing surplus for export, and flour is likely to be manufactured both in Sydney and Melbourne at less cost than in New Zealand, as the conditions of labour appear to be more favourable in those cities, and better prices can be obtained for the offals. Then, as the wheat is drier and harder than ours, it makes a better flour in some respects, and is worth more to the baker. The freight would not be more from Sydney to Auckland, if so much, as from Lyttelton to Auckland, so that if the present duty were removed we might have to compete under very unfavourable conditions with Australian flour in our own market—that is, unless the Auckland District grew sufficient wheat for its own consumption, of which there seems to be no probability. This competition would not so much affect the South Island, becau«e all the wheat the millers require is grown there, but it would seriously affect their market in the North Island. With reference to the manufacture of biscuits, lam of opinion that federation would give Sydney and Melbourne some advantage over us, as all the materials there appear to be cheaper, together with labour; and, as the industry there has been longer established, and has had a much larger market, it probably would be difficult for us to compete with them. 1814. What do you think would be the effect of federation upon the agricultural interests generally of the colony?—I have not studied the subject sufficiently well to give an opinion, although I am inclined to think that it would be better for New Zealand in the long-run. 1816. Have you considered how the colony as a whole would be affected financially?—-As I say, I have not gone into the subject sufficiently, except in a general way. I think that on the whole it would be to the interests of the colony to federate, apart from considerations of one's own business. 1817. You think your business would suffer, but you think the colony as a whole would benefit by federation ?—-I do. 1818. You know that New Zealand cannot federate at present as an original State ?—I did not know that. 1819. Would you be prepared to join at once if they would take us upon the basis of an original State? —No. 1820. Why not ?—Because, as I say, it would affect our own interests at present. 1821. Do you mean that you would rather wait than join at present ?—Yes.
441
A.—4
1822. Although you are of opinion that on the whole it would be for the benefit of the colony to federate ? —Yes, in the long-run. 1823. Mr. Roberts-] You know that wheat is subject to import duty here ?—-Yes. 1824. Of 9d. per 100 lb. ?—Yes. 1825. In joining the Commonwealth Western Australia has made an arrangement with the other States that the difference between her tariff and the Australian tariff cannot be adjusted for five years : if the same rule applied to us, do you think there would be any serious competition to your trade ? —The industry might survive, but I am not in a position to speak authoritatively on that point. 1826. Mr. Beauchamp.] What is your opinion of the relative quality of New Zealand and Australian flour ? Do you think the Australian is better ?—lt is stronger, but Ido not know that it is better for general purposes. It is stronger, however, and if it could be bought here at anything like the price of New Zealand flour it would probably be preferred by the bakers. 1827. Would it pay them to give £1 a ton more for Australian flour?—l think it would pay them to give, perhaps, 10s. more, but I do not think it would pay them to give £1. 1828. Generally, is Australian flour cheaper than New Zealand flour ?—At present it is. 1829. With intercolonial free-trade it would come in here cheaper? —It might. 1830. Mr. Leys.] I suppose it would also affect the wheat-growers here and in Canterbury ?—■ Yes. 1831. It would affect them disadvantageously ?—Yes. 1832. Have you read the Commonwealth Bill?— No. 1833. You have not considered the effect of the provisions of that Bill generally upon the institutions of this colony ?—No. 1834. When you say that you think federation would in the long-run be for the benefit of New Zealand, on what do you base that opinion ?—Just on general grounds. The fact of our federating with a large continent like Australia would, I think, lift us out of little party politics, and be for our good. And it would develop local self-government here. 1835. You could not have considered how it would affect local self-government unless you have read the Bill?—No ; but 1 have an idea that it would be for our benefit in that way. 1836. Hon. Major Steward.] If the effect of our joining the Commonwealth were that we would have to raise more revenue by direct taxation to the extent of £400,000 or £500,000, do you think it still expedient to join the Federation ? —lf we had to raise that amount, which I suppose is doubtful, we would have corresponding advantages, I presume. Joseph Cochrane Macky examined. (No. 168.) 1837. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ? —A warehouseman. 1838. You are also chairman of the Eiverhead Paper-mills ?—I was last year. 1839. Have you lived long in New Zealand ?—All my life—for forty-six years. 1840. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ?—To a certain extent, but not exhaustively. 1841. Have you read the Commonwealth Bill at all ?—Only outlines of it. 1842. What "is the conclusion at which you have arrived ?—I am against federation at the present time. ] 843. On what grounds ? - I have looked at the question from four or five different standpoints. 1844. Give us your views on the commercial aspect ?—I think that federation would be detrimental to New Zealand from a commercial point of view, because we would be at once in competition with older and stronger businesses. Those old businesses have an enormous control of capital, and I think the effect would be something like what it is in America—the development of enormous business institutions at the cost of smaller ones, which I think is detrimental to any country. I think there is no question that New Zealand would become the dumping-ground for the goods of these large houses. They would keep up the price over there, and dump the surplus on to New Zealand. 1845. Do you not think the merchants in New Zealand would be able to compete with the merchants in Australia? —I say we would suffer. In years to come we might grow strong enough to fight them; but, taking it as a movement of the present time, I think commercially we are bound to suffer. 1846. What is the next point from which you have considered the matter ?—From a manufacturing point of view. I think, from a manufacturing point of view the same arguments almost apply. They have, I think, cheaper labour and a larger output of individual lines; and I think that is what all manufacturing comes down to—the advantage of turning out large individual lines. It makes it impossible for small factories turning out greater varieties of lines to compete, except with a very heavy protective duty. I think that is a very strong argument from a manufacturing point of view. 1847. Is it not possible for large manufactories, with the best machinery, to exist in New Zealand?—l do not think it is impossible, but at the present time we would be at an enormous disadvantage; and I think our distance from Australia would make it hard at first for us to extend our markets against those which have been established so long, and have already a big output. 1848. How long do you think it would take New Zealand's manufactories to overtake them ? —We would be heavily handicapped by the distance, and we would be heavily handicapped by ignorance of the market. 1849. What is the next point? —I have looked at it also from the agricultural point of view, but on that I speak with diffidence. But, as far as figures show, Australia has always been a small market, and it does not control our prices at all. It is only a good market in times of drought, when they must take our stuff because of the nearness of the port and the cheapness of the freights. Ido not think, agriculturally, our people will gain much ; but Ido not wish to say much on that point. 56—A. 4.
A.—4.
442
1850. What do we produce that Australia does not produce ?—Kauri-gum, for one thing, and certain timbers and flax ; but Ido not know that those things are much required in Australia. The varnish industry might grow in Australia, but at the present time I do not think there is much consumption of kauri-gum there. 1851. Have you considered how the balance of trade is between Australia and New Zealand ? —No. I think, however, that the political point of view is the most serious aspect of the question. We would suffer seriously in that respect. We would not take the same interest or have the same control that we have hitherto, and it would not encourage us politically. It would not develop a political spirit, I think, but would rather tend to crush it, which would be a very serious calamity. I think, politically, we have developed so well by ourselves that federation could not develop us any faster, and the twelve hundred miles of sea seems to me, as Sir John Hall said it was, twelve hundred reasons why we should not federate. I know that in America, Prince Edward Island, which is only twenty miles away from the main States, was allowed five years to federate. 1852. On the sentimental question, what do you think of New Zealand sacrificing its independence ?—I am afraid New Zealand would sacrifice its independence. We would be a small minority, and I fail to see that we could influence the legislation sufficiently in the Federal Parliament. 1853. Have you any other reason for opposing federation except those you have mentioned ?— Ido not think from a defence point of view we would lose much. I think that the last war shows that the Anglo-Saxons stand together whether federated or not; and from the defence that it appears has been made against our army it is evident that it would take an enormous army to take New Zealand, and that no army in the world would attempt it. 1854. Can you tell us of any advantages that occur to you as likely to accrue to New Zealand through federation ? —One's sympathies are likely to be with any movement likely to draw men together, and on that ground I cannot help heartily sympathizing with it. I look forward to the federation that will be through Great Britain, when we will concentrate like the spokes of a wheel. We will not then lose our identity, but will join together through the centre. 1855. But can you look for any closericementing of the Empire than at present?—l think, yes, if the Empire as a whole took it in hand. I think New Zealand would sacrifice more for British federation than for a federation with Australia only. 1856. Do you think that New Zealand would sacrifice her local self-government as much as she would under Australian federation ? —I do not think that that federation would mean the domination of our local government. 1857. What would it be? —General representation in regard to colonial matters in some central place, say London. 1858. Do you think that such a federation as that would have been better for Australia than the present Commonwealth ?—No, I would not say that. Nature points to the federation of all the colonies on the Australian Continent. 1859. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the effect of this concentration of industries in Australia would be to cause the number of New Zealand workmen to shrink a little?— Yes, I think so. I think it would have an effect like that on the whole of the colony. These warehouses would grow rapidly in Australia, and draw trade away from here. 1860. Mr. Luke.] With the development of our concerns, do you think it would be possible in the near future to exploit the markets of Australia ?—They have such a large start of us that it would be very difficult to catch them up. These big firms have branches at Melbourne and Brisbane, and they have a lead which makes it very hard for us to catch up. 1861. Take the woollen industry : we have all the natural conditions, do you think we could develop that ?—Yes, I have always been inclined to think so. 1862. Then, kauri-gum could be manufactured into varnish here ?—I do not think it is necessary to state that. They could not buy anything else for varnish. 1863. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the past Australia has been subject to greater financial crises, has it not, than New Zealand ? —Recently, yes. 1864. In those crises have you suffered, or do you know of any suffering here, through the selling of bankrupt stocks in this colony ? —Considerably. 1865. With inter-State free-trade that would be accentuated in the future?— Yes, it would. 1866. With ordinary free-trade, do you think you would suffer from the distributing-houses in Australia ? —Yes, we would. Sydney is the big dumping-ground there, and Auckland would be made the dumping-ground from Sydney for New Zealand. 1867. Can houses in Australia buy better than houses in New Zealand ?—I think so, because of the large quantities. 1868. Do you think, after they have provided for the domestic trade, that they would send over the surplus here and cut prices ? —Yes. 1869. Have you considered the question of the loss of revenue by joining the Federation ?—I object strongly to that loss. Ido not think we would gain anything to compensate for the cost. 1870. Would you favour our entering into a reciprocal treaty as against federation?— Certainly. 1871. Have you any views regarding the establishment of an Imperial zollverein ?—I have not studied it sufficiently, but I am strongly inclined that way. Eobeet Dick examined. (No. 169.) 1872. Hon. the Chairman.] Where do you live ?—At Otahuhu. 1873. What are you ?• —A chemical-works manager. 1874. Are you attending here in a representative capacity?—As president of the Auckland Agricultural and Pastoral Association. 1875. You are one of a deputation from that body?— Yes,
443
A.—4
1876. How many members are there in that association? —Five hundred and forty-two in the Auckland association, but we also have the other agricultural associations in the province affiliated with us. I should say there are something like two thousand or two thousand five hundred altogether. 1877. Has the association met to discuss the question of federation? —No, owing to the short period we had allowed to us. 1878. They have not, then, as a body considered this question ? —Not properly. We had a short paper read on it a year ago, but it was only one of the papers read to be afterwards discussed at a one day's meeting. 1879. What is the opinion you have arrived at in the matter?— The opinion, as far as I am able to estimate the opinions of members, is in favour of federation from a farmer's point of view. 1880. What is your own opinion personally ? —Personally I am not before the Commission. I am here simply as president of the Agricultural Association. 1881. But have not you any personal opinion on the matter yourself?—l have to a certain extent, but I would rather not express it. 1882. You are merely speaking in a representative capacity?— Quite so. 1883. And you understand that the majority of the members of the association are in favour of federation ? —I do. 1884. Can you say if the majority in favour is a large one?—l should say there was a very considerable majority. 1885. The association consists of persons engaged in agricultural and pastoral pursuits, I presume ? —Almost entirely that. 1886. Can you state what are the grounds upon which they favour federation ?—I have here a statement which the secretary (Mr. Hall) and myself prepared, and with your permission I will read it: "It seems scarcely necessary to point out to such a Commission as this that agriculture is the staple industry of New Zealand. In 1899, out of a total of exports of £11,799,740, £8,923,414 represented agricultural products, and £378,066 manufactures. At the last census it was found that more persons were engaged in agricultural pursuits than in all our manufactories put together. The accompanying statistics show that a very large amount of agricultural produce has been sent to New South Wales (where we have practically an open door), while the quantity sent to Victoria in the same time is small, and some lines are absolutely shut out altogether by hostile tariffs. The total exports to New South Wales from New Zealand in 1899 were £1,118,699, while to Victoria, against a hostile tariff, only £412,822. The agricultural products alone to Australia amounted to over £700,000 in 1899. This may be due to a certain extent to factors that render New South Wales better suited for an exchange of products with New Zealand, but there can be no doubt it is mainly owing to the fact that in Sydney we have an open door for our produce, while in Melbourne we have to face a hostile tariff. We think the difference in climatic conditions does not altogether account for the fact that, while Sydney in 1899 took 172,737 bushels of malt, Victoria, with a hostile tariff of 4s. 6d. per bushel, refused to take one bushel. The same argument applied to other items ; for example, take maize—Sydney in 1899 took 145,682 bushels, Victoria took none; Sydney took 19,047 centals of oatmeal, Victoria, with a hostile tariff of 9s. per hundredweight, only 776 centals. Cheese—Free-trade Sydney took 21,313 cwt., Victoria only 1,770 cwt. The two latter items are instances of how a closed door in Australia may injuriously affect our manufacturing and transport industries as well as our farmers. I believe one of the few, if not the only line of our agricultural produce of which Victoria takes more than New South Wales is grass-seed, and it is worthy of note that there is no duty on seeds in Victoria. We are told that Australia will be compelled to take our produce, and that the consumers will pay the duty; but past experience shows that such is not always the case. Mr. Henry Overton, writing from Invercargill on his way home, said he saw 184 trucks of oats for shipment to Sydney. He also met a Victorian squatter, who was so taken with the low price of oats that he said he would take a lot home for his stock. On inquiry, however, he found that the duty on oats in his own country, Victoria, was Is. 2fd. per bushel, and he dropped the transaction. So the New Zealand farmer lost his market, and the squatter's stock had to do without oats. Some years ago a large business in cheese was done between this colony and Queensland. The latter colony imposed a tariff of 1-J-d. per pound on New Zealand cheese. This did not entirely stop the trade, and it was eventually raised to 4d. per pound, with the result that last year cheese to the value of £816 only was shipped to Queensland. Again, some years since, our Auckland supplies of maize were drawn largely from Fiji. The New Zealand Government put on a duty of sd. a bushel on maize. Did the New Zealand consumer continue to take Fiji maize and pay sd. a bushel extra for it—as we are told the Australians will do? No. New Zealand farmers were stimulated to grow it themselves, and last year they exported 187,932 bushels to a maize-growing country, New South Wales, which, again, represents a large amount of labour provided for the industrial classes. Australia now represents to New Zealand what is to all intents and purposes a home market of four million customers. How many millions will it contain in another twenty-five years? British merchants are keenly alive to the necessity of maintaining an open door in China. Is it not equally essential that every effort should be made to secure for New Zealand an open door in Australia? It is stated that this can be done by reciprocal tariffs, but the protectionist States of the Commonwealth have hitherto shown little disposition to meet us in this direction. It should also be noted that the beneficial effects of our Australian shipments to the agricultural community of New Zealand are not confined to the amount of money actually received for them. The resultant enhanced values of farm produce in our local markets is an important factor in the case, for on bulky articles of a comparatively low mercantile value the freights and shipping-charges to the United Kingdom are so heavy as to be almost prohibitive; farmers raise them in much smaller quantities when prices are excessively low, which again reduces
A.—4
444
the amount of money they circulate amongst the classes engaged in handling their goods—viz., merchants' employes, seamen, &c. Such a product as potatoes cannot be shipped to England ac all. We are told that Australia only buys of us in times of drought. Statistics prove that such is not the case, but that for many years New South Wales has been a heavy buyer of New Zealand produce (vide blue-book, ' Statistics of New Zealand, 1899,' page 246), and our exports to that colony have been steadily increasing for the last five years. It must also be remembered that these droughts are generally confined to portions only of Australia. In times of drought Tasmania and Victoria, for example, would be in a much better position to supply the needs of Australia, being able to ship duty-free, than New Zealand would with a hostile Federal tariff to face. For example, were a duty placed on potatoes, the Tasmanian would receive more for his potatoes than the New-Zealander would. There can be little doubt that such a set of circumstances would induce settlement in Tasmania rather than in New Zealand, and probably lead to New-Zealanders actually leaving this colony to commence farming in places where they would be able to take advantage of the open door for their produce.
"Agricultural Exports from New Zealand to New South Wales and Victoria in 1898."
"Agricultural Exports from New Zealand to New South Wales and Victoria in 1899."
1887. Do you wish to say anything on your own account, beyond what is contained in that statement ? —No. 1888. According to the evidence given, you are of opinion that if we do not federate the agricultural interests will be prejudicially affected?— Yes, that is so.
To New South Wales. To Victoria. Quantity. Value. Quantity. Value. Potatoes... Malt Oats Wheat ... Maize Beans and peas Barley ... Flour ... Bran 16,156 tons 97,748 bushels 439,250 „ 416 „ 86,725 11,662 „ 865 „ 197 tons 199 „ 300 cwt. 518 „ 15,493 „ 33,441 „ 138,7441b. 3,424 cwt. 9,389 centals 12,791 £ 102,874 25,868 47,831 83 11,822 2,859 .123 1,770 652 1,016 2,070 31,102 12,639 2,629 17,154 5,199 10,497 3,446 tons 100,350 bushels 1,446 bushels 1,104 „ 4 tons 215 cwt. 51 „ 4,150 „ 20,294 10,228 425 207 12 611 184 8,720 Bacon ... Hams Cheese ... Onions ... Preserved milk Butter ... Oaten meal Hides 12,480 lb. 5,130 cwt. 5,830 centals 6,112 249 25,829 3,087 5,862 276,188 75,708
'otatoes... lalt )ats Vheat ... laize Jeans and peas Sarley ... 'lour ... 21,869 tons 172,737 bushels 1,214,585 251,087 145,682 18,996 74,729 „ 1,331 tons 4,552 „ 1,044 cwt. 1,904 „ 21,315 „ 42,020 „ 117,7181b. 6,938 cwt. 19,047 centals 17,595 4,864 cwt. 1,299 tons 710,1771b. 124,0041b. 8,9801b. 32,572 40,486 96,774 27,584 19,512 3,764 10,079 8,160 11,428 2,668 6,766 43,825 6,389 2,030 29,651 7,188 14,513 6,262 24,182 18,457 4,206 300 192 tons 323 515,505 bushels 12 „ 42,712 1 5ran Jacon lams Jheese ... )nions ... 'reserved milk iutter ... laten meal lides rrass-seed 'allow ... Vool ... 1,232 bushels 12,744 „ 20 tons 97 „ 7 cwt. 14 „ 1,770 „ 538 „ 5,1441b. 2,871 cwt. 776 centals 7,691 7,422 cwt. 109 tons 92,0361b. 294 1,782 108 258 26 50 3,984 64 -97 11,907 333 7,680 8,215 1,807 2,364 „ scoured „ washed 416,801 82,005
445
A.—4
1889. Are you aware that with the duty which exists against us now in Victoria the exports of New Zealand produce to Victoria in 1899 showed an increase of £12,049 over 1898 ?—That is possible. 1890. You speak of Victoria as a closed door? —Practically it is so. 1891. Are you aware that Victoria is a large exporter of agricultural produce?—l am aware of. that. 1892. And that she is able to supply all her own needs ? —I think so. 1893. How would our federating or not federating with Australia affect our trade with Victoria?—ln the same way as it would affect our trade with New South "Wales. 1894. Can New South Wales produce in the same way as Victoria can produce ?—New South Wales is a large exporter of agricultural produce. She buys butter and cheese largely from us, and both of them produce largely for themselves for export. 1895. Is the butter and cheese we send there for " home " consumption or for re-export?— Because of the large sale of it there we take it that the great bulk of it goes for consumption in the colony. 1896. Then, you think that the agricultural interests of this colony would be adversely affected if we do not federate ? —I do. 1897. Have you considered how the manufacturing interests would be affected?—l am a manufacturing man myself. 1898. How would you be affected ?—I am quite prepared to meet them on the other side. 1899. You could hold your own? —If not, it is time I went to the wall. 1900. What lines are you manufacturing ?—Artificial manures and acids. 1901. Mr. Roberts.'] I suppose you conclude that the large production of agricultural produce in Australia has been largely the result of the protective duties there ? —To a certain extent, and also owing to the fact that the farmers in Victoria have naturally been alive to the possibility of climate and soil, and they have gone in for a very much higher method of farming. 1902. A method which could not have been carried on if New Zealand produce had been admitted free: is that not so?— New Zealand produce, if admitted free, would probably have swamped a good deal of their produce, as we did in the maize industry. 1903. Mr. Millar.] Why do you conclude that Australia is of such enormous advantage to our agricultural interests ?—lt is a very large market, and there are very large products that they cannot produce there in sufficient quantities to meet their own demands, and we would inevitably have a considerable market for our goods. I find that the item of agricultural produce sent to New South Wales is a very much larger one than that sent to the protected ports. 1904. You know that New South Wales has been a free-trade port all these years, and therefore why has it not been of a greater value to you ? At the present time it is only worth £600,000 ? —I understand that £652,000 are the correct figures, without specie, and that is nearly double the value of the whole of our manufacturing exports. 1905. Would you be surprised to find that half of the exports you sent to Australia has gone to the protected colonies ?—I am very glad to find it so, but lam not aware of it. I would call your attention to the fact that some of these colonies which are accepting federation are colonies that cannot produce the lines we send. It is a good deal to say that they have taken that amount in spite of protection. How much more would they not have taken if they had not been protected ? 1906. They will only take what they can consume? But they would consume far more if the prices were not artificially raised by high tariffs. Take cheese, for example : far more would be used in Queensland were the price lowered to 6d. per pound. 1907. Would not we stand in the same position under federation? —I do not think so. 1908. We have now a free port—New South Wales; the probability is that under the Commonwealth a protective tariff will be imposed, and we would not be able to export as much as we do now. Do you know that New South Wales is growing sufficient wheat for her own requirements ?—I know she is also exporting it. 1909. You would not get a market there for that ?—Yes, because the mixture of our wheat with theirs would make a better flour than theirs alone. 1910. Vice versa, it would be the same with Adelaide wheat imported here ?—lt is being imported now. 1911. Do you not know that Adelaide wheat is of a greater value than New Zealand wheat for baking purposes ?—I do not think any New Zealand miller would care to use Adelaide wheat alone. 1912. How is it that they import Adelaide flour now ? —They use in New Zealand a small quantity of Adelaide flour and a large quantity of ours ; but I do not think it would affect our exportation of flour. 1913. I suppose the reason you go to the Australian market is because it is the best market ? —We go to the nearest market. 1914. Presuming you find a better market, how long would you ship to Australia?—: That question answers itself. We would send our stuff to the best market. 1915. Taking South Africa, where attempts are being made to find a better market, in the event of the whole trade being diverted to South Africa, do you think that that would be beneficial to the agriculturists of New Zealand ?—lt might be if the returns were better, but the expenses of freight, &c, would be higher. But two markets are better than one. 1916. Which is the farmer's best market —his domestic market or his export market ?—lf he gets a local market he would sell there if the returns were good. 1917. As a rule, are not the returns from the local market better than the returns from the export market ?—As a general rule, for manufactured goods, but not for agricultural produce, where the supply so largely exceeds the demand, as it does in New Zealand.
A.—4
446
1918. If by federation you are going to reduce the demands of the local market, is that going to benefit you ? —How would you reduce the local demands ? 1919. By reducing the number of hands employed ?—I do not think federation with Australia would very prejudicially affect the manufactories, or that the number of hands would be reduced. Wages are as high in Australia as in New Zealand, practically. 1920. Have you gone into the matter to see how it would affect them ?—I have, but my information is meagre. 1921. There are over 50,000 hands employed in the whole colony ? —Yes. 1922. Well, it is admitted that six or seven of these industries cannot live to any extent under federation ?—I should doubt the statement if it referred to any leading industry. 1923. What about boots, which is a leading industry in the colony : would you say that that could live in this colony under federation ? —lf it could not live there is something wrong. 1924. How is it that with 22f per cent, duty foreign importations are coming in now?— They are increasing. 1925. How long is that trade going to last under federation?—lf the maufacturers cannot exist with the conditions applying in the boot trade, it is evidence that they are not in the proper groove, and that they are not carrying on the business as it ought to be carried on. It is a hothouse plant, and ought to go. Ido not think you would lose one-third, because you must remember that the employes in a boot-factory are not all married men. 1927. There is the same proportion of married men there as there is of married men on the land. How many farmers are there in the colony, taking the last census?—l cannot give the exact figures from memory. 1928. There are only thirty thousand all told, and twenty-one thousand agricultural labourers, or a total of fifty-one thousand, so that the two branches, farmers and employes in manufactures, are pretty evenly balanced : do you not think it would be more in the interests of the Colony of New Zealand for us to endeavour to do all we can to encourage those industries, and at the same time find new markets for the farmer ?—Encourage the industries of the colony by all means, so long as you preserve the natural conditions ; but if you are going to pamper them up by making other people in the colony pay heavy taxation to keep them I do not think it is a wise thing to do at all. 1929. Take beef lately—cattle which four or five months ago could be bought for £4 are now £9 :is not that difference going into the farmer's pockets?— That is not correct—£9 cattle could not be bought for £4 five months ago. Though they are higher than they were, that is not the result of protection. The farmer has got no protection to help him get that high price. Besides, he has to pay higher prices for his young stock. 1930. Yes; he has a duty of 10s. per head on horned cattle now ? —That is a very slight protection as compared with 22-J per cent, on boots, and is practically of no use whatever for protective purposes. 1931. But, from a purely farming point of view, do you not think it would be more beneficial if the Government of this colony endeavoured to find, new markets for the agricultural produce? — I have already said so. 1932. If that can be obtained without federation, do you not think it would be more~to the advantage of the agriculturist than to federate, and thereby run the risk of seriously damaging many of the manufactures of this colony ?— I do not think that is within the range of practical politics. 1933. Which ?—Finding a better market than Australia. 1934. Have not tenders been called for a South African service ? —We do not yet know whether that will be successful or not. 1935. Have not the Government also done all they possibly could to assist the agricultural interests by appointing graders for the dairy produce ?—They have done good work in that way. 1936. If they have done that, then should you not think that they have practically induced the people to increase the production, and, that being the case, they should endeavour to find a market for the increase ?—-It is consistent with natural conditions that they should do so, but not at the expense of half a dozen other interests. 1937. Then, the Government is not, in paying a subsidy for a direct service with South Africa, pampering the farming industry ?—Anything in the shape of direct taxation is to a certain extent pampering, but it should be done with caution ; and in some instances it has not been done with caution. 1938. You could not say the engineering industry has been pampered with a 5-per-cent. duty ? —I do not say so. 1939. But, as a matter of fact, the boot trade is one of the most highly protected of the whole lot?—It is. 1940. Would you be inclined to support federation if it could be shown that federation is not going to do the greatest good to the greatest number in this colony ? —I do not think any wise man would agree to that, if it were really shown to be the case. 1941. Do you approve of federation if it is going to do good to the greatest number ?—Certainly. 1942. Mr. Beauchamp.] Excluding specie, the value of our exports to Australia is 8 per cent., as against 92 per cent, to the Old Country : in view of that, do you still consider the Australian market of great importance to New Zealand ? —I do, considering we have sent 8 per cent, to Australian ports, with the one exception, under hostile tariffs, and taking into consideration the probable future increase in her population. 1943. But the majority of the produce has gone to New South Wales, which was a free port, yet the exported produce to New South Wales has not increased very much during the past few
447
A.—4
years, excepting when adverse climatic conditions prevailed there : are you aware of that ? —I think the increase has been a steady one for six years past. 1944. It is largely dependent on the conditions of climate over there, is it not ? —Within the last six years there has been more than one climatic crisis over there, but there has never been any appreciable difference in the agricultural export. It has been a rising one all the time. 1945. How do you account for the fact that in one year potatoes to the value of £120,000 were sent to New South Wales, as against in the next year ten thousand pounds' worth, and in the following year eight thousand pounds' worth ? Does not that show that climatic conditions must have an important bearing on the market?— Undoubtedly they always do. But that is only one item. 1946. Well, federation or no federation, when these adverse climatic conditions prevail they must have our produce ?—Not necessarily ; they can import from other parts of the Commonwealth —Tasmania, for example—and from America and the East. 1947. Is it not the fact that the production of oats in the continent has been stimulated within the past few years by protection ? —I should say not entirely. The Victorian farmer up to recently was not, in the proper sense of the word, a farmer at all. He did his work in a very slovenly way, and got very low returns; but within the last six years he has. apparently wakened up and completely revolutionised his methods of farming, and now in several departments of produce they are growing a very much increased quantity. 1948. Well, we may take it that protection has stimulated the cultivation of the soil, because they have had a better domestic market ? —During the last five years they have largely increased their output. 1949. With the result that they are now scientific farmers ?—Mostly. 1950. And that they are large exporters of oats ? —Yes. 1951. And to-day the price of oats in Victoria is about the same as the price ruling in New Zealand ?—Probably so. 1952. With the increased production in oats on the continent, and seeing that they can produce them as cheaply as we can in New Zealand, how can we look with any degree of confidence to finding an extended market for our produce in Victoria ?—I do not think that I referred to Victoria as being the Australian market, but I spoke of Australia as a whole. We did not anticipate it in Victoria, but we did in the other States. 1953. Supposing it was reduced to this: that in Tasmania and Victoria they can produce sufficient for their own requirements and can also export, would not their exports come into competition with ours ? —Yes, undoubtedly, as they do now in New South Wales; but unless we federate we shall probably have to pay a higher duty on our produce than they will. 1954. You still think that with federation you are going to extend your export trade ?—I have no doubt of it. 1955. Notwithstanding the fact that in most parts of Australia they produce a similar amount of produce to our own ?—They raise much smaller crops. 1956. Take wheat: they produce 40-,000,000 bushels as against our 9,ooo,ooo?—They exported a large quantity last year to New South Wales. 1957. Is it not a fact that for the last year or two we have been shipping a very large quantity of produce for re-export ?—I understand there has been a large quantity of produce sent away for reshipment, and probably some of it has been reshipped to South Africa and other parts of Australia. 1958. You cannot really judge of the value of the Australian market unless you have these facts before you, because we know that in our exports there are large quantities of stuff in regard to which we do riot know which port is going to be the ultimate one ? —That is so, but last year was an exceptional one. I have based my views on the average result of a number of years. I do not think the amount of wheat exported to Australia is very great, but we ship large quantities of oats. 1959. You mentioned something about charges on produce to England : despite these charges, is it not a fact that we are finding an increased market there ?—Yes. 1960. So that without any increase in the shipping facilities, and with the lowering of charges generally, which would seem to be getting cheaper every year, is it not possible that our market in England will become a very valuable one as the years roll on ?—I believe so ; and the same rule applies to the Australian market for the same class of produce, while to the latter market we have the advantage of a lower freight. 1961. With regard to artificial manures and acids manufactured here, is it not a fact that these goods are admitted free into Australia at present ?—Yes, and they are also admitted free here. 1962. Therefore your industry would not be prejudiced in that direction? —No; but Australia has the benefit of a cheaper freight as between its ports and Europe, and that, I think, gives them an advantage. It handicaps us in respect to the importation of manures. 1963. Without knowing the exact financial position and financial obligations if we wished to federate, should you recommend that we should federate under present circumstances, or wait until we know the exact way in which it would affect us?—l do not know that there is any necessity for being in a hurry. 1964. In other words, you would recommend us to wait ? —I recommend the getting of information on the subject—the studying of the matter so as to create an intelligent public opinion before doing anything definite at all. 1965. Mr. LeysJ\ Do you not think the figures that you have given with regard to exports may be somewhat misleading ? You quoted the exports from New Zealand to Australia :if you take out timber, fish, tallow, wool, potatoes, preserved meats, hides, fungus, and gold,
A.— 4.
448
which are mostly transhipments, we get £957,985 as our total exports to Australia. Including butter, which is largely for transhipment, we get over a million of exports to Australia in items that could not possibly be affected by federation : have you looked at those figures ?—I never quoted the total exports to Australia at all, and I certainly cannot accept your statement that the items you mention could not possibly be affected by federation. Besides, you talk about the re-export, but that re-export is in many cases to Australian centres, which will probably, under federation, impose a protective tariff against New Zealand produce. 1966. Do you think that wool is taken for home consumption in Australia ?—No doubt some of it is, because our wool is a different wool from the average wool of Australia. 1967. And potatoes and preserved meats?—l know that both these items are largely used in Australia, and that a certain number of hides are tanned in Australia; some of the fungus is reexported, but not all of it. 1968. Do you think these items would be affected by federation, one way or another ?—Most certainly, if you do not federate, there would probably be a duty against them in New South Wales, which would reduce the quantity of our exports, if not entirely extinguish them. How could perishable goods like potatoes be shipped to Europe ? 1969. Do you think that the tallow sent to Australia is for consumption in Australia ? —I could not say. 1970. With regard to wheat, you do not anticipate that there will be an export of wheat to Australia? —Not a very large quantity, but there will always be some. 1971. Are you aware that New South Wales this year has 180,000 tons of wheat for export? —Has not she always had a considerable amount for export ? 1972. No ; for the first time New South Wales this year exports wheat. Are you aware that New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, and South Australia are now large exporters of butter?—l am. 1973. Can we hope for a market for butter there to any great extent?—ln spite of the fact that they have had butter for export., they have been taking butter from us for some years. 1974. Is that not rather in the nature of an interchange on account of the seasons ?— No ; their seasons are practically the same as ours, though the temperature is different. 1975. Has not the butter trade been largely developed hi New South Wales in spite of free-trade?—lt has been, but the high quality of the butter from New Zealand still insures a market there. 1976. I see by the statistics that in 1899 New South Wales exported 4,549,722 lb. of butter, while the total sent from here to Australia was forty-seven thousand pounds-worth, so that we do not send very much over there for transhipment?— There is always a considerable demand for butter, bacon, and hams in New South Wales on account of the superior article New Zealand produces. 1977. What do you suppose the total export of agricultural produce from Auckland to all Australia is? —I have not looked at this question as an Auckland question, but as a New Zealand question. 1978. Then, your association is not considering the effect federation would have on the association ?—We are speaking as New Zealand farmers. 1979. Do you anticipate that the northern part of the colony would suffer at all through not federating? —Only in the same way as every other part of New Zealand. 1980. Are you aware that in Victoria last year the acreage of wheat and oats under crop was increased by 70,000 acres? —I have already said I am aware that Victoria is the most advanced agricultural colony in the whole of Australasia, to my mind. 1981. Do you think we should be able to export oats to Victoria under federation?—We should always raise a much greater quantity per acre than they do, and on account of our large production should always have a surplus to export to Victoria and other parts of Australia. West Australia alone in four years imported oats to the value of £425,000. 1982. Is it not a fact that now, despite their low average yield, the Victorians are large exporters to the outside world ?—Yes. 1983. In that case is it not really the outside price that fixes the price at which they can produce ?—No ; but it to a certain extent regulates the price at which both they and we must sell. But a hostile duty would reduce the amount our farmers would receive. 1984. Have you considered this subject from the political side of the question ?—No. I do not think any of us have sufficient information to enable us to form an opinion, and we are looking forward to the report of this Commission for that information. 1985. But still your judgment is of assistance to us ?—I am only concerned in putting before you what I consider the fair view from the farmer's standpoint. 1986. Hon. Major Steward.] Whether or not New Zealand joins the Federation, do you not think that, as Tasmania is part of the Commonwealth, and also from the fact that she is so much nearer to Victoria than New Zealand, she will reduce the value of the Victorian market to New Zealand ?—The difference in freight as between Tasmania and Victoria and between New Zealand and Victoria will not be very great; and, besides, you have the fact that we are equally as near to Tasmania as to the other ports, and if we were federated we would be enabled to compete with Tasmania on equal terms as regards tariffs, with the additional advantage that we have a greater production than Tasmania has. 1987. Do you not think that the fact of the nearness of Tasmania to Australia, and the fact that she can produce exactly the same articles as we do here, means that Australia is likely to get potatoes from Tasmania in preference to New Zealand ? —I repeat my former answer that the difference in freight is not much, and our extra production per acre would enable us to compete successfully with them in any market.
449
A.—4
1988. I apprehend that you are looking at the matter only from the £ s. d. point of view, as to whether it would benefit agricultural industries'?— Quite so. 1989. In considering the exports, are there not certain items, such as bacon, hams, butter, cheese, and even oats, which can be sold at a price at any time in the London market ?—Yes. at a price. 1990. Then, supposing you lose the Australian market altogether, and the farmer had to shipto London, the loss to the farmer will not be so great as some might think—he would almost get the same net result as in sending to Australia?— Freight and shipping expenses would be higher to London. 1991. Then, if we follow up that line of argument, he would simply have to bear that amount of loss by having to change the market ?—Yes ; but you must bear in mind this fact: that if you pour an extra quantity of stuff into the London market you will be depreciating your price there. 1992. Any amount we can send from New Zealand could not possibly affect the price there : is not that so ? —Pardon me. What we are sending in the shape of frozen meat is affecting the price now. 1993. That item is out of the question, because it all goes to London, anyhow ?—But I wish to show how the London market can be affected. 1994. Do you think that if this small amount of butter—to the amount of £47,000 —which is going into Australia were sent to London it could possibly affect the general price? And also the hams?— Not in those two lines. 1995. Oats only to the value of £200,000 go to Australia?— That is something. 1996. Having ascertained, then, what was likely to be the net maximum loss to the farmers through our standing out, and supposing that through federation the revenue of New Zealand was very much reduced, and that through the loss in the Customs tariff it was necessary for us to raise £600,000 or £700,000 by direct taxation, which would mean doubling or perhaps trebling the landand income-tax, would it be an advantage to the farmers under those circumstances to go into federation ?—We have no proof as yet that it would cost that amount. When those points are ■ proved we shall be able to form an opinion, but in the meantime we are in the dark. Matthew Middlewood Kibkbride examined. (No. 170.) 1997. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a farmer, residing where? —At Mangere. 1998. Have you any personal opinion to give us upon the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?— Yes. Speaking as a farmer, a settler of thirty-seven years' standing, I am of opinion that federation would be beneficial to New Zealand. Seeing that our own people only consume a portion of what we farmers produce, we have to depend on outside markets for the sale of our products. We have to compete in the markets of the world ; therefore it is a matter of vital importance to farmers to keep open all the markets we have now, and endeavour to open up fresh ones. I look upon it that it should be one of the first duties of the Government to assist in finding markets for our exports. We farmers depend for a living on the sale of our potatoes, oats, wheat, wool, mutton, butter, cheese, &c, and of these we poured 8,923,414 pounds' worth into foreign markets last year. Of this amount over 700,000 pounds' worth went to the Australian markets— the bulk of it to New South Wales, because of there being free-trade with that colony. A good many people have given evidence before the Commission to the effect that' their industries would suffer under federation. I may be pardoned for drawing your attention to the magnitude of the farming industry as compared with the manufacturing industries in the country. Besides supplying our own wants, farmers' produce exported in 1899 amounted to £8,923,414, while manufacturers, nursed by protection, partially supplied all local wants, and only exported in the same year to the value of £378,066. The exports of manufactures in 1889 amounted to £569,000, but had decreased to £378,066 in 1899, and of this amount £282,730 is credited to flax and leather, a proportion of which, at any rate, fairly belongs to the land. If New Zealand does not federate we shall lose the Australian markets for our produce, it being morally certain that a protective tariff will be set up; such a tariff will to a great extent bar New Zealand produce, as it has largely done hitherto in Queensland, Victoria, and South Australia. With our climate, fertile soil, and average yields, we should, if included in the Commonwealth' Federation, be in a position to increase our trade very largely. We should often have a market for our products close to our own doors, so to speak. Many people, the very people often who oppose federation, urge that we can obtain equal trade relations with the Commonwealth by reciprocal treaty. This, I think, is quite problematical. Ido not see how we can have protection against, and reciprocity with, Australia at the same time. The very evidence given before this Commission will show the people of Australia that New Zealand is not prepared to make many trade concessions. A strong party of producers in Victoria were entirely opposed to New Zealand entering the Union on equal terms. To quote one writer, a farmer, writing to the Melbourne Age a couple of years ago, says, " It would be utterly impossible for the Victorian farmer to meet the competition of New Zealand in his own market. In the event of her having free entry the price of wheat would never exceed export value. Federation or rio federation, the time has not arrived for Victoria to sacrifice her farmers on the altar of free-trade with New Zealand." The disinclination to reciprocate is shown, too, in the fact that, notwithstanding droughts have occurred in Victoria and Queensland, those colonies have shown no disposition to break down their tariff so as to admit outside produce. Ido not see any chance of obtaining free access to the ports of Australia except by federation. Eeciprooity is glibly talked of, but in view of the opposition on both sides of the water it would be more difficult to accomplish than federation. Some say that the opening of the Australian ports is of no great importance —that in England we have an equally good market for our produce. In reply to that, I may say that the English market is not unlimited in its capacity. If we pour all in there the tendency will be to lower prices. That is patent in the frozen-meat trade. The Home market 57—A. 4.
A.—4
450
has to be carefully fed or unprofitable prices result. Besides, perishable produce goes to Australia which could not be sent to England. Freight, again, is much higher to England than Australia— oats, 3d. to Australia, 6d. to England. A home market is preferable to a foreign one. Moreover, the time may come when the Labour party in England would retaliate and insist on their goods being allowed duty-free in New Zealand. Rather a one-sided idea at present, New Zealand produce and goods being allowed free into England, and English goods being penalised here. I believe that federation between this country and Australia would give the whole of this part of the world a commercial lift which you can hardly conceive the value of. 1999. How long have you been settled in this country ? —I came to New Zealand in 1863. 2000. I see you speak in your paper of its being the duty of the Government to find other markets for the produce of New Zealand : do you think that there is any chance for a market in New Zealand produce being found, say, in South Africa ?—I should think so, from what I have been told, and from what I have read. 2001. Do you think Australia is likely long to continue a market for New Zealand produce?— I think so. There will always be a market in some parts of Australia. 2002. You do not think that they are able to produce what we produce and to supply themselves, or are likely to do so within a short period of time? —It does not appear to me that they can produce the quantity that we can. The question is, Can South Australia produce wheat cheaper than we can ? In South Australia the average is under 5 bushels per acre, and we can produce 31 bushels per acre. 2003. Is there not a great saving in the harvesting there ? —Some saving, certainly. 2004. Are you aware that South Australia harvests in a very economical manner? —Yes ; they strip the crop, instead of reaping and binding it. Yet there is a good deal wasted by that system. 2005. Are you aware that Victoria is the largest market for oats?— Yes. 2006. Well", she is not likely to want any from us, is she ?—lf we can produce cheaper we can compete with her farmers. 2007. Taking barley, for instance: are you aware that that is successfully grown in Queensland and New South Wales ? —They can in New South Wales. 2008. Do you think that they would be likely to supply their own wants, or would they still have to take it from New Zealand ?—They have supplied their own wants in New South Wales in the matter of barley. 2009. Are they likely to take from us, then ?—Probably, in parts of Australia. 1 only go on past evidence. 2010. Have you considered how the manufacturers of this country would be affected by federation, or do you think they would be prejudicially affected?— Possibly they might suffer for a time, but it would be only temporary. 2011. Have you considered how the public finances of the colony would be affected?— No. 2012. What is your opinion upon the sentimental question of New Zealand merging her identity in the Commonwealth? —I do not think New Zealand would lose her identity if she joined ; and, as far as sentiment is concerned, I am very much in favour of the federation of the English-speaking race, and especially with a country so close to us as Australia. 2013. Do you see any disadvantage in the distance New Zealand is from Australia?— Well, I do not see very much in it. It takes longer to go to Dunedin than to New South Wales; and, as regards distance, we have been terribly isolated in the Auckland Province for many years, and we are still two days' journey from the capital of the colony, while we are only three days and a half from Sydney. 2014. But do you not think that the separation being by water affects the matter more than a separation by land-boundary ?—Not altogether. I look upon a waterway as a grand system of communication, particularly when you have fine steamers, which are improving every year on the run. It seems to me that distance is being almost annihilated, and water-carriage is very much cheaper than railway-carriage. 2015. Do you think that the people of New Zealand generally have an intimate knowledge of Australian affairs ?—I think the reading portion of the public have. 2016. Do you think that the Australians have any intimate knowledge of New Zealand ? — That I do not know. 2017. But do you not think the distance affects the matter very seriously?— Not as seriously as some make out. It is a certain objection. If we were within a hundred miles of the Australian coast federation would be carried by a very large majority. Tasmania is more than a hundred miles away, but she federated. 2018. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you consider that free-trade is essential to the farmers' interests ? —Yes. 2019. And you do not consider that free-trade can be obtained in any other way than by federating with Australia ?—That is my idea at present. 2020. Mr. Roberts.] You do not think the heavy loss of revenue which is likely to accrue to New Zealand through federation—probably £600,000 —is a serious matter to face ? —So far as the cost of the Federal Government is concerned, there is nothing definite about it yet. 2021. It is perfectly certain that we should lose £160,000 on sugar duties alone : is not that a serious loss to face ?—I have not gone into the question, and there are so many differences of opinion on it; but if we do lose that the Commonwealth takes over certain responsibilities and expenses. 2022. But we will require to pay for it ? —They pay for it out of the one-fourth of the Customs duties which they appropriate. 2023. That means we pay it ourselves, does it not ?—Yes. 2024. Assuming that the total loss would be £500,000 or £600,000 to New Zealand, do you think that is a sufficient deterrent to cause us to pause before going into the Federation ? —Seeing
451
A.— 4
that we cannot enter as an original State, lam not advocating that we rush into it. I think, perhaps, in four or five years' time we shall be able to estimate the cost and to form an opinion. 2025. Mr. Beauchamp.] Mr. Barton has assumed that he will require £8,500,000 for the expenses of the Federal Government. Upon the basis of population this means that our contribution would amount to £469,350. Assuming we have to contribute that, do you think it would affect the farmers if it were necessary to impose direct taxation to make up that amount?—lt does not seem to me that it would be necessary to impose any further direct taxation. 2026. Not to make good that loss ?—No. I understand that our public works in the future are going to be carried on by borrowed money, therefore we shall probably have a large surplus for years out of our ordinary revenue, a surplus larger than the sum you have mentioned as the contribution of New Zealand. 2027. But during last year especially large concessions were made upon the railways for the benefit particularly of the farming community, so that if these concessions go on it is possible that our surplus will be a diminishing quantity. We also established the penny-post, which is another concession as much to the farmer as anybody else ? —Well, for my part, I think there is still very great room for retrenchment and reform. 2028. If you advocate and effect retrenchment, would you have so large a surplus ?—You said that-probably this year that surplus would not be forthcoming. 2029. Ido not say that. I say it is possible, as years go on, it maybe a diminishing quantity? —It amounts to the same thing. 2030. Would you advocate our borrowing, and practically living on borrowed money, instead of trying to live within our means ?—I have never advocated that. I have always been against it. I believe we are most extravagantly governed. 2032. Have you considered the financial aspect at all ? —I have to some extent, but Ido not claim to be very well up in it. 2033. Supposing we are called upon to contribute £500,000 towards the cost of the Federal Government, that money would have to be found by the taxpayers of this colony, and it would be necessary, I take it, to make up that money by some other form of taxation, probably by direct taxation : do you think the benefits to be derived from the Commonwealth would be commensurate with the loss of that £500,000 per annum? —I have already told you that I am not in favour of any further taxation. I think we should go in for retrenchment. 2034. That narrows the issue down to this : that you would not advocate our federating with Australia if it was necessary to increase the taxation through joining the Federation ? —I do not know. My idea is that the trade and commercial advantages would be very great, and if the cost is not too heavy it would be to our advantage to federate. 2035. But if it was necessary to impose fresh taxation to make up for this £500,000 you would not be in favour of federation ? —I do not admit the necessity of imposing fresh taxation. 2036. You said you would not be in favour of any increased taxation being imposed. If it be necessary to impose other taxation to the extent of £500,000 or £600,000, would you still be in favour of federation?—l think so. 2037. You spoke of Auckland being isolated : do you think that Auckland's isolation from the seat of government has proved inimical to her interests ?—I think it has sometimes. 2038. Well, if the seat of government is in Sydney instead of Wellington, do you not think Auckland will still suffer?—l do not think it would suffer any more than it has done in the past. 2039. You spoke of the Labour party advocating a duty on produce from New Zealand: do you hold with that view ?—I think so. 2040. With inter-State free-trade we will admit the products from Australia free, and impose a duty on British manufactures: do you think there would be resentment in the minds of the Labour party in England at their goods being excluded?—-It is very probable. 2041. Do you recognise that it will only be in times of failure of the Australian crops that our produce will be admitted there, or do you think it will always be admitted?—l do not recognise that our produce will only be admitted in times of failure. We shall always have a market in parts of Australia. [Subsequently, Mr. Kirkbride said he did not wish to be bound down by the statement that he would favour federation even if it meant additional taxation to the extent of £500,000 a year. What he wished to say was that, as we had not entered the Commonwealth in the beginning, he was prepared to wait for the evidence collected by the Commission, and also see how the Federal Government worked for a time, before forming a definite opinion.] Edwin Hall examined. (No. 171.) 2042. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—Secretary of the Auckland Agricultural Association. 2043. Will you give the Commission your views on the question of New Zealand federating with Australia or not ?—My views have been largely embodied in the paper that has been read by Mr. Dick, and I have but little to add to what he said. A great deal has been said to the Commission about New Zealand exports to New South Wales and Victoria, but very little has been said about New Zealand exports to other Australian Colonies. It must be remembered that there are vast areas in Australia, and particularly in West Australia, that can never compete with New Zealand in the growing of agricultural produce, and particularly dairy produce. I cannot accept the statement that Australia is compelled to take our produce at our own price in times of drought. I have seen potatoes grown in China sold in West Australia. For climatic reasons West Australia cannot grow potatoes to compete with New Zealand. Whilst I was in West Australia the people of the farm on which I was were buying New Zealand oats, butter, and potatoes, Swiss milk, and imported flour. They could not grow enough grass to keep a cow, and even working-horses had to
452
A.—4
be stable-fed. That was during an ordinary normal season with an average rainfall for that country. If New Zealand had good communication with West Australia, and free-trade, I believe West Australia would be a large and regular buyer of our agricultural produce. Our New Zealand exports to West Australia have risen in nine years from £2,889, in 1890, to £66,321 in 1899. The West Australian farmer buys New Zealand dairy produce because the farmer here can sell it for less than the cost of raising it in West Australia. In 1897 and 1898 West Australia alone imported over two million pounds' worth of agricultural produce. 2044. Do I take it ti at you concur in the view expressed by Mr. Kirkbride—that from a farmer's point of view you favour free-trade for New Zealand products ?—Yes. 2045. Do you think that the advantages to be derived from free-trade in respect to agricultural products will be counterbalanced by any handicap upon the manufacturing industries of the colony arising from federation?—lf the growing of agricultural produce was increased in New Zealand by free-trade with Australia under federation, I take it that the extra employment thus given in growing and handling the produce would more than counterbalance any loss through a few industries being injured by competition. I cannot accept the statement made by one of the Commissioners that the number of men engaged in agricultural pursuits and the employes in factories are pretty evenly balanced. At the last census there were over 73,000 directly engaged in agricultural and pastoral pursuits, without counting the bushmen ; while the number of employes in our manufactories did not exceed 50,000. It is also stated in the blue-book that at the last census, out of 154,000 persons in the Auckland Province, only 6,160 were employed in manufactories and works (excluding Government shops). 2046. Mr. Luke.] You estimate the home market rather lightly as compared with the foreign market, I understand ?—No, Ido not; we need them both. 2047. Which is of the greatest importance?— Both are important. The local market is always regarded as better than the foreign market a distance away. 2048. Do you not think that with federation the factories here would be very largely supplanted by the large firms in Australia, and that our people here would be thrown out of employment, and have to gravitate to Australia? —I think that if New Zealand stood out of the Federation the effect would be to lead farmers to gravitate to Tasmania and other places which would provide them with free access to the Commonwealth markets. Ido not think the competition from Australia need make any serious difference to the number of people employed in_the New Zealand cities. Wages are little, if any, lower in Australia, and I am satisfied that if the artisans in New Zealand are prepared to work for the same remuneration per hour as the farmers they could easily compete with Australia. 2049. Mr. Beauchamp.] You seem to regard with apprehension the possibility of a large number of New-Zealanders having to migrate to Tasmania to compete with other markets ?—I think it is probable that were a duty of 15 per cent, put on New Zealand produce, and the Tasmanian farmer got that amount more for his produce than the New Zealand farmer, people would naturally prefer to settle in Tasmania, and it would thus induce settlement in Tasmania rather than in New Zealand. lam awaiting the evidence being collected by Che Commission to learn what federation is likely to cost New Zealand, but I am quite satisfied it will be a bad day for New Zealand if her farmers are shut out of the Australian markets. I do not say that such a state of things would ruin the New Zealand farmers, but it would injure them, and what is bad for the farmers is bad for the whole community, for in New Zealand especially the farmer feeds the whole community. 2050. Mr. Millar.] A farmer is supposed to return his income if he is making over £300 a year ? —No, he is not. 2051. Then, it is absolutely impossible to find out what the average farmer is making?—l have frequently tried to obtain statistics giving this information, but have not been able to do it. It might be the case that the earnings of some of the farmers exceed 6s. a day, but I am perfectly satisfied that if the farmers of New Zealand had to pay 6s. a day for all the labour which under the present circumstances is supplied by the members of their families they would have to close up altogether in some branches of agriculture. 2052. Hon. Captain Russell.] Were you long in Australia?—l was in West Australia for nearly a year. 2053. Were you in any other part ?—I was also on the Murray Biver, in the Eenmark fruit colony, in South Australia. 2054. You feel fully convinced, from what you say, that New Zealand can compete favourably with Australia in the production of grain and other agricultural produce ?—Undoubtedly. 2055. You say you were on the Murray Eiver : do you know anything of the fruit colony ? Yes; I stayed some months at Eenmark, making inquiries as to the prospects of that industry. 2056. We had evidence that if we federated the. immediate result would be that the jam and fruit industry in New Zealand would be ruined ?—I think that with New Zealand's climate we could hold our own in the fruit-market under federation. Certain fruits could be better grown in Australia, but with certain other fruits New Zealand could beat them. For instance, the Queensland or Murray Eiver fruit-grower could not grow apples or black currants, nor could the NewZealander grow bananas to make a profit. I believe that the New Zealand wine industry might be slightly injured by federation .on account of the Australian wines coming into New Zealand, but ours is only a small industry at the present time. 2057. Have you had anything to do with the fruit-growing industry in New Zealand ?—Yes. 2058. What is your experience ? Are there many difficulties in the way of growing fruit ? Yes; the apple-growers have lost very heavily from the ravages of the codlin-moth. 2059. Taking New Zealand from Otago up to Auckland, would you consider it a good country for fruit-growing, or the reverse ?—lt is a good country for growing fruit; but from a commercial point of view it is not, generally speaking, a very profitable business, because growers have to
453
A.—4
depend on the local market. The supply exceeds the demand, so prices are often ruinously low, as we have practically no outside market to take the surplus. 2060. Would you say that the science of fruit-growing was properly pursued here ? —lt is not generally conducted on such good business lines as in California, where they grow immense quantities of a few good varieties, thus enabling them to- fill repeated orders (of certain brands) from canning and other buyers. 2061. Do I understand you to say that fruit cannot be grown at a profit in New Zealand?— No. It depends largely on the management. I know some fruit-growers here who are very successful, and I know others who are not so competent, and who consequently are not able to make it pay. 2062. Is Id. per pound a remunerative price ?—Not for all fruits. You could not grow grapes or Cape gooseberries for Id. per pound. You might grow apples or tomatoes. 2063. Take stone-fruits—peaches, nectarines, &c. ? —They might be grown for that sum if the grower were near his market, and could thus keep down the expense of handling them. 2064. Do you know what the average price in California is ?—No ; but I know that their freights are much less than ours. They can send a box of strawberries a thousand miles for Id. 2065. You think they could not do it at Id. per pound in New Zealand?—lt depends largely on what it costs to send the fruit to the market. But the New Zealand grower cannot always count on getting Id. per pound. Our local markets are so readily glutted that tons of fruit in bhis province are left to rot and are never marketed at all, because it would not sell for enough to pay the freight and other expenses.
Table of Imports into Western Australia. The value of agricultural products imported into West Australia during the years 1897, 1898, and 1899 were as follows: —
The above included the following items : — Butter • 12,405,559 Ib. Cheese ... ... ... ... ... ... 2,905,254 „ Meat, fresh, salted, and preserved ... ... ... 12,905,429 „ Bacon ... ... ... ' ... ... ... 6,999,312 „ Potatoes ... ... ... ... ... ... 29,434 tons. Flour ... ... ... ... ... ... 41,794 „ Preserved milk to the value of ... ... ... £206,678 Fresh and preserved vegetables ... ... ... £46,915 N.B.—The population was only 171,032. Jambs Gillies Butherford examined. (No. 172.) 2066. Hon. the Chairman.) You are a farmer ?—Yes. 2067. Residing where ?—Near Bombay Settlement, twenty-eight miles from Auckland. 2068. Do you agree with the statements made by the previous agricultural society witnesses— Messrs. Kirkbride, Dick, and Hall ? —Yes. 2069. Have you anything to add on your own account to that evidence?— There are one or two little matters that Ido not think much has been said on. I represent the Franklin Agricultural Society, which has a membership of over two hundred. A great deal of maize is grown on the East Coast, and there is a considerable export of it to New South Wales, but the industry would be killed if there was a large duty put on it in Australia. 2070. What do you mean by a large duty ?—A heavy protective duty—say, 6d. per bushel. 2071. Is there anything else you wish to say?—We have been competing with Sydney on the same terms as Victoria and Tasmania, and also with Queensland, but if we have to pay 15 per cent, duty on our produce going there Tasmania and Victoria will meet us on better terms than at present. It would kill a great many of our present exports. Much of our agricultural produce could not compete against such a duty. 2072. Was there any other matter you wished to refer to ?—There was the matter of fungus. It has been stated that much of this is re-exported; but the Chinese population in Melbourne and Sydney is very considerable, and a great deal of it is consumed by the Chinese. Then, with regard to the dairy industry, I agree that it would not be remunerative if farmers had to pay 6s. per day for all the labour employed. In the Waikato dairying is generally done on shares— one man finds the land and the cows, and another man with a family finds the labour, the profits being divided. 2073. Are you in favour of immediate federation, or of waiting'?—l do not think that anything is to be gained now by immediate federation. As we did not join the Commonwealth at first, Ido not think that anything will be lost now by waiting and seeing how the experiment is likely to turn out.
Class of Import. 1897. 1898. 1899. Agricultural produce ... J?ruit and vegetables ... Wines Live-stock ... Farm and dairy produce £ 602,093 145,375 54,677 270,637 515,494 £ 512,813 125,792 30,792 257,608 512,305 £ 335,738 126,137 21,369 193,012 483,855 Totals ... 1,588,276 1,438,600 1,160,111
454
A.—4
Satueday, 9th March, 1901. (No. 173.) John Manners Mobran examined. 2074. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—A manufacturer of mackintosh clothing and ordinary clothing in Auckland. I have been thirteen "years in New Zealand. 2075. Do you know Australia at all ?—Yes ; I have not lived there, but I have visited Sydney. 2076. Will you tell the Commission your views as to how federation with Australia would affect the manfacturing industries of this colony ?—I consider federation would be a retrograde step. I consider that New Zealand is destined to rest upon its own foundations ; that we have nothing to gain by federating with Australia, and a great deal to lose. Our insular position is identical with that of Great Britain ; while Japan, which is an island similar to New Zealand, has proved to the world what an insular nation can do. Australia has a very large seaboard, and in the matter of defence could not concentrate a land or a sea force at any given spot in the short time that we could, or that Japan can, and therefore in that respect she has no advantage over us, but the advantages are rather with us. Then, again, this country is blessed with a temperate climate, and if we get domination over some of the islands in the Pacific, as possibly we may eventually, we would be in a position to be independent of others, as we should produce all we required. Then, again, from the free-trade point of view it has been argued that if we federated with Australia the trade of New Zealand would go to the larger centres of Australia. When I was in Sydney three years ago I found that our trade there was mostly in the hands of the Jews, the same as it is in the Old Country, and these Jews are noted the world over for cutting down prices, and working on the lowest possible scale, and a great many of them are not overproud as to their motives. I think you will find in Sydney that the manufacturers are not in such a prosperous condition as they are in New Zealand, as prices are so low. I found when I was there that things are made at half the price they are made at here. Trousers made from slop material can be made for Is. lid. in Sydney, and suits can be bought for 10s. 6d. in Sydney made of common tweed. The working-people there are not in the same prosperous condition as they are here —the girls are of a rougher order—which leads me to think that wages are not high over there. If they are as high as ours they must have improved facilities and better machinery than we have in this country. To sum the matter up, I consider the clothing-manufacture trade in this country would be simply annihilated by federation. 2077. Would that apply to the boot trade ? —I do not know anything about that trade, but I can see the result will be very similar as to the clothing, as the wholesale houses would purchase their goods in the cheapest market; and at the present time goods can be made very much cheaper in Sydney than here, and there is less trouble there in securing the leather than there is here. 2078. Supposing federation were an accomplished fact, and your views correct —that the manufacturers would go to the wall in New Zealand —what effect would that have upon a city like Auckland ?—I suppose there must be over a thousand girls employed in Auckland now in the clothing trade, which would be destroyed. 2079. What effect would that have upon the population of the place ?—They would have to find other fields for their labour, or else would have to go to Sydney to get work. 2080. Do you think that population would be attracted to New Zealand or Australia ?—Federation would have a tendency to depopulate New Zealand. The clothing trade is now distributed in the four centres, and the natural law is for wholesale trade to centre in one place, and if that place happened to be Sydney or Melbourne the whole of our trade would go to Australia. In some instances, though protected by a duty, it is cheaper to import some lines from England and to pay the duty than to make them here. This Government has been fostering the manufacturing interest, which would be ruined by federation with Australia. 2081. Would it not be a benefit to the farmers of New Zealand if we federated?—l cannot venture an opinion on that point; but I am assured by people I work for that I would have to close my premises because of the heavy quantities of stuff from the other side, which would stop manufacturing in my line. 2082. Mr. Roberts.'] You know that Western Australia has got an arrangement by which she is allowed five years to adjust her tariff to that of the Federal tariff: if a similar arrangement were made in the case of New Zealand, do you think we could then federate with advantage?— You mean, if some arrangement were made to protect our industries ? 2083. If the tariff were so adjusted that it would take five years to assimilate it with the Federal tariff? —After five years you would still be subject to Australia as regards the tariff. 2084. But anything that would affect our trade would affect theirs too?— Yes. 2085. Then, you do not think that any similar arrangement would do you any good? —It would only be putting off the evil day for five years. Andrew Jack Bntrican examined. (No. 174.) 2086. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Bntrican ?—A merchant in Auckland. 2087. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia or not?— Yes; I have given it a little attention. 2088. Have you read the Commonwealth Bill?— Yes. 2089. What conclusion have you arrived at ?—-I think the Government in New Zealand made a serious mistake in not allowing New Zealand to be represented at the framing of the Commonwealth Bill. On account of the proximity of New Zealand to Australia it would have been wise to have sent our Premier to represent us on that occasion, whether New Zealand afterwards decided to come into the Commonwealth or not. It would also have made the way clear for us if we afterwards wanted to go into the Federation, by enabling us to obtain certain concessions such as were procured by Western Australia and Queensland.
455
A.—4
2090. But that not having been done, what do you say? —It alters the position considerably. I am strongly in favour of federation, and I think, seeing that this opportunity has been neglected, we shall not be able to federate on as good terms as we might have done. 2091. What are your reasons for advocating federation?—ln the first place, I look upon this country as being essentially an agricultural and pastoral country, and an open door in Australia is about the very best thing that an agricultural and pastoral country can have, as it will mean a very large increase in our exports to Australia, which is the natural market for them. Our experience of free-trade in New South Wales has proved very conclusively that a general freetrade policy between all the colonies would be the means of materially increasing our agricultural exports. Then, I think there is always a great advantage in being federated with a larger community, such as Australia is bound to become. 2092. You are aware that Australia exports a good deal of agricultural products at present?— Yes. 2093. And that as population increases there they will be able to supply all their own demands ?—The settlement has been principally on the coast, where the climatic conditions are always good, but the interior of Australia will not be able to compete with us in the supply of cereals. 2094. Is there any other advantage that we should derive from federation, in your opinion ? — From a manufacturer's point of view I cannot see that we have anything to fear from it. 2095. You do not share the fear that the large manufactures would gravitate from here to large centres in Australia ?—Decidedly not. 2096. You mean that our manufactures in New Zealand would progress in competition with those in Australia?— Yes; I think we ought to take care in a young country like this that natural industries have an opportunity of developing, but we have in this country industries that are unnatural, which have been bolstered up by protection, and which should not be encouraged. 2097. Can you name one ?—¥es. I would name starch-making, which is not a natural industry, simply because we have to import the raw material from which the starch is made, and until the last revision of the tariff a duty was imposed even on the raw material. The whole community was taxed 2d. a pound on starch, which was equal to 100 per cent., to keep tenor twelve men employed in starch-making. 2098. Are there any disadvantages which occur to you that would arise from federating ?—A few small industries no doubt would be killed. Wine-making would be practically killed in New Zealand; but it is a very small industry, and Ido not think for its sake we should stand out of the Federation. Most of the people engaged in the wine industry are also engaged in fruit-growing, which no doubt they would then pay more attention to. 2099. What do you think of the sentimental question, as to New Zealand retaining its independence? —I do not think there is very much in that. I think we should retain our independence to a great extent. We shall still have our own Parliament, and shall remain a local-governing country; and at the same time there is nothing to hinder us retaining an individuality as a nation, even if we are connected with the Commonwealth. 2100. Do you not fear that the powers of our local Parliament will be curtailed by the Federal Parliament ?—I think that is pretty well provided for in the Federal Bill. Ido not think there is any fear of our individuality being interfered with further than is sketched out in that Bill. 2101. Mr. Millar.] You say you do not believe in bolstering up industries unless they are natural: what do you call a natural industry ?—I include in that term all industries where we have the raw material within ourselves, such as the woollen industry, which is a natural industry of the country. - 2102. And the boot trade ?—Yes, decidedly. We ought to be able, as far as the leather trade is concerned, with our climatic advantages, to turn out hides of very much better quality than in Australia, and we ought therefore to make better boots. 2103. Are you aware of the reason why they cannot turn out leather here of the same quality that they can in Australia?—No, lam not. I would like to be enlightened on that point. 2104. The reason we have assigned to us is that, in order to get leather thoroughly well tanned, it requires to remain a long time in the pit, which means a large amount of capital lying idle, and the tanners here have not that capital to enable them to leave the leather in the pit long enough ? —Why, we have been told over and over again by the Premier that the country is full of money, that the money is being locked up in every possible and conceivable shape in this country—in fact, the coffers are overflowing—and if the tanners are not able to get capital there must be some other reason at the bottom of it. 2105. Then, the clothing trade would be a natural industry, seeing we have the raw material? —Yes, I think so. 2106. So would the bulk of our manufactures, with the exception of the iron trade —I presume you would not include that in the natural industries ?—No. 2107. Is it not as well for us to produce our own machinery here, and thereby find employment for our own people ? —Decidedly; but, still, the question is whether it is wise to pay so much more for your machinery ; and it is a question whether a great many of these men would not be better engaged in another occupation. 2108. Mr. Beauohamp.] Is it not a fact that this part of the colony is specially suited to grapegrowing ?—I am rather inclined to think that the southern part of the colony is just as well fitted for grape-growing. I was informed on very good authority that they could grow grapes in Nelson and Central Otago just as good as in Auckland; but I do not think it possible for us to compete with Australia in grape-growing. 2109. Is it not a fact that some countries are dependent entirely on wine-making?— Quite true.
A.—4
456
2110. And that in future it is likely to be a very important industry in this colony ?—No. 2111. We were informed that in this part of the colony there are tracts of land that are not worth anything but for fruit-growing? — There is a large portion of land here which is only fit for grape- and fruit-growing, the holders of which might be affected to a very small extent by importations of fruit from Australia, but those affected would recover. 2112. Mr. Luke.] You said you thought the iron industry was an unnatural industry of the colony : what would you propose to do in connection with repairs, supposing all the iron-foundries in New Zealand shut up? —I consider a certain amount of iron industry is absolutely essential. 2113. Can you conceive of this : that you could not get an establishment in New Zealand that is dependent entirely on repairs ?—I am inclined to think we have a good many iron-foundries that are nearly all depending on repairs. 2114. Would you be surprised if told that not one-tenth depend on repairs ?—That might be true with regard to the South, where a large amount of new work is being done on the dredges, but I doubt if it is quite so true of Auckland. 2115. Do you not think that by far the bulk of the trade in Auckland is the manufacture of new machinery ? —No doubt about it. 2116. Can you conceive of the smallness of the shops and the smallness of the plants you would have if you were to depend entirely on repairs ?— Ido not know. I have always found that if there is anything wanted there are always plenty of people ready to do it. 2117. Is not that due to the fact that for fully two-thirds of their time they are engaged in manufacturing new machinery ?—I do not think so. I said a certain amount of that business was absolutely necessary. Ido not class it altogether as an unnatural industry. 2118. Is it not as much an unnatural industry as some others, seeing that all the raw material has to be imported ?—Coal has not to be imported. 2119. No ; but the iron, which is the raw material, has to. Coal is a necessity, and we have it on the spot ? —lt is just as much part of the raw material as iron-ore. 2120. Mr.'Beid.] Would you advocate immediate federation with Australia?—My opinion is that New Zealand even now would not be admitted as an original State. 2121. She could not now be admitted as an original State except as an act of grace on the part of the Commonwealth. Do you propose that we should "federate at once, or wait until we have a better opportunity of judging?—l think, the sooner the better, and the better the terms we shall secure. 2122. Do you think the same trade advantages which you advocate could be secured by a reciprocal treaty in regard to our products ? —That is a thing I cannot understand—the advocating of a reciprocal treaty. To my mind, it simply means that if we had free-trade it would be a benefit to New Zealand ; at the same time we object to pay our share of the cost of the Federal Government, while wanting to secure all the advantages of federation without any cost to the State, and I do not think it is possible to do so. I think the people of New Zealand ought to have the opportunity of expressing their opinion on the matter. I believe in the referendum, but I think we want a little more education before the referendum is taken. 2123. Mr. Leys.] When you say that only the coast-line of Australia has been settled, would you include the whole Colony of Victoria, for instance, as a part of the coast-line ?—I think perhaps you misunderstood me regarding that matter. I say that the part of Australia that competes now with New Zealand as a producer of cereals, which are our principal agricultural product, is the coast. The bulk of that produce comes from the coast. 2124. But Australia is such an enormous territory—larger than Europe : what do you call the coast-line ? ' Would you call the whole Colony of Victoria coast-line ? —Yes, nearly all of it, because Victoria has not a very great depth from the coast-line. 2125. Is not Victoria almost larger than New Zealand ; and has it not quite as large an agricultural surface as New Zealand? —I cannot exactly say what the area of agricultural land is. 2126.' Are not there very extensive districts of agricultural land in New South Wales?— But those are largely on the coast. 2127. Is not the same true of South Australia —that also is a large agricultural country ?— Yes ; it produces a large amount of wheat, which is about the staple production there. 2128. I want you to point out what you call the coast-land in avast country like Australia?— Take the butter industry : we know all the dairy factories in Australia are on the coast, and the bulk of the farmers who support them are on the coast—all within a hundred miles of it. 2129. I suppose you know that Victoria, South Australia, New South Wales, and Queensland are all large exporters of butter now ?—Yes. 2130. And you know there is a very large surplus in grain available for export from Australia ?—Yes. 2131. What do you think is the principal produce we shall be able to export there ?—I think, everything. Take butter :we have proved conclusively that the quality of New Zealand butter is very much superior to the quality of any Australian butter. 2132. Is it superior to the Victorian butter? —Yes. 2133. Does it command a higher price in the London market than the Victorian ? —Yes ; it commands the highest price next to the Danish butter; it is quite equal to Danish. 2134. Is it not a fact that Victoria is a larger exporter of butter to London than New Zealand ?—I do not think so; I think New Zealand exports more butter than any of the Australian Colonies. 2135. What items do you say you think we would export to Australia ?—Butter and cheese largely. I think Australia has been the best —in fact, the only natural —market we have had for bacon and hams, which I do not think it possible to ship to the Old Country, excepting in the form of pickled pork in casks ; at any rate, it is not so profitable as shipping bacon and hams to Australia, where there is always a splendid market for them.
457
A.—4
2136. I think we might expect that Australia will have an increasing production in those respects. We have had evidence from a number of millers, and some grain dealers, that in all probability considerable quantities of wheat and flour would come to the North Island from Australia : does that look like an advantage to the New- Zealand farmer?—l dare say a small quantity of South Australian wheat would find its way here, simply because South Australia produces a finer quality than we do, and they find that mixing it with New-Zealand-grown wheat makes a superior class of flour. Therefore a small proportion of that wheat would be imported to this colony. 2137. Have you considered the effect of federation on sugar-importation?— Yes. 2138. I suppose you know that £165,000 is now paid in duty? —Yes. 2139. But that if we federated Queensland would ship sugar in here without duty ?—Of course, we manufacture now a large amount of sugar in New Zealand, and the bulk of that comes from Fiji. You would still have a duty on that sugar. 2140. But if Queensland could ship in here free of duty, should we still import sugar from Fiji ?—Well, that is a grave question ; but, supposing sugar were absolutely free, the loss of the taxation is not, after all, a loss, because people would have per pound reduction on sugar, and would have the money in their pockets. 2141. Would not that taxation have to be made up in a direct way?— Supposing the incidence of the taxation were made to bear equally, the people would be no worse off. 2142. How would federation affect our island trade?—'l believe the island trade would be very seriously affected if we stand out of the Federation. At the same time the bulk of the trade is from Fiji, and Fiji would have everything to gain by joining the Federation instead of joining New Zealand ; and if they did join the Commonwealth it would cut out the business we do at present with Fiji. 2143. You know that Queensland is producing practically the same products as Fiji, and it has an enormous sugar-production now : would not the Fiji trade, under federation, be cut in two if Queensland were to ship in here ?—No, I do not think so at all. 2144. What else could Fiji send in here but sugar ?—There is no reason why the Fiji sugar industry should be affected at all. 2145. You are assuming that Fiji is coming into the Commonwealth?— No. Supposing you took away the duty on sugar altogether, it will not make any difference to the manufacturers of sugar here. 2146. Not if Queensland were to ship in free, and Fiji had to pay a duty ?—They have to pay the duty on the raw sugar now. 2147. But they would not if we were federated with Australia?—lf we were federated we could allow the Fiji raw sugar to come in free. We could easily arrange that. 2148. But we should have no control over the Customs and excise ? —No ; but Fiji would be outside the Commonwealth. 2149. The Customs and excise will be a Federal matter? —Yes; but at the same time there is no doubt that a protective duty would be put on sugar under the Commonwealth, and, Fiji being outside the Commonwealth, the raw sugar coming in from there would have to pay a duty. 2150. Well, under those circumstances would not Queensland command the whole of the Australian market ?—Yes. 2151. That being so, would not it hurt our trade with Fiji ? —Not in copra, fruit, coffee, and Manila beans, and several other things. 2152. Are those large items in that trade? —Yes. They are the products of the islands that come here regularly. 2153. From Fiji?— Yes ; and from the other islands of the Pacific. 2154. Does a large quantity of copra come from Fiji?— Yes ; and a little arrowroot. 2155. Do you think the same number of steamers would be maintained on the line if the sugar-importation from Fiji were destroyed ?—Yes, I think so ; because the bulk of the raw sugar that comes from Fiji is not brought by the ordinary means of communication, but by trampsteamers, which are sent down with coal from Newcastle, and come back with the sugar. The ordinary monthly steamers bring a small quantity of sugar, but it would not interfere with the ordinary steamers if the sugar were stopped ; I am sure they would run just the same. 2156. Hon. Major Steward.] I understood you to say that starch was not a natural industry, and that the raw material was imported ?—Yes. 2157. Is it not a fact that starch is largely made from potatoes?— Yes; you can make it from potatoes. 2158. Is it not also made from wheat?— Yes. 2158a.,Then, there is material in the country for manufacturing starch without importing it ? Yes ; but you cannot make the people use it. 2158b. What is the material that is imported for making starch?— Bice. 2159. It is the rice-starch that is superior?— The British people will not use anything else. We have tried all we can since the starch industry was established to get the local starch used. In fact, when the industry was established I believe it was the intention to try and make starch out of wheat, maize, and potatoes ; but, while the American people will use wheat-starch, the British people will not. 2160. But in this colony do they share the prejudice of the British people ?—Yes. 2160 a. Will the people here not use potato- or wheat-starch ?—No. 2161. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you look upon candles as a natural industry?— Yes. 2162. Would that be affected by federation ?—I do not think so at all. I think our climate and raw material are much superior for the manufacture of candles than the Australian climate and raw material. 58—A. 4.
A.—4.
458
2163. Mr. Beauchamj).} Is it not a fact that companies at the present time are simply struggling for existence with a protective duty of Id. per pound on candles ?—Yes ; but, although I answer that question in the affirmative, it does not give the correct answer, because you must remember that a certain quantity of paraffine-wax -candles are manufactured, the paraffine for which has to be imported, and there is a protective duty on it. 2164. But they reduced the duty on paraffine by 50 per cent. ?—Yes, lately. 2165. By abolishing the duty on paraffine-wax, do you think the candle industry could be maintained ?—I am quite satisfied that it would. 2166. You have not heard that already, with a duty of Id. per pound, plus the transit-charges, we are threatened with competition from Australia? —No ; but I do not fear it at all. 2167. Hon. the Chairman.} Is there any other matter you would like to mention? —I would like to read an extract from a speech by Sir George Grey on the question of federation. He says, "To federate with Australia would hold out many advantages. In the first place, free-trade between New Zealand and the Australian Colonies would give to the whole of this part of the world a commercial lift which you can hardly conceive the value of. I firmly believe that both colonies would go fast ahead. Just remember our isolated position in the world. We have no nations to the south of us : the whole of that immense part of the globe is unoccupied ; we have no one to trade with in our immediate vicinity. But each of these two countries produces exactly what the other requires, and the populations are increasing rapidly ; and I say that the traffic of four millions of people with one another would produce mercantile wealth the importance of which you can hardly estimate. These facts all furnish strong arguments in my mind in favour of union upon proper terms." 2168. You cannot tell us when that speech was delivered ?—I cannot; but it appeared in the Review of Reviews, September, 1899. Another matter I wish to mention is in regard to manufacturing—that is, the advantage of having four millions to supply instead of three-quarters of a milljon, as at present; and it is always held that the cost of manufacture of any article is just in proportion to the amount of production. If you have a large output you must have a large number of people to consume it, and therefore, in having four millions of people to supply instead of threequarters, you will have a larger market, and thereby cheapen production. With regard to the objection as to distance, I might point out that we can put .goods into Sydney from Auckland cheaper than we can send them to Nelson. It seems to me that distance counts for nothing there. We can put stuff into Sydney as cheaply as Melbourne or South Australian people can. William Atkin examined. (No. 175.) 2169. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—A coachbuilder in Auckland. 2170. How long have you lived in New Zealand?— Thirty-six years. lam a colonial. 2171. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?— Yes. As a broad principle, I am in favour of federation, but under present circumstances I am opposed to it. We are, as a colony, too weak to federate, as our identity might be merged in the greater country of Australia. From a manufacturing point of view America is our greatest enemy. Australia we do not fear, nor is it a field of export for us; but the American manufactures are so huge that when we talk of removing the duties the question comes home to us very strongly. The two questions of the tariff and the labour laws are our bugbears. I consider that a 10- or 15-per-cent. tariff for the federated colonies would be no assistance to us as against the American competition, because New Zealand would then be made the dumping-ground for cheap American manufactures, and in my own trade America has had for many years the largest manufacture of carriages in the world. Where we turn out one and two hundred, some of the factories there have a capacity for turning out thirty and forty thousand vehicles per annum. I also notice that for the first time American exports are greater than those of England, so the position we occupy as carriage-makers is a very weak one as compared with the huge competitor we have in America. 2172. How do you think other manufactures besides your own would be affected by federation ?—They would be put in the same position as ourselves. We are bound down by labour laws, and we cannot compete with the cheap labour or the immense production of larger countries. 2173. I thought you said that you were, broadly speaking, in favour of federation?—l was referring to the political aspect —to the wisdom of federating the whole of the English-speaking race. I look forward to the time when all sections of our race will have to federate, and when that time comes, as to how commercial affairs will be taken I do not know. 2174. Do you think New Zealand will be better able to help on that Imperial federation by federating with Australia than by remaining independent ? —By remaining as she is at the present time. 2175. Have you considered how the agricultural interests would be affected by federation?— Yes; and it seems to me that it is a pity that this Commission was not empowered to draw up some scheme whereby, we could increase our population, because that is the greatest want we have at the present time. For some years past the agriculturists of this colony have been working up an export trade with England, and that trade is a better one for them than the Australian trade; and I cannot see that it will be any greater if we did federate than it is at the present time. Therefore we should stick to England, as it is our best market. 2176. Do you believe that the Australians will be able to supply their own requirements, or will they have to draw their supplies from New Zealand ?—I feel they will supply their own requirements. 2177. Is there any other matter that you wish to state that you have not been examined upon ? —Yes. Mr. Masefield was asked a question about the railway-cars, and I think he said he had not been asked to go into the question of price by the present Government. I may say that we had been asked, and we have letters saying that designs and particulars of carriages required
459
A.—4
would be forwarded to us to give us an opportunity of quoting; but those particulars never came to hand, and immediately afterwards the carriages were ordered from America, and we had no opportunity of competing for the contracts. 2178. Do you think that the local manufactories could compete successfully with America in that respect ?—I do. I might say, further, that we have gone into the question of tram-cars very closely, but we do not know what will eventuate in that respect yet. 2179. I understood you to say that the carriage trade would be swamped from America with federation ? —I might have qualified that by saying not in respect to the high-class vehicle. The duty at the present time is absolutely insufficient to prevent America coming in with cheap lines of vehicles. Fbedebick Maskell King examined. (No. 176.) 2180. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you ?—Manager of a clothing-factory. 2181. Have you considered the question of whether New Zealand should federate with Australia or not ? —Yes. 2182. What are your views on the matter ? —I appear before this Commission for the purpose of speaking against federation. I believe the time is not far distant when the masses of the people of this colony will be strong advocates of a free-trade policy, while the natural trend of Australian legislation will be towards protection. In a large country like Australia it pays the monopolists to band together to control legislation for the purpose of fostering their monopolies. Perhaps the best example of this is seen in America, where large sums of money are spent at election-times for the purpose of returning to power men who are pledged to support a policy which will enable the monopolists to get an undue amount of profit out of the consumer. By a combined effort they can sway the whole Legislature in their own interests, while in a small country like our own the monopoly of supplying any given commodity is not inducement enough to warrant such expenditure. It should always be remembered that the wailings of a few who might be temporarily injured by a free-trade policy can always be heard above the rejoicings of those who would permanently benefit, and, from the speculator's point of view, it would be worth the expenditure of large sums in the form of election bribes (as in America) for the purpose of holding a monopoly of any commodity throughout the whole of Australia. I have shown why legislation in Australia will probably trend towards protection, and, however loudly the consumers might complain of the oppression by the monopolists, it would be almost impossible to free this country from the curse of protection. The fact appears to be lost sight of that the finished article of one trade is the raw material of another, and that if the price of one commodity is increased it increases the cost of production of other commodities ; for instance, a boot is the finished article of the bootmaker, but the farmer must have boots while ploughing, therefore if the price of boots is increased the farmer should get more for his wheat; but the price of wheat is controlled by the London market, and therefore the farmer has to pay a higher price for his raw materials (in the item of boots), but to take the lowest price for his product, wheat. Next comes the question of labour legislation. This colony has recognised the fact that labour should get a greater share of the product of labour than it has done in the past. Now, let those who advocate federation show how federation can benefit labour. We will suppose that the trade of this colony increased tenfold; for every shilling that labour gets the labourer would have to do a shilling's worth of work; but the result of increased prosperity would be increased land-values, and increased land-values would mean increased rents drawn from labour; therefore the benefits of increased trade which might come from federation would pass into the pockets of the landowners and speculators, who would grow wealthy, while living in idleness, by the industry and enterprise of the more industrious colonials. Another instance to show the absurdity that federation would benefit the masses of New Zealand can be found by inquiring into the effect upon our coal-mines. If federation caused an increased demand for New Zealand coal, it would only have the effect of increasing the value of the shares in the mines—that is to say, the monopoly value would be increased. The same could be said of any of the other New Zealand products —viz., wheat, oats, wool, kauri-gum, and timber—for if the demand for these products were increased the value of the land upon which they could be produced would also be increased; therefore the owners of the land would get whatever benefit might come to New Zealand through federation, while the return to labour would be a bare subsistence, the rate of wages being regulated by competition among the labourers themselves, which competition would not be decreased by federation. Then, there is the question of future reforms. A demand might arise among the people of New Zealand for an alteration in the Commonwealth law, for which the advanced people of New Zealand might see the necessity ; but before its adoption, and before any alteration could be made, it would be necessary to educate five million people at a distance of more than a thousand miles. Ido not think the question of federation should be approached in a narrow and personal sense ; the question whether A can sell a few more boots, or B another pound of butter, or Can extra case of apples, is to put this great question on an absurd basis. The question is, Will federation benefit the workers of New Zealand'? I believe it will not under the protection policy of United Australia. I believe this country has a great future before it, and that under a wise administration it is destined to become the Britain of the South, and that the time is not far distant when the people will demand free-trade and free-production. The former is impossible without the latter, and the latter is not possible till the people of this colony get equal access to the natural opportunities of the country. Thomas Macfaelane Quinn examined. (No. 177.) 2183. Hon. the Chairman..] What are you? —A grain and produce agent. At present lam not working. I have come over from Australia for the benefit of my health. 2184. How long have you been living in New Zealand?—We came to New Zealand in 1883. Then, after trading with the South, I went over to Australia with some agencies and commissions in 1891 and 1892. I was there again in 1894, and again for the last few months,
A.—4
460
2185. Have you been in business there?— Yes; dealing in produce and the New Zealand trade. 2186. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ? —Yes, for the last ten years. 2187. What is the conclusion at which you have arrived?—l have arrived at the conclusion that it would be to the best interests of New Zealand to federate. 2188. Why ? —I look on it that in some lines we will secure a better market for our products, and that we would become as an inter-State a member of a continent. At the present time we seem to have as many manufactories as we require for our agricultural population, and I do not think that trade has been extended as it should have been. In working the trade on the other side I find in oats and other products that it is too speculative in New Zealand to be worked satisfactorily by merchants on the other side. If they had been satisfied to buy on a fairly steady market, or to secure supplies all the year round, I am of opinion that the market, instead of representing 15 per cent, of our total trade, would probably have been 30 per cent. 2189. Are you aware that Victoria is a very large exporter of oats now ?—Certainly, 1 am. 2190. What hope is thereof New Zealand supplying Victoria with oats?— There has been none since 1894. I may say that we are all in the produce trade in various parts of New Zealand and Australia, and it has been to our interest to ascertain whether our business and private affairs would be best benefited by federation or not. 2191. Have you considered federation from your own point of view, or from the point of view of its effect on the whole colony ?—lts effect on the whole colony. 2192. Will the wheat trade be benefited by federation ?—Australia can produce wheat at 2s. 6d. per bushel, and I think that New Zealand, with an average yield of 30 bushels, against Australia's 8 to 12, ought to be better able to accept 2s. 6d. than the Australian farmer is. 2193. Do you think that the economy in the harvesting arrangements in some parts of Australia compensates for the increased cost of carriage from here to Australia ? —I do not think that wheat would go from here to Australia. I understand from business-men in the trade that there will be better shipping arrangements, and if they find a market in the East, or any other part of the world, the New Zealand farmers will benefit by the shipping facilities and better accommodation. 2194. How would New Zealand share in these facilities ? —Because I understand that if we federate with Australia there are firms in Australia anxious enough, in the course of a few years, to take their produce from New Zealand. 2195. Then, you are in favour of federation ?—Yes. 2196. Hon. Captain Russell.] Have you considered the question of federation in the light of the future —how it will affect us, say, fifty years hence ?—Yes ; I believe that New Zealand will be to Australia much what Denmark is to the British Kingdom, so far as oats and some other form of products are concerned ; and, also, if we are shut out of federation we are in nowise likely to get a reciprocal treaty. From what I know of Victoria lam quite certain they will do their utmost to handicap us in the competition for oats and other things they are interested in. It may harm some of our manufactures ; but if Victoria can compete with us in boot and some other manufactures, I advance the theory that we are more able to compete with them in products that are of more value. 2197. Do I gather from you that you think there is an antagonistic feeling in Victoria against New Zealand ? —Victoria has consulted its own interests by erecting a barrier against our produce which has enabled its farmers to compete against us in grains, hams, bacon, and several other lines. Under federation, what I reckon to be a 25-per-cent. profit would accrue to us in drought seasons. At present New Zealand has to compete with the world in drought seasons, but under federation we would secure that 25-per-cent. preference. 2198. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is it chiefly on account of the trade we are likely to do with Australia in hams and bacon that you would recommend us to federate ?—Not at all. It is not to my interest that New Zealand should federate, or to the interest of my family as a whole. Thomas Beazil Dinbbn examined. (No. 178.) 2199. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—An electrical engineer. 2200. And I believe you are one of the members of the council of the Australasian Federation League ? —Yes, of the Auckland branch. 2201. And I may take it you have given considerable attention to the question of Australian federation ? —I have been a Federationist for the last twenty-five years, and have given a lot of attention to the matter. 2202. Have you considered the question of New Zealand federating with Australia?— More from a sentimental point of view than from a trade or financial point of view. 2203. Perhaps the shortest way would be to ask you to give your views as concisely as you possibly can ? —You will see, according to the reports I have handed you, that the executive cost of federation will be £500,000, including 10 per cent, for contingencies. Exclusive of New Zealand, the cost of federation would be 2s. 6d. per head of the population; allowing four million people for Australia and one million for New Zealand, the cost would be 2s. per head, giving a saving'to Australia of 6d. per head, or £100,000 per annum. According to Sir Samuel Griffiths, the cost will.be £300,000, which will be Is. 6d. per head of the Australian people, exclusive of the people of New Zealand ; and including New Zealand, ]s. 2|d. per head, allowing New Zealand to have a population of one million. By that estimate Australia would save by New Zealand joining £60,000 a year. 2024. I think we want you to show us what advantages there will be to us through New Zealand federating ?—Well, I have handed you in a leaflet which gives my views in a condensed
461
A.—4
form. That leaflet is as follows : " Federation is a voluntary association of States, electing a common Government and Parliament to legislate on matters of joint national importance, and such other matters as are at present beyond the jurisdiction of the individual States which, as a greater power, it can undertake. Federation is not unification, as each State retains its present independence and form of government, and surrenders only matters of national importance to the Federal Government. Federation protects the rights of the several associated States by giving each State an equal voice in the Upper House of Parliament, and also insures the rule of the majority by giving representation in the Lower House pro raid to the population. The Federal Government is bound to protect States from both internal as well as external violence. Federation will protect and help to develop local industry by establishing a protective Customs tariff against the outside world, and by giving a population of four millions as customers to us, against our present New Zealand population of 750,000. Federation gives free-trade as between the States, and will open the markets of Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, Perth, and all other Australian ports to the producers of New Zealand, who, in consequence of cheap ocean freights, will have greater advantages than the local Australian producer, who is hampered by heavy railway freights. Federation will not swamp the New Zealand industries. Wages in Australia are as high, and in many cases higher, than in New Zealand. There is abundance of cheap water-power now wasting in New Zealand which is not procurable in Australia, and cheaper power means cheaper production, superiority in competition, and consequent increase of labour employed. Federation will not cause extra taxation or increase the cost of governing, as the saving effected by combining services under federation, and the better credit and stability given to the various State Governments, enabling advantageous conversions of public loans, will more than counterbalance any loss from Customs between the States, and the small individual expense of the Federal Government. To sum up, federation gives—(l) National combination and stability to the States ; (2) preserves free local independence to the States; (3) gives full representation to each State in the Federal Parliament ; (4) insures the defence of the States ; (5) as applied to New Zealand (which by reason of its soil and climate and by reason of its water-power and water communication has special advantages over Australia), gives the strong pecuniary advantages of—(a) Free markets in Australia and prompt returns as compared with outside markets ; (b) protection against the rest of the world ; and finally (6) federation gives all advantages with no risk of increase of burdens on the people. Compared with the other States of the Confederation, New Zealand has everything to gain and nothing to lose by federation. If it joins, with its natural advantages of climate, soil, scenery, wonderland, and power, New Zealand will become the most prosperous State in the Commonwealth, and will take a leading position in the Confederation. If it does not join, New Zealand will be hedged round from all Australia by the tariff fence ; it will lose its nearest and best markets ; it will be hidden in the shadow of its more powerful competitor ; and, as a smaller Power, will be but a bad second to Australia. In fact, federation in New Zealand's case means prosperity, success, and power. Isolation means neglect, decadence, and weakness." 2205. Hon. Captain Russell.] I understand you are an electrical engineer ?—Yes. 2206. Do you imagine that the manufacturers of New Zealand will obtain motive-power at a cheaper rate than the cheap coal of Australia will give?— Yes, very much so. Electricity in the near future will be pretty well the sole motive-power. 2207. You think, then, that under the circumstances we will be able to compete favourably in all manufactures ? —More than favourably. 2208. Do you agree with the argument put before the Commission very frequently that owing to federation we would not be able to manufacture so economically in New Zealand?—l do not think there is anything in it. There is no reason why we should not manufacture here better than in Australia, for we have a climate here favourable to hard work. For three months in Australia a man engaged in labour has to be continually mopping his face, and he loses thereby a lot of time in his work. That does not occur here. 2209. Do you know Australia yourself?— Yes ; I have lived there for a matter of twenty-nine years. 2210. Then, do you think that the New Zealand workman has greater powers of work than the Australian ?—No, Ido not; but I think, if the New Zealand workman likes, he can work harder than the Australian. The New Zealand climate is very much more favourable to hard work than is the Australian. 2211. Will a residence for three or four generations in that hot climate affect the powers for work of the Australian workman?—lt is bound to affect it in some degree, but, Australia and New Zealand being new countries, we have no practical means of estimating to what extent it will be affected. Ido not think the rising generation of Australians are quite up to the stamina of the people of New Zealand. 2212. You think there is a definable deterioration in the Australian-bred youth?—As far as physical matters are concerned, I think there is a slight deterioration. 2213. Is there any marked difference in the powers of work in the people who live in Queensland and those who live in other parts of Australia ?—There is a marked difference, and it is to be especially noticed in the women. In Victoria the women are plump, rosy, and robust; whilst in Queensland they are yellow, and not so plump as in the southern parts of Australia. They are not so strong, in fact. 2214. Though not so plump, their vital energy may be greater ?—No ; they are more subject to anaemia in Queensland. 2215. Do you think that Queensland will be a country for white men to work in ? —No, I thick not. I would as soon live there as in any other part; but I would not like to work there. 2216. Do you think that white people from generation to generation will be able to live and work there?— Without an infusion of new blood they will decidedly deteriorate.
A.—4
462
2217. What labour do you think will be used in Australia? —That question has already been decided so far as Queensland is concerned—that white labour must be used there. Black labour is practically done away with, although, of course, a large number of kanakas are there at the present time. I may say that there is nothing in the labour bogey in Australia. The kanaka as a workman cannot be any terror or fright to the white workman in any shape or form whatever. 2218. In the course of, say, a hundred years do you think the labour in tropical Australia will be white or black ?—I think in the course of fifty years it will all be white. 2219. And you think that white people will be able to labour persistently in the tropics? —I think there must and will be an infusion of fresh blood. 2220. Let us suppose that there is no infusion, or only a slight infusion ?—-Then I would not like to say what would happen. Ido not think the European production in the northern parts of Queensland would be a very nice race. I think they would deteriorate, but perhaps not to any extent in one hundred years. 2221. If there is to be deterioration, is that a matter to be taken into consideration before we federate ? —I do not think it would affect New Zealand, at any rate. It is principally kanaka labour that is introduced there. Latterly there have been a few Chinese, but that will be prevented by the Federal Government. 2222. Then, you think the law of nature, which throws a great disability in the way of European workmen in Queensland, will not cause a large influx of labour from other countries ?—No ; I do not think the other colonies will allow it. 2223. If you think that in a number of years there is to be a deterioration of the white people, who is to take their place, and who is to do the work ? —They would certainly have to import coloured labour. I know quite well that in Australia there is a large population of a nomadic character, and it is very seldom you will find the same men working for the sugar company for more than two or three seasons. There will always be a fresh infusion of new blood. 2224. Kanakas ?—No ; white men. 2225. What proportion of white labour is employed in the sugar industry ?—-1 really cannot say with any amount of certainty, but as you go north the proportion of black labour increases. There is a large number of white labourers engaged on the sugar-plantations at the present time. In New South Wales, almost entirely so. 2226. Taking an ordinary plantation, what do you think the proportion would be in the fields? —Not more than one-fourth would be whites. 2227. Are they imported men, or bred in the district? —They are men who travel. They generally go right from Victoria north. 2228. Then, do you look forward to an Anglo-Saxon population occupying northern Australia? —I think it will be a white population. There will be a portion of northern Australia that will never be occupied permanently for the purposes of agriculture, and that will necessarily give rise to a nomadic population. 2229. Do you know what is the proportion of native-born people in New South Wales ? —I should say fully two-thirds now. 2230." The infusion of new blood is not very great in New South Wales to-day ? —Not since immigration was done away with. It is not worth taking into consideration. 2231. And will the number become less as time goes on ?—-Yes. 2232. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] There is really a large area of good land in tropical Queensland ?— Yes, very good land. 2233. Is it comparatively cut off from the rest of Australia ?—So far as climate is concerned it is cut off. 2234. Must not that land be worked by coloured labour or remain desolate ? —Unless irrigation is brought in, a large amount of that land cannot be cultivated; and I have no doubt it must be irrigated. 2235. In all tropical countries is not the land cultivated by coloured labour of one sort and another ?—I have been in Fiji, and white men cannot do much work there. I believe, to a very great extent there are certain kinds of work which it is necessary to have coloured labour for. 2236. White men superintend the coloured labour at work ?—Yes. 2237. You mentioned the advantage New Zealand would have over Australia in the matter of electrical power: have you made any estimate of the cost of electrical power over steam-power ? —I can give you a fair idea. An electrical horse-power can be produced for about fd. by water, as against a matter of about ljd. by steam, on the spot. Distance, of course, increases the price per horse-power when water is used. 2238. That is really about one-fourth ?—Yes. 2239. And as we get more experience electrical power will become cheaper?— Yes; it is becoming cheaper every day. 2240. Mr. Millar.] Would not that place us in a position to compete independently of any tariff that was put on ? —-No, Ido not think so. There are freight and other matters to be considered. 2241. Have you any idea how many years it will be before we get any of these powers harnessed up? —It is only a matter of capital. 2242. Are you aware that in Dunedin, where they have capital, and are talking about using electricity, after considering all matters they have actually almost decided to go in for steam as against water ? —Not being in possession of data concerning the matter, I cannot give an opinion, but I presume that is because of distance; but there are, however, inventions in projection that will very possibly materially decrease the losses by distance. 2243. I suppose you would not advocate our joining the Federation until we had looked all round the question, and seen how it would affect us practically ?—Certainly not,
A.—4
463
2244. And if, after that careful investigation, it was found that the advantages were greatly in favour of our remaining aloof from federation you think we would be right in remaining aloof?— As a matter of business, yes. 2245. We have to look at the business side as-well as the sentimental side?—lt is right; but there are higher matters than business. 2246. Mr. Beauchamp.] You estimate that the total cost of the Federal Government will not exceed £500,000? —That is, the executive portion. 2247. Under the Commonwealth Bill they have the right to make the trans-continental railway a Federal matter ?—For defence purposes. 2248. In that case, and in the event of our federating, we would have to bear our quota of the cost of it ?—Yes. It is as necessary for Australia to defend New Zealand as it is for Australia to defend itself, for if an enemy got hold of our coal ports it would destroy Australian commerce. 2249. Do you think that Australia would come immediately to our aid ?—Not with a land force; but there is no doubt that a Federal navy would be established. 2250. In considering this question generally, have you not considered the advantages that Australia is likely to derive rather than those that would accrue to New Zealand ?—Looking at it from the point of view of an Australian producer, I should say, "Stay out New Zealand; we do not want you." 2251. You see greater advantages to New Zealand from joining?— Yes, I see better advantages to New Zealand than to Australia. 2252. Through the irregularity of the Australian climate, is it not almost certain that we wil come in and supply produce to them, federated or not federated ?—Of course, we will supply some produce. 2253. In that case they are not likely to erect a fiscal barrier against New Zealand ?—I think they will to the extent of 25 per cent., but not particularly as against New Zealand. Then, there is another thing: Australia is not likely ever to be all at one time subjected to drought. 2254. Generally speaking, Australia is self-contained ? —To a great extent. 2255. Then, as to the physical deterioration to which you have referred, is that observable only in Northern Queensland, or in other parts of Australia?—lf you stay in one place you do not notice the deterioration very much ; but it is more noticeable if-you travel about to a certain extent, principally in North and Central Queensland. 2256. Do you not know that the inhabited portions of Australia have produced some of the finest athletes in the world ?—That is so. I heard some evidence given here regarding the higher mental plane occupied by the people of New Zealand. I have travelled about a good deal, and if I was dropped down here suddenly at night I could not tell the difference between here and the southern parts of Australia. It has been also stated that we occupy a higher social status, and have a superior moral tone, and several things like that. I fail to see it. Strictly and truthfully speaking, I do not see any difference between the people at all, excepting as between here and Queensland, where there is a noticeable physical deterioration. But, as regards morality, I have seen worse doings here than ever I have seen in Sydney or Perth, which are the two worst cities in the Commonwealth. I have seen more juvenile depravity here in Auckland than in any part of the Australian Colonies. 2257. Have you compared the statistics of Auckland with those of Sydney?—l know that the crime statistics of Sydney are very much against Sydney in comparison. That can be easily traced to the convict element. 2258. Mr. Leys.] How about poverty in Australia? —There is a certain amount of poverty, and there always will be so long as drink, gambling, and other ills retain their present hold. 2259. Have you seen the same depths of poverty in New Zealand that you saw in any city in Australia?—No, I have not; but poverty in Melbourne and Sydney is only in the back slums. 2260. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any other matter you wish to refer to ?—I think that New Zealand would be a gainer by federation through the taking-over of the public debts by the Federal Parliament. According to the last Year-book the public debt was £46,000,000. That could be converted by the Commonwealth to 3 per cent., as against the £3 16s. 2d. we are at present paying. 2261. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You are aware that we cannot get out of our liabilities for twentynine years. We can convert at a great cost, but we cannot pay off our debts ?—Of course, that would have to be with the consent of the bondholders. Ebnest William Burton examined. (No. 179.) 2262. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a solicitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, practising in Auckland?— Yes. 2263. Have you given attention to the question of New Zealand federating with Australia ?— I have. 2264. What is the conclusion at which you have arrived ?—1 may say that lam in favour of New Zealand federating with the Australian Colonies. 2265. For what reasons? —The first of the questions raised against federation is that we should lose'our independence by joining the Commonwealth. I think that is an error, because we might say that in every Federation the individual loses his liberty, or a portion of his liberty, by joining in the Federation. I think that would be conceded as going too far. There was no loss of liberty in the various provinces of the Canadian Dominion or the United States of America by joining the Dominion or the Union. The next point raised is that of distance. I would point out in regard to distance that, in the first place, most of us are looking forward to the federation of the whole of the Empire at no distant date, but the very arguments of distance that are alleged to tell against federation with Australia will tell with a hundredfold more force against any possible
A.—4
464
Imperial federation. Then, there is the question of the loss of nationality—that Australia will develop into a different race. I would point out that at the present moment everybody must observe that there is an enormous difference between the colonial and the Home-born Briton. We only had to look at the rank and file of the Imperial .soldiers who were here the other day to see that there was a marked line of divergence between the average man of that group and the men of New Zealand and Australia; but I maintain that the difference between the colonists of Australia and New Zealand and the people of the Mother-country is far greater than the individual difference between the people of Australia and the people of New Zealand. Therefore I say, with regard to the points of difference, and of the likelihood of a different nationality developing in time, that if those reasons tell against our federating with Australia they tell with a hundredfold more force against any federation with Great Britain. There are great differences to be wiped away before Imperial federation can take place. We have no aristocracy in these colonies, no class and caste distinctions, no pauper problems to face in social organization. Then, it is argued that by federation we will be brought into competition with the people of Australia. Of course, as we all look forward to the federation of the whole Empire, that must bring us into far greater competition, as regards manufactures, with the people of Great Britain. Then, there is the point that has been raised that, if we unite with Australia, on all questions that affect the Continent of Australia we will have absolutely the whole voice of united Australia against New Zealand on all questions brought up in the Federal Assembly. With regard to that, I happened to have an interview with Mr. Barton in Sydney in January of last year, and I put that question to him. The answer he gave me was this: "I am delighted to be assured that we are at last united. I should have valued the assurance more if it had come from an Australian source ; but do you really think that under a system of representative government Cabinet would set about wrecking itself by making an enemy of a whole colony?" I reckon that in all questions that come up we will have to face a system of party government, and I cannot conceive a question coming up on which we would find the whole of Australia against us. Then, as to the black labour, it does not appear to me that we have any greater reason to fear the kanaka labour in Queensland swamping us in the way of manufacture than we have to fear the coloured labour of Fiji swamping the New Zealand markets. One assumption is about as logical as the other. I think that these colonies ought to be united fn the way of naval defence. If any of you have perused the weekly editions of the Times during the last six months you will have seen that on the China station Britain has been outclassed in naval strength, and that as to Japan and Eussia, on the China station their combined fleets far exceed that of Britain. I think you will find that the Japanese fleet in the course of construction will place Japan in the position of being the strongest Power in the Pacific. It would be absurd to say, in the face of combinations occurring near Home, that Great Britain should denude herself by making her naval strength in the Pacific greater than it is. In time it will be necessary for these colonies to take up the question of making themselves a naval Power in these waters. Unless we are united we shall find that we shall not be able to keep out the Japanese in the same way that we can the Chinese. It is said that by federation the manufacturing industries of the colony will be ruined. According to the last census there were 282,932 bread-winners in the colony, but of that number there are 214,876 engaged in callings that cannot possibly be affected by federation. That leaves only 68,056 to be accounted for. I wanted to find out how many of that number could be placed within the category of manufacturing interests, and the only light I can find on the subject is in the Year-book of 1899. That states that there are altogether 27,389 employed in manufactures and works. An analysis of these is given, and from it we see that there are 15,190 engaged in works that cannot possibly be affected by federation. These works are meat-freezing, sawmills, sash-and-door factories, butter- and cheesefactories, breweries, malt-houses, and gasworks. That brings the number down to 11,199 who can in various manufactures be prejudicially affected by federation with Australia. Then comes the question of finance. 1898 was a fair average year, and I notice that in that year the Customs revenue was £1,965,000, and the beer duty £76,200, making a total of £2,041,200. With regard to the making-up of that revenue, the following items will remain much about the same : Spirits, wine, beer, cigars, cigarettes, tobacco. In 1898 £764,735 was contributed by these items, and will remain pretty much the same under federation. I think it is wise policy to tax spirits and tobacco. There is a balance of about £1,190,000 that will vary by our being admitted to the Union. Supposing the Federal Customs duties averaged 15 per cent., that would mean a reduction on the figures we have to deal with of £324,618 on the £1,190,000. Then we have to add to that the loss on imports. In that year the import duty on goods imported from Australia amounted to £52,125, which gives a total loss by federation of £377,443. Then comes the cost of the Federal Government. This is set down at from £300,000 to £500,000, and is to be paid pro ratd of population, which would make our share £83,250. That makes the total loss we have to face by federation £460,000. Now, if we have a reduction in our Customs to 15 per cent, from 22£, we must allow that there will be some increase in our imports, and I say we ought to allow about £100,000 for that in a normal year. That would reduce the amount to £360,000. That is called by some an absolute loss, instead of being a question of where and how the burden can be shifted. I would just call attention to the very high duties in New Zealand, and I think we shall have to consider the question of shifting the burden whether we join the Federation or not. It seems to me that the burden will have to be shifted in some way from the Customs to a more direct form. Those are, shortly, the points I have thought over, and the difficulties that have to be faced. I have endeavoured fairly to face them. 2266. Do you think that the manufactures iv New Zealand would not be prejudicially affected by federation? —I do not think so, if their machinery is brought up to date. 2267. Hon. Captain Bussell.] You mean that there are no inherent disabilities in New Zealand to prevent her competing with Australia ?—That is so.
465
A.—4
2268. Mr. Roberts.] Do you take any account of the loss of duty that would take place on sugar ?—No, I did not take particular note of that. 2269. Mr. Millar.] I think all the figures you quoted with regard to the factories were from the census of 1895 ?—Yes. ■ 2270. Have you any idea of what these numbers have risen to now ? —I am at a loss to say; but I do not see how your factories can be increasing fast, inasmuch as I see the export of manufactured goods has come down to almost nil. 2271. Between 1895 and 1900 there was an increase in the hands' employed in the factories of 19,059 ? —I do not know how that is made up. Of course, I know that even a bakery with two hands is a factory now. 2272. If, in the light of the last five years' working, our present tariff has enabled work to be found for our own people, do you think that is better than finding work for people outside the colony ?—Very much better; but, notwithstanding that, you cannot keep people in New Zealand immediately there are improved times in Australia. 2273. Do you think the value of the Australian market to our agriculturists is worth our handing ourselves over to be governed from Australia ? —That is also begging the question. I maintain that we do not hand ourselves over to be governed by Australia. We enter into a Federal bond, under which we all have the same voting-power as we have here in New Zealand, and we will be under a Constitution that is much more liberal. 2274. Do you think the community of interest in Australia would not be greater than the interest the Australians take in New Zealand ? —I think that that matter of want of interest is due to the fact that up to the present we have taken no part in Australian affairs. 2275. Mr. Beauchamp .] In Australia there are several tobacco-factories and spirit-distilleries on which excise duties simply will be paid there: have you considered what the loss to the revenue of this colony would be by reason of the imports of these goods on which excise duty has been paid in Australia?— That is out of my line, and I cannot say. 2276. Mr. Leys.] Do you think it fair to exclude all the commercial classes from those who are earning a living from manufactures ?—ln what way ? 2277. Is it not a fact that a great many commercial people depend on manufacturing industries for their living—clerks, commercial travellers, and so forth ? —There must be a certain number outside those actually engaged in manufacturing that are involved in them. 2278. Well, then, do you think your broad division is a fair one? —It is approximately fair. 2279. Do you think if our manufactories were closed up there would be as many people engaged in mercantile pursuits as appear on that census return?—l remember the time when we had no manufactures here at all. John Mitchell McLachlan examined. (No. 180.) 2280. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—A retired business-man. 2281. Having lived in New Zealand for how long? —For fifty-eight years; I was born here. 2282. You have a written statement: will you read it, please?—"l am a native of New Zealand, and was born at Cornwallis, Manukau Harbour, in 1842. lam a retired business-man, and a Justice of the Peace. During my business career of thirty-five years I have been a director of two large timber companies, and otherwise engaged in general business operations in the City of Auckland. But it is more particularly as a native of New Zealand, not as a business-man, that I desire to give evidence. I have, of course, listened to the arguments pro and con, and generally from a business point of view I indorse the statements of those who are opposed to federation. Taking the whole of the circumstances into consideration, I think now, as I have always thought, that it would be unwise to join the Australian Commonwealth. I favour rather, if possible, a closer union with the Mother-country, which I, with hundreds of other native - born colonists, still look upon as our 'home,' and which many of us have visited as such. We are Englishmen, Scotchmen, or Irishmen, as our parents were, and any entanglements which would weaken this feeling would, in my estimation, be injurious. W 7 e hear a great deal about the ' broader life' and ' higher ideals' that would be evolved by our connection with the Australian Commonwealth; but, to me, to be a citizen of the Empire, and of that section of it called ' New Zealand,' is to place me on a higher plane than merely to be a native of a dependency of New South Wales, as we were seventy or eighty years ago. In fact, our present geographical connection with Australia, and constant use of the term ' Australasian ' by the Press of New Zealand, is a very great drawback, and I should like to see the word ( Australasian' in the Interpretation Act as including New Zealand altered. Sir Westby Perceval, when Agent-General, drew attention to the use of this word in connection with New Zealand as injurious, and, in a letter to me, regretted his inability to have it done away with. Beside all this, there is the fact that New Zealand is unique as regards—(l) Its insular position, its climate and scenery, and its productiveness ; (2) its people and their physique, in that in both of these respects, from the very nature of its first settlements, it more nearly resembles Britain than any other dependency of the Empire, and that these unique features are all in our favour ; and it should be our object to retain them, for, as years roll on, it will be found that the Canadian will become more and more American, the Australian will develop a type differentiating him more and more from the Briton, whilst the African will probably be further removed than either; and that this must be so is evident to every one who remembers the nature of their first settlements and their present environments." 59—A. 4.
A.—4
466
NEW ZEALAND. Weitten Statements accepted as Evidence. Coleman Phillips, Settler, Wairarapa, Wellington. (No. 181.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. Coleman Phillips as his evidence, as he could not appear for examination :— " I regret that I cannot attend the sitting of your Commission personally. Perhaps you will accept my evidence per scripta. As a country settler, lam strongly in favour of federation, and write to voice the wishes of many of my fellow-settlers in the Wairarapa, who view with alarm the evidence that is being tendered your Commission. There appears a distinct conflict already between manufacturers and producers, whereas New Zealand is still in the pastoral, agricultural, dairying, and mining stages, manufacturers being but a minor element in our development. I know of no instance in history in which peoples speaking the same language, obeying the same laws, and worshipping the same gods could be kept from federating with sach other. New Zealand is even now federated with Australia in a score of different things, and your Commission could not break those bonds; I instance postal and telegraph matters, New Guinea colonisation, wife-desertion, legal matters of practice, Church matters, South African defence, stock-diseases and quarantine, rabbit-suppression, banking, insurance, plague-prevention, &c. Most of our statutes are moulded upon Victorian or New South Wales statutes. I have sat at a Stock Conference in Wellington in which the federation of the whole of the Australasian Colonies in all matters connected with stock or land was practically complete. The land of these colonies cannot be worked with safety where federation of some kind is wanting. The New Zealand statute-books fairly bristle with evidences of federation. Change but the name, and the statutes read equally well in each colony. As to the twelve hundred miles of Tasman Sea which separate us from Australia, I would point out that, apart from the fact that it would be cheaper to supply the Sydney market over twelve hundred miles of sea-freightage than by six hundred miles of land-freightage, there is another and more portant reason why these twelve hundred miles of sea furnish twelve hundred good reasons why we should federate. Taking Sydney and Auckland as the opposite base angles of an equilateral triangle, of which the apex is Noumea, in New Caledonia, I hold that an 11,000-ton French ironclad (which is shortly to be there), and a fortified French naval base, will compel Sydney and Auckland to similarly fortify and assist the Imperial fleet to guard the Tasman Sea. Without federating they cannot assist each other. Union is always strength, and I trust your Commission will support that time-honoured maxim. We on both sides of the Tasman Sea must trust to ourselves, not to the opinions of Imperial officers, who of all men appear to be most wanting in knowledge of modern requirements in war. The greatest danger to us looming in the future is a Chinese or Japanese invasion (at present we are federated through mutual laws made for the purpose of excluding them should the immigration become too numerous); the merest whisper of such a thing would compel us to join together for mutual defence. Our duty is to join with and mould the Federation for our future benefit. New Zealand always will be powerful enough to mould the Commonwealth to its wants. Islands usually have dominated continents—such as England, Europe; Japan, China; Greece, Italy; and Sicily, too, may be regarded as insular ; and in their time all these islands dominated their neighbouring continents. Already our Union Steamship Company's fleet does much of the Australian outward shipping. With respect to our labour unions, I would remind these gentlemen that they are the heaviest-taxed men on the face of the globe, and that they appear blind to their fate. A shilling goes twice as far in Sydney as it does here. Wages can readily be 2s. a day less in Sydney, and yet pay the workman better than in New Zealand. If federation only brings about the great blessing of making the 75.-a-day wage worth even ss. (not 3s. 6d. as at present), the labour unions should be thankful. That is, in my opinion, what it will do, and save £1,000,000 a year in gross taxation by conversion of loans and a lessened general tariff. In science matters the scientific men of these colonies are federated. I am proud to name myself a member of the Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science, an association now some ten years old, holding its sittings in turn around the different colonies, so that in religious, scientific, legal, parliamentary, defence, and pacific matters we are already federated. Furthermore, the New Zealand potato, onion, oat, maize, cheese, butter, bacon, ham, horse, &c, are the best of their kind, and bound to dominate the markets of the Southern Hemisphere, and many of the north-eastern ones too. Would the labour- and trades-unions of the colony place their own hands in shackles by closing not only the Australian markets, but the immense markets beyond, which will be opened up through Australian ports to New Zealand's productions, and allow inferior Australian goods to be supplied? I scarcely think so. Upon calm reflection, these labour unions and your Commission must, I think, " weigh down the beam "in favour of federation. Sydney not long since sent 1,000 tons of New Zealand potatoes to Manila. I but write in the interests of the colony as a whole, dropping self out of the question. With respect to the loss of some parliamentary independence, that will do New Zealand good. Ever since 1869, when the mistaken policy of huge public debt and consequent huge public taxation was entered upon, the various Governments of the colony have done nothing but harm to the workers by making their daily wage worth only half what it appears to be. I exclude no Government we have had from this blunder. Time it is to let a Federal Government try and remedy the mistake in the interest of the great mass of men and women workers. The colony "has had full power to tax itself, and it has eagerly availed itself of every avenue to do so, until now there exists a list of thousands of articles subject to taxation. Nothing escapes this list, from the cradle to the grave. New Zealand could now cover itself with railways with the interest it pays upon its public debt. Tbe Federal Parliament would never be so unjust as to plunge the States
467
A.—4
into such enormous debt. Its object would be quite different—viz.. to check State extravagance, and keep taxation light upon the people. The highest principle to make a people strong, happy, and contented is to keep down domestic taxation. I am convinced that the great benefit of federation to New Zealand would be in a reduction of our taxation. Only lately the New Zealand Government endeavoured to tax the farmers' milk. I writers the promoter of New Zealand trade into the Pacific since 1873. I strongly desire federation with Australia, so as to work out Australasian interests in the Pacific, jointly from Sydney and Auckland, which I have always advocated. I write, too, as the father of the co-operative dairy factory movement in these colonies, which I had the honour of instituting in 1881, a movement which, without public cost, has been found of great benefit to all classes of settlers, traders, and labourers. Ido not wish to see this industry taxed, and I believe the Federal Government will keep it from taxation. My wish is to see all Australasia working together as one united people, aiding and assisting each other, which they will do if allowed, unitedly repelling foreign aggression, and moulding the Federal Commonwealth Act to their wants. I have no fear as to New Zealand's position in the Commonwealth. There can be no petty logrolling in the high Senate of Australasia, as there is now in all the State Legislatures, to the injury of the mass of the people. The actions of the Dominion Parliament of Canada stand out to us as a shining example. And we hear very little scandal from the chief Congress of the United States of America. Any Federal Government can keep down domestic taxation better than State Legislatures, which, having to supply directly the funds for local expenditure, keep down the continued demand for premature public works. I think Australia will have the good sense to allow us to join as an original State, but join we should not fail to do. With respect to manufactures in this colony, protected under a 20- to 40-per-cent. tariff, I would point out that these only injure the colony, even the best of them, by shackling trade. They would develop better under a Federal oariff, owing to our superior energy and coal resources; but I have no wish to injure any established manufacture,-and would suggest a graduated Federal scale of reduction for five or ten years for this colony." J. O'Bbien, Timber Merchant, Auckland. (No. 182.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. O'Brien as his evidence, as he could not appear for examination : — " I have not had much opportunity of giving this great and important question the careful and close application it demands in order to be able to give anything like an intelligent opinion of what federation with Australia really means. lam inclined to think it would be a mistake to join, and these are my reasons for thinking so: (1.) That we would to a large extent forfeit our independence and sink our individuality and national character, which we are as New-Zealanders proud of. (2.) That the curtailed duties and responsibilities of State Parliaments would not induce our best men to go in for such politics, but would have a tendency to produce an inferior class of politicians. (3.) That all leading questions, such as defence, Customs, post and telegraph, railways, &c, would be taken over by the Federal Parliament, and consequently our best men would aspire for Federal honours, to the neglect of our own immediate concerns in the State. (4.) That the seat of the Federal Government would be too far away, and our representatives too small in numbers to have much weight or power to effect reforms that we may think desirable and essential for the well-being of our country, and there would be a risk of these matters, if taken out of the hands of the State Government, being very much neglected. (5.) That we would be drawn, as one of the federated States, into the vexed question of white versus black labour, which is likely to be a very troublesome one in future, and such disputes could not be settled by our Arbitration or Conciliation Boards. (6.) That, being part of the greatest Empire in the world, assistance for defence purposes, when needed, will be always given ; and, besides, the Commonwealth will in all probability unite with us in matters of defence without our joining the federated States. (7.) That the extra cost of Government which must necessarily follow the establishment of the Federal Government would mean a considerable increase of taxation, and would also have a tendency to reduce wages by flooding our markets with goods made by Chinese and other cheap labour. (8.) That federation would give an increased prosperity to some of the other colonies, especially New South Wales and Victoria, and considerably depopulate, for a time at least, our own towns. Many new industries will be started in time over there, and no doubt protected by a tariff. (9.) That New Zealand possesses one of the most beautiful and healthy climates in the world, and a fine progressive race of people, with natural resources and rich possessions all her own ; and we would be hampered and retarded in our progress if not left free to work out our own destiny. (10.) That Australia will never be induced to put a prohibitive tariff on our produce, but will be inclined to arrange reciprocal treaties to our mutual advantage. For instance, kauri and white-pine timber are used for special purposes over there, in preference to the Baltic or Oregon timber, and is unquestionably more suitable ; and it is contrary to common-sense to say that she would so far stand in her own light by putting a prohibitive tariff on importations of the kind or commodities that she needed. If they do, there is a market now for all our surplus kauri in England, France, Glasgow, Belfast, and the growing demand, by the expansion and progress of our own country, will make an increasing demand, for our timber. The white-pine is peculiarly adapted for butter-box making. I have never heard of another timber so suitable for that purpose ; it leaves no taste of the wood on the butter, while most other pine has an expensive chemical preparation to make it tasteless; and I am almost sure there never will be a tariff put on white-pine. The kauri is used largely for furnituremaking, matched lining, flooring, fittings, &c, and is preferable to the Baltic or Oregon, and is as cheap as any other pine, as far as I know, and is much better suited for the purposes I mention than any other timber that I know of. The kauri, I feel sure, will not be handicapped if we never federate."
A.—4
468
Austin H. Bisley, Fruit-grower, Nelson. (No. 183.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. Austin H. Bisley as his evidence, as he could not appear for examination : — "As requested, I hereby have pleasure in writing re federation. My views on the matter, in the first place, I might say, are, perhaps, of little "consequence, as I have not perhaps taken the interest I should have done, or considered federation with Australia to any extent. The general advantages to be derived I have considered more from an interested point of view—viz., with reference to our hop industry. If anything, I think the great question of federation with Australia is premature, and could be considered with greater advantage in, say, five years hence. Hops are our principal staple, and I think if we had a reciprocal treaty it would meet our case. If that were granted us, lam of opinion we could almost double our present production, and compete more than favourably with any hops grown in Australasia. Without a reciprocal treaty or federation, I presume an equal duty in all States will exist. In that case we could well compete with hops grown in other parts of the world. Now, all parts of Australia, with the exception of New South Wales, have duties from 6d. to Bd. per pound, and each colony, in the face of these duties, takes our hops largely ; but, of course, without a treaty, such business cannot be expected to exist for, say, longer than three or four years. I am aware that some of the largest breweries in Australia, especially those of New South Wales, are already contracting with Tasmanian hopgrowers with a view to extending their gardens for large supplies, with a guarantee to take their production for five years at Is. per pound. At the expiration of this time, as I have said before, without a reciprocal treaty our own industry must fall from an average production of 4,500 bales, with an average value, say, of £53,000, to that of the requirements of this colony, of about 1,500 bales, to a value of £18,000. Such loss of production would be very serious-to Nelson, and mean ruin to very many small settlers. Hops here are mostly grown in small patches—say, Ito 3 acres —and can be brought to full maturity from three to four years. Hence my opinion that, without a treaty, Tasmania can grow almost Australia's requirements in three to four years from time of planting." Geoege E. Aldbeton, Editor, Northern Advocate, Whangarei. (No. 184.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. George E. Alderton as his evidence, as he could not appear for examination : — " Being unable to attend your Commission personally, I beg to submit in writing my views in regard to the industry of viticulture and its relation to federation. Without in any way wishing to express an opinion for or against federation on its broad basis, I feel it my duty to point out that, in the matter of viticulture, federation with Australia would mean utter ruin. The kauri-gum and kauri-timber industries of the Province of Auckland, now worth more than all the wool exported from the Port of Lyttelton, are industries which are rapidly dying through depletion. Both will probably have completely disappeared during the first generation of this century. The land which is now yielding so much wealth will have been exhausted, and those industries, which now support directly and indirectly no less than twenty-five thousand people, will have disappeared. Hence it is most desirable to provide, if possible, new industries in place of those which we must inevitably lose, for neither kauri-gum nor kauri timber can be reproduced. The lands, too, from which the timber and gum are obtained, being practically useless for agricultural purposes, must, so far as that branch of industry is concerned, remain barren wastes. We have, however, in the vine a plant that will flourish on this otherwise useless land. But if viticulture is to be firmly established here we must have a clear understanding that there is to be no federation, and if the Government, in addition, were to afford the industry a fair measure .of encouragement we might reasonably expect the viticultural industry to fully compensate us for the lost timber and gum industries. Vineyards are being planted throughout the north, and wine, quite equal to the best Australian, is being produced. As to the suitability of climate and soils, there can be no room for question. Nor is there any question as to markets for the wine. The world is our market, and the further the wine is ship-borne the better it will mature. Nothing " makes "or ages certain classes of wine so much as a long sea-voyage. For the thorough establishment of viticulture in this colony we want—(l) The existing law in regard to phylloxera made to conform with the law obtaining in France ; (2) bottle licenses, so that stores can sell the wine; (3) an Act of Parliament guaranteeing that, whether federation is adopted by this colony or not, the industry of viticulture shall remain protected as against the importation of Australian wines and grapes for a specified number of years. It may seem a novel proposal to pass an Act for such a purpose, but now that federation is dangling in the air we can have no security from year to year, there will be no finality to any proposal, and all confidence in industrial pursuits will be destroyed; hence, if an industry is to be encouraged by the colony, it will be necessary to pass an Act affirming that that industry is to remain unaffected by any treaty or legislation for a given number of years. If Australian wine were allowed to come into this colony duty-free, viticulture could never be established here. The importance of establishing the industry in New Zealand is very far-reaching, for, apart from the potentialities of the future of viticulture — an industry which gave to France the most numerous and wealthiest peasantry in the world—we have to bear in mind that we have in the North Island immense tracts of land, which never can be used for any economic purpose except vine-growing, and if we sacrifice that industry we render absolutely useless an immense area of country. The vine will grow where grass will hardly exist, and often on the poorest of soils produce the best wine, and that, too, without any manure. Its cultivation in this colony has been sadly overlooked ; but there is ample evidence available now to demonstrate the great value of the vine in so far as the North Island is concerned, and the objectlesson furnished by the Government plantation at Wairangi, where the vines grow luxuriantly on the poorest of soil, confirms all that I claim for the vine." • ■':'
469
A.— 4\
F. G. Ewington, Land Agent, Auckland. No. 185.) The following written statement was accepted from Mr. Ewington as his evidence: — "My name is F. G. Ewington. I am a land and estate agent, and have been in Auckland since 1862. In my opinion, federation with Australia would benefit New Zealand politically, commercially, and socially. I wish to emphasize the political phase of the question; no right decision on federation can be come to without realising and understanding the changed and changing aspect of the political situation in the Far East. China, an Empire which has endured for thousands of years, is breaking up, and European Powers will almost certainly become involved in war between themselves or Japan in scrambling for territory. Had China, which is practically eighteen mandarinates or kingships, subject to the whims of the dominant clique at Pekin, federated thirty years ago, federalism might have saved her from dissolution. It may yet save her if Britain, the United States, and Japan will step in to protect her from Russia and France, and give her similar assistance throughout the Empire to that which Britain and Japan are giving the Chinese in the Yangtze territory. Russia and China are our danger. Federation gave new life to Canada, Switzerland, and Germany, and will no doubt greatly consolidate, invigorate, and benefit Australia Russia will most likely dominate China. She is seizing vast territories, and closing Chinese markets against British goods. She has not only made Vladivostock almost impregnable, but Port Arthur also ; and, although now only twenty days' steam from New Zealand, she is trying to get a port nearer to us, and may possibly get one in or near the Persian Gulf, within easy access of the Trans-Caspian Railway. France, the ally of Russia and hereditary enemy of England, is considerably nearer to us at present in Indo-China, embracing Cambodia, Cochin-China, and Annam. Both France and Russia are exhibiting hostility to Britain in the Far East: Russia from the north and France from the south. But France's possessions at New Caledonia, only a thousand miles north-west of New Zealand, and the Society Islands, only two thousand miles north-east of this colony, bring her into strategical positions whence she could take quick advantage of our isolation in event of war. If Britain were involved in war with Russia and France, Britain might not be able to afford adequate naval assistance to New Zealand. Britain would have to exert herself at more vital places near her heart. A mere outpost like New Zealand would have to rely mostly upon itself. But Japan has now been admitted into the family of nations, and she has a navy in the Pacific and 200,000 soldiers. She may agree with Russia over Korea, or she may fight Russia over it; and in either case Britain is almost sure to be drawn into the struggle. Japan also may get to war with Russia over China. Japan aspires to save and guide China. But, whether there be war or not, there will be trade disputes between New Zealand and Japan ; so that that new great political Power in the Pacific has quite altered our political situation as a colony. Taking, therefore, into account the changed and changing aspect of affairs in the Far East, and the fact that we cannot escape the consequences of Britain's foreign policy, I think our federating with Australia would secure to us more strength and prestige. In any representations we might have to make over trade or racial disputes we should command a better hearing if we had united Australia by our side. In any matters of defence we should be stronger if we had the wealth and population of Australia with us. She will have a navy. Hence, to my mind, it is not a mere question of whether we should pay more for our boots or our administrative government; it is a question of national life and death. Sir Philip Fysh, Treasurer of Tasmania, shows that New Zealand's share of the Federal expense will be £279,000 a year at first. In my opinion, if it cost three times that sum it would be money well spent, and the people could pay it in direct taxation. As for the commercial advantages, I believe they would be great. The trade and population of Canada increased greatly in a few years after federation. It stands to reason that free-trade with Australia would be an advantage to New Zealand. The late Sir George Grey, with the instincts of a far-seeing statesman, said at Wellington in 1891, when speaking on federation : ' Considering all these points, I confess lam in doubt as to whether it would be better to federate with Australasia or not. But lam certain that the objections which have recently been made to it and that I have heard are not of very much validity, of that I feel confident. To federate with Australia would hold out many advantages. In the first place, free-trade between New Zealand and the Australian Colonies would give to the whole of this part of the world a commercial lift which you can hardly conceive the value of. I firmly believe that both colonies would go fast ahead. Just remember our isolated position in the world. We have no nations to the south of us—the whole of that immense part of the globe is unoccupied ;we have no one to trade with in our immediate vicinity. But each of these two countries produces exactly what the other requires, and the populations are increasing rapidly ; and I say that the traffic of four millions of people—of four millions of people with one another— would produce mercantile wealth the importance of which you can hardly estimate These facts all furnish strong arguments in my mind in favour of union upon proper terms.' As for the social advantages, I think there would be greater intercourse between New-Zealanders and Australians. All would take more interest in each other. We would have loftier political ideals. An impetus would be given to thought and enterprise. From being slow and small we should become vigorous and great. Although we would lose our identity as a nation, we should only lose it as a single lady loses hers when she gets married. We and united Australia would become ' one people, have one destiny.' We shall not lose legislative independence. The great difficulty I see is in clause 127 of the Australasian Federation Enabling Act, which provides that ' aboriginal natives shall not be counted.' But lam sure our statesmen can get over that difficulty if they honestly desire to unite all Australasia in the desirable and indissoluble ties of federation." . Gekald L. Peacock, Editor, New Zealand Farmer, Auckland. (No. 186.) Mr. Peacock, in lieu of being examined, sent the following written statement, which was accepted as his evidence : — " There are two aspects of the federation question which present themselves for consideracion by New-Zealanders —(1) The commercial, and (2) the political. The commercial advantages of
A.—4
470
becoming a member of the Australian Commonwealth would have to be overwhelming to counterbalance the grave objections from a political and social point of view; whereas the greatest commercial advantage that could be gained from free Australian markets for New Zealand products must be only of inconsiderable value in proportion to the total volume of our produce-export trade. Moreover, it is debatable whether there might not be commercial disadvantages for this colony arising from the Federal bond which would quite discount any trade benefits that might be secured to us by intercolonial free-trade. The only agricultural products of any importance which New Zealand can supply to Australia are oats, maize, potatoes, and dairy produce ; and for these, even if admitted duty-free to Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, and Adelaide, there would only be a market in Australia at exceptional periods of scarcity through drought or floods. At such times there would be a temporary demand for New Zealand produce —duty or no duty—to whatever extent Australian supplies were deficient. Flour has always been cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand, which proves that under free Federal markets we could not sell a bushel of wheat or a ton of flour in Australia (except for mixing purposes), but Australian merchants could undersell our own people in these breadstuffs in New Zealand centres. Under a Federal tariff our hands would be tied as regards making reciprocal Customs arrangements with Great Britain, or with other nations, which, though advantageous to New Zealand, might not suit Australian interests. The control of the railways exercised by the Federal Government might be used to the serious commercial disadvantage of this colony, by means of differential rates and special concessions to big Australian companies and corporations; for it must be remembered that New Zealand could always be outvoted in the Federal Parliament by the united power of the Australian States, or even by a combination of four of them, on occasions where our business interests clashed with theirs. As regards railwayconstruction, for instance, it is unreasonable to suppose that the interests of a number of coterminous continental States would always be identical with those of an island community separated from the former by twelve hundred miles of ocean. Indeed, having regard to inter-State trade rivalry and competition, which it would be idle not to anticipate, the commercial interests of the continental and island communities, in the matter of railway construction and management, might be not only different, but actually antagonistic. The same possible, if not probable, antagonism might arise with respect to postal routes and services, and thus causes of friction and future trouble and estrangement would spring up which might lead to the ultimate disruption of fraternal relations between two members of the British Empire. An irritating and irksome bond of this kind would prove an obstacle rather than a help to the gradual growth of the grander Imperial federation which is the aspiration of all far-seeing and patriotic Britons. Politically, I can see no advantage to this country from joining the Australian Commonwealth under the present Federal Constitution which we should not enjoy as an independent member of the Empire in friendly brotherhood with Australia. With regard to finance, it is generally assumed that, as a member of the Commonwealth, New Zealand would be a gainer, because, owing to the supposed superior security the Federal Government could offer, a lower rate of interest would be paid on account of our public debt. But the real value of national securities depends upon the natural productiveness of the borrowing country, the intelligent energy of its inhabitants, and the wisdom and public honour of its Government. In steady productiveness and varied resources New Zealand is superior to every one of the Australian Colonies, while in the industry of its people and the public integrity of its Government it is at least equal to any. The financial stability of this country and its comparative freedom from serious commercial disturbances is borne witness to by no less an authority than Mr. T. A. Coghlan, the New South Wales statistician, who writes, in the latest edition to his statistical work on the ' Seven Colonies of Australasia,' page 770, as follows : ' The configuration of the Colony of New Zealand renders it to a very great extent immune from the droughts that so much affect the mainland of Australia, and the financial crisis of 1893 had only a comparatively slight influence on its trade; the progress of trade in that colony was therefore fairly regular during the years when the finances of the- mainland colonies were most disturbed.' Surely this is a strong testimony to the steady interest-paying power of New Zealand, which is the main thing the public creditor should and would take into account in making his investments. There is therefore no reason why this country should not be able to borrow in moderation as cheaply as the Federal Government of Australia. Although the taxation per head of population amounts to £3 16s. 9d. for New Zealand, against an average of £2 17s. 9d. for Australia, the wealth per head of population in this country is greater than in any of the Australian Colonies, being £266 in New Zealand, against an average for Australia of £242. Moreover, 14J per cent, of the property in the Commonwealth States is owned by absentees, while in New Zealand they only own 8| per cent, of the total wealth. In short, in whatever way the relative positions of Australia and New Zealand are considered in relation to the chances of unfluctuating prosperity and steady progress, this country has the advantage. In other words, our national business position is the soundest and the most promising. What material benefit, then, can we derive from entering into close partnership with a national business not so good as our own —a partnership, be it remembered, which, once entered into, must be indissoluble? From an intellectual and social point of view, federation with Australia under the existing Constitution would tend, in my opinion, to dwarf and narrow public life and spirit in New Zealand. Even her own representatives, deliberating in the Federal capital, far removed from our island life and interests by hundreds of miles of sea and land, and surrounded by the atmosphere of, and feeling the rush and swirl of, the great continental interests all about them in their daily lifework and social environment —even they would in time become partially estranged from their New Zealand interests and aspirations, throwing themselves into the exciting turmoil and conflict of the larger continental affairs, about which we, as a people living in this colony, would know little, and care less ; while about New Zealand questions the Australians would be even more ignorant, and still less interested. I fear such would be the case partly because of the wide stretch of
471
A.-4
dividing ocean, but still more because there is no similarity, except a superficial one, between the conditions of life here and in Australia. Except for the accident of greater proximity, and the blessed absence of Dutchmen in Australia, there is no more in common between us and the island continent than there is between us and Cape Colony. Under such circumstances only the very loosest Federal tie could prove tolerable, such as the establishment of reciprocal tariff arrangements ; a union for mutual defence against foreign aggression ; and perhaps a common Criminal Code and uniform marriage laws. But the Commonwealth Constitution means much more, in reality, than a mere Federal bond. It is likely to prove a strong amalgamating force, welding firmly together the different provinces of Australia into one homogeneous political whole. This is possible, and, as I think, right for them ; but with New Zealand included it would be impossible, and fatal to our highest interests as a free, self-governing nation, proud of her connection with and her part in the glorious destiny of an Anglo-Saxon Empire."
SYDNEY. Satueday, 16th Maech, 1901. Hon. John See, M.L.A., State Secretary, New South Wales, examined. (No. 187.) Hon. the Chairman: Mr. See, the New Zealand Parliament have appointed this Commission to inquire into the question of the advisability or otherwise of New Zealand entering the Australian Commonwealth. The Commission has taken evidence on the matter throughout New Zealand, and we now wish to inquire in Australia into the question of how trade matters, postal matters, defence matters, and judicatory matters would be affected by New Zealand entering the Confederation, and generally into all matters connected with the question, in order to enable Parliament to arrive at a just conclusion as to whether it would be advantageous to New Zealand to join the Commonwealth. If you could afford us any information on these questions, or favour us with your own views on them, we shall be extremely obliged. Hon. Mr. See : I am very pleased to meet your Commission, and I shall be very glad to give you all the information possible, and my own views on the matter, for what they are worth. I shall be pleased to afford you any data and information you may require from the Government x departments, and any assistance in the way of printing. The question to be dealt with by your Commission, however, will be largely one for the Federal Government to deal with, and therefore any specific statement on the question will naturally have to come from them. Hon. the Chairman: We propose to see Mr. Barton on the general question at an early date ; as far as the question of reciprocity is concerned, I presume that is one as between the different States ? Hon. Mr. See : No; that is a Federal matter entirely. 1. Hon. the Chairman.] We would like to hear your views, Mr. See, as to the general question of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth ?—I am favourable to federation, and I have no doubt what the result will be, because we shall be able to do away with the hostile tariffs now existing in different States, which have hindered rather than promoted the settlement of the country. This in itself will be a good thing. New Zealand is in the same position as Tasmania, excepting that she is a little further away. The tariff question naturally affects New Zealand, which now has only one unrestricted colony—New South Wales—to work with, and, being outside the Federation, you will have no special advantages under the Federal tariff unless some special reciprocal arrangement is made between New Zealand and the Federal Government, which alone would have the power to make it. The Constitution Act gives the Federal Government a good deal of scope on that point; but whether the other States would feel disposed to allow a colony outside the Commonwealth to come in and enjoy the same privileges of trade as the States of the Commonwealth enjoy is a matter, of course, that would have to be considered seriously. I am not in a position to give an opinion as to whether they would be favourable or not, because I do not want to do anything that would be likely to prejudice your inquiry, or your desire to obtain the best information possible. 2. There may be advantages to be gained by New Zealand coming into the Commonwealth which some people in New Zealand fail to appreciate: how would the defence question be affected, Mr. See ?—lf New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, and were attacked, it would be attacked as part of the Empire, and just as we assisted Britain in South Africa—which is a part of the Empire also—to maintain the rights of the citizens of the Empire living in the Transvaal, so we should assist New Zealand. Then, having one uniform system of defence for all the States, and under which troops could be rapidly moved by railway, would be a great advantage. With regard to trade, I need not tell you what it would mean to New Zealand if the Australian market were open to you, because there are many things which we require which you can produce better than we can, and you have climatic advantages which we do not possess. 3. Is the Federal tariff likely to be a revenue or a protective one ? —lt must be a revenue one, and we must have a pretty heavy Customs tariff to provide the necessary moneys for the expenses of the Federal Government, and to give the States back as much as they are getting now; the imposition of a tariff of that kind will mean a large increase in the amount derived from Customs duties. New South Wales, in round numbers, will receive a million more from Customs than she is getting now, and I have no doubt that the other colonies will also get more than they are now receiving.
A.—4
472
4. Then, New South Wales would be able to remit taxation in other directions?—We cannot. We have nothing to do with Customs and excise duties, excepting on tobacco and spirits, and I do not know that we could remit any taxation ; but we can do with another million all right here. Our Customs revenue last year was £1,700,000; but we only tax tobacco and cigars, and a few items like that. 5. How would postal matters be affected by federation ?— That is a matter for the Federal Government entirely ; I think it is a great deal better for the colonies to work with uniformity in regard to postal matters than to work by themselves, and the ocean mail-services, whether from America, Canada, or Great Britain, should be conducted with uniformity, as far as all the colonies are concerned, if possible. It is an advantage for all the colonies to have mail-services by way of America or Canada; but whether the Federal Government and the New Zealand Government should contribute to a service which is purely American, and which does not reciprocate in trade with the people of these colonies, is a big question, and I may say that, looking at the thing broadly, I do not think it is fair that the moneys of these colonies should go towards subsidising a mail-service which does not reciprocate with us, ..and which has practically hunted one of your boats out of the trade—that is, the " Moana." Whether some treaty could be made with the United States to allow our boats to get a share of the trade Ido not know; but it may be worth trying, because we wish to be as friendly as we can with all sections of the Anglo-Saxon people. Perhaps the representation of the unanimous expression of the opinion of the people of the Commonwealth, added to that of the people of New Zealand, would have some weight with the United States in this connection. 6. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do the leading people in Australia hold pretty strong views on the matter, Mr. See? —I think they do. The Chamber of Commerce in Sydney passed a resolution condemning the selfishness of the United States Government in giving such an enormous subsidy to their own mail-boats, and then expecting us to subsidise them in addition to that. That is the general feeling among the merchants here. We are only paying £4,000 towards the service at present, but, as a matter of fact, it is more a New Zealand service than an Australian service. 7. Hon. the Chairman.] Could you tell us how the question of the coloured labour is going to work out in the Commonwealth ?—I cannot tell you. That is a very complex question. 8. Could you advise us as to the best course to adopt to get a good expression of opinion with regard to the financial aspect of federation ? —That is quite a statistical matter—merely a matter of figures. The difference is this between the parties now: taking Sir William McMillan, he admits that we want eight millions, and proposes to get four millions from spirits, two millions from excise, and two millions from ad valorem. We have fifteen millions of imports. In order to get the two millions from ad valorem, he will have to make it a tariff—that is to a large extent speculative—on all imports other than those which are specifically fixed. That taxes everything. When I introduced the tariff under the Dibbs Government, the Free-traders called 10 per cent, "protection," and they fought us very keenly over it, and got us to knock off some of the duties and to put it on to direct taxation. We had then exemptions on from six hundred and fifty to seven hundred articles. Now they call 12£ per cent, on everything " protection," and they justify the name from the fact that they say it taxes everything, and does not distinguish between one article and another. It is purely a matter of opinion. If you tax articles it must be a little bit harder on the consumer. The principle Igoonis to make all those articles which we cannot produce as cheap as possible to the consumer. Hon. E. E. O'Connoe, M.L.A., Vice-President of the Commonwealth Executive Council, examined. (No. 188.) Hen. the Chairman: We are, sir, a Commission appointed by the Parliament of New Zealand to inquire into the question of the advisability or otherwise of New Zealand federating with the Commonwealth of Australia, and, in pursuance of that object, wish to take evidence in Australia. We have waited upon you to-day to ask the assistance of your Government in the prosecution of our inquiries. Hon. Mr. O'Connor: Gentlemen, with sincere pleasure I welcome, on behalf of the Government, such a representative body. I look forward with the most earnest hope that the result of your inquiries here will be to complete the circle of the Australian Commonwealth. We know from our own experience that the rational tendency and instinct of every man tend to union, and we only hope that the commercial and material considerations which you are to inquire into more particularly will lead you to entertain the idea of union, and, in fact, that on all grounds the union will be entertained, and a complete Australasian Commonwealth will be brought about as soon as possible. Every opportunity which there is of getting information will be open to you, and we shall be very pleased indeed to assist you in every possible way. Hon. the Chairman : We have to thank you, Mr. O'Connor, for your very kind welcome. This Commission has taken evidence throughout New Zealand, from merchants, Government officials, and persons interested in agriculture, manufacture, and trade generally, as to the desirability or otherwise of New Zealand joining the Australian Federation. We have also taken evidence on the sentimental aspect of the question ; and we are now here to inquire as to the advantages—which the people of Australia may be able to exhibit to us in a more concrete form than we have had them presented to us in our own colony—we would gain by entering the Confederation. We wish to inquire into all matters connected with defence, post and telegraphs, the judicature, finance, and generally all other considerations to enable Parliament to come to a just conclusion as to whether it would be to the advantage of New Zealand to join the Commonwealth. If you could give us the benefit of your views on .these matters we should esteem it a favour, and they would prove of material advantage to us in reporting on the questions involved in the scope of pur Commission.
473
A.—4
Hon. Mr. O'Connor: I have rather been taken by surprise by your visit, and therefore you must take what I have to say as simply the result of my general thinking on the question, without having had any special preparation. Had I known earlier that this interview was going to take place I certainly would have had some material got together and placed before you in a concrete form. I would prefer to have a little time-to think the question over, and if you will kindly give me a few notes as to the subjects on which you seek information I will go into them and afford you all the information I can at another interview. Hon. the Chairman : I will be happy to do so. Hon. Mr. O'Connor : Are there any points we can discuss now in an informal way? I might say that there is a provision in the Constitution Act for admitting other colonies to- the Commonwealth on such terms as the Parliament might agree. Ido not know whether your inquiry here has relation to the particular conditions on which your colony could join? 9. Hon. the Chairman.] One important matter we have to inquire into is as to the possibility, supposing the decision of the New Zealand Parliament is against federating, of a reciprocal treaty mutually satisfactory to both sides being arranged in reference to certain articles of production. Then, there is the question of defence, postal matters, judicatory matters, the tariff, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the labour laws generally, and the criminal law. Could you favour us with your opinion as to how New Zealand would be affected in those respects under federation ? — With respect to the criminal law, the Commonwealth has no jurisdiction over the criminal law of any particular State. 10. You think they have no power to set up a Criminal Court ?—I think there is no doubt about that. The Federal Courts will have jurisdiction in criminal matters on any points in regard to which they have special jurisdiction, but the general control of the Criminal Courts will remain with the States. It. One of the most important questions is the tariff question. We want to know, if we can, what will probably be the contribution that our colony will have to make to the cost of the Federal Government ?—Of course, those expenses will very largely be made up of what we call the cost of the transferred services, such as the postal and telegraphic, telephonic, lighthouse services, and, of course, the cost of collecting the Customs duties. The cost of the Federal Government is a matter upon which we can give you fairly definite views, but in regard to other matters perhaps you know as much as we do. 12. Mr. Beauchamp.] There are certain works of a national character to which we understand each State will be called to contribute its quota. There is the question of a trans-continental railway, for instance ?—That is a matter, of course, which has to be considered. There is no definite proposal with regard to it yet. It has been stated in the newspapers that a definite scheme has been approved of. Mr. Barton, in his Maitland speech, said he was in favour of a trans-con-tinental railway on the route suggested by Sir John Forrest some years ago, which presents a good many advantages ; but the whole matter would have to be carefully inquired into—first, as to the propriety of adopting that route ; secondly, as to the cost; and, thirdly, as to the conditions which might have to be made with the colonies through which it passed, as to their contributions, and as to its cost. 1 think there must be a trans-continental railway. 13. Hon. the Chairman.] There is the question of the admission of New Zealand, if we decided to enter the Federation, on the basis of an original State ? —As to that point, I can say now, at once, that we are only too anxious that you should come in, certainly on no worse a footing than that of an original State. Our desire would be, if possible, that some arrangement of thai kind should be made; and, with regard to New Zealand getting special terms as to the construction of the works referred to, I think there might be good ground for reasonable discussion on that matter : that if you were to contribute to works affecting this continent specially you should have a contribution towards something that affects the whole of your colony. 14. Hon. Major Steward.] There is one other special point: the exclusion from count of our Maori population, who are on the same footing as the Europeans. We wish to know if provision could be made, in the event of our joining the Federation, for including the Maoris in the count ? — There is a provision in the Constitution enabling conditions to be made ; but there are certain conditions which could not be made—for instance, equality of representation in the Senate, and other matters, which cannot be altered. But these are matters which are well worthy of discussion, because it could not be expected that you should be placed in a worse position as regards entrance to the Commonwealth than other people. 15. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] It is a question as to the possibility of obtaining conditions in certain respects, such as were obtained by Western Australia—whether the Commonwealth would be inclined to entertain any question of that sort ? —lt would be very difficult for me to express an opinion on those matters. 16. Mr. Leys.] There is a feeling that, the administration being at such a distance, the tendency would be towards inefficiency. Your views on that question would be of value ? —As a matter of fact, you are really closer to us than Western Australia is. We can get to you in less than four days. 17. But we look forward to the time when Western Australia will be more closely connected with Sydney than New Zealand is now. Then, the question of appointments comes in : how would they be made ?—No doubt there must be some special centralisation with regard to New Zealand. Efficiency would certainly demand something of that kind. 18. Then, there is the probability of the powers of the States being gradually absorbed by the Central Government. There is a feeling in New Zealand that there is a common interest among the States of Australia that will lead to the gradual absorption of many State powers, such as a common interest in railway-construction and in the development of tropical Australia, and that the interests of New Zealand might suffer ?—Yes, excepting that New Zealand must share in the prosperity of Australia; and, as a set-off against the development of tropical Australia, I think we 60—A. 4.
A.—4
474
ought , to look forward to the time when Oceania will be embraced in Australasia. All those islands will probably be attached in some degree to the Commonwealth, and New Zealand will be much closer to them than the continent is. No doubt, in dealing with the continent in the matter of the centralisation of administration, there would be advantages which we would specially reap; but, on the other hand, in dealing with the outlying islands' and portions of the Commonwealth, New Zealand would have an advantage which would counterbalance the other. But these are matters which are too distant at present, although they may become urgent at any time. .We have had communications from Mr. Seddon on several very important questions connected with these islands, as to the disputes between the French and Great Britain in the New Hebrides —disputes which seem now to be at such a point that they may become critical at any time, and the position of Australia and New Zealand in relation to them may become very much altered. 19. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there a possibility of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act being passed by the Federal Government ?—That is down in our programme, and I think it is a matter which will have to be carried out at an early date. It is only when an industrial dispute spreads beyond a State that we can have anything to do with it—such disputes as those concerning the shipping trade, wharf-lumpers' union, and coal-mines. 20. Hon. Captain Russell.] Some people in New Zealand hold the view that, if such an Act were passed here, labour in Australia being on a different plane to what it is in New Zealand, probably our industrial classes would suffer, and they are fearful on that point of federation ?—I do not think that there need be any apprehension on that point. Public opinion in Australia is so very strongly in favour of the adoption of some method such as you have adopted that I do not think it will be very long delayed. 21. Mr. Beauchavip.] We should like to have your opinion as to whether it would be necessary for the Federal Government to take the whole 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue which will be collected from each State for the first ten years?— Under the " Braddon " clause, 25 per cent, is the limit of the accrued revenue the Commonwealth is entitled to apply towards its expenditure, and should the expenses be less than 25 per cent, each State gets credit for the balance. There is no difficulty to be apprehended on that score. I think you will find that there will be a strong pressure in favour of economy in regard to all matters of administration. 22. Mr. Beid.] How far is the right of appeal to the Privy Council affected by the constitution of the Federal High Court ?—With regard to the powers of the High Court and the appeal to the Privy Council, the position of the matter is this: that in all cases first of all there is an appeal to the High Court, which is a voluntary appeal. 23. It is not exclusive?—No ; in all matters coming from the State Courts it is optional. In matters which come within the range of jurisdiction of the Federal Courts it is dependent on the statute which would be passed whether it would be made exclusive or not. Of course, in these cases there will be an appeal to the Privy Council only under certain conditions. The High Court may certify that the case is one which ought to go to the Privy Council in England, and, of course, it will go on —that is, under section 74 ; but, as a general rule, with regard to all appeals from the State Courts, the appeal would be optional. 24. We have had a difference of opinion in New Zealand on the point; some people there hold that the appeal is exclusive to the High Court ? —Oh, no. 25. Hon. the Chairman.] As regards the appeal to the Privy Council from the Federal Court, is not that only as to questions affecting the Constitution ? —On questions affecting the rights of States in the Commonwealth, as between themselves. In the case of appeals from the High Court, that Court has to certify to the propriety of the appeal. That is the compromise we arrived at. 26. Hon. Major Steward.] Do you think the Commonwealth would be disposed to do something towards shortening the journey between New Zealand and Australia in the direction of subsidising fast steamers?— That is a matter that could be discussed. 27. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any probability of the Commonwealth consolidating the debts of the States? —That has never been considered as a matter of Government policy at all. I think we all recognise that at an early period there must be consolidation, and when it takes place it will be a very great advantage to the States and the Commonwealth, but the question has not been considered yet.
Tuesday, 19th March, 1901. T. A. Coghlan, Government Statistician, New South Wales, examined. (No. 189.) Mr. Coghlan appeared before the Commission. He answered some inquiries of the Commission, and undertook to make a report conveying his opinions on the various matters referred to. The Commission agreed to treat his verbal replies as "confidential." 13th May, 1901. Albebt Pitt, Chairman. Major-General Fkench, commanding the New South Wales Forces, examined. (No. 190.) 28. Hon. the Chairman.) Would you kindly tell us your name?— George Arthur French. I am a Major-General in the Boyal Artillery, and Major-General commanding the New South Wales Forces. 29. We are a Commission from New Zealand for the purpose of inquiring into the question of the desirability of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth of Australia, and one matter referred to us is the question of defence : would you kindly favour us with your views as to how the defence of New Zealand would be affected or benefited by federation being established between New Zealand and Australia ?—T can only express my own opinion on these matters. On the general question, under the Commonwealth Act the Commonwealth is bound to defend every State in the Union,
475
A.—4
and, if New Zealand became a State in the Union, Australia would be bound to defend that State. Now, it is a very serious responsibility for a country without a navy to undertake the defence of a place twelve hundred miles away. 30. Of course, we presuppose that there will be "for many years to come an English navy available in these waters?— That is given to us as the first point of consideration ;as long as our navy rules the sea, the probability is that all these colonies are pretty safe. 31. In Now Zealand the general opinion seems to be that, as far as defence by land is concerned, New Zealand can look after herself; but, supposing it were necessary for a force to be sent from Australia to New Zealand, and England were at war with a naval Power, would it be practicable to send land reinforcements from here to New Zealand ?—Quite practicable, as long as England had command of the sea. Everything must be based on that. 32. Hon. Major Steward.'] Would you be able to spare men from here ? —Yes ; we have plenty of men here, and we would be able to send transports from Sydney. 33. Hon. the Chairman.'] Would you kindly state generally what you think would be the duty of Australia in the matter of the defence of the several States, and what you think would be the advantages which New Zealand would derive from a system of Federal defence ?—I think the advantage would be altogether on the side of New Zealand. To begin with, New Zealand is peculiarly open to attack, owing to what is now a very great advantage to it—namely, the numbers of its good harbours, which to any Power with a fleet at sea is an important consideration, especially as they offer facilities for disembarking troops. That is not the case in Australia, where the ports are few and far between. Then, again, you have a good supply of the best coal, which would make you an object of attack by any naval Power operating in these waters. That seems to me to necessitate the defence of the important coal ports of Greymouth and Westport. 34. Do you think that we in New Zealand would be open to attack by way of bombardment from the sea, or by way of the landing of a hostile force of any considerable size? —I think you are peculiarly open to the form of attack that might take place from a few cruisers with two thousand or, at the outside, three thousand men on board. You would be very much open to that form of attack. 35. Where would a cruiser that could carry that number of men get coal from ?—I do not mean a single cruiser could carry that number, but that would Be the total number at the outside that would be landed by cruisers. The cruisers would not carry the men, but they would probably have accompanying transports that would carry the men to be landed. 36. Where would they get their coal from to carry them the distance they would have to come? —If they could not carry their coal transports with them it would be all the more necessary that they should get hold of one of your coal ports. 37. Where are those cruisers likely to come from?—l do not know what Power we may be at war with, but one of the Messageries steamers would carry two or three thousand men at a pinch. 38. Do you chink that they could steam from Saigon (in the French China possessions) to New Zealand without recoaling ? —lt would be a risky business, but they could do it; and you know that there is not any very serious difficulty in coaling at sea from a collier under the lee of an island if you arranged for your colliers to be there. That sort of thing has been proposed and arranged for by a foreign Power already. There are numerous islands in the Pacific, and it would be very easy for a cruiser to arrange for a collier to meet her under the lee of one of them. I see nothing to prevent a foreign vessel of war being accompanied by colliers on such a raid as I have indicated. 39. It is recommended that the defence forces of New Zealand should be raised to eighteen thousand men : -do you think that with that number of men available in New Zealand there would be any necessity for obtaining reinforcements from Australia ?—Probably not, if the form of attack is merely a cruising raid, as I have indicated. 40. Then, I take it that the advantage you see in New Zealand joining the Federation is that, in respect to the question of defence, we would be better associated with the Commonwealth than if we remain a separate Government ? —Yes. 41. Are you prepared to say whether there would be any saving in making the defence of the colonies a Federal matter ?—There would be many advantages in that. It would bring all the colonies under one head and one uniform system, and you would probably have one military college for the whole of Australasia. You would have uniform-clothing factories, ammunition-fac-tories, &c, and in that way you would concentrate your efforts very much better than if you were each under a separate system of your own ; and, through concentration, there would be a considerable saving in the expenditure, as we should all work under the one system as regards enrolment and the payment of the men. 42. We have a small-arms-ammunition factory in New Zealand, which is a branch of the one in Melbourne : would it be better to maintain a separate factory in New Zealand, or to have the manufacture of ammunition concentrated in one place? —I think, in such an important matter as the supply of small-arms ammunition it should be done by a Government factory. I have always held the view here that you cannot afford to take the risk in time of war of poor ammunition, and therefore the ammunition must be made by the Government, who have no other interest than to make it good; and, of course, the first thing with a private company is to make a profit. 43. Hon. Captain BuhSell.] Then, I understand, General French, that you consider that, so long as England commands the sea, none of these colonies have anything to apprehend ? —Nothing serious, excepting raiding attacks by a couple or so of cruisers. 44. If England should by any misfortune lose command of the sea, would Australia be able to send troops to New Zealand? —It is very doubtful. It would be a very risky thing to send troops to New Zealand without an adequate escort.
A.—4
476
45. Then, so long as England is mistress of the sea, we can go to sleep ?—lt then becomes a very simple matter, and you need not fear any serious attack. 46. And what would happen should England lose command of the sea?— Then Australia is in exactly the same position as New Zealand, and it would be a very serious position indeed, because a very large force might be landed; and, as there is no such thing as a fortress in Australia, if a large body of men landed from foreign ships there would be nothing to stop them excepting an adequate body of defenders. 47. You have been in New Zealand, I understand?— Yes, in the North Island. 48. Do you consider that we are a defensible country ?—Quite so; but your weak point is your number of fine harbours. I gave Mr. Seddon a confidential report on these matters when I was over there two years ago. 49. Theoretically, I suppose our population ought to be numerous enough, and our country strong enough, to defend ourselves, if we have the pluck to do it ? —Quite so, against the form of attack that is likely to come under existing circumstances. The form of attack that we are told is the most probable under existing circumstances —that is to say, the landing of a force of two thousand or, at the outside, three thousand men, who would necessarily have to be infantry, as a foreign Power could not afford to bring down any large number of horses or artillery. 50. And your opinion would be that it would be better, in regard to the small-arms-ammu-nition factory, to have only one establishment in Australia: in that case, what would happen if our supplies were cut off by England losing command of the sea?—Of course, you should always have a proper stock at all times. You should have between five hundred and a thousand rounds per rifle always in stock. 51. In case of the outbreak of war?— That is what you should have always. You should reckon that as the war footing. 52. Should we not require a constant supply : I am speaking of the possibility of our not being able to get any from Australia in the event of war?— There should always be a sufficient supply kept in the magazines in view of any possibility of that sort. 53. Do you think we should have any need to have a separate ammunition-factory in the Colony of New Zealand if we were federated ? —I should not think so, as the whole of Australia would scarcely be able to keep " one " going. 54. You think there is no danger, presuming that England lost command of the sea, of our supply being cut off ?—ln that case it would be very different; but you should always have a sufficient quantity in your magazines, and also a sufficient supply for your big guns, to provide for a contingency of that sort. The small-arms ammunition lasts a good many years; if you keep on working it over it stands good in this climate for ton and possibly twenty years. 55: Being so far away from headqnarters, if they were in Australia, should we not have to have a separate army-corps system in New Zealand?— Yes; you would have a distinct force of Volunteers, with Militia, mounted rifles, and artillery. 56. Would the senior officers in command there be independent of control from Australia ? —■ Practically that. 57. Then, there would not be very much gain in our being connected with a general military system in Australia ?—Only in the point I drew attention to—namely, having one system, you would probably have one military college, one ammunition-factory, and a common system generally, instead of having, as at present, seven different systems. 58. In the case of the successful landing of hostile troops in New Zealand, the control, I suppose, would, devolve entirely upon our own commanding officer, or would he be practically directed from here ?—He would be responsible for the local defences, and we should supply him with assistance in the shape of men and material from here. 59. But do you think we should be in the position of requiring assistance on land from Australia ?—I do not think it is in the slightest degree likely, because, as long as England has command of the sea, any attack on these parts can only be from some raiding force. 60. Then, I suppose, if we did not belong to the Commonwealth, and if the occasion arose, Australia would send men to help us should we need them ? —No doubt they would, like we sent men to the Cape to help England, and as, I think, we sent to New Zealand during the Maori war. It would be to the interests of Australia that New Zealand should not be allowed to fall into unfriendly hands, or any part of it. But that means that England must have lost command of the sea, and that some great European Power attacked the colonies generally —not a mere raiding fleet. 61. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I gather that General French states that really the first line of defence for us is the navy, and therefore our first expenditure ought to be in the shape of contibutions towards the navy?— That is unquestionably the first and most important line of defence. 62. And if the colonies were all to make contributions proportionate to their strength and needs towards the navy, there would be a strong enough navy to protect the whole of these seas ? ■ —That is rather a large question, because we do not know what combination of European Powers we may have against England. 63. As these colonies grow in population they will become nations, and their contributions towards the navy would naturally become a big thing?— Yes. 64. And therefore the first consideration is a contribution towards the navy ?—The first consideration is keeping up the naval defence somehow, aad having around us the strength of the British navy. 65. Hon. Captain Russell.'] Have you considered the question of maintaining naval reserves out here ?—Yes; there has been a good deal of talk about it, but there is not a very large naval force to be obtained here so far as I can see. There are two ships in reserve here, but they have not got the skilled officers for them. 66. I am thinking of the men. I mean, for those ships in reserve, and for which there ought always to be crews ready to be put on board?—-We have the men, but we have not got the skilled officers.
A.—4
477
67. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You mentioned the fact that New Zealand would be rather an object of attack to the enemy, on account of its good harbours : would not that also mean that it would be a very good place for a defending navy to operate from,? —Certainly it would. 68. Therefore we should not have to look to Australia at all for any defence ?—I think the only attack would be by a few cruisers, by a mere raiding party; and, with regard to the question of defence by land, the number that has been mentioned of enrolled Volunteers —namely, eighteen thousand—is proportionally far in excess of what we are keeping up here. 69. Hon. the Chairman.'] We have thirteen thousand enrolled ?—Well, at the present moment I do not suppose there are twenty-five thousand enrolled in the whole of Australia, which has four times your population. 70. Hon. Mr. Boioen.] Summing up this point, I gather that you consider that as long as England holds the sea there would be no necessity for the transportation of any land forces between Australia and New Zealand ?—I should not think so. 71. And if England lost command of the sea there would be no safe means of transport?—lt would be risky. 72. Mr. Boberts.] Are there any vulnerable points around the coast of Australia?— There are not many good harbours to land at excepting in the case of Queensland, where you have smooth water and good landing-points inside the Barrier Reef. At the same time there are many points where Australia would not be very seriously injured even if the place were taken by a landing force. 73. But you have seen in South Africa that the British army has maintained itself a thousand miles awa-y from its base at Capetown ?—Yes; but it took a tremendous quantity of men to do it. In my opinion Fremantle is about the most vulnerable point of attack in Australia. It has no means of defence, and it is quite away from the ordinary cruising-grounds of the Australian squadron. 74. Mr. Luke.] Do you think that, in addition to providing the batteries we are now providing in New Zealand, we ought gradually to supplement the British navy by contributions towards ships of war ?—I think it would be a very good w T ay of applying our money towards the defences—by strengthening the navy. 75. Mr. Beid.] With regard to naval defence in New Zealand, probably you are aware, General French, that the principal coal ports or bar harbours are difficult of access by large ships of war ? —No, I have no correct information on that point. 76. That is the fact—the principal coal ports are bar harbours ?—Could not ships go in at high water ? 77. Yes, vessels of a certain draught, but they require to be piloted in ?—Well, very few of the cruisers now draw under 22 ft., and probably no big vessel could get in; but smaller ones could. 78. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that in the course of time there is likely to be a movement to set up an Australian navy as distinct from the Imperial navy ? —I suppose it would come to that ultimately, and I certainly think that we should look forward in time to finding our own men and officers, and manning certain vessels belonging to the Royal navy, and thereby strengthening the fleet. 79. Do you imply that we should build our own vessels ?—I do not know about building them ; Ido not think we could build war-vessels here. England would have to do that. 80. Do you think that ought to be undertaken in any near period of time ?—As these countries grow it would be necessary. 81. Do you think it would be better to go on as we are doing now—contributing a certain amount per annum towards the Imperial navy, and the Imperial Government finding certain ships, which they control —or should we provide and control these ships ourselves ?— I think our present system is an excellent one, and we get good value for your money. Increasing the expenditure in that direction would be a very good way of supplying some of our deficiences in the matter of defence. 82. You do not see any probability that that system will be changed soon?— You get very good value for your money here, and you have a strong fleet without any considerable extra expenditure, and that fleet can be extended to any degree if the colonies like to find the money. 83. You think the system works efficiently ?—I think so. There is no mistake about it, the navy is our first line of defence here. 84. Hon. Major Steward.] Would it not be better for the colonies to increase their contributions, and have in return a much stronger naval squadron in these waters, than to attempt to set up a naval squadron of their own ? —I think so. 85. Is there any probability of a Commonwealth squadron being established within a short period of time ? —I do not think so. 86. So that in the near future in New Zealand we shall still have to rely upon the Imperial fleet, as we do now ?—I think so. 87. I suppose you know, as a matter of fact, that all the leading European Powers are just as cognisant of the facts about our harbours as we are ourselves? —No doubt they are. 88. And in the event of any difficulties arising they would probably have the means to send ships here ?—ln the event of any difficulty arising they would be at a disadvantage in regard to obtaining coal-supplies. 89. In the contingency—which we all hope is remote —of England losing command of the sea, and of New Zealand becoming an object of attack, presumably Australia would be attacked too; and could she spare men, after providing for her own defence, to assist New Zealand?—lf we were satisfied that the enemy's main attack was on New Zealand, I suppose we could. We would be bound to do all we possibly could to help New Zealand under the Constitution Act. 90. But if we were an object of attack, because of our connection with the Empire, you your-
A.—4
478
selves in Australia would also be equally an object of attack ? —Yes, excepting that, I take it, New Zealand, by reason of her numerous harbours, would be more likely to be attacked than Australia. 91. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you look forward to-gun ammunition being manufactured by the Commonwealth at any date ?—Later on, yes. 92. And to the establishment of an arsenal ? —Yes ; we ought to gradually look forward to making all our own clothing, saddlery, warlike stores, and everything possible. I would not go to the length of making guns, because that means an immense plant, and the requirements would not be sufficient to make it pay. 93. What amount of ammunition is allowed per man for practice in the Volunteer forces in these colonies, beyond the regulation amount to be expended periodically on musketry practice ? —It varies greatly, but it comes to about two hundred rounds per man. 94. What is the price of ammunition to the Volunteers here ? —We give it to them at halfprice. Interview with the Eight Hon. E. Barton, X.0., Prime Minister of the Commonwealth. (No. 191.) [This report has not been corrected by Hon. Mr. Barton.] 96. Hon. the Chairman: I might explain, Mr. Barton, that we are a Commission from New Zealand, appointed by Parliament to make a report on the subject of New Zealand federating with Australia, and we have -sought this interview for the purpose of ascertaining from the Federal Government what advantages New Zealand would derive by entering the Federation. We shall esteem it a favour if you would kindly give us your views on the matter. Hon. Mr. Barton : To begin with, the most important section in the Constitution Act with regard to New Zealand appears to be section 121, which states: "The Parliament may admit to the Commonwealth or establish new States, and may upon such admission or establishment make or impose such terms and conditions, including the extent of representation in either House of the Parliament, as it thinks fit." That seems to be the initiatory provision. Of course, Western Australia is an original State, and there was a special clause—No. 95—drafted for the purpose of meeting her case. What you want to know, I presume, is whether the clause I have just read covers the case of a State wishing to enter on special terms. It is a very difficult question to answer, because of the existence of another clause—No. 92—which reads: "On the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free." The question that arises there seems to me to be whether clause 92 relates to the state of things which would be in existence in the Commonwealth after the Federal tariff is imposed. Under the Commonwealth, as it will then exist, the imposition of uniform duties of Customs will bring about inter-State free-trade in the Commonwealth. 97. Hon. the Chairman: But that would not apply to" Western Australia, would it? Hon. Mr. Barton : I was going on to say that section 95 obviates the application of that provision to Western Australia, because it states, " Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the Parliament of the State of Western Australia, if that State be an original State, may, during the first five years after the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, impose duties of Customs on goods passing into that State, and not originally imported from beyond the limits of the Commonwealth." Then, the question arises whether, upon the subsequent admission of New Zealand as a State, or the subsequent negotiation for admission as a State, it would be possible to institute negotiations on that subject for the purpose of establishing a modus vivendi for intercolonial free-trade for a period after the admission of New Zealand, and as a condition of admission. I should not like to give a very positive opinion on that point, but the trend of my opinion is that the Commonwealth would have power to negotiate upon the question, and to arrive at terms with New Zealand. 98. Hon. the Chairman: Without making any amendment in the Constitution ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Yes, of course. There remains another thing to be considered. This is an Imperial Act. Although its terms were made here, its form of law conies from England ; and the question is whether, with the consent of both parties to the negotiations, the Imperial Parliament could not declare what the intention of the Act was by a short declaratory measure—that is, to say that the intention was that this wide power of negotiation should exist. 99. Hon. the Chairman: But do you not think the Colonial Government could amend the Constitution Act? Hon. Mr. Barton : We can amend the Constitution Act, but that involves obtaining an absolute majority in both Houses of Parliament, and a State and general referendum—a majority of the States and a majority of the people. 100. Mr. Reid: But, apart from that, does it not come within the general terms of section 95, which provides that anything that is necessary for the giving effect to this Constitution the Commonwealth Parliament would have the power to legislate on ? Hon. Mr. Barton : I should not like to commit myself to the opinion that that matter was intended to come under this section ; but I think, by agreement between Australia and New Zealand, a declaratory act might be obtained from Great Britain explaining the intention of this clause to be that the wide powers of negotiation given included the power to negotiate on a subject of that kind. That, I think, would be the preferable way. Ido not say it without doubt, but I think the intention was to give these wide powers of negotiation. 101. Hon. the Chairman : The next important point we wish information upon is the question of the absorption of the State powers by the Federal Parliament and Government. Hon. Mr. Barton : That matter is entirely regulated by the Commonwealth Act itself. We have under section 69 provided that the control of the Customs shall be automatically taken over
479
A.-4
on the establishment of the Commonwealth, and that was done on the Ist January; and also that, with regard to the following departments, they shall be taken over on a date to be proclaimed by the Governor-General after the establishment of the Commonwealth : (a) Posts, telegraphs, and telephones; (b) naval and military defence; (c) lighthouses, lightships, beacons, and buoys; (d) quarantine. Those departments may be .taken"over, as I have said, at such dates as may be named in a Proclamation by the Governor-General, and two were taken over on the Ist instant— namely, posts, telegraphs, and telephones, and naval and military defence ; but, apart from the matters mentioned in section 69, there are no departments which go over to the Commonwealth Government from the States, either automatically or under Proclamation. No other departments can be affected ; and the powers of the Commonwealth Parliaments are regulated by section 51, which contains the twenty-nine subsections with respect to which the Parliament has the exclusive power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth has the power to make laws on those subjects, and that power extends so far that a law passed providing for the Commonwealth taking over the existing departments in all the States that deal with any or all of these matters would be a valid law ; but it does not operate on the question of the posts, telegraphs, and telephones, defence, or Customs, which are specially legislated on, and they are matters which, I think, we all agree there might well be uniformity of legislation on. There are also a few subjects, such as banking, copyrights, bankruptcy, and insurance—mostly mercantile matters —which are common to all the States, and in regard to which uniformity is also desirable. There are also a few subjects outside of these which are of primary importance, such as emigration and immigration. On the question of the character of the immigration which should be allowed, I take it that the ideas and sympathies of New Zealand and Australia are practically identical. If one may judge from the conversations I have had with Mr. Seddon, I should think that our objections to alien races and New Zealand's objections are practically the same, and that we have the same desire to preserve the " European " and " white " character of the race. 102. Hon. the Chairman : Have you the same conditions here with regard to the restriction of the Chinese as we have ? Hon. Mr. Barton: We have an Act similar to the Natal Act, which requires the ability to read a certain phrase in the English or European language. Mr. Moore, who represented that colony at the celebrations, was rather pressing in urging legislation on that subject as soon as possible, because he said they had found that a good deal of the evil had been done before they passed their Act, and it was likely to lead to serious trouble hereafter. 103. Hon. Captain Bussell: Have you thought about the possibility of alien races coming into tropical Australia, of the difficulty of restraining them, and the difficulty of settling that part of the country with a white population ? Hon. Mr. Barton: Yes; and we are very much exercised at present on the question of a " white " Australia. The distinct majority of opinion in Australia is in favour of preserving the character of the race in the way I have named. I think the objection to Asiatic races is even stronger than to the South Sea Islanders, but the objection extends to the South Sea Islanders, although, looking at the importance of the sugar industry, there is more tolerance on the part of all classes towards the kanakas than towards such people as Chinese and coolies. 104-. Hon. Captain Bzissell : I allude to the possibility of a European race residing permanently in the tropics and continuing to beget their species. Hon. Mr. Barton : Can you give me an illustration of that, Captain Russell ? 105. Hon. Captain Bussell : It has been much in my mind that in no tropical country in the world has a European, much less an Anglo-Saxon, been able to live and labour continuously, and it seems to. me that that will be the difficulty you will have to meet in settling tropical Australia : has that occurred to you ? Hon. Mr. Barton : We do not anticipate any such difficulty, because, so far as we have gone in tropical Australia, we do not find that there is any inability in the case of the white man to live and to multiply. As to what effect climatic conditions may have in regard to preventing the race increasing in future generations, of course it is impossible to predict; but, so far as we have gone at present, we do not find that difficulty arising. Of course, we need not go into the question of kanaka labour in the tropics, excepting so far as New Zealand is affected by itr; but the matter comes to this: that, so far as we can gather information on the subject, the one party in Queersland state that the importation of kanakas cannot be of indefinite continuance, and the other party will be satisfied with the recommendation of, and imposition of, some definite term of duration for its continuance. Therefore the difficulty arising in that respect in Queensland is not really so great as it seemed to be a while ago. 106. Hon. Captain Bussell: I do not allude to the desire of Australia, but the possibility of the tropical part being occupied by Europeans ? Hon. Mr. Barton : As to that, I fancy science will have a great deal to do with the solution of the question. Cane-cutting hitherto has never been done excepting by black labour ; machinery will in time do it, and overcome the difficulty which has been experienced in that respect, and I think that science will be successful very soon in the devising of the machinery required. In all the other branches of the sugar industry, such as the labour in the mills, white labour does the work. We have white men in the mills, and, although in many cases while at work they are stripped to the skin, there is no obstacle to their doing the work. 107. Hon. Captain Bussell: Then, the fact of there being no record of European labour becoming permanent in the tropics does not cause you to be afraid of any such difficulty occurring in Australia ? Hon. Mr. Barton : We do not think it is going to cause as much trouble as was at one time anticipated. You have men working underground in Charters Towers, and the climate there underground is as trying for a man to work in as any climate you will find. The position is this :
A.— 4.
480
One side complain that the white man will not work—the planter says the white man will not work in the cane-fields ; and in the majority of cases the white man does not deny that he can work, but he says that "he will not work side by side with black men." In the carrying-on of railway-construction, however, in that climate white labour is exclusively employed. 108. Hon. Captain Russell : What is going to happen three or four generations hence ? Hon. Mr. Barton : I do not know, nor have I heard that there is any scientific prognostication that the race is going to decay if it works in the tropics. 109. Hon. Captain Russell : I do not know of any tropical country in the world where there has been a permanent occupation by the working Anglo-Saxon, do you? Hon. Mr. Barton: I have not gone as deeply into the subject, probably, as you have, Captain Eussell. 110. Hon. the Chairman : With regard to the absorption of the State powers by the Federal Government, do you think there is danger in that respect ? There is the case of the railways and public debts : what is the position with regard to them ? Hon. Mr. Barton : In the case of railways, the Federation cannot take over any railway without the consent of the State concerned. That is provided for by the 33rd and 34th subsections of section 51, which state : " That the Parliament shall have power to make laws (a) with respect to the acquisition, with the consent of the State, of any railways of the State on terms arranged between the Commonwealth and the State ; (b) and with respect to railway construction and extension in any State, with the consent of that State." The consent of the State is imperative in every case, and it is only fair to look at the probabilities : it might be advisable in the future to ask the consent of a State for the purpose of carrying out the complete trans-continental system. We no not know whether that is going to be done in the immediate future or not, but it is not a question which arises in the case of New Zealand at all, and I should say, speaking from the common-sense point of view, that the desire to acquire the railways of a State which is separated by a sea-voyage from Australia would not be so strong as in the case of railways from State to State, which are really a necessary part of the existence of the States. 111. Mr. Beauchamp : With regard to the trans-continental railway, do you infer that New Zealand would not be called upon to contribute any quota at all to the cost of that ? Hon. Mr. Barton : That all depends on the terms on which the trans-continental railway is built. We do not know on what terms as regards South Australia or Western Australia it might be built, but we must have the consent of both States before it can be built at all, and that principle underlies the whole question in the main. We do not know what the terms would be. All we have expressed, or may express, is that there is a tendency in favour of giving a means of communication to the isolated western States, as a matter of justice, if it can be done on terms that are not unjust to the rest of the Commonwealth. That governs another question you asked Mr. O'Connor —as to the Commonwealth contributing to the cost of a swift intercolonial steamservice in the event of New Zealand contributing towards the cost of a trans-continental railway and other Federal projects. I suppose the intention of the question was that if you had to contribute towards a trans-continental railway you would have a claim to a swift intercolonial steamservice ? 112. Hon. Major Steward : Yes, so as to do away with one of the chief objections to federation from the New Zealand point of view—the question of distance. Hon. Mr. Barton : Recollect that Western Australia has twice as much objection in that regard as you have. If there is a trans-continental railway, and it is a matter which demands close consideration, as we have stated in our " manifesto," it still means that the distance would be longer from Western Australia to Sydney than from New Zealand to Sydney, and in that respect Western Australia would still be worse off than you even are now under present conditions. 113. Mr. Beauchamp : But her boundary is coterminous with that of another State ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Yes, when she gets there. 114. Hon. Major Steward : But trains are running every day, while steamers are not? Hon. Mr. Barton : As regards that matter, we have steamers running twice a week to London, and you have very frequent communication between yourselves and Australia. Western Australia also has fairly frequent communication, but the train would not necessarily run every day to Western Australia, because we have trains from Sydney to the western States which only run two or three times a week. 115. Hon. the Chairman : Do you think the Federal Government, if it takes over, with the consent of the States, the several railways in Australia, would be likely to leave out the railways in New Zealand ? Hon. Mr. Barton : It would depend on the intention with which they took them over. If they took them over for the mere purpose, in the first place, of abolishing the gauge difficulty, and not with regard to their value for defence and postal purposes, none of these questions would apply with the same strength to New Zealand. Of course, the larger the area of the country the greater the importance of these questions, and with the small area of New Zealand their importance is not nearly as enhanced as in the case of Australia. 116. Mr. Leys : But you might take over the railways by an amendment in the Constitution ? Hon. Mr. Barton: Oh, in that case they would have to go through the course prescribed by the Act—an absolute majority of both Houses, and a double referendum. 117. Mr. Leys : Does clause 128 require a majority of both Houses ? Hon. Mr. Barton : It requires a majority of each House, taken separately, and then the proposal is to to the electors in each State, but there is a provision in the Act to which I would call your attention ; it is as follows: If there is a proposal for amendment of the
481
A. -4
Constitution, and one House passes it by an absolute majority, and the other House rejects or fails to pass it, or makes an amendment that is not agreed upon, and if after an interval of three months the introducing House again passes it by an absolute majority in any of the forms in which it has been submitted, it may be submitted to the electors in each State—that is to say, in connection with the proposed amendment", if either House fails to reject or pass it, or makes any amendment which is not agreed to, it may go to a referendum of the people, under which an absolute majority of the States and of the electors is required. 118. Mr. Leys : Does not that take the control from the Senate and leave it to the popular vote? Hon. Mr. Barton : It dilutes the control of the Senate to a certain extent, but I take it that the Senate —or, rather, the Upper House—is intended to be on a popular footing. 119. Hon. Captain Russell: Take the case of Victoria, New South Wales having the dominant vote : if they could carry one other State with them they could divide the Senate, could they not ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Do you mean in regard to the amendment of the Constitution, or in the case of an ordinary law ? 120. Hon. Captain Russell: The amendment of the Constitution ? Hon. Mr. Barton: Yes; but they cannot divide the Senate, because if the referendum is taken, and New South Wales and Victoria were joined together, they have a great deal more than half the population, and if the referendum showed that a majority of the people of the State and a majority of the States were against the proposed amendment it would be lost. In the taking of the referendum, if a majority of the States are against the amendment the amendment is doomed, although the smaller States were in favour of it; so that I think the control of the Senate may be passed over until you get down to the referendum, which finally decides the matter. 121. Mr. Leys : Is there not a probability that in the transfer of certain powers to the Federal Government under the popular vote, although there might thereby be a gain to Australia, it would be to the disadvantage of New Zealand ? Hon. Mr. Barton: It is quite conceivable that it might be so, but any disadvantage to New Zealand would also apply to Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia, and South Australia. New Zealand is not going to suffer under any greater disability than any other State. 122. Mr. Leys : Of course, the idea is that there is a common interest in Australia which does not apply to New Zealand. Take the difficulty relating to the tropical question and to the administration of the lands : you might require to transfer the control of the lands to the Federal Government ? Hon. Mr. Barton : They would never do that. There is not a State in regard to which for any number of generations we can forecast that there will be the slightest idea of interfering with the control of the lands ; but, of course, you can put supposititious cases, and if you view the matter in that light anything is possible. 123. Mr. Leys : And you think there is no probability of the Federal Government going in for a great scheme for developing the tropical lands ? Hon. Mr. Barton : No. If they tried to take the control of the lands of a State they are met by another section, which I will read : " No alteration diminishing the proportionate representation of any State in either House of the Parliament, or the minimum number of representatives of a State in the House of Representatives, or increasing, diminishing, or otherwise altering the limits of the State, or in any manner affecting the provisions of the Constitution in relation thereto, shall become law unless the majority of the electors voting in that State approve the proposed law." (Clause 128.) Mr. Leys : Would that prevent them from administering the lands ? Hon. Mr. Barton: Supposing we wanted to administer the tropical regions of Queensland, it might be that the mere veto of the State of Queensland would defeat it. 125. Hon. Captain Russell: But under the referendum could you not alter all that ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Under the referendum you can alter anything. 126. Mr. Leys : There is this consideration: that a popular vote might bring about an amendment of the Constitution for the good of the Continent of Australia, but to the disadvantage of an isolated State like New Zealand. Hon.Mr.Barton. : Of course, it is quite possible, but it is advisable to consider in what direction it might be made. You have to look not only to what is possible, but what is probable. 127. Mr. Leys: Take the development of tropical Australia? Hon. Mr. Barton: You are now talking of a territory which you consider would be developed to the injury of New Zealand. Do you mean that they might take part of tropical Australia and make it a Federal territory, and administer it under black labour in such a way that you would be taxed and yet get no advantage from it ? 128. Mr. Leys : Yes; your revenues are derived from Customs and excise, and they might take that revenue for carrying out such a scheme, which would be of no practical benefit to New Zealand ? Hon. Mr. Barton: I do not see how, I must confess. lam a little bit at a loss to understand these forms of argument, because we never reckoned on such speculative questions as these. I never heard of them before, and they never entered into our thoughts in drafting the Constitution. 129. Hon. Captain Russell: Do you think the States will uphold their powers, or that there will be a tendency on the part of the Central Government to absorb the powers of the States ? Hon. Mr. Barton: I quite feel that the tendency of the States will be to hold on tight to their powers, and that feeling is at the present time stronger in the minor States than in the more populous State of New South Wales. 61—A. 4.
A.—4
482
130. Hon. the Chairman : In New Zealand we have had the experience of the provinces being absorbed by the General Government, and that is the reason for bringing forward these speculative questions ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Yes ; but in the instrument giving you your present form of government the lands were placed under the control of the Central Government, and under our Constitution the lands are absolutely and permanently excepted ; so that I do not see how your argument can lie in regard to the agreement of two Constitutions which in their essence are absolutely in accord on that point. 131. Mr. Leys: As far as the analogy goes, the provinces were abolished by popular vote. There was an appeal to the country, and the abolition followed on that appeal. A similar appeal seems to be provided for here ? Hon. Mr. Barton : A very different appeal indeed, is it not, because your appeal was not an appeal to the electors, but to the ordinary methods of dissolution ? 132. Hon. the Chairman : Assuming the Federal Parliament were to legislate on the whole of the thirty-nine matters which are mentioned in section 51, the thought that occurs to us is, what would there be left for the States to do ? Would not their occupation be gone ? Hon. Mr. Barton : No, I should not think so. 133. Hon. the Chairman : Well, practically gone ? Hon. Mr. Barton : No, not practically gone ; the essence of government is territorial government, and the passing of these thirty-nine Acts would not interfere with your territorial government at all; not that the Government would not be less by the amount of the Customs, but you would still have the thousand-and-one internal arrangements that are practically left to you, and which would enable you to deal with laws which would supply all those arrangements, notwithstanding if certain mercantile questions were made the subject of a uniform law, which would be for the benefit not only of a man in New Zealand, but of a man in Sydney. 134. Hon. the Chairman : Yes ; but our commercial laws are practically one now ? Hon. Mr. Barton : To a large extent that is so ; but the advantage of a Federal law is that it operates equally in every State of the Union, and not in the State in which it is passed only. Take the questions of banking or bankruptcy, or laws relating to weights and measures : you could not arrive at any identical forms for legislation on subjects of that kind if you dealt with them separately in each State, and that is one reason why federation would be a benefit. In fact, the advantage to business-men is so evident that it does not admit of argument. 135. Mr. Millar: Assuming that you passed a local government Bill, would it apply to all the States and override their present local government Acts ? Hon. Mr. Barton: We could not pass a local government Bill. 136. Mr. Millar: Yes, if it were remitted to you by the States ? Hon. Mr. Barton : But only by those States which remitted it, and it can only be made applicable to other States if they consent. Section 51 says, " The Parliament shall have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth in respect to matters referred to the Parliament of the Commonwealth by the Parliament or Parliaments of any State or States, but so that the law shall extend only to States by whose Parliaments the matter is referred, or which afterwards adopt the law." 137. Mr. Millar: I notice that your Press is already trying to create a feeling in favour of reducing the number of members here ? Hon. Mr. Barton : We have not a full system of local government in New South Wales, but only an optional system, and it is a matter that applies more particularly to New South Wales; people have conceived it to be more to their interest to have roads and bridges made out of the public funds rather than to be taxed for them. We want to see local government here, and a large number of people want to see the number of members of Parliament reduced; but that is only a New South Wales matter, and ought to be the subject of a New South Wales statute. With regard to the abolition of the provinces, the difference is this : that in your case you legislated for the destruction of autonomy, and here we legislated for the preservation of it. Of course, there is no doubt that there must be subjects of common concern under a common authority, and regulated by the Central Government; but I do not think that we have, taking all those thirty-nine sections, one matter amongst them which may be described as purely a matter of local concern. 138. Mr. Leys : Do you think there will be a tendency to widen the functions of the Central Government, and to legislate on such subjects as are relegated to it, and not to interfere with such matters as are purely local ? Hon. Mr. Barton : I should say that not for very many years, or in our time, will there be any attempt to go beyond these thirty-nine powers which are set out in section 51; and recollect that the 38th and the 39th subsections of that section deal practically with incidental powers, and the 36th is a mere matter of drafting. The 37th refers to matters which requires the concurrence of a State or States. Take those away, and you have left the remaining ones, which include matters relating to departments which are already taken over. Take the question of astronomy and meteorology: is it not advisable to pass a uniform law dealing with those matters ? because in making these observations the assistance of the Telegraph Department has to be called in, and that department has already been taken over by the Commonwealth as a department of common concern, and the State Government could not deal with it to the extent it would like, because it has been taken over by the Federal Government. 139. Hon. the Chairman : There is another important question which we should like your opinion on—viz., the question of the native races being counted in the representation ? Hon. Mr. Barton: That is a matter which would demand the very greatest care before you went in for federation. There are two sections in the Act referring to it—section 127, which
483
A.— 4
states, " In reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives shall not be counted " ; and section 25, which states, "For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted." That, I take it, would not apply to New Zealand, because it only applies to cases where, by the law of a State, all persons of a particular race are disqualified. It does not apply to your Maoris. The word "or" has a significance. It refers to the exclusion from the reckoning, for the purposes of clause 24, of races which are entirely and absolutely disqualified. 140. Hon. Major Steward : Then, our Maoris would count? Hon. Mr. Barton: No; if you look at clause 127 you will see that in reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth it states that aboriginal natives shall not be counted. That clearly does not apply, as far as I can see, to the apportionment of the numbers of the people necessary to make up the quota for the House of Representatives, because the aboriginals which are in the State may be called into question; that matter has been dealt with by clause 25. 141. Hon. Major Steward : Would it not apply to the referendum ? Hon. Mr. Barton: That is the particular point lam coming to; it might apply to the referendum. It is quite probable that if New Zealand desired to join she might require that that point should be cleared up, and in justice it ought to be cleared up. And, in so far as you yourselves have allowed, and utilised, the votes of the Maoris, I can quite understand that you would be very unwilling to enter into a federation in which your law in that respect, which is. part of your original Constitution, were not respected ; you would certainly feel yourselves justified in not accepting admission unless that provision were altered. 142. H.n. Mr. Bowen : The Maoris are more largely represented with us proportionately than Europeans. There are four Maori members, and the Maori population is only about forty thousand. Hon. Mr. Barton : It is a point, I take it, of extreme importance, and I should, of course, be entirely sympathetic in anything which would recognise existing conditions which were part of a settlement as between race and race. 143. Mr. Beauchamp : Would the Federal Government recognise those conditions'? Hon. Mr. Barton: I think they would meet you. That is one of the principles the Federal Government would be inclined to recognise on the broad question of national honour as between race and race, and anything which would clear up that matter would be a Commonwealth matter. We understand that this question operates only in New Zealand, and with a diminishing race, and that it is part of a solemn covenant you have entered into ; and in the settlement of that question, if a demand were made that the Maoris should be counted as integers of the population, that demand would certainly have to be taken into serious account. 144. Mr. Beauchamp: Are you prepared to give us your opinion as to the probability of the early enfranchisement of women throughout the Commonwealth ? Hon. Mr. Barton : The intention of the Government is to endeavour to pass an Act for that purpose before a second appeal to the people. We cannot have it now. Of course, the ordinary practice is, when you pass an Act for the reform of the franchise, to dissolve Parliament; but in the present case there is so much work for the first Parliament to do that it is impossible to pass it this session and then dissolve; the endeavour would be to pass it before another general election should come on. 146. Mr. Leys : Could you indicate to us the intention of the Federal Government with regard to passing a Conciliation and Arbitration Act ? Hon. Mr. Barton : That we have on our programme, and it is in the hands of Mr. Kingston. I do not know whether you know his legislative history, but he is one of the strongest democrats in Australia. That Bill, I have no doubt, will be ready before Parliament meets. 147. Mr. Leys: As to the appointments to the Civil Service, how would youths from New Zealand who might aspire to enter the Federal service be situated ? Would they be placed at a disadvantage by reason of their distance from the seat of government ? Hon. Mr. Barton : I should say they would be less prejudiced than the youths of Western Australia, who are farther away still, and the difficulties in your case would be less than in the case of Western Australia, even if they had the trans-continental railway. And if New Zealand joined as a State there would not be the slightest objection on the part of the Federal Parliament, if I might forecast what the Federal Parliament are likely to do, to saying that some representative from New Zealand should be a member of the Federal Ministry, in which case you would have your own guardian of your rights. 148. Mr. Leys : Is there any basis for admission to the Federal Civil Service? Hon. Mr. Barton : No ; there cannot be a basis until we pass a Civil Service Act. We have a Civil Service Bill in preparation, the main principles of which I hope will be that, while there will be an entrance examination, examinations for promotion will not take place in abstruse subjects which are not likely to be wanted, but on subjects which the candidate is likely to be exercised in in his practice, and "merit" will have a stronger claim than any other qualification. 149. Mr. Leys : Would not the distance of New Zealand necessitate something like a separate administration of such departments as Telegraphs and Post Offices ? Hon. Mr. Barton: There would be to a certain degree a separate administration. Of course, there will have to be a Federal Postmaster-General, and a deputy for each of the other colonies, who will have to be a permanent head in each State; but the deputy must have a little more power than a permanent head, who has as yet never been intrusted with it. Ido not see how that can be avoided, because he must have occasion to act without being able to consult his
A.—4
484
Minister. The whole thing points in the direction of enlarging the powers of the permanent heads, unless you go in for political Under-Secretaries. 150. Mr. Leys: In New Zealand telegraph-offices have been placed in places where there is no chance of their paying, but simply to meet the demands of settlement: how would claims like that be dealt with ? Hon. Mr. Barton : I should say the tendency is certainly not to take away facilities already granted. 151. Mr. Leys : I was looking rather at the claims for telegraphic facilities? Hon. Mr. Barton: Ido not see any chance for niggardliness in those questions, but I think the tendency would be to increase the facilities in every direction. My personal view is strongly in favour of that. If you can do that without seriously hampering the Commonwealth revenue you are bound to do it. 152. Mr. Leys : It does hamper it ? Hon. Mr. Barton : It does to a certain extent; but I see from an article of Mr. Ward's in the Review of Reviews that you are going to get out of that difficulty. Prom that article I take a very hopeful view of the future of the Commonwealth. 153. Mr. Beauchamp : As regards the Civil Service, is it possible that the Civil Service of the Federal Government will be administered by a Board ? Hon. Mr. Barton : I think the probability is that any Act we passed would have a Board to administer it. 154. Mr. Millar: Is your experience of the Boards in existence in Victoria and New South Wales sufficiently good to warrant your creating another Board ? Hon. Mr. Barton : That is a very relative question. The Board in New South Wales has very large powers indeed, and I must confess that I was certainly not very satisfied with the early administration of it. I thought there was a considerable degree of harshness in the administration of the Act, and a considerable tendency to save money at the expense of efficiency, but that Board was appointed under conditions which to a large extent compelled them to economize. Ido not know that there is anything particular in the precedent of that Board which need give us any fear here. Of course, I very much prefer the system of having an administrative Board for the public service, so long as it is not of too "red-tape " a character, because we all know how terrible the increase to the Civil Service is under unrestricted political patronage. It becomes a burden, and in the different departments the men are falling over one another. I have a very strong opinion that administration by a Board is best, so long as you take care not to give too much away to the Board. 155. Hon. Mr. Bowen : With regard to the probable appointment of a New Zealand Minister to the Federal Cabinet, if New Zealand joined, might there not be a little difficulty in the formation of Ministries through the necessity almost, under present conditions, of having to appoint a Minister to represent each State ? We have that trouble in New Zealand; instead of finding the best men to represent the colony as a whole, one has to consider the claims of the districts, and so you do not always get the best men : is there not that difficulty to look forward to ? Hon. Mr. Barton: Undoubtedly; I can see what your opinion is, Mr. Bowen, and I do not disguise my feeling with regard to it. I think the time has not yet come when you can depend upon the feeling of the States being sufficiently Federal to tolerate the passing-over of States in forming a Commonwealth Government. I found that out when I formed the present Government, as I had to pass one colony over. I left Sir Philip Fysh, of Tasmania, out. Of course, it is a difficulty, but there is a possibility that we may so adjust the various departments that Tasmania may not remain unrepresented. I quite agree with you, however, that the time may come when the national feeling will broaden to such an extent that it will not be absolutely necessary for every State to be represented in the Cabinet, but that will not be until the people have more confidence in one another than they have now. In the Canadian Cabinet there is a number of the Government representing different provinces. 156. Mr. Beauchamp : Under the Act each State has to contribute not more than one-fourth of its Customs and excise towards the expenditure of the Commonwealth : could you tell us how much of that 25 per cent, is likely to come back to tho State? Hon. Mr. Barton: Do you wish to take the period before we pass the Federal tariff, or the period of five years which comes after we pass the Federal tariff ? 157. Mr. Beauchamp : I refer to clause 87, which says, " During a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter until the Parliament otherwise provides, of the net revenue of the Commonwealth from duties of Customs and of excise not more than onefourth shall be applied annually by the Commonwealth towards its expenditure." How much of that 25 per cent, are the States likely to get back ? Hon. Mr. Barton : You mean the Braddon clause, which is not the provision we suppose it to be, judging from the class of public speeches we are hearing now, in which it is stated that the Commonwealth is bound to raise four times the amount necessary. The real necessity for this provision is not stated by the "Braddon blot." The Braddon clause was a clause proposed for the purpose of forcing economy upon the Commonwealth, and not for the purpose of causing it to raise untold and unnecessary revenue. The whole purpose is entirely misrepresented. Sir Edward Braddon proposed it to prevent the Commonwealth becoming extravagant, and not, as has been stated, for the purpose of raising an unnecessary revenue. It means this : Out of what you raise, at least three-quarcers must go back to the States. Supposing you raised eight millions—and lam simply taking this as an illustration—it provides that you shall not spend more than two millions on Commonwealth purposes. Now, you may have such a state of things as this : that, allowing for the Defence Department being entirely an expending department, and for the expenditure on the Post and Telegraph Department in some of the States being larger than the revenue, you might want something over a million—say, a million and a half
485
A.—4
for Federal purposes ; and if you raise eight millions through the Customs this clause only prohibits you from taking from the States more than two millions, and you have to give back the £500,000 if you only want one million and a half. 158. Hon. Major Steward: What we wish to know is, what would be the probability with regard to refund—that is to say, whether it is probable that the Commonwealth would expend onefourth of the revenue, or, if not, what sum New Zealand is likely to have to contribute? Hon. Mr. Barton : It is impossible for me to supply that data in regard to New Zealand just now; but the expenditure of the Commonwealth divides itself into the expenditure on the transfer departments, which may be specifically reduced to three—namely, Customs, Defence, and Postal—and the new expenditure of the Commonwealth : that is, on the newly created departments —the Treasury, the Department of Home Affairs, the Attorney-General, and that of external affairs. On all these as they stand the expenditure will be very small; but very soon you will have to pass Bills for the creation of a High Court of Justice, and an Inter-State Commission, which will swell the new expenditure of the Commonwealth. The various estimates which have been made by competent people as to the new expenditure of the Commonwealth have been from £250,000 up to £500,000. Some of our most fanciful opponents brought it up to £750,000. You cannot take the first two months as a criterion, because we are not in working-order, or else you would be surprised to hear that the new expenditure was only £1,327 in the case of New South Wales; consequently you may take it that when the Commonwealth gets into working-order the new expenditure to be divided amongst the contributing States will be from a quarter to half a million, and you can gauge from that what the contribution of New Zealand would be. As to the method in which that will be arranged, until the imposition of a uniform tariff we have, by the Constitution, to credit to each State the revenue collected in it by the Commonwealth ; then we debit to each State the expenditure under it by the Commonwealth for the maintenance of the transfer departments which I have spoken of, and the new expenditure of the Commonwealth is to be debited to the States in proportion to their population. Of course, as far as the new expenditure is concerned, it is a mere flea-bite ; and, with regard to the expenditure on the transfer departments, your Postal Department had been paying until you got universal penny-postage, and will pay again; in ours we spend more than we get, while South Australia gets more than it spends ; but the whole amount is not a very serious question. Defence is all expenditure, and, with regard to Customs, whatever the expense of the Customs fs, that is debited before you get the net revenue from your Customs and excise which is spoken of in the Bill. Hon. Major Stetvard : Some people in New Zealand appear to think that we have to contribute £500,000, and get nothing back. 159. Mr. Beauchamp : Then, there is the question that would arise through the importation of a large amount of goods on which excise had been paid—that is, tobacco and spirits, which are manufactured largely in Victoria : what about that ? Hon. Mr. Barton: That is a question for regulation under intercolonial free-trade. What I have been giving to you is the state of things that will exist before the Federal tariff is passed. It is necessary to mention that, because the state of things which will exist afterwards is very close to it. After that the same process will be observed—that is to say, the crediting to each State of the revenue collected by the Commonwealth, while the expenditure of the Commonwealth on the transfer services will be debited against the revenue collected by each State, and then the per capita proportion of the new expenses of the Commonwealth, which are very small. That is to be paid by the State month by month, and that process goes on after the Federal tariff is imposed, but with this slight exception : that, in the case of goods passing from State to State, the State in which they are consumed is credited with the duty. That goes on for five years after the imposition of the system of Customs duties. After the five years are up the Parliament may provide such a basis as it deems fair for the monthly payments to the several States of all surplus revenue of the Commonwealth. The cardinal point is this : that the Commonwealth cannot keep one penny beyond its necessities. Every penny of revenue beyond the amount sanctioned for appropriation by the Commonwealth for this purpose, whether for the transfers or for new departments, must be distributed to the several States month by month; and the last two months the matter has been working out to such an extent that we expect to show an increase in the revenue over that of last year, notwithstanding the Commonwealth deductions. 160. Mr. Leys : Would an Inter-State Commission have any control in New Zealand over the railway-rates ? Hon. Mr. Barton: Under the Constitution it would be what the Press calls a "brutumfulmen," for this reason : that it is constituted to deal with questions as between State and State ; it has not power to interfere with anything in any particular State, because the Ist subsection of section 51 says that " the Commonwealth Parliament shall have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to trade and commerce among the States, and with other countries." Any trade or commerce arrangements within a State are not subject to the Inter-State Commission, or to the power of the Commonwealth Parliament to legislate on such matters. With reference to the railways, in your case, as they deal with matters which are entirely exclusive to New Zealand commerce, they could not be subject to the Inter-State Commission excepting nominally. 161. Mr. Leys .- Can it deal with existing lines? Hon. Mr. Barton: They deal with existing lines; and if there were any railway-rates in your State, or railway-rates in a State here, with which you are exchanging goods, and wherein it was deemed an improper preference had been given, that question might be referred to the Inter-State Commission. With regard to the railways themselves, clause 102 says, " The Parliament may by any law with respect to trade or commerce forbid, as to railways, any preference or discrimination by any State, or by any authority constituted under a State, if such preference or discrimination is undue and unreasonable, or unjust to any State ; due regard being had to the financial responsibili-
A.^-4,
486
ties incurred by any State in connection with the construction and maintenance of its railways. But no preference or discrimination shall, within the meaning of this section, be taken to be undue and unreasonable, or unjust to any State, unless so adjudged by the Inter-State Commission." So that, before a preference law or regulation can be enacted in a State, the Inter-State Commission must first decide if it is unjust or unreasonable in regard to any other State, and then it may come within the prohibitory section of any Act of Parliament. The danger in the case of New Zealand or Western Australia would be perfectly infinitesimal. It is mainly the four eastern States that are concerned, and your case is very much like that of Tasmania, excepting that yours is a greater State. 162. Mr. Leys : With regard to maritime commerce, how would the Inter-State Commission affect that ? 4 Hon. Mr. Barton : I should say, not to any extent at all in practice. The Inter-State Commission would have the power to administer any laws which the Parliament may pass in regard to navigation and shipping; but, on the other hand, the Commonwealth cannot pass any laws with regard to navigation and shipping which give a preference to one State over another. Laws so passed could be immediately haled before the High Court of Justice and declared to be invalid. 163. Mr. Leys: The Inter-State Commission seems to have some arbitrary powers ? Hon. Mr. Barton : It has no more power than Parliament gives it. 164. Hon. Mr. Bowen : Supposing Parliament did not pass an Act, is there anything to compel the setting-up of this Commission ? Hon. Mr. Barton : There is nothing to compel it, excepting that there is a practical direction to Parliament to pass it; but I think that Parliament will pass an Inter-State Commission law which will to a large extent be based upon the result of investigations into the history of the matter in the United States, where there is an Inter-State Commission, and on certain ameliorative powers of the Board of Trade in England. 165. Mr. Millar: Do I understand that this Inter-State Commission will practically assume the functions of the Board of Trade in England in administering the shipping laws ? Hon. Mr. Barton : No, it will not administer our shipping laws; but I think the probability will be that the function of the Inter-State Commission will be to deal Vvith the complaints brought before it about rates on railways, rates of other common carriers, and by people owning colliers; but it is not likely to be given very extensive powers. It might be given some administrative powers, similar to those of a Court. 166. Mr. Millar : But it is not suggested that it would have powers analogous to the Board of Trade ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Not analogous; but I think it would be formed on the lines of the powers given to the Inter-State Commission in America, and after considering the work done by the Board of Trade in England. 167. Mr. Leys : Would such a law as the one regulating the trade of foreign steamers on the coast come within the control of the Inter-State Commission? Hon. Mr. Barton: It would be a matter for legislation by the Federal Parliament, and if the Federal Parliament chose it could give powers to the Inter-State Commission in that regard. Any general navigation laws would be passed and administered by the Parliament itself, and it is only in cases of attempts to interfere with trade which amount to the abolition of inter-State free-trade principles that the Inter-State Commission has power. 168. Mr. Millar : No vessel can trade on the New Zealand coast without paying the current rate of wages: would the Inter-State Commission have power to allow another vessel to come down and trade on that coast simply because the Commission was set up by the Commonwealth ? Hon. Mr. Barton: No. If you had a law applying to vessels trading in New Zealand, and not applying to any point outside New Zealand, the provisions of that law could not be interfered with by the Commonwealth law. All the provisions as to powers of legislation are contained in the 51st section, and in that section you will find that the Ist subsection is this : " The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to —(1) Trade and commerce with other countries, and among the States." Now, the trade to be affected must be either between some port of Australia or another country, or between two or more States of the Commonwealth, before the Commonwealth Act can touch it at all. If you had a railway-rate between Sydney and Goulburn, and only referring to traffic between Sydney and Goulburn, I do not see how the Commonwealth could touch that. 169. Mr. Leys : Supposing a Sydney steamer with cargo for various ports in New Zealand touched at one port in New Zealand and passed on to another, could the New Zealand law be enforced against that steamer? Hon. Mr. Barton: If the ship carrying a cargo to New Zealand, or to Melbourne and New Zealand, were to call at other Australian ports, that cargo would be inter-State traffic, and the Commonwealth would have power to make laws to regulate that traffic. The Inter-State Commission would have just as much control as the Parliament chose to give it by law, but it might have to wait a long time before the Parliament passed such a law. Whatever legislation the Commonwealth passed must be uniform, and must not discriminate between one State and another. 170. Hon. the Chairman : There are a good many provisions in the Act which state, " Until the Federal Parliament provides to the contrary " ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Those are the cases in which you must give power to legislate afterwards. 171. Hon. the Chairman : These matters have referred to the difficulties we have had in looking at the matter of federation generally, but I think the Commission would be glad, sir, if you could show where the practical advantage would be for New Zealand to come into the Commonwealth ?
487
A.—4
Hon. Mr. Barton: The attractions are no smaller to New Zealand than they are to any other State. The origin of the federation of the States has been a desire on the part of a number of the colonists, largely of the same race, of the same habits and customs, and following very largely the same vocations, to arrive at some system of laws which would apply uniformly to all, and in which they are concerned as one: That is, I take it, the whole object of federation—the desire of the colonies to provide a common defence, a uniform system of taxation as regards the external world, and common facilities for communication. One matter in which the feeling has been getting stronger every day has been that of the advantage of a common defence. In your case you will remember that it was said there were twelve hundred reasons against your federating. Well, you might as well say that there were twenty-five hundred reasons in the case of Western Australia, but they have been got over. In your case I take it that the advantage of a common system of defence would bo that those soldiers enrolled in your State would understand that there was a common system under which they would work with us, and that would be a material advantage both to you and to us. Then, with regard to the question of quickening the means of communication between New Zealand and Australia, I am not at all averse to Mr. Seddon's idea in that connection. In fact, whether you are to unite colony with colony, or whether you are to unite various self-governing communities within the Empire, you must make your communication quick and cheap. That would be one of the necessities of a common system of defence ; and the principle applying to New Zealand which appeals to my mind as underlying the defence question is this : If an attack were made in any part of Australia—we might say on some port in Queensland where they have coal—it would take several days to send soldiers to its defence from the southern colonies, and it would take no more time to get soldiers to its defence from New Zealand. Then, supposing an attack were made on New Zealand, where you have such good coal, the retention by the enemy of that place would be a serious menace to the whole of Australia; and it would be a very great advantage to have a common system in all the colonies by which in the first instance you could come to our assistance, and in the second case we could come to yours. Ido not* see any argument which applies to the mutual defence of States not separated by water, so long as the difficulties of transit are great, which does not apply equally to States which are separated by water, and where the difficulties of transit are not unusually great. As to the Customs, I am there treading on the delicate ground of reciprocity, but no doubt the expansion of markets resulting from inter-State free-trade, together with the protection of these extended markets under a uniform tariff, would be quite as good for one State in the Union as for another. I cannot pretend to constitute myself a judge as to the exact percentage of advantage which each State would get out of the Union ; but, in regard to the tariff, some of us must be prepared to be subjected to greater taxation than we have to pay now, and in our case it is the high price New South Wales must pay for federation; while in the case of New Zealand she might be prepared to pay a great deal for the privilege of enjoying the advantage of an extended market for her produce, and for some of her many manufactures, as she would have a market of nearly four millions for her products outside of the seven or eight hundred thousand she has now, and that would be a decided advantage to her. Of course, the future is a very important consideration. It is certainly a most undesirable thing, to my mind, that there should be growing up side by side in. these seas two separate Commonwealths, which will in the nature of things have a tendency to drift apart the longer they are left apart. It causes a friction which can only be settled as between the Governments, and that would, under separation, tend rather to increase than to diminish. While you can settle, if the States are combined, any friction that might arise by the medium of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and High Court of Justice, if they are kept apart they can only be settled by the old common argument of steel and iron; and imagine two Commonwealths growing up in these seas under those conditions—l do not mean that they would come to blows. 172. Hon. Mr. Bowen : That could not be the case as long as the British Empire stands. Hon. Mr. Barton :As long as the British Empire stands ! It is even possible —I do not want to doubt the stability of the British Empire, which is quite as dear to me as to any other man, but we have the future to look to, and while we are part of the British Empire that possibility is very remote ; but if we ceased to be, by the force of circumstances at any time, a part of the Empire, then these dangers might immediately arise, and when that time comes it may be quite impossible to adjust the adverse interests that may have arisen, and I think the policy of the time is to adjust them now. Your difficulties are not much greater than the difficulties other States had in joining. On the question of admission you yourselves are the best judges. We should welcome you in on your own terms. When I was speaking at the time of the referendum I was constantly met with the argument that I wanted to hand New South Wales over bound hand and foot as the slave of the other colonies of Victoria and South Australia; and when I went to Queensland to speak on federation I was met there with the same argument—viz., that Victoria and New South Wales were in a conspiracy to plunder Queensland. Well, I have not the slightest doubt that these arguments have been raised in New Zealand ; but, of course, they will fail, as they failed in the case of the other colonies, because there is no foundation in them. We cannot say by what percentage any one will benefit by federation, excepting that there will be material advantages hy which we should all benefit. There is an idea in New South Wales that it will not benefit as much as any other State; and in Victoria they have an idea that they will benefit. Ido not grudge them any advantage they may get, and. I do not care which gets the most advantage, personally, so long as we all get our fair share. 173. Hon. the Chairman : Supposing the Parliament and the people of New Zealand were to finally decide against federating, might I ask you if you think there is any chance of any reciprocal agreement being come to between the two countries ?
A.—4,
488
Hon. Mr. Barton : I have been asked that question several times at Press interviews, and it is a difficult one to answer; but perhaps some light may be thrown on it from the history of matters here in Australia. There has been the power to make reciprocal arrangements, and until we got federation various proposals and arguments in that direction were used. At one time Victoria and Tasmania almost came to an arrangement, but they never actually, I think, got a binding one—l am not quite sure on that point—or if they did get a binding one its tenure was so short that it was very speedily given up. They did not find it workable, or that it benefited either State appreciably, but that it caused various complaints. We had a proposal from Tasmania some years ago, and we suggested that, as federation might now be regarded as reasonably close, there was no need to enter into reciprocal arrangements, as there would be all the reciprocity desired under the system of intercolonial free-trade. You might take it that the efforts made in Australia to obtain reciprocity have quite fallen through, or that the reciprocity that was obtained for a short time proved a failure. There does not seem to be now a tendency to make arrangements of that kind. The difficulty is that they are subject to abrogation, and if you get the least instalment of inter-State freetrade it means that you practically come within the full development of federation. If you have reciprocity you have a permanent advantage over other States, in which case you have no security that the investors of capital can regard their investments with safety. I should think that the tendency of the people here would be to say you could have full reciprocity by joining the Federation, but that is a question to which lam hardly prepared to give an answer. I will not be the guarantor of the people in that way. 174. Hon. the Chairman : In the event of federation, is there a possibility of the assimilation of the labour laws of New Zealand to those of the Commonwealth, or vice versd ? Hon. Mr. Barton : So far as the labour laws in your State being brought into touch with those of the Commonwealth is concerned if you entered the Federation, every matter which is not touched by this Constitution remains an integral power in the hands of the State in which it exists. If you look at sections 106, 107, and 108 you will find that in each case the powers of its Parliament and the laws in force in each State are all preserved, excepting in so far as they are inconsistent with any law passed by the Commonwealth within the limits of the powers granted by the Act. 175. Mr. Millar: If you were to impose these labour laws on the manufacturers of New Zealand, who were in competition with the manufacturers of another State where those laws did not exist, it would handicap the New Zealand men to such an extent that they would not be able to compete? Hon. Mr. Barton: We have a factory law here and in Victoria. 176. Mr. Millar: It does not apply to the same extent as the New Zealand law. Hon. Mr. Barton : In the case of inter-State free-trade you would make certain regulations by statute. Supposing certain rates of wages and certain hours prevailed in the case of New Zealand, and you federated with other States in which the rates of wages were lower and the hours longer than in New Zealand, then the tendency would be to adopt the New Zealand races and hours in all the Commonwealth —that is to say, by the adoption between State and State of internal freetrade there would be a tendency towards similar rates of labour and similar wages wherever possible, not by the operation of Commonwealth laws, but by the desire of States to bring themselves into line. 177. Hon. Major Steward : Is there any serious difference between the wages in New Zealand and those of other States ? Hon. Mr. Barton : I have not had time to look into that, but I do not know that there is any difference. 178. Hon. Major Steward: In some departments, yes; in the boot trade and the furniture trade the wages here are lower than in New Zealand. Hon. Mr. Barton : I did not know those instances existed. Such tendencies which have arisen under your separate tariff would be to a certain extent counteracted by the prevailing rates in Australia. 179. Mr. Luke: But during the process the colonies, which have no such possibilities as regards factory laws, would go down in respect to their manufacturing interests. Hon. Mr. Barton : How ? 180. Mr. Luke : The process would take a certain length of time, and during the transition such colonies as New Zealand might be placed at a great disadvantage. Hon. Mr. Barton : Ido not quite know how. I should suppose that after the new tariff had been in force for a reasonable term, and all existing industries had received a certain amount of protection, the tendency would not be to lower wages. 181. Mr. Luke : Only it would be uniform. Hon. Mr. Barton :It would tend towards uniformity, and if you had higher wages'in some factories than in others the tendency might be to lower them, excepting in those instances that would, of course, be affected by the conditions that you have spoken of —by your not being so close to Australia as the States themselves are to each other. The only thing that would counteract that is the question of free-trade, which is a very large one. 182. Mr. Millar: In the case of boots, with 22| per cent, of protection, we imported something like nine thousand pounds' worth from New South Wales last year, and if you take off that duty it means that that amount is goiug to be quadrupled. Hon. Mr. Barton : Do we not import any boots from New Zealand? 183. Mr. Millar : No. Hon. Mr. Barton : Why is that ? Is it because there happens to be so many manufacturers in this city with up-to-date machinery, and that it is rather a question of up-to-date machinery than of any difference in rates of labour or tariff?
489
A.—4
184. Mr. Luke : That, together with the centralisation and the specialisation which the larger colony is adapted for. Hon. Mr. Barton : Where you find good plant and first-rate machinery you will have to have it as good elsewhere in order to compete. 185. Hon. the Chairman : Ar.e you prepared to state, Mr. Barton, your idea as to what the probable Federal tariff will be ? Hon. Mr. Barton: I could hardly tell you the rates of duty, because if I were to do so the astute importers here would immediately go down and deplete the bonds, but I do not know what the tariff will be. The policy is this :We have to raise a very large revenue ; we cannot ignore the revenue side ; and therefore we cannot make our protective duties prohibitory, because that would be to kill our revenue. Our proposal is to raise a large revenue by Customs duties, apart from direct taxation; to resort to direct taxation would be to destroy the source from which the several States could make up any shortage in their revenue. Eaising it, therefore, by Customs and excise means a high tariff and high protection, and, although the Ministry are pledged to an amount of protection, we admit that by the exigencies of the case we cannot make the protective duties prohibitive ; so we shall have to make them such that a certain amount of revenue can be raised, while extending ordinary protection to local industries. New South Wales, which has ■ been practically a free-trade colony for some time past, will naturally have to submit to much higher duties than she has paid in the past. 186. Mr. Leys : You could not indicate whether it would be a 15-per-cent. tariff? Hon. Mr. Barton: No, I could not do that; it would be all over Sydney in half an hour. It must be a high revenue tariff, and it also will be protective to the extent of moderate protection, but it must avoid prohibition for the fear of losing revenue. We shall not be in a very great hurry to make our excise duties equal to our import duties, as we do not intend to destroy local industry. 187. Mr. Boberts : Do you propose to spend the eight millions and a half ? Hon. Mr. Barton: We are not going to spend all. The expenditure must be placed in somebody's hands, and therefore, I suppose, it is put in the hands of the Commonwealth, which has one general source of taxation ; but what happens is that we take out of the Customs what is spent in each State on the transfer departments, and what is spent per capita on the new departments, and hand the rest back to the State from which it was collected, month by month. 188. Mr. Roberts : So that three-quarters of the amount must be returned again ? Hon. Mr. Barton : Three-quarters of it must be returned, but it will be vastly more than threequarters in the first five years. Taking New South Wales, we shall get back this year a considerably larger proportion of revenue from the Customs and excise, after all deductions, than we got before the initiation of the Federation this year.
Wednesday, 20th Maech, 1901. Geobge Jambs Beuce examined. (No. 192.) 189. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you, Mr. Bruce?—Eetail manager in New South Wales for the Goold Bicycle Company, trading in Australia and New Zealand. It is a Canadian company. 190. How long have you lived in the colonies ?—I am a native of New Zealand, where I spent the whole of my life until fifteen months ago, when I came to Australia. 191. Have you made a study of the federation question?— Yes. 192. Will you tell us what your views are ?—I am against New Zealand federating with Australia, for the following reasons: If New Zealand came into the Commonwealth she would only get one-seventh representation in the Senate, and a proportionate representation in the other Chamber, and the advantages she would gain by surrendering her control over her greatest departments of State business are not sufficient to counterbalance the disadvantages that would accrue by her giving up that control. Almost immediately this Commonwealth will have to borrow a considerable sum of money for defence, &c, and New Zealand, if she came in, would have scarcely any voice at all in the controlling of the expenditure of that money. Then, again, the Commonwealth will have to do something towards relieving the large amount of distress there is at present in Australia amongst the unemployed people. There are a large number of paupers here, and this matter will require very serious attention ; paupers are increasing in New South Wales to a large extent, and in Sydney you find thousands of people sleeping in the parks. It is the same to perhaps a lesser extent in the other States, but this is a burden that the Commonwealth will have to carry for some time. 193. How does this bear on the question of federation ?—ln this way : that the Commonwealth will have to provide the means to give these people employment or relieve their immediate distress, and New Zealand would have to pay its share; whereas at the present time she has no large pauper population, and is not called upon to bear a large burden in that respect, while her aged and infirm are provided with pensions. 194. Why should not the State attend to that matter?— Because this pauper population exists throughout the Commonwealth, and it would have to be made a national matter. In connection with defence, it will be urged that it is necessary for New Zealand to join, otherwise she would be left out of the scheme of naval defence; but that scheme, you will find, is going to resolve itself into making a great and expensive naval base in Sydney, towards which New Zealand will have to contribute a one-seventh share. As a sop, we will probably be told that another naval station will be established at Auckland in order to induce New Zealand to come in, but I do not consider that the advantage she would gain by this would be sufficient to compensate her for losing her independence and getting that which is her inevitable due. She will get the advantage of the Sydney 62—A. 4.
A.—4
490
station whether or not. Under clause 69 of the Constitution various departments of the public service have to be transferred to the Commonwealth, amongst them being post and telegraphs, Customs, and defence. Dealing with the postal question, New Zealand has now established a universal penny-postage scheme, and the immediate effect of her coming into the Commonwealth will be that there would perhaps be an interference with her postal arrangements, as they would have to be made uniform throughout the Federation. "We have no penny-postage in Australia yet; and I put it to you, is it likely that Australia is going to adopt-New Zealand's penny-postage scheme straight away? The probabilities are that if you join the Federation New Zealand would have to go back to the twopenny-postage and shilling-telegram days in order to come into line with the rest of the States, as in Australia the politicians are rather hostile to the penny-postage, I think, at present. This is indicated by their reception of New Zealand's request to admit her penny letters. Under clause 69 the Customs and excise are to be transferred to the Commonwealth, and it is possible that the Commonwealth may decide to go in for a scheme of free-trade, in which case New Zealand would have to try and exist under free-trade. 195. Of course, there would be free-trade between all the colonies ?—Yes; but the Commonwealth may decide to have free-trade with the rest of the world, and New Zealand would have to try and live under a scheme which would in her case probably injure industries which have been established there under a system of protection, and which are now flourishing. In this connection I might say that, although Sydney is under free-trade, the cost of living here is higher than in New Zealand, which is a protective country. I have with me the latest retail price-lists from A. and T. Inglis, of Dunedin ; Wardell Brothers, of Wellington; and the Civil Service Stores, Sydney. I notice that the retail prices are less in New Zealand than in Sydney, which has free-trade —for instance, a man can get for £1 4s. lid. in Wellington what he would have to pay £1 10s. for in Sydney. 196. Hon. Captain Russell.] Can you illustrate that by a few articles?— Yes. In the case of Ceylon tea, No. 1 blend, the retail price at the Civil Service Stores in Sydney is 2s. 6d. per pound, in Wellington it is 2s. 2d. per pound; salt in Sydney is Bd., in New Zealand 7d.; cheese, cheddar, is Is. in Sydney, and 7d. in New Zealand ; jams, assorted, s£d. per pound, and sd. in Wellington; oatmeal is 4s. Bd. a 251b. bag here, and 3s. in Wellington ; raisins, 9d. here, 7d. in New Zealand; currants, 7d. here, sd. in New Zealand ; candles, sperm, Bd. here, and sd. in New Zealand; bacon, Is. sd. a pound here, and 7-Jd. in New Zealand; biscuits, arrowroot, are 7d. a pound here, and 6Jd. in New Zealand ; and Derby tobacco, 6s. per pound here, as against ss. 6d. in New Zealand. Perhaps one cause of this is the high rents caused by the concentration of people in the large cities of Melbourne and Sydney. Sydney has a population of over half a million, and the people are so crowded together near the centre of that city that rents are very high. We pay a very high rent for a warehouse in the city, a rent altogether out of proportion if one considers the real value of that warehouse for trade purposes. I would also point out that New Zealand is better off under her policy of protection, and is making greater strides in industry and commerce and showing more enterprise than any State of the Commonwealth. Under clause 87 New Zealand would immediately lose a sum riot exceeding one-fourth of her Customs revenue without obtaining any corresponding advantage. Under clause 89 the cost of maintenance of the Commonwealth is debited in proportion to the different States, and New Zealand would have to bear an equal share of that with the other States, in addition to what expenditure the Commonwealth might decide would be necessary for defence and other purposes. Under clause 92 New Zealand would have to admit free everything Australia liked to send it, and the position she would be placed in would be this: In New South Wales particularly wages are very low. In our own business we get cycle mechanics for about half of what we have to pay them in New Zealand. We have a branch in New Zealand, and it pays us to build bicycles here, and send them over to New Zealand and pay the Customs duties on them, on account of the low wages here.. Under free-trade between the States you would find that nearly all the bicycles used in New Zealand would be built in Sydney. 197. Hon. the Chairman.] Why do you oppose the federation of New Zealand with Australia?— From patriotic reasons. lam thinking more of my country than my business in giving this evidence. I do not want to see New Zealand industries crushed by the sweatingdens of Australia. From my experience in the City of Sydney I can say that there are people herded together in small rooms who are working for starvation wages, especially in the tailoressing trade and in dressmaking and millinery. In New Zealand a girl cannot be employed unless she gets 4s. or ss. a week at least, but here they get any amount of work done for nothing. There are also the Chinese working in the furniture trade, and there are cases known in Sydney in which two or three families live, sleep, and work in one room, and this is the sort of thing that New Zealand would have to compete against under free-trade. Under clause 98 the Commonwealth could interfere with the navigation and shipping laws. The New Zealand shipping laws have a good reputation over here. I hear them spoken of as being the best in the southern seas, and perhaps the Australians might try to assimilate your shipping laws to their own, with the result that there would be retrogression in that respect. Clause 127 says that aboriginals shall not be counted in the representation, and that means that your Maoris would be disfranchised. I plead for my Maori brethren. What have they done that they should be disfranchised? Under clause 128 women are also disfranchised, so that New Zealand would probably have to submit to the disfranchisement of its Maoris and women until Australia was ready to enfranchise its aboriginals and women. I would like to point out that New Zealand has within the last four years doubled her trade with New South Wales, while the goods she has taken from New South Wales has not increased more than 50 per cent. 198. You are giving us the figures in connection with the existing trade with New South Wales, which is already an open port to us; but we understand that if we do not come into the Commonwealth there will be prohibitive duties which New Zealand would have to face: what have you
491
A.—4,
to say to that ?—My answer to that would be that the Commonwealth is not likely to put on a prohibitive duty against New Zealand alone, but against all outsiders. If Australia goes in for protection, New Zealand is in the best outside position to compete for her trade, and in the matter of produce New Zealand can produce certain articles better than this continent can. New Zealand has nothing to fear from any part of Australia in connection with produce. 199. What about Tasmania ?—Tasmania could not feed the Continent of Australia. Take wheat, in which the average crop in Australia is 11 bushels to the acre, whereas New Zealand will grow 33 bushels to the acre. In that respect the New Zealand farmer can afford to compete with the Australian farmer, because for the same outlay he gets three times as much yield, and could sell to pay at half the price. 200. Supposing New Zealand joined the Commonwealth, there would be free-trade between it and Australia, and our agricultural produce would be admitted free : do you not think that would be a great advantage to New Zealand ?—lt would. 201. How would New Zealand be affected if there were a protective duty in New South Wales which does not exist now ?—Simply that the people would have to pay more money for certain articles of produce and for certain goods, because they could not live without them. 202. Would it affect the sources of supply in New South Wales ?—Slightly. 203. Are you acquainted with Victoria?— Yes, -a little. 204. Do you know how much grain Victoria exports annually ? —I do not know the latest figures, but I know she exports a lot. 205. Have you any other reasons to urge against New Zealand federating?— The social conditions are very different here from what they are in New Zealand, and the wealthier classes dominate politics to such an extent that it is difficult to appreciate the many difficulties in the way of bringing about reforms in social legislation in Australia. Politics here will be for many years to come in the hands of one particular class, and the poorer people will not be allowed to come to the front. People here feel that if New Zealand were allowed to come into the Federation her influence would be for progress in legislation, because she has gone ahead in every direction, and she can show the way to all the other colonies in regard to her advanced legislation; but she would be swamped in both Houses. Here the people have lost or have never had any power of initiative owing to being dominated by the classes I have alluded to, and probably climatic influence, and they put up with a very old-fashioned method both of government and legislation. I believe that the climatic advantages of New Zealand will always enable it to compete successfully with Australians, and New Zealand will always take the first position on the list—in fact, New-Zealanders are coming out on top here every time. The standard in commercial and political circles is lower than it is in New Zealand, and in that respect we are not so well off as you are in New Zealand. 206. Mr. Leys.] Do you mean to say that the legislators of Australia are of a lower type than those of New Zealand ?—I scarcely like to put it that way ; but I consider that the standard of men in Parliament in New Zealand is very much higher than it is in the Parliaments here, as the representatives here are largely controlled by the wealthy people. In regard to the settlement of the people on the land, I have some personal knowledge of the settlements on the back blocks in this country, and the state of things is such that I do not suppose you will find worse existing in any other part of the world. You will find here families all herded together in one hut, trying to eke out a bare existence by catching a few wallabies. I think that the settlers in New Zealand back blocks are in a very much better position, and have certainly better prospects, than they would have if they were in the Commonwealth. 207. Mr. Roberts.] You emphasize the fact that, because of the large property-owners here, the people could not get on the land : do you refer to the pastoral tenants, who generally are able to hold their own very well ?—There is some desire here to open up the land, but the Ministers are not so energetic in that respect as they should be, because our Parliament is largely controlled by the wealthy classes. 208. I presume you are aware that very large areas of land have been resumed and are lying open for settlement at the present time ?—I visited much of that land, and it is poor land that is not likely to be taken up for closer settlement. 209. I do not think you are quite justified in saying that the runholders are stagnating settlement ? —Well, the people cannot get suitable land. 210. Is not that because they prefer town life to country life?—My experience in New Zealand was that as soon as a block of land was opened up the people rushed and took it up, but here a certain class control the Legislature to such an extent that the Government are not opening up these good blocks of land. 211. Well, they take half a big run and resume that for settlement, and that is a pretty good average : what is your opinion on that point ? —There is scarcely any good in taking the land that is offered. It is generally the worst part of the run. But in any case the inducements offered by the Government are not sufficient to get people to go on the land. That is the bald fact. They do not go on. 212. Mr. Luke.] What is the average pay to a cycle-builder here ?—£l ss. a week in the case of youths and men, but sometimes £1 10s. is paid to a man. 213. What hours do they work ?—Nine hours a day. 214. Why do they celebrate the eight hours by a demonstration here ?—That is done by a few trades who enjoy the eight hours. 215. Is this herding together in small dwellings going on to any great extent ?—A report recently submitted to the Sydney City Council shows that it prevails to a very serious extent, and a number of these buildings are being pulled down. 216. If £1 ss. is the average wage paid to a mechanic, what is the average wage paid to a labouring-man ?—About 7s. a day on Government Labour Bureau works.
A.—4
492
217. Is it not peculiar that there should be men who are prepared to build bicycles when they can only get such a small wage as compared with the wages that can be obtained by the labouringclass ?—A bicycle mechanic is generally a man who is skilled only in that particular business, and he gets permanent work at it. 218. Mr. Leys.] Do you infer that the working-population here cannot get a very great show at the elections ? —Yes, because the elections here are controlled more by money than is the case in New Zealand. 219. Do you mean that the poorer classes of population, both in the city and in the country, are more amenable to money or property influence ?—Certainly, because when a man is in a fairly comfortable position he is more independent. 220. And your impression is that the social legislation of the Commonwealth will not progress rapidly ?—No. To bring New Zealand into the Commonwealth would be like hitching a motorcar on behind an old stage-coach. Thomas Bailey Clegg examined. (No. 193.) 221. Hon. the Chairman.'] What is your official position, Mr. Clegg?—l am Clerk in charge of the Department of Labour, New South Wales. 222. Mr. Millar.] Under your Factories Act, how many hours do they work in the factories here ?—Our Act only limits the hours of women and young people. 223. What hours do they work under that Act ?—Forty-eight. 224. Have you experienced any difficulty in ascertaining if the forty-eight hours are worked through there being any defect in the Act ? —We find a great difficulty, and we have represented in our reports that the hours should be fixed by statute at eight per day. 225. We have had it in evidence that fifty-four hours are nearer the mark than forty-eight: can you say whether that is correct ?—They are allowed to work a certain overtime, which would increase the hours worked weekly. 226. Then the wages would be increased ? —Of course, time and a half is paid for every hour of overtime. 227. What constitutes a factory here?— Four hands in the .case of Europeans, and two in Chinese. 228. So that until they employ four hands they are not reckoned under the Factories Act at all ?—No. There is one exception where machinery is employed. 229. Has your department any means of obtaining approximately the number of hands employed in factories where they do not employ four hands ? —No. The Government Statistician covers a wider ground than we do. 230. Would it be too great a trouble for your department to give me the number of hands employed in two of the largest factories in each of the principal industries? —We can give that. I will send you in a return. 231. Have you any idea of the number of Chinese in the factories ?—There are a number of Chinese in the laundries, and I can give you the number of Chinese employed in cabinetmaking. 232. I suppose Mr. Coghlan gets his statement of the wages from the returns sent in by your department ? —Yes, we supply that; but our factory laws do not cover the whole of the colony. There is a Metropolitan District and a Newcastle District, but the Governor in Council has the power to extend the Act, if he thinks fit, to other portions of the colony. Hitherto he has not seen fit to extend it. 233. Then, outside of Sydney and Newcastle there is not such a thing as a Factory Act in existence in New South Wales ?—No. 234. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I presume that nearly all the large factories come within these areas? —Nearly all. 235. Mr. Millar.] Have you any laws applying to the compensation of workmen in case of accidents ? —No, not apart from the ordinary Employers' Liability Act. 236. Is there any statute limiting the minimum of wage paid to women or children ?—No. 237. Mr. Leys.] Do you administer the Shops Act here?—l do. We call it the Early Closing Act. 238. Is it rather more stringent than the New Zealand Act ? —I think it probably is. 239. What is your hour for closing?— Six o'clock. 240. Absolutely ?—Not for all shops. We have a schedule exempting fruit-shops, refreshmentshops, and others. 241. I mean in general?—lt is 6 o'clock for all shops. 242. Do you manage to enforce that?— Yes; we found a little difficulty through an interpretation of the Supreme Court regarding a certain clause. 243. Does the Act provide for any half-holiday?— Yes, the usual weekly half-holiday. 244. Does it provide for one in the week ?—With one exception. There is one long night and one short day. 245. Have you the power to fix hours?-—No, not in the ordinary shops; and the Act fixes the hours in the scheduled shops. 246. How does that apply to dressmakers and milliners ? Do they come under the Factories Act?— That depends on their business. If they simply make goods to order they are factories, and they are not factories unless there are four persons employed. 247. But supposing a milliner has goods for sale and employs a number of girls?—lt would be a shop as to the persons she had in the shop, and would be a factory in regard to those in the back rooms who were engaged in machining. 248. With regard to wages, is there any law ?—None.
A.—4.
493
249. Do you know if there are many employed without wages in the shops here ? —Not in the shops, but there are in the factories. We have apprentices and improvers in the latter who get nothing, or who start at a very small wage. 250. We have been told that there is a lot of sweating practised : is that so, in your experience ? —There is sweating in Sydney, but I cannot say to'what degree it is practised as compared with other colonies. 251. Is there not a very large amount of poverty in Sydney?—l cannot say. Poverty is a relative term. What we would call poverty in this country would probably be regarded as comparative prosperity in older countries. 252. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you any limit as to the number of apprentices who may be employed? —No. We have an Apprentice Act, which provides for a simple form of indenture, and so on. 253. Have there been many breaches of the Compulsory Closing Act ?—Yes. 254. On the whole, it is working fairly satisfactorily ?—lt is in the larger shops ; but you get a small shop worked perhaps by a widow or some other person in poor circumstances, and if the law is enforced against such people a certain amount of public feeling is excited against the Act. That has been a difficulty with us. 255. With your knowledge of the conditions of labour prevailing in Sydney and in New Zealand, would you feel inclined to confirm the statement made to us frequently that in Australia the hours of labour are longer and the rates of pay lower than in New Zealand, and that there is very much more boy- and woman-labour employed ?—I am not in a position to say that. 256. Hon. the Chairman.] Have you a Truck Act in force in New South Wales ?—One was passed last year, and has only been in force three months. 257. Have you any Workmen's Wages Lien Act?—We have. 258. And any law regulating the due payment of wages ?—Yes; we had a short Act, which secures typewriters and sewing-machines from distraint. 259. But I mean preventing the workmen's wages from being attached? —Yes; passed last session. Wages are protected up to £2. Alexander Davidson examined. (No. 194.) 260. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a grain and produce merchant, residing in Sydney ? —Yes. I have been about seventeen years in Australia. 261. Do you know New Zealand ?—I was five years there—from 1879 to 1884. 262. Are you in favour of New Zealand joining the Commonwealth of Australia ?—Certainly. 263. On what grounds ?—As far as New Zealand is concerned, she will have a free entry to the Commonwealth. In New South Wales we are isolated at present as a free-trade country. All the other colonies are protected against us, but that will be removed by federation. 264. Is there any other advantage besides that ? —I do not think so. Of course, the reciprocity in trade will benefit all the colonies, but New Zealand specially will have the advantage in having the right of free entry into all the Australian ports, and, as the principal export from here to New Zealand is coal, the advantage should be on the side of New Zealand. 265. Does it occur to you, on the other hand, how New Zealand's manufactories would be affected by the large manufactories in Australia ? —ln regard to woollen manufactures she should be able to compete, as there are only one or two mills here where there is any woollen-manufacturing done. With intercolonial free-trade the sources of supply will be cheapened, and she will have a larger market for export too. 266. I am asking you whether the New Zealand manufacturers could compete with Australia: under federation, would the New Zealand manufacturers have to shut up?—No, Ido not think so. 267. Mr. Beauchamp.] You view this question simply from a trade standpoint?— Yes. 268. And with the knowledge of the trade which has been done between New Zealand and New South Wales during the past sixteen or seventeen years ?—Yes. 269. Has that trade been of an extensive nature ?—Not as far as produce is concerned. At one time it was a very important thing, but it has retrograded, for the simple reason that in New South Wales a great deal more country has been put under cultivation recently. In 1883 we had a periodical drought, and required large quantities of produce from New Zealand; and there were also large public works going on which also helped you considerably. In 1889 our railways were completed, and public works ceased, territory was opened up, and gradually the importation of New Zealand produce has been lessening rather than increasing. 270. Does Victoria now export much produce to New South Wales ?—Yes. Chaff is the principal import here. 271. I suppose each year Australia as a whole is growing more produce and relying less on New Zealand ? —Yes. 272. I suppose, in the matter of oats we could compete against Victoria all right ?—Yes. Victoria sends us very few oats, because they go in for the Algerians, which are not much use here, but they have been getting the trade of South Africa for these oats. In January last they had orders for 25,000 tons of hay for South Africa, and that took away a great deal of their surplus. 273. Assuming the tariff on oats is not a very high one, then we can always find a certain demand in New South Wales for our oats ?—Yes. 274. Mr. Luke.] You say there is not very much manufacturing done in New South Wales? —Not in woollen goods ; there may be in iron and other industries. 275. Then, the statement I read in the paper that the manufacturing interests of New South Wales are almost equal to those of Victoria is not correct? —I think Victoria is ahead of New South Wales considerably.
A.—4
494
276. Are the wages in New South Wales anything like equivalent to those of New Zealand ? — I do not know the usual wages, but a man here gets for casual labour Is. an hour, and carpenters Is. 3d. 277. What do manufacturing mechanics get?—l could not say. 278. Mr. Leys.] You think that the New Zealand produce trade is already declining, because a larger area has been placed under agriculture in New South Wales ? —Yes, it is declining year by year. 279. Then, that is likely to go on?— Yes. 279 a. Take oats ? —We cannot grow them here to equal New' Zealand ; they are not nearly so good as the New Zealand oats. 280. Take wheat: is New South Wales now importing wheat ?—No; Ido not think there will be much of a market for New Zealand wheat. 281. Do you anticipate that there will be a market for New Zealand flour?—No, because New Zealand flour has a dampness in it which the Australian flour does not possess, and it is consequently looked on as an inferior article. New Zealand flour has almost gone out of use in New South Wales. 282. Have you done any exporting to the South Sea Islands ?—No. 283. Do you know whether Australian flour is preferred to New Zealand flour in the South Sea Islands ?—I sent some on one occasion, but I got it sent down from Auckland. 284. What about butter : is New South Wales exporting butter now ?—Largely. 285. Is that likely to increase? —Yes. Sometimes we import very largely from New Zealand in butter. The summer butter is all exported from here, and after that the supplies gradually become less ; but, as fresh territory is being opened up, there is not the likelihood of much being required from outside. In dry seasons we import largely from New Zealand. 286. What are the items, excepting oats, which New Zealand is likely to supply to Australia ? —Sometimes there is a regular market for cheese here, and second-class butter, which is dairy butter and used for biscuit-manufacturing. 287. Is the dairy industry in New South Wales, which is a developing one, likely to supply all the cheese, and this inferior butter you speak of ? —No; they are now going in for separators all over the country, and where you could get a few years ago thousands of kegs of dairy butter you can hardly get one now. 288. Do you mean to say that there is butter of a better quality coming from New Zealand than you get in New South Wales ?—No; but one class is—farmers' butter, which is made in New Zealand, and which has never been through the factory. Milled butter is the term they use in New Zealand for it. 289. What other items would New Zealand be able to send ?—Maize comes from there. Fifteen months ago we imported maize from America, but we have had none from there this year, and for the last four or five months a great quantity has been coming from New Zealand, and we have taken the surplus of your produce. America could not send maize here owing to the higher freight, so New Zealand has been benefited to that extent. There will always be a market here for good qualities, because in the summer-time our local maize goes all weevilly. A large quantity of bran and pollard also comes from New Zealand, and it is one of the items which it is very advantageous to get rid of from New Zealand, because your milling-power is far more than sufficient for the colony itself, and with the exclusion of Australian markets you cannot get rid of it. The tariff in Queensland on bran is £1 13s. 4d. per ton, and there is a good demand for it there. The importation of Manitoba flour began several years ago. It was imported with the idea of mixing it with the local flour, and at that time it was worth between £2 and £3 a ton more than the local flour; but last year they were paying about twice as much for it as for the local flour— £11 for Manitoba, and £6 to £6 ss. for New South Wales. The idea was to mix the flour, but I think importers are rather sorry now that they began with it. 290. Do you not anticipate that we should be benefited with respect to flour ?—I do not think so. There is a lot of malt used here, and there have been large contracts with Christchurch firms for supplying it. Hemp is another article for which there is a demand here, but only one man uses it. Generally speaking, in Queensland, when the tariff is taken off, there will be a good demand for the various articles of produce from New Zealand, such as oats and maize, in regard to which you will benefit considerably. It is very small at the present time; practically we do no business there owing to the duty. 291. Do you not think, Mr. Davidson, generally speaking, there is such a rapid expansion of the agricultural industry in Australia that our market here will gradually decline unless in times of drought?—l think so; but, of course, there is the quality of New Zealand produce, which we cannot get here. 292. Can you tell us what amount of New Zealand produce which comes into Australia is transhipped to Manila ? —The firm that is doing that business is Cassels Brothers and Wolfe, and last year, I think, they had contracts with New Zealand for produce for Manila, to where they shipped between 200 and 300 tons per month. I refer to potatoes, which are, on arrival here, ta,kc n out of the bags and put into boxes. I believe they all came from New Zealand last year, and that Christchurch got the bulk of the orders. 293. Will not that trade still be open to us?—l do not know that it would. If they send potatoes to Manila they have to be taken out of the bags and put into boxes, and I do not think they will continue to do that in the case of New Zealand potatoes. Only under special arrangement could repacking in bond be allowed. 294. Do they not do something of that kind in Victoria with oats when reshipping to South Africa ? —I think, as far as reshipments to South Africa are concerned, they get them boxed in New Zealand, and not in Victoria.
495
A.—4
295. Could they not adopt a similar system for Manila, and get them bagged in New Zealand? —Yes, but there is this difficulty : Wolfe is a man here who has the option of the Tasmanian market by having his headquarters in Sydney, and can buy from New Zealand also. He often takes advantage of the local market when the Tasmanians have dropped to a low price. If he went to New Zealand he would only have the option of your" market. 296. With regard to oats, has there been a large shipment of oats to Manila? —Practically none. 297. What about onions: are large quantities of the onions that now annually go to Australia for transhipment to Manila?— Yes. 298. Do you know anything of Victoria?— Yes. 299. Do you think New Zealand has any chance of shipping produce into Victoria if the tariff is removed ? —I do not think so now, as I think Victoria is completely self-supporting. A large item of consumption fifteen years ago was oats, which were required for the tram-horses in Melbourne, but now they have cable-trams, and there is no demand in that respect for oats; and, besides, they grow enough oats in Victoria to export, and, unless for milling purposes, there can be practically no market there. 300. Do you think the New South Wales market will be the only one that might be closed to us, supposing we did not join ?—Practically, they are all closed under federation. 301. And that market you say is a declining market?—l do not know. I think now they have got to about the top. It depends on prices. Take wheat: In the southern parts of New South Wales they work on what is called the " halves system" —the landowner finds the land and seed and the farmer finds the labour, and they halve the result. When wheat was 4s. to 4s. 6d. a bushel they did very well, but for the last three years they have been getting 2s. to 2s. 2d. for it on the ground, and there has been nothing in it for squatter or farmer, and now they are going back to sheep again. Therefore it appears to depend very largely on grain-values whether they continue grain-growing or go in for sheep. 302. Do you think there is a very large area of land in New South Wales suitable for agriculture ? —Yes. At certain places wheat is more suitable than oats as a crop. They grow wheat from the Queensland border down to Albury. 303. I suppose you look forward to a continuous export of dairy produce from Australia, and to a continuous expansion in that industry here? —Yes. 304. Hon. Major Steiuard.] You mentioned amongst the items we should gain would be woollen goods. The total export of woollen goods from New Zealand to Australia for 1898 was £4,037 : do you think there is any probability of that amount being increased, seeing that in Sydney woollens are now imported free of duty?— Yes; you would have the Queensland market and other markets, even if the New South Wales market were not affected. 305. In regard to pollard and sharps, I find the total value of that export to New South Wales in 1898 was £225 : was that an abnormal year, or is there likely to be any increase in the importation?—lt depends on the price, and in some years when there has been a drought very large quantities of pollard are sent over here. 306. In years of drought you would inevitably require to import ? —Very largely. 307. In 1898 we exported from New Zealand potatoes to the value of £100,000: was that an exceptional year?—ln 1898 potatoes went up to £9 a ton, and New Zealand benefited very considerably. We started that year buying potatoes at about £3, and they went up to about £8 f.o.b. New Zealand; the quantity was not so much, but the value was considerable. 308. Is there any reason why you do not get potatoes in Tasmania?—We do. 309. Is Tasmania capable of supplying all the needs of the other States in the matter of potatoes ? —Sydney is one of the principal markets for Tasmanian potatoes, and Victoria can supply her own to a large extent. Tasmania we depend on principally for our supply of potatoes, and we like them better, and people are willing to pay from 10s. to £1 a ton more for them than for New Zealand potatoes. 310. Can you import as cheaply from Tasmania as from New Zealand ?—The freights on the potatoes at the present time from Tasmania are running into Is. a bag, and from New Zealand I think it is 12s. a ton. It is practically the same thing. 311. If the Tasmanian potato commands a slightly higher price, is there any likelihood of New Zealand, excepting under exceptional circumstances, having a large export of potatoes to you ?—lt depends altogether on the supplies coming from Tasmania. If Tasmania can produce the quantity required they would get the preference. 312. Another large item of export to Australia from New Zealand is sawn timber for butterboxes?—There is a great deal used for that purpose—white-pine. 313. Is there any timber obtainable in New South Wales which would be suitable for the purpose ?—That I cannot say. 314. The value of the export of oats to New South Wales in 1898 was £47,000: can you tell us whether this was for your own consumption or for the supply of customers of yours beyond the seas ? —I think they were mostly consumed here. 315. Do you think that New Zealand is likely to have a market for maize in Sydney or other places in New South Wales ?—I think there will be a market here in certain months of the year. The new maize begins to come in from New Zealand in September, and by that time our local maize is becoming very weevilly, and it is impossible to get a sound sample of maize towards the end of December. 316. Do you get any from Queensland? —Occasionally, but not much. 317. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think New Zealand would be able to compete with the maize from America ?—I do not think there is any chance of that coming in from America again, because we now pay so very much higher freights than when the importation began two years ago, besides which there will be added the Federation duties.
A.—4
496
318. Mr. Leys.] You said that the New Zealand flour was inferior to the Australian : do you think that under federation much flour and wheat would be shipped to the North Island from Sydney ?—No, unless they sent you their surplus. 319. Is there not a probability that they would again send their surplus to the North Island ? —A year or two ago a lot of wheat went to the North Island for the Auckland Boiler Mill Company, but that is the only year I know of. 320. Mr. Beauchamp,] Is not flour, as a rule, slightly cheaper in Australia than in New Zealand ? —I do not think so. Under federation Hobart and Launceston would probably lose the trade they have in flour with the west coast of Tasmania, and Melbourne would get it. Hon. Sir W. McMillan, M.L.A., K.C.M.G., examined. (No. 195.) 321. Hon. the Chairman.] You have taken part, sir, in the politics of New South Wales, and you have been a Cabinet Minister in New South Wales ? —Yes. 322. You have also resided in New South Wales for many years past? —Yes. 323. Would you have any objection to giving us your views upon the question of New Zealand joining the Australian Commonwealth, more especially having regard to what you conceive would be the advantages which New Zealand would gain from entering the Commonwealth, if you think there are any ?—ln the first place, I think there is no doubt about the advantages. This is a large continent, under peculiar conditions, at times subject to droughts, and forming a natural market for your more favoured country as far as climate is concerned. Again, your country is an isolated one, but in the temperate zone ; whereas a large amount of our territory is either tropical or subtropical; in other words, there are all the elements for the interchange of commodities existing between the two countries, which, of course, is the basis of trade. I take it for granted, and it almost goes without saying, that if it were not for the distance by sea between the two countries there would be no question at all about your joining the Australian Union ; so that, after all, it narrows itself down to a question of distance. But if you take some of the distances that would have to be travelled by the representatives of the different States in Australia, no matter where the capital may be situated—because the capital cannot be situated in the centre of our continent, where there is probably no water to drink—you will see that even the three or four days' journey it takes to come from New Zealand is not a very great period of time as compared with what a man would take who has to come to within a hundred miles of Sydney from the remote parts of Western Australia or the remote parts of Queensland. Also, as population increases and as trade increases, if we are united communication must become better every year until it reaches the highest possible point of quickness. I conceive that travelling in one of the modern steamers for three days is much less of a hardship than travelling three days in a railway-train, consequently that part of the inconvenience will be overcome as the years go on. On the other hand, there is no doubt that, as you see in the case of England and Ireland, even a very few miles of sea creates differences with regard to the habits and life of a people, and there is no doubt that there is a distinctive civilisation before the people of New Zealand, which marks them out in regard to certain peculiarities from the other colonies; and I dare say 'there is—and this is borne out as far as I can learn from reading the newspaper reports—on the part of the New-Zealanders a sort of ultra-independence, and a desire to workout their own destiny on their own lines. On the other hand, the question of the development of commerce between Australia and New Zealand must inevitably arise, and it certainly would be a bad thing for New Zealand and the mutuality of trade if any restriction existed in respect of the trade of the two countries —in other words, that the absolute free-trade which we had established or are establishing among the Australian Colonies, if extended to New Zealand, would be mutually beneficial. At the same time it would be a very difficult thing for what is practically an integral part of the Empire, such as Australia, to make any separate treaty with New Zealand for the interchange of commodities while she was not a component part of the Australian nation, Australia at the same time putting on comparatively heavy duties against Great Britain and the rest of the British Empire. So that you see the difficulties in view are great with regard to trade and intercourse if there is not an absolute union—by which I mean a political union—and without such union the difficulties I have pointed out must increase. With regard to New Zealand, it is not necessary, I think, to carry the union into certain services—services as contrasted with powers —as we have done in the case of Australia. For instance, I would not see any sense in the transfer of the postal telegraphic service, and certainly there would be no transfer in the future of the railways, or any service that, owing to the twelve hundred miles of sea, cannot be affected in the sense that such services on the continent are affected. It does, however, seem to me that Australia would never consent to any kind of union unless it were of a completely political character. In other words, there must be all the elements of national union—one Parliament, one Executive, one Supreme Court, of which you could have your branch, but which would be essentially a part of the judiciary of Australia and New Zealand combined; and in all other matters it would be necessary politically to fuse us into one people, just the same as if you were Tasmania or Western Australia. Then, again, looking at the matter more broadly, and from an Imperial point of view, I think that if the British Empire is to hold together there must be three great Confederations, putting aside the Asiatics and others, under what you might call "Crown rule"—namely, Canada, South Africa, and Australasia—and the future of the British Empire will depend, I think, upon the absolute coherence of all the different separate entities working first locally, and in their own geographical area, but working together for the Empire. Now, I hold that any attempt to create a second Federation in the Pacific would very soon work out fatally to the integrity of the British Empire —that is to say, I very much fear that causes of difference would arise between the Federation dealing with the Pacific and the Federation dealing with Australia as a whole; and if once there were these differences of
497
A.—4
opinion, and they were accentuated so as to create, if not actual hostility and strife, at any rate strained relationships, it would very seriously imperil the union of the different parts of the British Empire. To explain myself more fully, were Canada in her geographical area absolutely dominant there, South Africa dominant in her area and in any further access of territory that might take place there, and Australia and New Zealand, with all the islands in the Pacific, dominant in this area, then you have got three great integral parts of the British Empire each working within its own domain, but all ready to give their united strength to the Mother-country when necessary. Of course, it is not unreasonable that there should have been hesitation on the part of New Zealand about coming into the Australian Union, because, apart from the distance and the other different conditions, you naturally would have to go through a period of educational reflection, such as we have gone through here, and it is reasonable to assume that that period of education and reflection has as yet scarcely commenced. Here I must say that I think the step of sending out a Commission and getting information is really a good one, and I think it will probably lead to a better understanding of the whole position; and I might also say, perhaps—and I throw out the suggestion for what it is worth—that when the Federal Parliament meets in Melbourne, and the Executive is established, it might be considered a wise step that a representative from New Zealand should be permanently appointed to watch the development of Federal politics, to report to the Government of New Zealand, and thus to form beforehand a sort of ambassadorial nexus between us and you, because I believe the feeling in favour of federation will grow, and that in a very few years the advantages to you, as well as to us and the Empire, will be so apparent that circumstances will force you into our Union, as circumstances have forced the different States of Australia into their Union. 324. You told us that you thought it was not necessary for the Federal Government to take over the post and telegraphs in New Zealand, but under the Act must not the Federal Government take over the Post Office?— Not necessarily. They took over the Post Office here simply because it is one connected system, but it does not follow that they would take it over in New Zealand, where it will be an isolated system of its own. But the question of the Post Office does not affect the political and national view of this matter. It is a service that I take for granted, in the event of New Zealand joining the Union, would be considered on its merits; but these are subjects which would be left open for future discussion, and are not necessary to national union. 325. What do you think would be the effect of the distance as regards administration of the public department ?—Of course, the distance is a disadvantage, no doubt; but it is one of those difficulties—if there were no difficulties you would have been in the Federation—which would necessitate probably some special consideration, so that New Zealand would not be hampered in that respect by reason of the distance—that is to say, you would probably have a branch of the Supreme Court there ; and, in fact, the only question of administration is the one question which applies to members of Parliament coming hither. But it is only a matter of three days to get across. 326. I was referring to the administration of such branches of the public service as the Federal Government takes over? —I do not think there are any difficulties in respect of those departments, because the bulk of the services taken over are entirely of a national character— services which are administered by the British Government to-day over a very vast area, much vaster than the area over which the Commonwealth has to rule ; and they are also greater services than we have to look after, because, after all, the two things the Commonwealth has to deal with are defence and commerce. The question, of course, arises out of the difficulty, perhaps, of administering the Customs ; but you can see clearly that you cannot have 'inter-State free-trade between different parts of a nation unless you have got a uniform tariff. If you have a uniform tariff it must be administered from a common centre ; but I do not think there is any difficulty or would be any in your case. Supposing there is a Minister for Customs, he administers the Customs for the northern part of Western Australia through a deputy, in just the same way that the Postmaster-General will have deputies in each of the capitals. The whole question is one of departmental administration, after all. 327. Do you think the trade between New Zealand and Australia, supposing New Zealand came into the Commonwealth, would be likely to increase? Do you not think that Australia produces nearly everything that New Zealand could send here ?—We get a good deal from you now, and if the tariff were brought into uniformity a very much larger quantity of produce would come from New Zealand. I think the tendency would be for a very large trade in the future to develop, because you have a country that is splendidly productive, with a magnificent rainfall, whereas we are subject to periodical droughts. 328. Assuming that the trade would be improved, do you think that that is a sufficient reason why New Zealand should sacrifice her political independence ? —Of course, I naturally look upon the matter from the more important point of the unity of the Empire—that it is absolutely necessary, if this is to be a strong outlying portion of the Empire, that there should not be two Powers in the Pacific. Ido not look at it from the mere question of whether New Zealand is going to get a larger trade or not, although I believe that that trade will increase very much. 329. Have you any fear of Australia becoming a republic ?—No ; but I have a fear that in the case of two independent Powers in these seas—because, after all, the union with Great Britain is purely voluntary, and our self-governing powers will be enlarged more and more — there might be some serious cause of dispute between them, just as there were creeping up serious sources of dispute between the different Australian Colonies before they federated. Bafore our union, one cause that brought the matter very forcibly before the minds of politicians here was the boundary of the Eiver Murray question, the using of the water for irrigation, and so interfering with navigation ; and I am perfectly certain that there would be questions connected with the South Sea Islands which would cause a great deal of friction. 63—A. 4.
A.—4,
498
330. Do you not think that they could be adjusted without New Zealand entering the Commonwealth ?—T do not think so. I understand you are aiming at incorporating Fiji and the islands with New Zealand under one great Federal Power, somewhat on the lines of the Australian Federation. 331. May I put the question to you this way : do you think that Australia would like New Zealand to come into the Federation, not so much on account of the benefit it would be to New Zealand, but to prevent complications with reference to the islands ?—I do not honestly think that the people here have given the matter any very serious thought at all. 332. Hon. Captain Russell.] What people?—l do not think the majority of our people here have thought anything about it, excepting that they understand that New Zealand imagines it is too far away to come into our Union, and there it stands at present. 333. Hon. the Chairman.] You think the people of Australia are indifferent on the matter?— I think they are at present; but then, of course, it is the business of public men to think over these matters, and I think those who have thought of this matter have foreseen great dangers and troubles through New Zealand not being joined to us. They believe that if we were all joined together there would be perfect safety, and that as one voice, speaking for the whole of Australasia, we would be certainly a much stronger factor in the Imperial system than by being divided. 334. Hon. Captain Russell.] There is a feeling in New Zealand, consequent, no doubt, on the abolition of our own provinces, that possibly the Central Government here would absorb the powers of the States : have you any views on that point ?—We, of course, have provided against any possible danger of that kind, and in this way : We have based our Constitution on the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America as distinct from that of Canada, by which the State simply gives up certain powers and services only to the Federal Government, the State remaining absolutely sovereign, so to speak, in its own domain. We have some very drastic clauses here by which no territory can be alienated in any State, and also a provision under which the Bill itself cannot be altered in any of its salient points without the rather drastic process of a referendum, so that the idea of the Federal Government, as a central power, absorbing more and more the powers of the States is largely guarded against under this Constitution. The Constitution can only be altered by a majority of the States, and by a majority of all the electors. 335. But is it not by a majority of the voters rather than by a majority of the States ?—There must be both. Four colonies of a comparatively small population could not dictate to two colonies which in the aggregate had one-half the population. 336. Does not clause 128 allow of a majority of the two Houses voting together to alter the Constitution ? —No, that is only the initial step. 337. We will suppose that the Houses have disagreed on the question of amending the Constitution, surely it can be referred to a general convocation of both the House and the Senate, and a majority of those voting decide what is to be the law ? —Not without a referendum. Take the last clause, which says, "The proposed law for the alteration thereof [of the Constitution] must be passed by an absolute majority of each House of the Parliament, and not less than two nor more than six months after its passage through both Houses the proposed law shall be submitted in each State to the electors." So that no matter what process it goes through in the Parliament it must also go to the people. 339. You alluded to what you thought was a condition of social difference between New Zealand and Australia : what did you allude to there ? —I simply meant that we are on the Continent of Australia, and you beyond the sea, and that there are twelve hundred miles of sea between us. There are natural provincial habits and tastes that consequently arise. For instance, there is no doubt that a life of civilisation and colonisation which the conditions of a tropical country have given rise to is a different kind of life, in many instances, from what you get in New Zealand or Tasmania. 340. Do you imagine that the difference between the two countries will be accentuated and increased in the process of years sufficient to almost induce a difference of feeling and interest in regard to political thoughts and aspirations ?—I think any step in that direction will be checked very considerably by the complete union of Australia with New Zealand, and the greater intercourse that must necessarily arise from that. 341. You alluded just now to Queensland, and I see that politicians have agreed that there is to be a " white " Australia : do you think that is going to be a political problem of any difficulty ? —I spoke at Woollahra last night, and I deprecated strongly that question being raised at all at the present moment, because we have only just joined together the different States, and it is not a question that must be looked on either from a provincial aspect on the one side, or from the aspect of the mere prejudices of the different States on the other. It is a matter that must be considered fully by the representatives in the Federal Parliament, when the representatives of Queensland are there. 342. Whatever is the law of the Commonwealth, the tropical lands have to be occupied by coloured people, have they not?— You must make a difference between the occupation of a country by people like the kanakas, who are under restrictive administration and control, who do not intermarry, and who go back to the islands, and people like the Chinese, Afghans, and coolies. Australia has decided that these latter people shall be kept out of the country, so that there will be no difference between you and the great mass of the democracy of Australia on that question. 343. But from its social aspect do you think it is possible to avoid in the future the tropical country being occupied by black labour?— Certainly. I mean that class which would marry, settle down, and possibly mix their blood with our people. 344. Who will it be occupied by then?—By white men,
499
A.—4
345. You think that possible?— Yes. I think it possible that there will be a certain amount of labour obtained from the islands, but under the very strictest supervision, and returned again periodically. 346. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You spoke about the danger of possible conflict between two Powers in these seas, and of a possible split with the Mother-country, through their interests conflicting; but would not the fact of those two Powers watching each other be a check, so to speak, on any possible split of that kind?— Great Britain has taken up the position that she will not interfere with purely local matters. You see, it is very easy to discriminate between what are Imperial matters and what are purely local matters, especially if you have got certain well-defined Powers in different parts of the world acting within their own geographical area. But, supposing there were any friction between two of these outlying Powers, there is no process under the Constitution, excepting that of conciliation, by which Great Britain can interfere in any way ; and the result might be, if there were any interference, through the fact of friction between us and another Power in the Pacific, the breaking-away of one part from the British Empire, and when one party broke away you do not know what would happen next. 347. Mr. Roberts.'] What are your views on the Federal tariff, Sir William? —I have said already that three-quarters of the Federal tariff is pretty well fixed already, in this way : The volume of Customs duties and excise was, a year ago, about eight millions of money, of which only four millions was collected from narcotics and intoxicants, upon which we all agree. There is no fiscal principle in that, but it is a financial principle that if you raise your duties beyond a certain amount you get less revenue ; so that there is a limit to a large portion of your finance to which you can go, and as to which we are all agreed more or less. You would probably get two millions from specific duties, leaving two millions to be obtained from another source, and that inevitable source, which we do not like, is the ad valorem duties. But these duties will be imposed undoubtedly to make up the necessary balance. Under free-trade we shall want to impose a uniform tariff of 10 per cent., but the Protectionists say, " No ; we shall make a free-list, and then put on 20, 30, and 40 per cent, on other items, so as to create and encourage industries which we think the times are ripe for." 348. Under federation the sugar would be produced in Queensland ?—Yes. 349. So that with intercolonial free-trade you will lose the revenue from that ?—There will be a loss through intercolonial free-trade of about a million, which will have to be made up by duties on oversea products. 350. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the estimate of that loss, have you taken into consideration the loss there would be to the State which imports a very large quantity of tobacco and spirits on which excise duties have been paid ? —All excise will go into the Commonwealth. 351. In the case of New Zealand, large quantities of tobacco and spirits, manufactured, say, in Victoria, are imported into New Zealand, and that would mean a considerable loss to that colony?—ln the first place, the duty is followed into the country where the consumption takes place for a certain period, and then the whole matter is open to reconsideration. The simplest scheme would be a per capita distribution, but the difficulty of that is that the powers of consumption are not the same in different countries. But it is a very difficult question, and will have to be considered. 352. With respect to the 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue that would be collected by the Federal Government, are you of opinion that a part of that will be returned to the States, or will it be necessary for the Federal Government to retain the full amount on account of their expenses?— So far only one great service has been transferred —that is, the Posts and Telegraphs—which about balances itself.- For defence they would probably require about a million, and for that service, together with quarantine and other matters which would be transferred, I calculate that about £1,700,000 will be required, and £300,000 extra would be required for the expenditure of the Federal Government —for Parliament, and so on. And then there is the interest on the buildings transferred in connection with the Postal Department, for which we shall have to reckon 3J or 4 per cent. We calculate that it will take two millions to cover the Federal expenditure, and you can take that as being 25 per cent.; but the fatal " Braddon blot " provides that, if you want £2,100,000, for the extra £100,000 you have to raise £400,000. 353. Mr. Leys.] To whom would that interest you have referred to be payable ? —That would be payable by some arrangement probably to the States. 354. So that, assuming that our Customs amounted to about two millions, it looks as if we should have to contribute something like £500,000 towards the cost of the Federal Government ? —It looks like that ; but you must consider that you will get relieved of your defence, quarantine, and lighthouses, and the only thing you would have to pay would be your per capita portion of the new expenditure—that is, £300,000 —the other is simply a transferred expenditure. You transfer the expenditure and you get rid of the liability. 355. Is it probable that New Zealand would be called upon to contribute to the cost of a trans-continental railway, or to works for the development of tropical Australia ?—I think the whole thing is premature, and I cannot help feeling that there is a great deal of the political cry in the whole affair. There is no practical information at the present time before us respecting the cost of such a railway ; but, depend upon it, in regard to any matter like that which benefits one particular State alone, the other States would be able to look after their own interests. In the case of a railway across the continent to facilitate communication with England, it might be looked on as a work of a national character, and if it did not pay expenses the interest on the work might have Co be distributed amongst all the colonies, and you would probably have to bear your share. I do not think that any State would be asked to bear its share of any work that was not distinctly of a national character. 356. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Will not there be a very large expenditure on the new capital ?—Pro-
A.—4
500
bably, yes ; but the freehold of any part of the area within which the capital is created is not to be parted with, but leased, so that it is not improbable that there will be a very big revenue from that source. 357. Mr. Luke.] If this trans-continental railway for the better carriage of mails or for defence purposes were built, and we had to contribute our share of the cost, would it be reasonable to expect a subsidy towards a swifter steam-service between New Zealand and Australia ? — With reference to a matter so very important, very much can be urged; but, speaking for myself, I take it that, if there were a large expenditure on a railway system on which there was a loss distributed throughout the whole of Australasia, if New Zealand had to bear a portion of that loss it would be a very reasonable thing that she should receive some equivalent in the shape of a subsidy. 358. Do you think there is a possibility of the Federal power absorbing by a gradual process the powers now enjoyed by the States ?—No ; they may obtain services such as the railways, which are now run separately in the different States, for military purposes, and for the more completely carrying-out of the principle of free-trade. We have provided in the Constitution for an Inter-State Commission, but it is possible that the judgments of this Commission will be so peculiar that the only way of putting an end to an intolerable trouble will be for the Federal Government to purchase all the railways; but that will not affect you at all. 359. Then, the Bill provides for the splitting-up and creation of more States : is there the possibility of creating another State in Northern Queensland, and thereby reducing her influence in the Federal Parliament ? —Yes, there is certainly a danger of this —and in this State also—and I think it a very good thing too. Ido not think it would be detrimental to the general interests, because they would probably vote together, according to their own geographical area, if there were any attempt made to do anything which was unreasonable. 360. The Constitution of other States would not necessarily be prejudicial to the interests of New Zealand ?—-I do not think so. It could not be done without the consent of the State in question, and it would be no more prejudicial to the interests of New Zealand than to those of any other State. I think the principle of equal representation in the Senate will always be adhered to, and it is carrying out the principle in the United States Constitution, where they have two Senators in each State. 361. Mr. Leys.] Assuming that the Federal Government did take over the railways, I suppose they would take over the public debts as well ? —I think so. 362. Would not the taking-over of the railways involve future railway-construction being made a Federal work ?—Certainly. 363. Then, assuming that you consolidated the debts', we would require to go to the Federal Parliament for any new railway-works we required ?—Certainly ; but I do not think in your case the railways would ever be taken over. The railways are taken over in these States not because it is a service that the Federal Government must necessarily have, but in order to have one combined system for the sake of obtaining freedom of trade in all parts, and to make laws which will prevent these railways giving the preference to any particular State. 364. Do you think the Federal Government would take over our debt without taking over our railways ?—I think they might. Many people have proposed that the whole of the debts be taken over in Australia without touching the railways at all. The one thing does not absolutely depend upon the other. 365. You mean that they would charge us with the interest on these loans ?—What they would do would be this : They would consolidate the debt, of which you would have a certain portion, and then, .supposing our debt was consolidated at 3 per cent., you would have to pay only 3 per cent, to the Federal Government upon the debt which they had taken unto themselves. But I think that many of these things, as far as New Zealand is concerned, might well be left out of calculation ; they really do not touch the question at all of your coming in politically with us. 366. Only that we might be hampered with regard to our future railway policy ?—There is nothing to prevent you borrowing locally. 367. Could we borrow to any advantage, seeing that our credit was so far pledged ?—What would be done would be, I think, what is done in the case of the loans for India: there would be the guarantee of the Commonwealth for all your loans which they could approve of, and you could not expect them to guarantee loans of which they could not approve. 368. But that, of course, would make our entire internal policy subject to the approval of the Federal Parliament ?—Under this Constitution the debts cannot be taken over without the consent of the States. 369. Unless by an amendment of the Constitution?— That is not intended, and that would never be done. There are certain specific conditions which would have to be altered by the process of the referendum, and it is not intended that they should be altered. 370. But they might starve the States into conceding anything ?—They could not starve one without starving the others, and they are all so mixed up with one another that they would stick together against any such attempt. 371. Do you not think that as feeling grows the popular vote will go in favour of a considerable enlargement of the Federal powers and the contraction of the State powers ?—I do not think so. Outside certain services, such as railways, Ido not think there can be much enlargement of the Federal powers, excepting such enlargement of the Executive authority which is liable to come in under a great Central Government. 372. You have said that the States have territorial rights—they may construct railways with a vrew to benefiting their lands : is it not likely that such works may be undertaken by the Federal Government, and, if so undertaken, they may take the lands as security ?—No; the Federal Government has no authority to touch the lands without the consent of each State.
501
A.—4
373. Excepting by an amendment of the Constitution ? —You could not do it; it would be a breach of faith, which is not conceivable. 374. You mean after ten years? —I mean at any time. When the Bill came from the Conference in Melbourne the State Parliament in aay particular State had power to agree to the division of its territory ; but an amendment was put in the Bill when it passed the second referendum that there must be a direct appeal to the people before any territory could be taken from any State, so that it is almost impossible to imagine that any amendment of the Constitution would be introduced to override that absolute understanding. 375. Do you not think it probable that in the case of tropical territories the States might desire an amendment of the Constitution in such a direction as to place these tropical regions under the Federal Government for development ?—There might be an endeavour made, however difficult it might be, to cut off the centre of Australia, and form it into what you might call a territory to be put entirely under the Federal Government, and I think that would be a very wise thing to do; but there is no use talking about changes affecting an arid district of Australia, and anything affecting a country like New Zealand, where the bulk of the land is settled and taken up under ordinary conditions : there is no analogy. 376. Take the case of trans-continental railways and irrigation-works ? —I take it that all works undertaken by the Federal Government would be supposed to be reproductive works, and there is more likelihood of great public works undertaken by the Federation paying, and being no loss to the general revenue, than of works undertaken by a State. 377. Yes; but you do not regard a work that does not pay interest, although it promotes settlement and improves the country, as an unprofitable work? —No, but I mean where we often run railways in a certain direction in order to take the trade from other colonies, and carry goods at very low rates with the same object. The works done by the Federal Parliament would be free from provincial jealousies, and would be carried out on a proper mercantile basis. And then, again, I think that by the adoption of a system of Federal loans a very great saving would take place. 378. But has it never occurred to you that the inclusion of a country like New Zealand, having so little in common with the Continent of Australia, might really hamper the consolidation and development of national life in Australia ?—I do not think so. I think the disturbing element would not come in if we were united. You have got a magnificent country, where we can go and see some of the greatest sights of the world. 379. With regard to this South Sea Island difficulty, external affairs are still in the hands of the Imperial Government, are they not ?—We have nothing to do with anything outside of our own shores. 380. Then, this question would entirely be disposed of by the Imperial Government, I presume ?—No ; I think that just as united Australia has recognised the fact that, although there are thousands of miles of country between the different States, there is still a common ground for union, and a common interest amongst them, so this matter of the islands of the Pacific is one of common interest to us as well as to you, and a very much better result can be obtained from the British Government dealing with a Federal Government here embracing all Australia, New Zealand, and the adjacent islands as well probably, than could be obtained by Australia and New Zealand approaching the Home Government separately. It is better for us to join together and go with one voice to England with respect to the control of these islands than to do so separately. 381. Do you not think that there is as much chance of disputes arising if we were an outlying State of the Commonwealth, with chronic grievances, as if we were going along separately ? — At present you are very friendly towards us, and in the event of union we should all go along like brothers. 382. Hon. Major Steward.] I think I understood you to say that our contribution towards the cost of the Federal Government would be necessarily absorbed ?—But then you would be rid of the liability. The annual charge upon you, taking £300,000 as the estimate of the special expenditure of the Commonwealth, would be about £60,000. 383. Will not bringing New South Wales within the area of taxation, so far as the protective States are concerned, mean really a loss of revenue from Customs?—No; for this reason : that you make a million in the case of New South Wales through the introduction of the new duties, and, as there is about a million a year lost in the intercolonial duties in the case of the other States, New South Wales will about square that in the general average. 384. When the tariff is settled, will the duties be higher or lower than they are now ?—lt depends on many things. Each State has a different tariff, and the differences are so great that it is almost impossible to say what will be the character of the uniform tariff; but I should say that probably if the Victorians had to form the tariff there would not be very much difference between what the Victorian tariff is now and what it would be under federation. 385. Eon. the Chairman.] Assuming New Zealand joined, the Federal Government having taken over the Postal Department, what do you think would happen to the San Francisco mailservice to New Zealand? —That, of course, would be dealt with, I take it, from a broad political point of view, and that, in regard to any questions which dealt specially with the interests of New Zealand, a very great amount of consideration would be given to the representations of New Zealand, just as in the English Parliament a great deal of attention is shown to the Scotch representations, and to the Irish—sometimes. I take it also that the Federal Cabinet would contain one Minister from New Zealand if you federated with us, who would be looked on as the authority for dealing with New Zealand matters. This question of union must be discussed on broad lines and dernocractic principles, dealing with the interests of the colonies as a whole. We see that out of consideration for West Australia the mail-steamers are made to call at Fremantle, although it means unnecessary delay and loss of time.
A.—4
502
Thursday, 21st Maech, 1901. Eobbrt Lucas Nash examined. (No. 196.) 386. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you, Mr. Nash?—Financial editor of the Daily Telegraph, Sydney. 387. I need hardly say that you have lived in New South Wales a considerable time?—l have lived here rather over eight years. I came out from London. Before that I was the editor of the British Australasian in London. 388. Have you been connected with the Press here throughout the whole of the Federal movement ?—Certainly ; since 1892. I was in London for many years before that, where I was connected with the Australasian Press, and for some years was sub-editor of the Economist. 389. As you know, we are a Commission sent out from New Zealand to get information here as to the propriety or otherwise of New Zealand going into the Federation?—l have seen that stated ; but, of course, the matter has not come before the people of New South Wales to any great extent, because 1 think the proceedings of the Commission have been kept a little quiet here. 390. Who by ? —I do not know. The people here have been occupied with other things, and that is probably the principal reason. If we had not had the Commonwealth elections ahead of us it would have been very different. 391. Perhaps you might be able to give us some information that would be useful to us as to any advantages that you think would accrue to New Zealand from going into the Commonwealth, or upon the general aspect of the matter ?—Well, I have not gone into the figures with regard to New Zealand as carefully as I have with regard to all the other States, which I saw from the first must come in; but, speaking generally, I think it would be very greatly to the advantage of New Zealand to join the Commonwealth. As a matter of trade policy I should think it would be greatly to New Zealand's advantage. Her soil and climate enable her to supply much of the produce which we require here, and she already supplies a large amount of that produce to New South Wales especially. If New Zealand were federated with Australia the produce she would supply to us would be double and treble what it is now, whereas if she stands out that produce will be to a large extent excluded. 392. What produce do you particularly refer to ?—I have not the returns with me at the present time; but take simply the matter of oats : there is no doubt New Zealand can grow better oats than Australia, and at a price which none of the Australian Colonies can grow them at. She would command the trade of that description. 393. Do you not think that Victoria could grow them ?—Victoria could grow them, but she excludes New Zealand oatmeal now by a duty of, I think, 9s. a cental; but that, of course, does not prove anything. Ido not think Victoria is able to compete with New Zealand in the matter of oats. 394. What about wheat ? —Wheat is a different thing. The Victorian and South Australian wheat commands a higher price than the New Zealand wheat. 395. Do you think that the Australian wheat would go into New Zealand to the prejudice of New Zealand growers ?—I think not. It would go perhaps for mixing purposes, which would be to the advantage of the people generally. There is no doubt that New Zealand can grow wheat cheaper than Australia can, but it does not take the same stand in the market. 396. How about timber ?—I do not think Australia grows anything quite in a line with the kauri. There may be timbers exchanged between us, but New Zealand would always send more to Australia than Australia would send to New Zealand. 397. Is there anything beyond oats and wheat —for instance, fruit ? —New South Wales supplies fruit to some extent to New Zealand, and I think New Zealand returns the compliment. 398. What about hemp?—We do not grow hemp, but New Zealand does, and she supplies a considerable quantity to these markets now, and that is a trade which you would have practically in your own hands. 399. Do you think that, whether we federated or not, there would be much difference in the demand and supply of grain between the two countries ?—To a great extent I think New Zealand grain would be excluded from Australia, not by New South Wales willingly, but by the Protectionists in the southern portion of the continent. I think they would be too strong to allow New South Wales free-trade views taking effect here in respect to imports of New Zealand products. 400. Do you think that even with free-trade there would be any chance of New Zealand exporting oats to Victoria ? —Do you mean under federation ? 401. Yes? —I think so. 402. Could you give us your views on the financial aspect of the question ? —There would be, I should say, under federation some shrinkage in the New Zealand revenue. Of course, you can pick out various items, such as sugar, in which there must be a shortage of revenue ; but the people would gain to that extent, as they would get the goods cheaper. I think, however, that New Zealand at the present time is in such a position that she could stand a slight reduction in her Customs revenue with the greatest ease. 403. Can you give us any idea of what the shrinkage would be in respect to the sugar duties ? —It would depend, of course, upon whether there was an excise duty on sugar. I should think it highly probable that the Protectionists would put an excise duty on sugar, and I am not at all certain but what the Free-traders, if they got into power, would do the same. 404. You mean that there would not be intercolonial free-trade in that respect? —If there were an excise duty of £3 on sugar, and an import duty of £7 or £8, it would keep the supply entirely in the hands of Queensland, but there would still be some revenue. 405. You think there would still be an excise duty?—l think it is highly probable. 406. Have you yourself formed any opinion as to what the probable tariff would be of the Federal Government ?—lt would depend very greatly on the party in power; but there is a
503
A.— 4
tendency, of course, in respect to all these matters to compromise. Mr. Barton goes about the country and tells us that he intends to compromise the matter, and that will probably be the result. Of course, if the Protectionists get a very large majority, we would have as little compromise as possible ; but the probability is that the tariff will be a compromise between the existing tariffs. 407. Have you formed any opinion as to what it will probably be ?—I do not think I can without examining my notes. 408. Probably you are aware what the New Zealand tariff is : do you think it would be as high or lower than that? —It would vary. Many of the New Zealand items would certainly be reduced, and others probably would be increased. As a rule, I do not think there would be so much difference, excepting in a few items on which New Zealand at present levies revenue duty, and which in future she would obtain from Australia. 409. You could not, then, give us any idea as to what would be the probable loss of revenue to New Zealand by any alteration in the tariff?—lt would necessitate my going through the Customs returns item by item before I could form a clear view on the point. I have done that with regard to all the other States, but not in the case of New Zealand ; and if I expressed the opinion that there might be a loss of a quarter of a million, or £300,000, it would be open to modification after I have looked through the figures carefully. 410. But do you think it would be at least a quarter of a million ?—I think so. 411. In round numbers the Customs revenue of New Zealand is something over £2,000,000, and you are aware that under the Constitution Act the Commonwealth can retain not more than one-fourth of the net revenue from Customs as a contribution towards the expenses of the Federal Government : could you give us any information as to the probable amount that would be likely to be retained by the Federal Government out of that New Zealand Customs revenue?—l have not the figures before me. It is easy to see what she would retain when the various services are taken over. You have the reduction of the post and telegraph expenditure, defence, and one or two other items, like quarantine. It is a matter that could be determined pretty closely. 412. I am speaking of the Customs revenue : what portion do you think would be retained for the expenses of the Federal Government?— That, of course, does not refer only to New Zealand. Financially, the Commonwealth Act is a very complicated arrangement, and, whereas they can retain up to 25 per cent, of the whole, it might mean 30 per cent, in the case of New Zealand, or 20 per cent. ; I should not like to say without going into the figures. The Braddon clause does not refer to New Zealand or to any single State, but to the net revenue of the whole of the States put together, and it might affect the States differently. I know that in some cases it does affect them differently. Then, of course, the position is complicated by the new expenditure being charged at so-much per head of the population ; so that there are two forms of accounts. I will send you the figures in a couple of days as I work them out, but I imagine that you have worked them out yourselves. [Figures since received from Mr. Nash—see Appendix.] 413. What is your opinion of the distance question—as to the effect of New Zealand's distance from the continent on the question of administration?—lt makes a considerable difference in certain ways, but, with regard to defence, posts and telegraphs, I consider that the distance is a comparatively small matter. The Federation which has started here will grow, and will certainly in time include the debts and the railways. It is but a question of time. Of course, during the campaign here I fought very strongly for the debts and the railways being included in the Federal arrangements at the outset, because here the railway question especially is a vital one, as State control enables one State to fight another after federation if they retain the railways in their own hands. Of course, in the case of New Zealand the railway question can be viewed from a different aspect altogether, and New Zealand, I imagine, would require to have as much of the control with regard to railway expenditure and railway extension as she possibly could get. The Commonwealth would not be so good a judge as the people of New Zealand would be with reference to the railways in that colony. That, of course, was the position which was discussed here some years ago, and Mr. Eddy, the late New South Wales Eailway Commissioner, went into that matter very fully and proposed that under federation each State should appoint one of the Federal Eailway way Commissioners, who should be intrusted with the control of the railways in that State, subject, of course, to the general Council, and that each State should retain the power which is left to the provinces of Canada—that each State should retain the power, if the Federal Government would not construct an extension which was considered necessary in the State, to do so itself, and an arrangement could be made with regard to working this special extension. It is a difficult question, and one which will have to be faced before very long, and it is a question which I think New Zealand would be peculiarly interested in, as she is in a different position from that which obtains here. 414. In reference to the departments that the Federal Government are sure to take over, such as Customs, Post and Telegraph, and Defence—those they take over at once—how do you think that distance would affect the administration of those departments ?—I hardly think it would affect them materially. 415. You have mentioned the matter of free-trade, and of an extended market for New Zealand produce : beyond that, what is the advantage that is to accrue to New Zealand from going into the Commonwealth ?—I consider there would be great advantages to be obtained politically, as at present we find New Zealand and Australia divided upon a great many questions, such as the control of the islands in the Pacific. 416. That is a vital question now, and could you give us your views about that ?—I consider that it would settle the question of the control of the Pacific in the only way in which it is possible ultimately to settle it. New Zealand, we may take it for granted, would never be allowed by Australia to obtain superior rights in connection with those islands, and in the same way New Zealand would oppose Australia obtaining them, and ultimately there must be an arrangement by
A.—4
504
which both should be equally served. New Zealand, from her proximity to so many of these islands, would undoubtedly come to an arrangement under federation to obtain a considerable part in them, and it would be an advantage of which Australia could not deprive her; otherwise, if there is to be antagonism, I imagine that for years, to come the question with regard to the Pacific would remain altogether unsettled, and would always be a burning one. 417. Do you think that the matter could be accommodated by certain islands being annexed to the Colony of New Zealand, and certain of them being annexed to the Commonwealth of Australia?—No, I do not think so at all. 418. Do you not think the matter could be accommodated by the islands being left as they are, and not attached to either?—Of course, they would have to remain very much as they are now ; but the Commonwealth Act gives a certain amount of power to the Government of Australia with regard to the islands of the Pacific. The extent of that power is ill-defined, but there is a certain amount given. 419. What about the power of legislation beyond the boundaries of the Commonwealth: do you mean anything beyond that power ?—There is a power affecting uniformity of trade relationships. The position would be this : that the Commonwealth would obtain such an accession of influence in the United Kingdom that I should think it would be highly probable that the wishes of the Commonwealth would receive special consideration. Now, it is a matter that would be worth your while considering, whether that would not be the case. Hitherto the Australian Colonies have been divided, but now, on a question of that sort, they will speak with one voice, and it will be a very powerful one. 420. Are there any other advantages which would occur to New Zealand through federating? —There are several others ; for instance, I think the laws of New Zealand should, be similar to those of Australia in respect to a great many questions, which are quite outside my province as a financial man, but if you read down the list of the thirty-nine articles on which the Commonwealth can legislate you will see that there are a great many advantages to be obtained by having uniform laws. 421. There is the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, that, of course, would interfere with the Act of the State itself? —Yes; but take also coinage, banking, and insurance. 422. The labour question is a burning one in New Zealand, and, supposing the Commonwealth Parliament took up the matter of a Conciliation and Arbitration Act, how do you think New Zealand would be affected by that ?—I should not like to express an opinion on what lines Australia would legislate. 423. What about the coloured-labour question in Queensland : how do you think New Zealand would be affected by that ? Do you consider that there is a prospect of this question of a " white" Australia becoming an accomplished fact ? —My personal views are so entirely different from the views of the majority on that subject that I hardly like to express an opinion. I consider it is almost criminal in the Australians to take a million square miles of tropical country and say that, as within this area the white man cannot work, it shall lie idle for all time. But it is not the view of the people here. And with regard to New Zealand the kanaka is a comparatively small matter. You in New Zealand have a much larger Native population ; and my own view is that sugar cannot be grown in the tropics without suitable labour. If the kanaka or other suitable labour be driven out of the tropics it means the sugar industry coming further south. Sugar will have to be grown in southern Queensland and northern New South Wales. Without suitable labour the effect will be to stop tropical cultivation altogether. 424. Hon. Captain Russell.] You have pronounced views, apparently, upon the possibility of the occupation of tropical and sub-tropical Australia by a white people. If you look to the history of the black man in America you will see that he has been a source of trouble ?—-But the wealth of America was originally made out of the black man. Take cotton alone: he adds, I should think, to the wealth of the United States £140,000,000 or £150,000,000 a year, and they could not get it without him; and if you have a tropical country you must have tropical labour, or let that country lie idle. 425. You think, then, that, whatever the law of the Commonwealth maybe, Northern Queensland will not be " white " ?—No ; without coloured labour it will largely be a desert. 426. Then, do you think it would be possible for the country to remain a desert unoccupied by a coloured race in some way or another ?—I should think in time they would permit a certain amount of coloured labour; you could confine it to the tropics, and have special legislation for it; but this question would solve itself in time. 427. Have you any idea what proportion of Australia is of that nature where the white man will be unable to labour in it?— Certainly more than one-fourth. 428. In the course of your reading, have you read of any country in the world where white labour has been able to continue and to perpetuate itself in the tropics ?—lt generally deteriorates, but I think that in the hills of India you will find as rosy English children as you ever wished to meet, and within the tropics. 429. That is practically your defence. Is that the only place ?—lt is the only place I know of, but I dare say there are others. 430. Do you think there will be a tendency to abrogate the powers of the States and to magnify those of the Central Government ? —There must be. At the present time the finances of the Federal Government are really subservient to the States. The Federal Government will have an expenditure of four million pounds, while New South Wales will have an expenditure of between ten and eleven millions, and Victoria of between six and seven millions. Those States will come to look down on the Federal Government. The Federal Government is tied hand and foot, and has to account to the States for every penny it expends. It is a position which cannot last. 431. Do you think there will be a tendency towards unification of Government rather than a true Federal style of Government ?—The tendency will be that way, but as to how far it will be
505
A.—4
altered I should not like to say. I think it will approach eventually very much to the conditions in Canada. I consider that the present financial arrangements under the Commonwealth Act are quite unworkable, and that is my principal starting-point. They cannot go on. They cannot keep separate accounts between the States, or keep up these Customhouses between the States simply for statistical purposes. 432. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I gather from what you say that you think the most urgent question that may create a difficulty between New Zealand and Australia will be the Island question?—l think the most immediate question for New Zealand is that of her trade. That is the vital point. I think that the trade of New Zealand with Australia would, under federation, increase within a couple of years by £750,000 or even more, and the consideration is a very important one in view of federation. 433. But the present tariff with New South Wales is practically a free-trade one ? —But New South Wales cannot carry her present free-trade tariff under federation, and she might have to come down to what it is in Victoria. If you join the Federation your trade will be increased by your obtaining free access to the whole of Australia, whereas now you are excluded beyond the confines of New South Wales, and if you do not join you will be largely excluded from New South Wales. Taking the New Zealand tweed-factories and articles of that sort, I think the fact that the New-Zealanders have been able to hold their own so exceedingly well, and to enlarge their market, will mean that federation will be quite as much to their advantage in respect to such manufactures as it will be to the advantage of Victorians. 434. But, of course, you are aware that most of our trade is with the Home-country, and not with Australia?—l think that one or two of the New Zealand woollen-mills have opened offices in Sydney. Ido not know that they are doing much business, but they are doing something. Mr. Roberts : They have closed again. 435. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] With regard to the question of sea-distance and its influence on the Government, do you not think there would be a very large difference between the public opinion on the continent here and public opinion as expressed generally in an island twelve hundred miles away ?—There would be points of difference, but I do not think they would be in any way vital. I think the questions which are handed over to the Federal Government are not such as there can be any great difference of opinion upon. 436. Taking such a step as New Zealand took lately with regard to the introduction of the penny-postage, a matter we are pretty well unanimous on, New Zealand could not have done that had she been connected with the Federation ? —No. 437. Does not a country by federating give up its autonomy to a great extent? —Yes. 438. Then the question arises : what we are going to get in return for that ? Do you not think that an Imperial connection will preserve us from attack just as much as if we were part of the Federation ?—I have always found that, while there is a loyal feeling with regard to the Mother-country, it does not produce any feeling of loyalty to neighbouring States. I think it acts rather the other way. 439. Mr. Leys.] What about South Africa?—ln South Africa it has acted very much the other way, and I think it has been the same here, where you find an antagonism between New South Wales and Victoria, although, of course, both are loyal to the Mother-country. 440. Do you not think there is a great deal in the fact that coterminous lines of boundary exist in the case of the continent here which produces a community of interest, which does not exist in the case of an island State ? —Some colonies in our case pursue a policy having in view the checking of the trade from other colonies as much as possible. 441. That is to say, the coterminous boundaries have tended to that greatly?—lt does not matter whether you have a boundary of a river or a boundary of twelve hundred miles of sea. New Zealand has pursued the same policy. 442. There cannot be the battle of the railways, like that Eiverina business, in our case ?— There could not be, but there might be the battle of the ships. We have our ocean highways, and I think they are even more important than the land railways. The means of communication between the Australian States must to a large extent be by sea, and even now the ships take goods from Melbourne to Sydney at half the cost the railway does, and when once you get a quantity of goods on board a ship it does not matter whether you carry them six hundred or twelve hundred miles, the cost is very much the same. It is different on the railways. 443. But what about passengers ? —Passengers are different, and many of them try to avoid the sea. 444. But does not the coterminous land boundaries create some community of interest between the members of States which are united by land that would not be possible between such States and a country to reach which you have to go over a pretty stormy ocean ?—I do not think I could speak with regard to the passenger traffic. There is no doubt that the promotion of trade increases the passenger traffic, and there is a big passenger traffic now between Australia and New Zealand, and I am convinced that if you increase the trade connection between the two countries the passenger traffic will increase also, but whether it will be increased to the same extent as between Sydney and Melbourne, or Sydney and Brisbane, I should not like to say. 445. Mr. Roberts.] You roughly estimate the loss to New Zealand at £250,000 ?—Yes, on the existing trade. 446. You think it is probable that the sugar duty would go ? —The Customs duty would be inoperative. 447. That would mean a loss of £158,000 to New Zealand, and then our tobacco duty is 3s. 6d. per pound, and we might reckon that the new duty of the States would be 2s. a pound : how would that affect us ?—The import duty is higher here on manufactured tobacco than 25., but the excise duty is, in some States, very low indeed, and in South Australia it is nothing. The import duty on 64—A. 4.
A.—4
506
manufactured tobacco here is 35., and Is. if imported raw for local manufacture ; then there is the excise duty afterwards, so that it would make good much of the loss on the item of tobacco. 448. Would it not be pretty well £100,000 with Is. a pound reduction'?— You would find a great many reductions would be made which would lead to a much larger revenue. You get a larger revenue on a great many items in a tariff if you reduce the duties. 449. But then our import duty on spirits is 16s. : what would happen in that case ? —lf you reduce that duty to 12s. you would find a probably bigger revenue would be obtained, as a larger quantity would be consumed. 450. Assuming an average tariff of 15 per cent, were imposed under the Federal tariff, our loss of revenue would be about £250,000, excluding sugar, tobacco, and spirits ?—Yes, but a great many items would be higher than 15 per cent. ; take kerosene, for instance. 451. Kerosene is free with us now ?—But there is sure to be a duty on kerosene, as the Commonwealth cannot get on without it. 452. Taking this proportion, do you not think the loss to New Zealand would reach something like over half a million ?—I do not think it could be more than £350,000 to New Zealand. 453. Then, there must be a much higher tariff than you conceive, as basing it at 15 per cent, the loss would be £250,000 ?—The Australian tariff will not be higher than 15 per cent, over everything, outside stimulants and narcotics. It may be 15 per cent, ad valorem, but when you come to the specific duties they would be raised to 35 and perhaps to 50 per cent. 454. But do you not think the loss will be very much more than you estimate ?—I do not think so. In the case of New Zealand there are so many compensating conditions. There are many items in the revenue in regard to which there will be a large increase, and the £350,000 will certainly cover the loss. 455. But you would not consider it reasonable for New Zealand to join the Federation until she knew what the tariff would be, and what would be the loss from it ? —Australia has gone in without considering the financial question at all, and I marvelled why Australia did so. In the case of Queensland it is a very serious question; but Ido not regard it in the same light in connection with New Zealand, because I consider that New Zealand could come in with far better prospects financially than Queensland. 456. Do you think that anything like a fair proportion of the Australians understand the question in all its bearings ?—I think that the great majority of the population did not understand the question at all, excepting with regard to the political aspect of it. They gave up the financial question, and said, " We shall let the finance settle itself," and that is the position to-day. 457. Mr. Millar.'] One very strong argument put forward in favour of New Zealand federating has been the great saving it is said there would be to us and to all the colonies through the conversion of loans : did you go into that question ?—Yes ; I have studied it considerably. I think there is a great saving to be effected, and probably an increased appreciation to be secured in the London market. With regard to New Zealand loans, conversion under the Commonwealth might prove to you a less considerable advantage, as your loans at present stand exceedingly well in the London market, and rightly too. But for all that, there are a number of serious matters to be considered in the case of New Zealand. New Zealand has a number of large stocks falling due on one day—in one case as much as £29,000,000 —and it would be a very serious matter for New Zealand were such a stock to fall due at the present time. But the conversion into Australian consols would be a distinct advantage. 458. Are you aware that we are automatically converting all the time ?—-Yes; and you are the only Australasian colony which has adopted any sort of conversion. 459. As a financial expert, do you see any advantage from a national point of view in converting a loan prior to maturity ? —There is less advantage in the case of New Zealand than there would be in the case of Australia, because New Zealand has already converted on two occasions, and Australia has never attempted any conversion. There is more scope in the case of Australian loans than in the case of New Zealand loans; but there is this to be considered : that under federation any advantage obtained by the Federal Government applies fairly equally to all the States, and New Zealand would obtain her share of the advantage. 460. Do you anticipate that the Commonwealth will be able to get money in the London market cheaper than New Zealand could if she remained a separate colony ?—ln time, yes. 461. Do you anticipate that Australia will be able to get money at much less than 3 per cent. ? —I think the 3-per-cent. rate is as low as we can expect it for many years to come. I have an idea that in London the tendency will be for money to rise, and nob to fall, and I cannot attempt to hazard an opinion about what the rates will be twenty years hence. I feel convinced, however, that we shall not get money much cheaper. 462. Are you aware that the price we are giving for our own loans is 3 per cent., and that we are getting money at that price ?—Yes ; but if New Zealand continues to borrow internally, she will not get money at 3 per cent, for long. 463. But if she continues to borrow money at 3 per cent., you do not anticipate that the Commonwealth will be able to do anything better?— No. 464. So, from that point of view, she is just as well off as she would be if she joined the Commonwealth ?—lt depends. Ido not think she would be as well off, because New Zealand, if she borrows internally, or in London, will not continue to borrow at 3 per cent. 465. Hun. Mr. Bowen.] Of course, you are aware that the great bulk of New Zealand's liabilities will not become due for twenty-nine years ?—Yes. 466. Mr. Millar.] In the case of the Postal Department and the Marine Department, which are taken over, New Zealand has a considerable revenue—a profit; but I think you said there would be a big saving by the transfer of those departments ; but would not it be rather the other way, that we should lose something ? —Yes; but the profit is not large, and the profit on one counterbalances the loss on another.
507
A.—4
467. Then, perhaps you are aware that a great deal of our legislation of a social character is very much in advance of what exists in Australia at the present time, and do you not think that our manufacturers would be hampered under federation until such time as the Australian legislation came up to the same level as our own ?—There will always be these differences at the start; but the aim of the Commonwealth, of course, would be to reconcile them at as early a date as possible. 468. But do you not think that while it is being reconciled it is going to be a very serious menace to our manufacturers?—l have an idea that the Australians have been waiting to see the result of your experiments, and I am not at all certain but what Australia was wise in so doing ; but, although there must be these differences at the start, it is quite within the power of the Federal Government to assimilate all the social legislation. They have the right to deal with a Conciliation and Arbitration Act at any time, and they probably will legislate on that matter. 469. Have you worked out what the estimated saving to Australia would be under a conversion system at existing charges ?—They could not carry out a conversion with any degree of success at the present time. You have to watch your opportunity ; but at a favourable opportunity I think Australia might save £600,000 a year. Of course, if you work out the conversion fully, it would amount to a bigger sum; but there is always a large proportion of holders of securities who will not convert for a lower rate of interest. £600,000 a year is about what they could save over the whole of Australia. 470. Mr. Beauchamp.] How do you account for the fact that, while New Zealand cents are quoted at 108, New South Wales are at 102 ?—You refer to the cable messages that are published every week ? 471. Yes? —New South Wales does not have the arranging of those messages. There are two New South Wales 3J-per-cent. loans, and one always has been rather above the other, and it is the lower one which is always cabled. Ido not know why that is, but I have an idea that Victoria arranges these cable matters rather to the disadvantage of New South Wales, because our loans are rather higher than the Victorian. The principal reason why there has been a drop in New South Wales 3J-per-cents lately has been because the London market expects a loan, and if they get a New South Wales loan they like to put down the price beforehand, so that they can make a profit. If it were known that New South Wales would not borrow in London for another two years, you would find that the price would go up very considerably. 472. As to our trade with New South Wales, I suppose you are aware that at the present time only about 8 per cent, of our total exports goes to Australia, and the balance to the United Kingdom ?—But the trade you do with Australia must be more profitable than what you send to the Mother-country. 473. It might happen that out of the produce we ship to New South Wales we may make 5 per cent, more than on the produce we ship to the Home-country, which on a million would be £50,000, and we have to place that as a set-off against the share New Zealand would be compelled to bear of the Federal charges?— That is not the way, I think, to look at it; that is the merchant's way, but when you look at it from the country's point of view you have tq take the total sum that they are paying to you. 474. That being so, and considering at the present time the balance of trade, if you exclude gold, is slightly in favour of the Commonwealth, is it likely that the Commonwealth would exclude the'produce of New Zealand while such a large reciprocal trade is carried on?—ln part, I think, Australia would. The New Zealand trade would be stimulated greatly by your joining the Commonwealth, and your external trade would not be checked, because in some articles you would have a lower tariff than now with the outside world, and you would at the same time have knocked down all the barriers which separated you from Australia. 475. Have you considered the fact that the excise duties would be possibly very much lower than the average rate of duty in New Zealand, and the transhipments that would follow through the removal of the duties ? —I think the people of New Zealand would be the gainers by that. If New Zealand reduced her tariff on tobacco by 10 per cent, to-morrow the possibility is she would have quite as big a revenue as she has now. The high duties check consumption, and your tariff taxes so extensively that a reduction in duties all round would increase the revenue—that is, dealing with the question simply from a revenue point of view. 476. And you speak as a Free-trader? —Oh, yes. 477. Do you think we would get any refund out of that 25 per cent, which we have to contribute to the cost of the Federal Government, or do you think the whole of that would be absorbed?— You would be relieved of Posts and Telegraphs £388,000, and Defence £142,000, that would be £500,000. Your expenditure now on defence must be considerably more than £142,000 ; and the position is this : that you would require to have a return of 80 per cent, to put you in the position you were in before. 478. Would not that difference have to be made up by some form of direct taxation ?—I should not like to say that. 479. You spoke of the possibility of an excise duty being placed on sugar; but would not such duty only be enjoyed temporarily in such State where the sugar was consumed—it would not be a permanent matter?—-The people in the south would undoubtedly like a permanent excise duty on sugar, but whether they would bo able to carry it is a doubtful matter. It would be strongly opposed here and in Queensland. 480. It is not definitely stated how these excise duties must be dealt with after a period of five years: do you think it is likely that there will be a strong feeling in favour of the excise duties being enjoyed in the various States in which the goods are consumed ?—-Certainly; but the bookkeeping system is not a permanent arrangement, it is only for five years, or longer. It will probably break down. If a State enters the Commonwealth you ought to take the revenue and expenditure of that State, and see what liabilities are handed over and what revenues, and then see
A.—4
508
what sum you would require to be returned to you. If you get an arrangement of that sort it would be simple and workable, and would save expense, but to attempt to make distinctions between each State in the accounts which cannot be properly kept seems likely to lead to confusion, and possibly some ill-feeling. 481. Does the eight millions and a half which have been referred to by Mr. Barton include a specific sum for defence purposes? —Yes, I think about £600,000 a year, but it is not enough. There is, however, at the present time such a drag on the Commonwealth with regard to its finance that I do not see how it can spend much additional on defence. 482. Have you thought of the effect upon the small industries of our colony in the event of intercolonial free-trade, by reason of the large industries of the Commonwealth exporting their surplus to New Zealand?—l do not think they would do so to any material extent. Queensland exported her surplus once to Canada at a loss ; but I quite agree that there would be a tendency to concentrate manufactures at certain points. 483. Which means that centralisation enables you to turn out articles very much cheaper than generalisation ? —There is always that tendency, but in some respects New Zealand would be able to specialise in the same way. All the trade is not going to centre round Sydney or Melbourne. In Melbourne they think it is, but they will wake up to the fact that it is not so before long. 484. Do you think the cheaper coal and water-carriage will put the balance of power in favour of Sydney ?—Probably; but we have hitherto enjoyed cheaper water-carriage because of free-trade. 485. Do you think that the fact of our Commission being very little known argues that there is want of interest between here and New Zealand ?—New Zealand started off by saying she did not intend to join the Federation, and Australia looked upon that as rather a snub. Now, this Commission has arrived here at a time when we are absorbed in the elections, but had you come at another time there would have been considerable excitement over your visit. 486. Mr. Luke.] You spoke rather lightly of the distance between New Zealand and Australia ; but do you not think that nine-tenths of the people rather object to a sea-trip ?—I think many men do object to it. 487. Do you not think that would be a serious fact, as preventing community of interest between Australia and New Zealand ?—lt might have some effect, but not much. 488. As regards the expenditure of money by the Federal Power, do you not think that influences would be brought to bear by the States within reach of the Federal Power as against the interests of New Zealand?—No; there are so many outlying States in the same position, and they would be inclined to check rash expenditure quite as much as New Zealand would. Ido not think there is any difference in your position from that of Tasmania or Western Australia with regard to distance from the capital, supposing it were placed at Bombala, or elsewhere in New South Wales, or with regard to the expenditure of public money. 489. If New Zealand joined the Federation, do you not think that Tasmania would displace more or less of our produce which is sent to Australia now ?—I do not think so. One effect probably would be that Victoria would largely give up growing oats; but there are many products which Victoria can produce better than you can. There is one article of trade which New Zealand could gain an extensive advantage in—that is the higher quality of her meat. She would be able to enter the Australian meat market with some effect by shipping chilled meat to Melbourne. 490. But do you not think the prejudice against chilled meat would place us at a disadvantage ?—There is no prejudice against chilled beef or mutton. 491. With regard to labour legislation, a New Zealand mauufacturer stated that it places him at a disadvantage of 20 per cent, in competing against Australia where such legislation does not exist ?—lf that i-s the case, lam afraid it would be all up with him. He could not stand a 20-per-cent, handicap. But 20 per cent, must surely be an exaggeration. 492. Mr. Leys.] If the present financial system breaks down, do you contemplate that the Federal Government will take the entire Customs and excise, and hand back to the States whatever it pleases ? —No ; the Federal Government will not be allowed by the States to do anything it might wish to do in that way. It will have to come to a mutual agreement with the States. 493. But, after a lapse of ten years, is not the Federal Government supreme in the matter ?— Yes ; but there is a State House created in the Senate, which is a very powerful House, and can veto anything it does not like. 494. Do you contemplate that the Federal Government will absorb some of the important functions of the States?— The debts and the railways. 495. In that case what will be the position of the States with regard to the construction of railways ?—The State could practically construct the railways as it does now. Under the Federal Government a Commission would be appointed to see that the States did not injure one another, and that the railway revenue was pooled; but if New Zealand, for instance, wanted a line along the west coast of the South Island, or something extravagant that the Federal Government would not undertake, New Zealand would have to undertake it itself. It would still have the power to make a railway wherever it liked, if the Commonwealth objected to incur the liability. 496. If a State were to borrow for that purpose, could it borrow with any advantage?— Not with much advantage; but the State credit in the London market would be, I suppose, 5 per cent, lower than the credit of the Federal Government. 497. What about the loans we have been raising for the purpose of buying lands for settlement ?—That is entirely a State matter which the Federal Government cannot touch. The lands are wholly State property. 498. Do you think that our credit for such purposes would be injured by the fact that the Commonwealth had taken the control of the Customs and excise revenue, and had generally assumed the consolidated debts ?—The State credit certainly would be affected to some extent.
A.—4
509
499. Would it be seriously injured ? —I should not like to say seriously, but the State credit, as compared with the Federal credit, would be on a lower scale. 500. Do you think it would be brought down to the level of the present municipal finance ?—I should think so —about the same. It might be a little higher. The State would be able to borrow on something like the same terms as Sydney or Melbourne could borrow. 501. Hon. Major Steward.] Does not New Zealand stand to lose, if she kept out of the Federation, the trade she has now with New South Wales, which is a free port ?—Yes ; the bulk of the shipments to New South Wales would be stayed, and some of the trade which now goes to the other ports would be stayed also. 502. If that effect is to follow, would there not be an advantage to balance it in the fact that there is likely to be a lower tariff in the protectionist States?—No, I think not; for this reason : that the Commonwealth would have so much larger a population than any one of the States that protectionist duties would exercise much the same effect, even if they were reduced. If you increase the population to double what it is now in Victoria, you would find that greatly reduced duties would be as effective from the protectionist standpoint as the present Victorian duties are. 503. Have you formed any idea of what the cost of the Federal Government annually would be ?—I should say that the annual cost of the Federal Government will be far greater than any official estimates hitherto formed. It would need more than £2,000,000 a year from Customs and excise for its own expenditure, and if New Zealand were included the Federal Government would want nearer £3,000,000. 504. Supposing we have to contribute £300,000, would it not mean that we should have to raise three-quarters of a million by direct taxation, in addition to what we now raise?—l certainly think not. I think any increase of direct taxation might be avoided. You have now a substantial surplus, and that surplus would perhaps go, but beyond that you would not be called upon. Ido not consider you would require to make any economies. I think that surplus would be sufficient to cover all loss of revenue and increased expenditure. 505. Supposing the Commonwealth Parliament legislated for old-age pensions, and made the pensions different from those now obtaining in New Zealand, should we not have to submit perhaps to our pensions being cut down ?—Certainly; but the probability is that in all these matters there would be a levelling-up. 506. What do you think would happen with regard to the penny post ?—Things would remain as they are until the Federal Government introduced special legislation ; but then it becomes a question of revenue. Australia would like to have a universal penny post if it could afford it, but I am inclined to think that it will have to wait some little time. 507. If we entered the Commonwealth, should we not immediately have to revert to the Commonwealth rates ?—No, not necessarily. .The Federal Government takes over the liabilities and the arrangements entered into by the States, and is bound by them. That was the case with regard to the recent arrangement with the Eastern Telegraph Company: Tasmania, South Australia, Western Australia, and New South Wales entered into an arrangement which bound the Federal Government, and that Government cannot revert from it. 508. In estimating the net disturbance to our revenue through intercolonial free-trade, and our contribution to the cost of the Federal Government, have you taken into consideration the question of interest on che capital value of the buildings taken over? —I do not know what the value of the public buildings for Posts and Telegraphs or the defence-works would amount to in New Zealand, but I should say that in Australia there are about fifteen million pounds' worth of such works to be taken over, and possibly with New Zealand there might be another £2,000,000. The Federal Government will not be able to pay each colony in cash for them; they will probably take over a certain amount of the debt, or agree to pay interest at the rate of 3J per cent, on such debt, and for maintenance of buildings another 1 per cent., so that you might reckon on 4J per cent, on the capital value of these works so taken over; that is an expenditure of about three-quarters of a million a year, of which the States would be relieved by these works being taken over. 509. Taking the two matters into account, is it not probable that the annual moneys that the Commonwealth will require to disburse will be something like £2,000,000 a year?— Yes, more than that; and if New Zealand were included, it would want nearly £3,000,000 out of the Customs and excise. 510. Hon. the Chairman.] As a financial expert do you think there is any saving ultimately to a State by the conversion of a loan ? —Yes. I know different opinions have been expressed, but I think there is a substantial saving. 511. But do you not have to pay the same ultimately for your loan as the value of it at the time of conversion ?—No. If you look at the list of the London Stock Exchange and take the loans of any State you will find that a 3-per-cent. loan yields the lowest rate of interest to the buyer, and all the rest yield higher rates to the buyer as you go up, which shows that the investor appreciates the 3 per cent, at a more substantial figure. He does not relatively appreciate a loan which has risen to a big premium. 512. In answer to Major Steward you spoke of the Commonwealth taking over the defenceworks and public buildings, and of the Commonwealth having to allow the State interest on the capital value of such works and buildings. If that is so, would that make any difference to the finances of the States at present that have to pay the interest upon the loans for those works and buildings—if they had to pay a large contribution to the Federal finances on account of the Federal Government having taken them over?— Yes. Every item of expenditure taken over makes a direct difference to the States, for this reason : that after taking over that expenditure, or any additional item of expenditure, the Commonwealth still has to return 75 per cent, of the revenue from Customs and excise, and it has to balance its own expenditure out of the 25 per cent, remaining. 513. But the point I wish to put to you as to your answer to Major Steward's question, from which it appeared that the contribution of the States to the Federal Government would be larger by
A.—4
510
reason of the fact of these works having been taken over, is, Is not the State relieved of its own expenditure in reference to those works ?—Certainly. 514. Then, where is the difference ?—lt is relieved of its own expenditure, and yet has to receive back 75 per cent, of the Customs. It is an advantage to the State. If the Federal Government arranged to take over further expenditure, and still had to return the 75 per cent., it is an advantage to the State all the way through. 515. Mr. Leys.] Did you mean to infer that the Federal Government would be permanently restrained from altering the penny-postage in New Zealand ?—No, I do not think I could go that distance ; but if you had entered into contracts with the British Government, or with any other outside Power, to charge a certain rate, it is a commitment by which the Federal Government would be bound ; but you have not entered into any internal contract with the different States here, and they would not disturb any arrangement of that sort until after legislating definitely for all the States. 516. That legislation might take place as soon as the Federal Government meets, and what would happen then ?—I should think that they would not be able to touch the postal arrangements for a considerable time to come, as there are such a number of important questions cropping up, and I think they will fight over the tariff for seven or eight months. 517. As soon as they can tackle the question I suppose they will make uniform postal arrangements, will they not ?—I do not think it is compulsory, and I should think it would be far better for the Federal Government to leave such arrangements which have been entered into by the States to stand as long as possible. It means that in the interests of unification they would probably have to come down to the universal penny-postage, and they cannot afford it yet; and when that happens I should think New Zealand, having led the way, would carry the day as to what form uniform postal legislation would take. 518. Do you think the other colonies would be satisfied under Federal management to allow New Zealand to have a penny post while they had to pay 2d. ?—As long as there is no definite legislation on the subject they must be satisfied; but the Federal Government will not legislate on it until they see their way to do so. 519. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you think there is a general tendency to have a uniform rate ?—I think there is. Australia certainly wishes the penny rate, and the probable effect of Federal legislation will be to adopt it. 520. Mr. Millar.] About the revenue and the State charges : I find here in the " Seven Colonies" that there is a deficiency of £300,000 in the Postal Department of Australia, and that they charge interest and cost of maintenance. The net profit to New Zealand on that department is £27,000?— That, I think, would be quite likely. William Francis Schley examined. (No. 197.) 521. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the President of the Labour Commissioners in New South Wales ?—Yes. 522. What are your duties in that respect ? —They are more varied than defined, but generally to watch all movements which concern the labour-market; and particularly to take charge of all matters affecting the unemployed—those who complain that they are unable to find employment in the ordinary avenues, and who appeal to the Government to find work for them. We have a labour bureau, and we classify all applicants into one of five classes, and then send them to work according to the rota kept in connection with each class. We have a State Labour Farm where we send single men who are unable to maintain themselves, and we are charged to initiate, almost immediately, a labour farm on a larger scale to which we propose to send married people and children. 523. Mr. Millar.] I suppose you have a pretty wide knowledge of the general conditions of labour here, Mr. Schley ?—I think I might claim so. 524. In regard to your Factories Act, it is nominally intended to provide for forty-eight hours being the legal number of working-hours per week ; but can you tell me whether the forty-eight hours are the hours generally observed in the factories here ? —The Factories Act is administered by a different department, and if you call the officer who is in charge, Mr. Clegg, he will give you the information. 525. We have evidence from Mr. Clegg that they cannot enforce the forty-eight hours owing to their not being fixed by statute : is that so ? —There is a maximum number of hours beyond which you cannot go, and in the case of factories it only applies to girls and boys under a certain age, and not to men generally. 526. Have you any idea of the number.of hours the men are working in the factories?—ln ordinary times about sixty per week. 527. Unskilled labour, I believe, is about 7s. a day here : is that the standard paid by the Government ?—No. I should say that the standard in other classes of unskilled labour is considerably below that. Seven shillings is the standard which the Government have fixed here for men employed by them, and for the men employed on Government works; but even that is subject to variation, inasmuch as we have a regulation that the engineer in charge of any works, if he is of opinion that the man is not worth that, does not pay it. We have three grades of workmen employed on public works—l refer to the unemployed whom we send to those works. There are the first-class able-bodied labourers for whom the standard is fixed at 7s. a day. Then there is the third-class, consisting of wholly or partially crippled or maimed men, or men who are incapacitated through sickness, or of pronounced weak physique ; the rate of pay for those men is ss. a day. Between these two classes we have the second-class, which is the largest class of all, and into which we put all those who are not considered good enough to be put into the first class and not bad enough to be put into the third class, and their standard wage is 6s. ; and the instructions
511
A.—4
sent to officers in charge are that if any man is sent to him as a first-class man and he finds that he is not a first-class man he may reduce him to the second class, or, if the man objects, he puts him off the job. 528. Are your Government works carried on byday-labour?—Not at all. 529. Do you go in for the co-operative principle at all ?—Only to a very small extent, and only in this way : that we have let a number of small public works from time to time to parties of men —such as repairs to a road or the obtaining of ballast. A set amount is put down for the work, and the men select a ganger, who is recognised as the intermediary between themselves and the Government, and to him the money is periodically paid according to the measurement of the work, and is divided in the presence of the Government officer amongst all the men equally; but as to any system of Government co-operative works we have none. 530. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you find that the officers who have the power to raise or lower the men ill the various standards, in the case of finding employment for the unemployed, carry out their duties with satisfaction to the men generally ?—Generally speaking, the arrangement is satisfactory ; but, of course, any man who is reduced, as a rule, complains. 531. There is no right of appeal?— Yes; anything with regard to the classification of the men is subject to an appeal to the Labour Commissioners, of whom there are three at present, and we take whatever evidence may be available, and decide whether the man shall be reduced or not. 532. Mr. Millar.] Can you tell me whether the railway hands here are classified?— They are classified under a special Act of Parliament, and not under the Public Works Act. 533. Are the postal officials classified by Act? —Yes, under an Act of their own. 534. Hon. the Chairman.] Under whose control are the Civil servants? —The whole of the public service, with the exception of those departments that are specially exempt by Act, is under the control of the Public Service Board, which consists of three members. 535. Are the appointments to the Civil Service made by that Board ?—Yes ; that is to say, that if any additional hands are required in any department application has to be made to the Minister in charge, and if the Minister approves of such appointments the matter is then referred to the Public Service Board, who, after satisfying themselves that there is money available for the payment of the office, thereupon fill it up. 536. But as to appointments to existing offices and departments—who makes those—the Minister or the Board —promotions, and so on ?—The Public Service Board in every case. 537. Independently of the Minister ? —Practically so. The Public Service Board is charged with the duty of inquiring into the qualifications of every officer in the departments once a year, and once in five years they have to go through the whole of the public service under their control and inquire into the qualifications of every officer, and regrade them according to their judgment, and that is now being done. 538. Could the Minister appoint or promote a Civil servant without the sanction of the Public Service Board?— According to the Public Service Act I think not, but I cannot say whether in the last resort the Minister could or would do so. 539. Can he dismiss without the consent of the Public Service Board ? —Practically yes, but the matter really goes through the Board. The final stages of it are approved by the Public Service Board, but all these things are done on the recommendation of the departments immediately concerned. Dr. Henry Noeman Maclauein examined. (No. 198.) 540. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your profession ? —A doctor of medicine. lam also a member of the Legislative Council of New South Wales, and have been a member for twelve years. 541. Then, you have been in the Legislature during the whole history of federation?— Yes. I took a good deal of interest in it when it was being discussed, both in the Legislature and before the public, and I expressed my views pretty plainly on the subject. 542. You may probably be aware that we are a Commission appointed by the New Zealand Parliament to make inquiries in Australia as to the possibility of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth, and we should be very glad if you would mention to us any advantages which occur to you, or disadvantages, by New Zealand coming in or standing out of the Federation ?—Of course I cannot, as I have been taken at a moment's notice, go into the matter in detail, but I had an interview some time ago with a gentleman from Dunedin to whom I expressed my views on this matter. It seems to me that the only advantage that you would gain in New Zealand by joining the Federation would be measured by the monetary advantage to you of getting free-trade in Australia. Politically, I think there would be very great drawbacks connected with such a federation, because there are thirteen hundred miles of ocean between us, and it is very difficult to have that close intimate connection that there ought to be between two members of what is considered the same family. The circumstances and conditions of New Zealand are different from those that prevail in this country, and I think also that from a political point of view the system of federation which has been adopted by this country is so exceedingly cumbrous, and will prove so difficult to work, that no political advantage would be gained by New Zealand joining it. The main measure of advantage would be that advantage which would arise to New Zealand from having absolute free-trade with Australia, which would simply be an extension practically oj: the free-trade she has now with New South Wales. 543. Supposing you were a New-Zealander, would you regard that as a sufficient inducement to you to part with your political independence as a separate colony ?—Frankly, I would not; but then I am not a trader, neither am I a farmer or a producer, and one would require to weigh very carefully the prospects and interests of the farming, manufacturing, and trading classes before expressing an opinion. Of course, the great primary producers of New Zealand, are, after all, what the country lives on. There is no doubt of that. Their interests must be carefully con-
A.—4
512
sidered, and therefore I should be inclined to examine carefully what is the volume of trade between New South Wales and New Zealand, which can easily be obtained. I should consider, then, what were the probabilities of export trade when the other ports of Australia were also open to you, and, having satisfied myself by my calculations as to those points, I should then try to see whether those advantages were sufficient to recommend you to part with your political independence. 544. Of course, there is another class to be considered—the manufacturers of New Zealand : how do you think they would be affected by federation ?—The principal manufactures that you send here, as far as I know, are the woollen cloths, shawls, &c, and tweeds. Under the Federation they would have open ports all over Australia, and therefore they would have a distinct advantage. 545. But New South Wales for some time past has had a free-trade policy : under the Commonwealth, do you think that policy is likely to be continued as applied to the whole of Australia? —So far as I can see, unless there is an extraordinary alteration in the Commonwealth Constitution, it is impossible that that policy should be applied to Australia as a whole, as it has been to New South Wales since 1895, because, practically speaking, the whole of our Customs taxation in New South Wales is raised on stimulants and narcotics. There is a small duty on sugar, but practically nothing at all besides that, and it can be shown that they will not raise a sufficient sum of money to meet the financial requirements of the Commonwealth on a free-trade policy like what has prevailed in New South Wales. 546. Then, would it be fair to say that, in the event of the majority of the people of New Zealand being in favour of free-trade, they would have a better chance of obtaining it independently than as a State of the Commonwealth? —I think so, undoubtedly, for you cannot by any means whatever, under the present Constitution, estimate the revenue required by the Commonwealth at much less than eight millions and a half. I think they will require more, but not less, and that cannot possibly be raised by any tariff which would be called free-trade by reasonable people. 547. Do you think the present political powers of the States will be maintained or absorbed by the Commonwealth ?—I am afraid that they will be maintained. My principal objection to the scheme of federation was that too much power was left to the various States. I did not contemplate New Zealand at that time, because there is no doubt that there was then no question of New Zealand joining the Federation; but one of my principal objections to the scheme ultimately adopted was that it gave too little power to the Federal Government, and left too much power to the State Governments, and left so many burdens on them which were too much for a small population to bear, such as having seven Parliaments, seven Governors, seven Executive Councils, and seven Supreme Courts. This I look upon as a mistaken policy; but the principle adopted by the gentlemen who framed this Commonwealth was to give as little power as they could to the Federal Government, and to retain as much power as possible in the hands of the local Governments. My idea was to give all general power to the Federal Government, and only to give to the local Governments the specific powers which were reserved for them. This plan would have been more economical, and it would have left the Commonwealth free to decide for itself whether it ■ should adopt a free-trade or a high revenue policy. Whether it will be a free-trade policy, or a high revenue policy, with a certain amount of protection in it, are questions that have still to be decided, but there is no doubt in my mind that it must be a high revenue tariff. 548. Are there any other disadvantages that occur to you under the present Federal Constitution ?—There are a great number of specific objections, but I have endeavoured to lay down the general principle which underlies all my objections. They have confined the Federation to the Customhouse, to the Post Office, to the military departments, to quarantine, and to various matters connected with navigation. That is all the Federal Government interfere with just now. 549. And railways?—No, sir. There is no doubt that they propose to appoint what they call an Inter-State Commission, which shall have certain powers of regulating the rates upon the railways ; but they did not federate the railways, and the result of this is that the Customs revenue which they take over is much more than is required for the use of the Federal Government, and it is therefore to be paid back to the States in certain proportions. The consequence is that there will always be a danger to the credit of each State under the Federal Government if the surplus paid back is insufficient. My suggestion was that they should carry the proposal much further, and add to it a Federal railway system of Australia, taking over all the railways, and also relieving the States by taking over the debts. This would leave a surplus of about £700,000 in the hands of the Federal Government, which would be just about enough for public instruction. The Federal Government would be left without any surplus at all, excepting such surplus which would gradually grow by reason of the increased trade and population, and for which they would require to account to the States ; while the States would require then to exercise a due economy, and to bring down their expenses as much as they could. But they would not adopt that plan, which would have suited the only form of federation which was, in my opinion, reasonable. 550. You are aware that the Federal Government have the power to construct railways for military purposes ?—Yes. 551. And that it is also proposed to construct a trans-continental railway?— Yes. 552. If the Federal Government do that, do you not think difficulties will arise between them and the States in reference to uniformity of gauge, running-powers, &c, and that they will become so accentuated that it will become necessary for the States to give their consent to the Federal Government acquiring the railway 3 ?—I dare say, but I hope that no Government will ever undertake that trans-continental line for many years. It would never pay. 553. Mr. Millar.] You seem to think that the States will always retain the powers granted under the Constitution ?—I think so.
513
A.—4
554. In that case what will there be for the Federal Parliament to legislate on in the course of a few years, when all the powers of legislation they have are exhausted ?—lt would be very difficult to tell, but there is an old hymn which says that " Satan finds some mischief still for idle hands to do." 555. Do not you think that, when it comes to that point, the Federal Government will gradually encroach upon the powers of the States? —They cannot do so excepting by amending the Constitution, for which you must have a majority of the States, and a majority of the people voting, and there must also be a majority in the particular State to which the amendment applies. 556. Do you not think the people may clamour for the abolition of the States?—l hope so, but I am not very sanguine of it, because there will always be a body of men who will be affected by any reduction in the State Governments. 557. Supposing we joined the Federation, and the States were abolished, we should simply be controlled by Civil servants, should we not ? —Quite so, and therefore I do not think the NewZealanders have anything to gain, and the system you have now suits you better than even the system I am in favour of. Regarding the question of defence, your distance from Sydney and Melbourne is so great that it would be exceedingly inconvenient, if the forces were put under the one command, for you to have to refer every matter to headquarters in either of those two Australian cities. 558. Do you think that the States will find it more difficult to borrow money than the Commonwealth will ?—Strictly speaking, there ought to be a reduction in the credit of the States on account of a great deal of their security having been taken over by the Federal Power. People who lend money are moved by so many different reasons that it is impossible to offer an opinion on what may occur. Ido not think the Federal Government is going to borrow money more cheaply; but I would rather not offer an opinion. The security of the States would be diminished. 559. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think that the legislative independence of New Zealand would be interfered with by her joining the Commonwealth ?—Only with respect to certain particular points ; and I think that the Act excludes a number of Bills that have been dealt with by New Zealand. The Federal Government does not claim an exclusive right to deal with Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration unless it involves more than one State ; so that the power of New Zealand to make such laws as that would not be interfered with: 560. You do not think that the Federal Government would take up that measure with a view to making it apply throughout the whole of the Commonwealth ? —lf there were a strike extending from one State into another then they could do it. 561. I understand you would be strongly in favour of the Central Government conferring such powers upon the States as are now enjoyed by the London County Council ?—I dare say I should go further than that. I said that I thought the State control should be reduced more to the condition of the municipal powers ; but when you had to deal with Queensland with its thousands of square miles on the lines 'of the London County Council it would scarcely answer. What I would rather suggest would be that the principle of the Canadian Constitution should be adopted, where all the power is supposed to lie with the Dominion Parliament, excepting such specific powers as have been delegated to the local Legislatures. Here all the power at present lies with the local Legislatures, excepting such powers as have been expressly delegated to the Federal Parliament. The Federal powers are very much reduced from what they ought to be, but that would be rather an advantage to New Zealand. 562. Have you given any attention to the question of a " white " Australia ? —A good deal. 563. Do you think it possible to develop certain parts of northern Australia without black labour? —It is quite impossible. It is not a question of wages, because the white man cannot continue to work in the cane-fields inside the tropics. In New South Wales they grow sugar by white labour. White men can work in the cane-brakes in New South Wales, but in the neighbourhood of Cairns, with its unhealthy steamy climate, no white man can do it. As a medical man, my opinion is that the cultivation of sugar in the tropical parts of Queensland by white labour is an impossibility. 564. Do you know of any country where cultivation is carried on in the tropics otherwise than by coloured labour ? —ln the Mauritius, Java, West Indies, and the southern parts of the United States of America the white man cannot do it. 565. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you anticipate that there will be any difficulties between the Federal Government and the State Governments in carrying out the present Constitution ? —I do not, but, taking the matter from an all-round point of view, I think the Federal Government will be rather an unimportant body, and of noc much consequence, excepting as a tax-gatherer. 566. Do you not think it would be likely to magnify itself at the expense of the States ?—I do not, because the Constitution is so clear. One of my objections to the present Constitution is that there is equal representation in the Senate. That is a great mistake. I would rather have had a proportional representation on a population basis. 567. Hon. Mr. Boioen.] Will not Northern Queensland have to be worked by coloured labour unless the land is to be left desolate ? —The tropical part of Northern Queensland, where the white man cannot work at all, is mostly on the sea-coast, and it is only on the alluvial banks of the rivers near the coast where sugar is grown. But the white man can look after sheep and cattle even in the most tropical parts or on the sea-coast. When you come to sugar-cultivation he cannot do the work. Tobacco he can grow perfectly well in certain parts of Queensland. 568. Hon. Captain Bussell.] In that tropical part will the white people be able to go on from generation to generation without the race breaking down ?—The people who are living in Northern Queensland do very well, and I do not see why they should not go on under normal conditions. 569. Hon. Major It has been represented to us, as a strong argument in favour of New Zealand joining the Federation, that the united voice of the seven colonies would have a very 65—A. 4.
514
A.—4
much stronger influence with the Imperial Government than if the two countries remained separate. Have you any opinion on that subject ?—We have had our own way as much as we possibly could expect, and the only time when we did not get our own way was when Lord Derby refused to recognise that the Germans were going to get a part of New Guinea. That is the only mistake they have made. The New Hebrides question is a difficult one to decide. 570. Some people hold the opinion that having two distinct Powers in these seas would make for greater influence with the Home Government than having simply one united Australasia ?—I do not think there would be very much difference. There is not the slightest chance of conflict arising if you remain outside the Federation. The only ground of friction is with respect to Fiji, if it were intended that the Australian trade should be excluded. Fiji could not be taken into a federation of white men.
Friday, 22nd Maech, 1901. Hon. J. M. Ceeed, M.L.C., examined. (No. 199.) 571. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name? —John Mildred Creed. 572. Are you a member of the Legislative Council of New South Wales ?—I am. 573. Have you been long interested in politics in this State ?—I went into the Assembly in 1872. 574. Of course, you are well acquainted with the history of federation in Australia?— Yes. 575. You have taken part in and contributed to the literary work in connection with the matter ? —Yes. 576. You are aware, Mr. Creed, that we are a Commission appointed by the New Zealand Government to consider whether New Zealand should join the Commonwealth of Australia, and we have come here to ascertain what advantages can be shown in regard to our coming into the Federation ?—Yes. 577. We shall be obliged if you will give us your views generally ?—Of course, what I should do would be to state what 1 think are the advantages, and what I think are the perils of federation as regards Australia. How it applies to New Zealand does not concern me—that is a matter for the Commission. I have always been of opinion that the union of the colonies is of essential importance to Australia, and that, the more complete that union is, the greater will be the advantage to the various colonies. But what I always feared was the perpetuation of the States Government at the same time that we have a Central Government. From my reading, and experience in other countries, I have found that in every federated country there has always been friction sooner or later between the Governments of the individual States and the Central Government which has been formed by the federation of those States. I fully realise that at the time many of those Federations were formed there was no possible choice for them to have anything but the continuance of the dual Governments. For instance, at the time of .the union of the United States, want of communication facilities made it imperative. Now, owing to telegraphs, cables, electricity, and other means of communication it is possible to decide questions in twelve or twenty-four hours that under the old conditions would have taken months. But the conditions of the United States at that period and of these colonies now are not on the same footing at all. The German union was one of a number of States whose interests were all extremely diverse, and which could not prudently be rapidly consolidated. Norway and Sweden have been federated for a great many years; but I understand from friends who have special knowledge that the friction between them is so accentuated that it is merely a question as to when civil war will take place. My idea with regard to federation is that we should have one all-powerful Central Government, with the abolition of the States Governments, and the creation in their place of very large local-government districts. The interests of the different portions of a large territory like New South Wales are extremely diverse, and no Government of the State can be representative of those conflicting interests. I favour the establishment of large local districts, to whom I would give very large powers, such as entire control of the liquor laws within their own boundaries, the control of education (subject to its reaching a standard to be ascertained and fixed by the Central Government), and kindred matters. I would also leave to them local railways, irrigation, &c. In New South Wales we have no local - government system outside of the town municipalities. For years past we have had Prime Minister after Prime Minister including it in their programme ; but up to the present not one of them have carried it into effect. I might mention that the leader of the unification idea is Sir George Dibbs, who, when in office in 1894, wrote to Sir James Patterson, then Premier of Victoria, and proposed that the two colonies should proceed to draw up a Constitution which would be fair and just to the whole of Australasia, and that on their union under one Government the other colonies should be admitted into the Federation thus established on the terms arranged between the two colonies. His plea was that it was utterly impossible for six colonies to agree upon a fair arrangement that would work profitably and well between them all; whilst if two drew up a fair and just scheme, then the others could come in or stay out as they chose. When they came in they should have the right to do so with no more disabilities than if they had entered the Federation as original States. Unification would mean a great saving of expense in regard to the local Parliaments, and there would be the avoidance of friction between the State and Federal Parliaments. It would greatly assist—in fact, render possible—the solving of questions that now present immense difficulties, such as finance and revenue. 578. Under your system of unification, did you propose to have State Governments at all ?— No ; under the present system of federation the tariff will have to be fixed according to the needs of the poorest State, and not with regard to the revenue requirements of New South Wales. I think it probable that the majority of the people of New South Wales are in favour of a low tariff
515
A.—4
—I will not say absolutely a free-trade tariff—but a revenue tariff. But under federation it will be necessary for New South Wales to collect something like a million and a half more revenue than she requires, because Victoria, South Australia, and Tasmania cannot do with less than their present Customs duties; and to have a uniform Customs tariff, which is essential under federation, the New South Wales duties will have to be raised. " That makes the question of finance a very difficult one. Ido not know that the surplus will be more than we shall use, because in connection with some legislation, which I protested against when under discussion, we have already been drawing promissory notes on this anticipated, future surplus. Then, there is the question of excise. Very suddenly last session a special Act had to be passed lowering our excise duties on tobacco, and I think on beers, so that we might not be Hooded with the Victorian manufactures and stocks under the prospective free-trade which it was supposed would be quickly established between the colonies. We had to lower our excise duties to half. Beally in this we were not governed by our own interest, but by the duties collected in a neighbouring State. The great difficulty is that we have entered into a partnership in which none of the conditions under which that partnership is to exist are really determined. I cannot call to mind one matter that is definitely settled. In private concerns this would be a great imprudence, and I cannot see that it is anything else when dealing with the affairs of a country, any more than it is in connection with the business relations of individuals. One great argument, for instance, that was formerly used in favour of federation was that under it we would have unification of the debts, and thereby secure better rates in regard to loans from our being able to offer better security. There has not been the slightest attempt to settle the unification of the debts in the new Constitution. Another point which I think of the highest importance, and which has been left entirely unsettled, is the question of the railways. There is to be an Inter-State Commission, but how it is to enforce its decisions, whatever they may be, regarding rates on the railways of the various States, lam unable to see. As far as I can tell at the present time, each of the railways of the federating States is to be carried on independently of the others. With regard to the main lines, matters may perhaps be easily settled. But what about the branch railways, which may or may not pay, yet be of essential importance to certain districts ? With regard to them difficulties will surely arise. If there is to be any future federation of the railways, under what conditions are the colonies to construct branch lines which may be necessary for them to open up districts ? The New South Wales argument is that our railways are our greatest asset, one paying more than interest on the money expended. But how are they to be brought into line and amalgamated with those of the other colonies, not paying interest ? W T ill it be possible to reconcile the interests of so many various colonies concerning their railways, which have been unwisely left to be settled in the future ? Another problem is that of the post-offices. We are supposed to have union there, but there are still various important questions to be faced. In New South Wales we have throughout the country districts a twopenny-postage rate, and with our wide territory cannot well charge less. Within thirteen miles of the city and certain other towns, however, we have a penny rate. Victoria and South Australia have universal twopenny rates. Is the higher rate to be lowered, or the lower rate to be raised ? This is a matter which, I take it, should have been settled before federation was entered into. In New South Wales newspapers are carried free, but this is not the case in the other colonies. Is this free postage to be abolished, or extended over the Commonwealth ? Another matter left unsettled by the Federal Constitution in regard to the post-offices is the savings-bank of that department. There is a sum of five millions and a half deposited in the Post-office Savings-bank of New South Wales. Within a fortnight of the termination of the untrammelled States Governments—within a fortnight of the Federal Government coming into power on the Ist January last—some time in December, at all events —the New South Wales Government had suddenly to act, not by Act of Parliament, but by some special power inherent in the Executive Council, and it nominally removed the funds from the control of the Post Office to the control of the Treasury. At the same time these savings-banks are still carried on in the offices that are now Federal post-offices. Are they dealing with money which is State money ? Are they part of the Federal General Post Office system ? The funds were removed on the ground that the State Government, having used this money, could not really afford to hand it over to the Federal Government. Perhaps, also, the Treasurer of New South Wales did not consider it fitting to hand the savings of our fellow-colonists to the Federal Government. Up to the time I speak of the money was in the control of the Post Office ; after that it was placed in the administration of the Treasury of the State, though the work of receiving and paying is being carried on in the post-offices as before, they now belonging to the Commonwealth. 579. But by the Federal Government?— You can hardly say that of the money that is under the control of the New South Wales Parliament. It is questionable whether the money received since the Ist January is State or Federal money. lam complaining of the crude way federation was entered into, and quoting this as an example of it. 580. They will have to draw the line on the Ist January in the books ? —I am only telling you what I know. It might be Worth your while to call a Post Office official. It is a very important question. 581. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] In what position are the funds now that were removed before the 31st December? —They are invested by the Financial Treasurer as it suits his financial scheme. I think you will find that no one can tell exactly how the matter stands. Another difficulty that I see regarding the amalgamation of various departments is the promotion of the officers. Will it be considered one service, or is each colony to stick to its own officers ? There would not be this difficulty with one Central Government merely. 582. Mr. Beauchamp.] It was in 1894 that Sir George Dibbs wrote that minute?— Yes. 583. Had the Federal movement started at all then ?—Sir Henry Parkes made a speech on the subject in 1889. The question of the defence forces is essentially one demanding union. I think
A.—4
516
the Federal Government will gain more in that direction than in any other. By having one headquarters for the whole of the military forces of the Commonwealth there will be one system of discipline. Detachments can be then sent from place to place at requisite times, thus preventing local attachments and local influences bearing upon the forces. It is not, however, yet decided whether the Volunteers are to be under the Central Government or the State. I certainly think they should be under the former. Up to the 31st December New South Wales was arranging for the creation of additional Volunteer regiments. At the present time various districts feel sore because they are not allowed pretty well their own way in such matters. What will be the state of affairs when the whole of the colonies have to be dealt with ? 584. There can be no doubt about it that from the 31st January they must be under one head ?—lt is unsettled. If that idea is worked upon there will be a great deal of friction with regard to the Volunteer defence forces of the colony. 585. I was wrong. It was the Ist March they took over defence ? —The contingents now going away are being worked by the New South Wales Government independently of the Federal Government. And similarly in Victoria. 586. You will find the Imperial Government are charged with the expenses, though ? —Yes, but the expenses are a minor consideration in a matter of that kind. The discipline is of more moment. Another question very strongly affecting the Federation is that of alien labour. The southern States maintain very forcibly that there must be no black or Asiatic labour in Australia. Well, how is it possible to grow sugar in Northern Queensland without it? How is it possible to develop the Cape Yorke Peninsula without it'? Tea, coffee, spices, and other articles can be profitably cultivated there with Asiatic labour, but not without it. lam perfectly at one with those who think that in a country like this any labour should be permitted to come in that does not interfere with the labour of whites; and I think alien labour should be employed in such ways as will not decrease but increase the employment for whites. For instance, doing away with alien labour will mean the collapse of the sugar industry. Not only would that throw numbers of white people out of employment on the spot, but it would lessen the labour to be performed by other industries or branches of work in other parts of Australia directly or indirectly connected with the sugar industry. 587. Can you tell us of any advantage that you think New Zealand would gain by coming into the Federation ? Of course, I understand that you object to the Constitution as it at present stands? —I prefer unification, and if I had the choice at the present moment I would not have New South Wales one of the States in the Federation under the existing conditions. 588. There is the Constitution as it stands. Now, if you were a New-Zealander, knowing what you do about the Constitution, are there any advantages that present themselves to your mind that New Zealand would gain by coming in ?—lt is hardly fair to ask me as an Australian to advise New Zealand in that particular way. I might say this : that, the States having entered into the Federation, I feel it my duty to do everything I possibly can to make it a success. With regard to New Zealand, I have never been there, and do not feel competent to speak as to her conditions. I take it, though, that her object would be to get her produce introduced into Australia free of Customs duties. 589. To put it shortly, she would get the advantages of intercolonial free-trade ?—Yes. I cannot see how her defence forces can be amalgamated with those of the continent to her advantage. I cannot see any manifest advantages to New Zealand joining, beyond the fact that she would then enjoy free-trade with the States. 590. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] And Australian products would be introduced into New Zealand under similar conditions ?—Yes, But you have sufficient wool to supply all your manufactures there, and all sorts of dairy produce can be produced there equal to or better than the Australian products, so I do not see much gain in this way to our producers. 591. What I mean is that manufactured articles would come down to New Zealand from Australia ? —We do not manufacture as many woollen goods as you do. 592. It has been alleged here that certain lines are manufactured cheaper here because they mix cotton with the woollens ? —I cannot speak as to that; it will be a question of demand on the part of New Zealand. 593. lam saying that on both sides the goods would be allowed in free ?—I suppose New Zealand manufacturers will put cotton in the stuff if there is the demand. They would quickly be taught the secrets of adulteration in this way. 594. Mr. Roberts.] You mentioned that there are no local-government provisions in New South Wales outside the town municipalities ? —There are no Road Boards, Shire Councils, or anything of the kind. The people simply bleed the State Government through the member for the district as they can. The non-existence of local government is destructive of the purity of parliamentary life, because oftentimes the worst member is surest of election, or re-election, simply because he is successful in bleeding the Government for local requirements, as he makes his vote on great questions depend on the compliance of the Government in office with his demands for expenditure in his constituency. The better man will not do this, and consequently his reputation as a good local member suffers. I would like to see the money distributed by the Central Government pro ratd according to population. I would give the local districts the power to raise their own revenue amongst themselves. I think I would give them the revenue from land and also from its taxation. The older land districts, with lessened revenue, would have small wants ; the newer, having more need of income, would have larger resources from them. 595. You think the borrowing by the Federal Government would not in any way handicap the borrowing of the States ?—We shall only know that when we know what the Stock Exchange at Home thinks of it. I think there is an Act recently passed in England that permits trust funds in England to be invested in colonial securities under certain conditions. If this applies to the States,
517
A.—4
which I rather question, then that would render our securities as good in the market as the others ; if not, it would drop them to about the level of municipalities, and they would require the guarantee of the Federal Government to secure money at low rates. 596. One witness here stated that he thought the States would be very much in the same position as municipalities ?—lt all depends upon whether the Imperial Government permit the investing of trust funds in the State securities. 597. Then, would it not be looked upon somewhat in the light of a second mortgage, the Federal Government having the first power?—lf the position came about, I suppose the whole federated country would have the first lien, and the State the second—certainly over future debts, whatever it may have been with regard to past ones. 598. If it is your opinion, as a legislator, that federation was brought about in a most crude way, what must be the opinion of the person in the street ?—They went into it baldheaded. 599. You think it was simply a wave of sentiment ?—Absolutely. 600. They have not considered the pros and cons of it ? —I think the people who voted against it did. Ido not know of one person who was not in favour of Australia being formed into one country, but the fault lies with the Constitution as adopted. 601. Mr. Millar.] From your intimate knowledge of this question, do you anticipate that the Federal Government will get increased powers later on ?—I cannot anticipate that. This is supposed to be an irrevocable and indissoluble union of the colonies. How can it be that if the Constitution is to be altered ? 602. You expect the States to retain the existing powers granted to them under the Act?—l would rather not see it. I would vote for the abolition of the State Governments to-morrow. 603. Can you tell me what the opinions of the leading men here are on this point ? Do they anticipate it ?—My own opinion is, No. The people are too selfish and too shortsighted to do it. My opinion is that it should have been an integral portion of the Federal Constitution Act, abolishing the States Parliaments either wholly or, failing that, in proportion. I would reduce them to-morrow to half. 604. What is going to be the ultimate position of the Federal Government if they have no further powers to legislate than those granted by the Act ?—The whole thing is so defective that we shall have to sit down and puzzle it out. 605. As it stands at present it would simply mean that there would be one huge administrative body without administrative power?— Let the lawyers settle that. I have not considered it particularly. 606. We want to see practically what the powers are likely to be before we come in ?—Call Mr. Barton and let him try to explain it. 607. Do you anticipate any great gain to the colonies by one huge consolidation as regards loans ?—I do not know that there will. Some of the States will be worse off than before, because they will be tied to the weaker States. Are the richer States to afford the weaker States charitable assistance, or are the weaker States to go bankrupt? As to Australia as a whole, I think there will be a gain. 608. I think you will find that the larger States will have to carry the poor States on their backs?— That is what I object to. Sometimes one part of Australia will be more prosperous than another. The mass would be satisfied if united, but when kept separate there will be grumbling if one has to assist another. 609. Mr. Beauchamp.} What, in your opinion, hastened the consummation of the federation of the colonies ? Was it the desire of any particular colony to obtain superior trade advantages ? —I think the scheme would not have matured so rapidly but for Victoria's interest in the union. 610. You said this Federation was irrevocable: could not the Constitution be altered by referendum ? —I proposed to insert in the Address a paragraph asking that Her Majesty would direct her Advisers to introduce a clause into the Bill to the effect that on any State showing that it was unduly oppressed the Imperial Ministers would consider the propriety of passing another Act to free it from the Federation. I was ruled out of order, because the contract is to be indissoluble. 611. Presuming that certain matters can be altered by referendum, do you think it possible that within a reasonable time the States will go for unification, or one Central Government only, in place of the existing arrangement ? —They may or may not be taught by experience. 612. You apprehend very serious and grave difficulties ?—Yes, in the federation of the States as it is now. Ido not see how the very great questions are to be settled to their mutual satisfaction. The Melbourne Punch of last week says, "It is our duty to practically scheme all we know to keep the Federal capital in Melbourne as long as possible." That shows the spirit animating that colony. 613. The great hope was that federation would break down the provincial spirit?— Yes. 614. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you believe the capital will be built soon ?—I think it should previously have been settled. It is not a question for the moment, but for five hundred years hence, as to the site of that capital. It gives an undue advantage to a colony if the existing capital of that State is chosen as the Federal capital. Those colonies away from the seat of government will in any case lose the services of their best men. The capital should be on a new site altogether, and can be built practically free of cost under a proper financial scheme. Personally, I prefer Bombala as the most suitable position for it. Many people are fighting to have it here. Many districts are endeavouring to get it in their midst, under the idea that their land will be considerably enhanced in value; but every acre, I suppose, is to be resumed, and it certainly should be on the site being selected. 615. The Government would lease it out ? —1 would always renew the leases somewhat on the single-tax ideas. You can do that in a new country. Such a system of lease would pay the interest on as many millions as we wanted, and provide a sinking fund in addition.
A.—4
518
616. The question of distance is already having an important bearing on the class of men you are likely to return ?—Yes ; if you put the capital as I suggest you practically put every State on the same basis. 617. We in New Zealand, with the capital sixteen_hundred miles away, would be in the worst position '?—New Zealand and Western Australia would be in the worst positions of the colonies. The question of distance is a most important one. You have good men who have to attend to the local State duties and also to their businesses, and they could not do this if they had to come to Australia. 618. Under the present system of party government would not the same conditions apply as those to which you refer, in that the most active man, although not the most scrupulous, would get the most money for his own district ? —I do not think the Federal Government will provide anything for local wants. They will hand over a certain surplus to the States. 619. They have, under the Constitution, the power to take over certain things with the consent of the States ?—That hardly applies, I think. 620. Mr. Luke.] I understand that you have no system of local government at all in New South Wales outside the town municipalities—roads and bridges are entirely dependent on the man who can bring the most influence to bear at the most critical moment ?—Yes; and it has continued undealt with by Ministries, because the Assembly can be ruled better under those conditions than without them. 621. Mr. Reid.] If there was a strong demand by the public for a Local Government Bill it would have to be carried ?—People do not take examples for good ; they say, " It will tax us," and that is quite enough to cure them. 622. Mr. Luke.] Goulburn, Bathurst, and other large places are already covered by the existing Act ?—Yes ; but size is not of moment. As far as I can gather, the district councils in Queensland are very much larger. They have immense distances there—larger than we would have in any part of New South Wales. 623. At any rate, there is no reason why a Local Government Bill should not be carried through by the State Parliament in the future ?—lt is a mere question of the man in power introducing a Bill. It must be a Government measure. It is a matter of printers' ink to carry it. Educate the people to its advantages and the Bill would pass. 624. With regard to the question of the Federal Government taking over certain services not now provided for to be dealt with by them, such as the public services, there is no reason why the first session should not provide for the change?—l do not think the men of the Ministry will do it. 625. There is no lack of power to do it if they thought fit ?—I do not think the Federal Government will be strong enough to establish a Civil Service for the whole Federation. Local jealousies will be the cause of trouble. Shifting a man from one colony to another may be for the good of the country, but the people themselves will not like it. 626. A certain amount of friction is almost sure to result in introducing a matter of this kind. When we introduced representation districts in New Zealand there was the same trouble ?—There is a vast difference in having one man to fight, and a Parliament. The man may be treated .unjustly, but he has to grin and bear it. 627. Is there any power in your Constitution Act that will enable you to reduce the legislators in the House?— Undoubtedly; there is an agitation going on now in that direction. 628. We have not that power in New Zealand. Can you reduce the legislative bodies to one Chamber ?—There is nothing forbidding it in the Constitution Act, which we have the right to amend. It provides for two Houses, but we can take away any part of the Constitution under it. 629. Have you any idea whether the Federal High Court will sit at the Federal capital when chosen ? —They should do so. I cannot say whether they will or not. 630. What is the idea amongst people here concerning that point ?—They have no idea about it at all. 631. It would have to sit somewhere. They might hold sittings of appeal in Melbourne, or Sydney, or Brisbane ?—That is a matter of minor detail. In America the Supreme Court of the United States never sits outside of Washington. 632. It is a matter of great importance to us. We do not want to chase the Court all over the country?—l take it there is nothing to prevent it. 633. Mr. Leys.] You seem to anticipate very serious trouble between the State and Federal Parliaments under this Bill ?—I do. We are too much united to fight as yet, but we will do everything but that. 634. If that is the case in Australia, would it not be a much more serious matter for New Zealand ? Would not the discontent and friction be much greater in relation to the State so fatas we are concerned ?—I can only say that the distance that New Zealand is away from Australia would handicap her in many ways. 635. You said that if the federation of the colonies had to take place again you would oppose it again, and would object to New South Wales entering it, under the present Bill?— Yes. 636. Is it not a fair inference, then, that you would much more strongly oppose federation if you were a New-Zealander? —I think I would. What applies to one applies to the other. 637. You do not see sufficient material interest for New Zealand to come in under the existing Constitution ? —No, I do not. 638. Hon. Major Steward.] You expressed the opinion that it was quite impossible to carry on certain industries in Northern Queensland without the aid of alien labour ?—Yes, successfully. 639. You are aware that Mr. Barton has declared for a " white " Australia, and has stated positively that there will be a cessation of kanaka labour within a number of years ?—Yes. 640. Do you think it at all possible for that to be carried out ?—lt is if three parts of Australia are willing to sacrifice the other part of the country, and the combined interests depending on the prosperity of that other part.
519
A.—4
641. Exactly. If it were carried out the industries of Queensland would be seriously interfered with ? —Yes. Not only Queensland, but the Northern Territory. 642. It would be very much against the interests of the world at large, inasmuch as a large portion of territory would be thrown out of cultivation ? —Yes. 643. You are aware there is a large amount of friction in connection with that matter?— Yes. 644. Is it likely to be serious ?—I think so. 645. You are aware also that under the Commonwealth Act the laws of the Commonwealth are to prevail over the laws of any individual State when they come into collision?— Yes. 646. You mentioned that the matter of the post-offices was in a very unsettled position under the Bill : you are aware that we in New Zealand have adopted penny-postage ? —Yes. 647. Supposing we joined the Federation, what is your opinion as to what is likely to happen in regard to this question of postage? —You would have to hand over the offices to the Federal Government, and they would fix the rates. 648. The same applies to old-age pensions : supposing an Old-age Pension Act was passed by the Commonwealth, we would have to submit to that also?— Supposing power has been granted to the Commonwealth Parliament to override your Act and pass another one. 649. Would not great friction arise from the fact that Acts were passed superseding local legislation in those directions ? —Yes; there are any amount of points of difficulty which we will know nothing of until they arise. 650. The fact is that, so far as this present Commonwealth Bill is concerned, there are a large number of matters left entirely unsettled?— Speaking generally, I do not know of one single point that is definitely settled. 651. You think it is impossible for any public man to say what will be the outcome ?—Yes. 652. Hon. the Chairman.] You spoke of the Constitution being indissoluble : is that mentioned anywhere in the Constitution Act except in the preamble ?—I do not think it is. It is important to consider that, for in private Bills it has to be proved by Select Committee, at any rate. 653. This Constitution is contained in an Act passed by the Imperial Parliament. There would be nothing to prevent the Imperial Parliament repealing it and granting another ?—I take it that the Home Government has power to pass any other Act. Whether they have the power to enforce it is a question that the colonies would have to decide. 654. Assuming that the Commonwealth Parliament found it inconvenient or impossible to give effect to their wishes under the powers granted to them by section 128 of the Act, and they were unanimous that the Constitution should be altered, do you think there would be any difficulty raised by the Imperial Government to altering the Bill as was considered necessary here ?—No; the Imperial Parliament could do it. But the need of the alterations would have to be shown very manifestly. A large proportion of the Commonwealth might have to suffer for years under gross injustice before it would be altered by an Imperial Act. 655. May I say that you regard this present Constitution, as it exists, as a legislative mistake ? —Yes ; as it exists, I think it is. Geoege Euttee examined. (No. 200.) 656. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name ?—George Eutter. 657. What are you?—A stonemason by trade. lam secretary of the Trades Hall in Sydney. 658. Mr. Millar.] What I would like to get, if possible, from you, Mr. Eutter, is a tabulated statement of the rate of wages paid in the different trades here ? —I could not give it offhand, but I can supply it. (See Appendix.) 659. I would also like to know the number of hours worked in each trade, the daily wage, and whether it represents eight or eight and a half hours a day or fifty-four hours a week, whichever would suit you best ?—Yes, I can supply that. 660. I would also like to know the number of Chinese engaged in cabinetmaking or any other industrial work of that kind in Sydney ?—That information would have to be approximate, as I could not give the exact numbers. I could not give their rates of pay. 661. Do you think the secretary of the trades-union would have any idea?—l think he could supply what you require. 662. Could you give me any idea of the quantity of boy-labour as against adult-labour in the separate trades? —Not in all trades; but I will try. I will provide the information as far as I possibly can. 663. You understand that my reason for getting this is that New Zealand is considering the question of federation, and, as it has an important bearing upon the future of the workers of New Zealand, they are anxious to know the exact conditions under which they would have to compete. Can you send the returns? —Yes. 664. Any time before the 16th of April will suit us ? —I can get it for you before that. 665. In regard to legislation, what Acts have you here which affect the workers of this colony, particularly in regard to trade disputes and compensation for injuries ? Have you anything beyond the Employers' Liability Act?—No, not at present. 666. That is pretty well an old Act ?—Yes. 667. That is not of much value so far as getting compensation is concerned?— No. 668. You have a Truck Act, have you not ?—I believe that has been passed. 669. Have you a Wages Lien Act ?—No. 670. There is no possible means of ascertaining what the rates of wages are outside the Sydney district, is there ? The Factory Act only applies to the metropolitan district and suburbs ? —The Factory Act would not give it. It would be possible to get those particulars in regard to a centre like Broken Hill, or from Newcastle, in connection with the miners, &c.
A.—4
520
671. They would not practically come into competition with New Zealand: it is more in regard to the trades where the products are interchangeable that I require the information ?—That would be confined to the metropolitan area. 672. Mr. Leys.} Is there a large proportion of skilled labour connected with unions here?— You might say, almost the whole of it. 673. What number is connected with the Trades Hall ?—I could not give you the figures right away. 674. Approximately ? —I could not give them approximately. There are about forty societies; I have not reckoned up how many members there are. 675. Upon the whole, is labour well organized in Sydney?— Some trades are and other trades are not. On the whole, it is not organized as well as it might be. 676. Have you any means of enforcing the preferential employment of union men against nonunion men in most of the trades ? —No, none. 677. Has it been attempted?—l do not think so. 678. The unions are not strong enough to enforce it?— They have done it in individual cases, but generally they are not. 679. Are the unions strong enough to limit boy-labour?— Generally speaking I should say No, but in some cases Yes. 680. Would the majority of the unions be able to limit boy-labour ?—I think so. 681. Would it be possible either to give preference to union labour or to limit boy-labour without legislation?—No, not in all unions. 682. Do you think it impossible to do it without legislation ? —I do. 683. There is no legislation now that will assist you in that direction?—No, not material assistance. 684. Have the unions made any effort to get a Conciliation and Arbitration Act, somewhat similar to the New Zealand law, passed ?—Yes. 685. For how long have they made such efforts ?—lt is about ten years since they started it. They only got it through the Lower House last session, and then the Legislative Council threw it out. 686. Is the Act that was introduced last session a measure that was satisfactory to the unions ? —They would have been quite willing to accept it. It was not exactly as they wished, but they would have accepted it for want of a better. 687. If the unions are so well organized, how is it that they have not succeeded in getting such an Act passed ?—That is hard to say. A member of Parliament would explain that better than I can. The fact remains that it has always been shelved. 688. How many labour members are there in the New South Wales Parliament? —There are sixteen. 689. Hon. Major Steward.] Out of how many members ? —A hundred and twenty-five. 690. Mr. Leys.} Do the other members come mainly "from Sydney, or from the country?— The country sends a very fair proportion—in fact, they send the majority. 691. Is there a very large floating population of workers unemployed in Sydney at the present time ?—There is a fair proportion of unemployed. It is not as large just now as it has been, owing to the Government having started a number of large works. Are you referring to skilled or unskilled labour ? 692. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is the skilled labour fairly well employed ?—Yes. 693. And the unskilled ?—ls not. 694. Is it a chronic condition here to have a large number of unemployed ?—lt has been the condition ever since I arrived in the country, seventeen years ago. We always have the unemployed with us. 695. Do those unemployed tend in any way to keep down wages ? —While we have unemployed I do not see how we can do anything to raise the wages. As long as there is unemployed, I should say there would be that tendency to lower the rates of pay. 696. Is there any sweating in Sydney ? —Yes ; unfortunately, there is. 697. In what branches of industry does that apply ? —I think the clothing branches are the greatest sufferers. 698. Does the Factory Act do anything to improve those conditions here ?—There is no Factory Act here as you have it in New Zealand. 699. Is there not a system of inspection ?—The inspection assists it, but sweating is not done away with. 700. Is the inspection enforced very rigidly?—l could not answer that, not being closely connected with those particular trades. 701. How does the Early Closing Act work here, from your observation?— The people are beginning to get used to it, and I find that it is working very satisfactorily now. There are a few discontented with it. 702. Are the shopkeepers opposed to it?— They are becoming reconciled to it now. 703. Are there many inspectors to carry through the work ?—I have no idea. 704. How can they enforce it in a big city like this ? —The police and the inspectors do it. 705. Do they enforce it pretty rigidly, or is there a good deal of quiet evading of the Act tolerated ?—I think it is fairly well carried out. 706. Throughout the suburbs ? —I could not answer for the suburbs. 707. On the whole, do the working-population support it or object to it?-—They support it. 708. Hon. the Chairman.] Are you acquainted with the labour laws of New Zealand ? —No, I am not. 709. Mr. Beauchamp.] Has there been any determined and concerted action on the part of labour to improve the condition of the masses in New South Wales ?—No further than trying to have this Conciliation and Arbitration Act, and several other Acts, passed through Parliament.
521
A.—4
710. From your knowledge of what is going on in New Zealand, do you think the same interest is shown here by the labour classes as in New Zealand ?—Speaking generally, No. 711. Do you not think that the number of unemployed here is very much due to the congenial climate ? —Yes. 712. The climate does not compel them to work here so keenly as in colder countries ? —That is my private opinion. There are a large number of unemployed here who would be unemployed under any condition, for they simply do not want work. But there is no doubt that there is also a large number of genuine unemployed. 713. That is possibly due to the fact that in all countries people flock to the large towns ?—I believe that has a good deal to do with it. 714. In the case of Sydney it is accentuated by the fact that men can practically live out in the parks, and so on, during a considerable part of the year ? —No doubt that has a lot to do with it. 715. Mr. Luke.] In giving us those returns, can you give us the wages paid in the different departments, such as engineering, ironmoulding, and so on ?—Yes. 716. Is there uniformity of hours in the different factories—trades like engineering, woodturning, &c. ?—Yes ; they all work forty-eight hours per week. 717. Does the Act compel that, or is it by common consent ?—That is the union rule which is enforced. 718. If the Government cannot enforce that Act, do the employers fall in with it agreeably ?— Oh, yes. The employers recognise the forty-eight hours a week, and there are very few attempts to break through it. The unions deal with any attempt to do so. 719. Will you state in the return whether they are paid time and a half or time and a quarter overtime? —Yes, I can state that. 720. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you think a workman here can perform the same amount of labour during eight hours as he could if he were in a cooler climate ?—There are some days in the summer-time that are most fatiguing. 721. Have you worked in a colder climate ?—Yes, I have worked in New Zealand, and I have worked harder here than in New Zealand. 722. So that they really do more work here, irrespective of cljmate ?—There is more vigour in a cold climate. They take it out of you more here. 723. Mr. Leys.] There is more rigid supervision here in connection with the work ? —You have to do it. on account of the supervision. 724. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] How about the cost of living: have you ever looked into that particular matter ?—No. I think it is about the same. 725. We had a witness here who gave us figures and particulars which went to show that articles purchased for £1 4s. lid. in New Zealand could not be bought here for £1 9s. 10d. : is it your experience that there is so much difference ? —I can scarcely answer that without going into figures. 726. Mr. Luke.] What are the rent-charges here ? What does a house of six rooms suitable for a mechanic cost here for rent ?—They are generally four-roomed houses for mechanics, and they would cost in rent from 10s. to 14s. 727. What is the cost for a six-roomed house in a fairly respectable district?— From 15s. to 18s. 728. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] That would be some distance from town? —Close to town. 729. Is the rent higher here than in New Zealand ?—I never paid rent in New Zealand. 729 a. Mr. Beauchamp.] Are the necessaries of life cheaper here ?—Yes, considerably cheaper. Eobbet Little examined. (No. 201.) 730. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name?—Eobert Little. 731. What are you?—A grain merchant, residing in Sydney. 732. How long have you been a resident of Australia? —About forty-five years. 733. Do you know New Zealand?—l have visited there frequently. 734. You understand that we are a Commission appointed to inquire into the wisdom or otherwise of New Zealand entering the Australian Commonwealth?— Yes. 735. Your evidence will probably be entirely in reference to the agricultural view of the matter ?—Entirely. 736. We have had a good deal of that from New Zealand. We would like to hear your opinion from the point of view as to the advantages of New Zealand entering the Commonwealth? —It appears to me as an outsider that New South Wales is the principal importer amongst the colonies of New Zealand produce. The exports from New Zealand to the Australian Colonies are about a million and a half to a million and three-quarters —including specie—the greater portion of which is agricultural produce. The portion that is exported to Victoria is, I should say, from my knowledge of the position, probably sent there for re-exportation. It seems to me that as we have federated, and New Zealand does not enter the federation, her products will be shut out by the protective tariff which we feel must come, and it is a question for her as to whether she can obtain other markets equally favourable for the amount of her products which she now exports to these colonies. 737. Of course, that is the question. What do you think of her obtaining other markets elsewhere? —I do not see how it is possible for her to have as remunerative a market for her produce as the Australian Colonies. You may say that we will be forced to take your products, but Ido not think we will. The production per acre in New Zealand is greater than in this colony. You could produce, and your people could live on growing oats at Is. 3d. a bushel, but we would starve on it here. The same thing applies to other products, With a tariff here that will, 66—A. 4.
A.—4
522
of course, shuc you uul ii'Oiu cumpotiiig m tins market against the locally produced article, it will enable our farmers to produce at a price that will insure them a living. 738. You are aware that it is a comparatively small portion of our exports that come to Australia at present —that the bulk of our exports go.to England? —That may be the case. lam only speaking of the imports into these colonies from your colony. I do not know what proportion that is of the whole of the exports of the colony. Mr. Millar : The proportion is 1395 per cent. —you might say, 14 per cent. —of the whole. 739. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think that Victoria will be able to supply the agricultural needs of New South Wales? —She will assist. I think the colony which will derive the greatest benefit from federation, from an agricultural point of view, is Tasmania. 740. "Would Tasmania and Victoria together be able to compete with New Zealand in supplying New South Wales ?—I think so, entirely. For instance, at present Victoria consumes little or nothing of New Zealand products—her importations there are for reshipping purposes, for export purposes 741. What about Tasmania supplying her?—l think the area of Tasmania under cultivation will increase considerably, and that their products will command a very much higher value than they do at present. 742. Do I understand you to say that, with intercolonial free-trade, Victoria and Tasmania could successfully compete with New Zealand in supplying this colony? —That is my belief. 743. If that is so, what is the advantage to New Zealand in coming into the Commonwealth ? — The advantage would be this: If you come in, then, instead of having only New South Wales as a State consuming your products, you would have the whole of the States consuming them. 744. Hon. Major Steward.] Consuming products such as we supply ? —Yes. 744 a. Do you think Victoria and Tasmania can supply that class of products on equal or better terms ? —Yes ; assuming that we have a protective tariff. 745. Mr. Luke.] Do I understand you to say that if we come into the federation we could supply New South Wales with our products, as against Tasmania and Victoria? —Undoubtedly. You would be on more equal terms then, because the freight from New Zealand to here is somewhat similar to the freight from Victoria to here, and you can produce a very much larger amount of produce per acre than we can on this side. 746. More than Tasmania ?—Considerably more, and, I should say, of better value. 747. Hon. the Chairman.] Are New Zealand potatoes imported largely into New South Wales? —Very largely. 748. Do you know if they are imported into the other colonies ?—Yes. I think Western Australia occasionally buys from New Zealand; but that market has to be forced—l mean that you have to cut prices from New Zealand in order to get in against the Tasmanian produce. 749. Have you considered the exports from New Zealand to Australia ?—I have no figures in regard to them. 750. Beyond free-trade, would there be any other advantage to New Zealand by coming in ?— I have not thought of any other. 751. Mr. Roberts.] If you think that New Zealand could and would supply all the colonies, do you consider that the cost of producing here is pretty well on a level with the cost of producing in New Zealand ? —No, the cost of production here is much greater. 752. Can you give us any information ?—For instance, you can produce over 25 bushels of wheat per acre on an average. It is as much as we can do in an ordinary good season to produce 10 or 11 bushels. 753. But then, on the other hand, we have in New Zealand to cut, stook, and then thresh most of our grain ? —Over which you have 14 bushels to the good. 754. Do you think the balance makes it good?—I do. 755. Have you any idea of what the cost of taking the grain from the land to the bags is here? —No, I cannot give you accurate information about that. There is another matter which I might mention, and that is that we draw a lot of oats from New Zealand—that product is a very big item with us. 756. As a matter of fact, Victoria has a big lot on hand now ? —They do not come into this market to any extent in regard to oats. We are now importing a great quantity of oats. We have ourselves sold over 15,000 sacks of New Zealand oats during the past fortnight. 757. What proportion of that was for local consumption, and what for export ?—I should say, fully 75 per cent, was for local consumption. 758. Mr. Millar.] Seeing that you anticipate that we would have such a good market in the future, can you explain how our market in New South Wales is not now much better than it is? A large number of items in these lists will not be affected by federation ?— You mean, for agricultural products ? 760. The figures show the whole of the exports to the Commonwealth amount to about £250,000 ?—lt is £436,000 here. 761. That is agricultural produce alone ?— Yes. 762. Does it not include pastoral?— No. 763. That is for the whole of the Commonwealth ?—Yes. 764. Do you not think that if New South Wales was going to be such a good market in the future we should have developed more trade in the past, seeing that you had absolute free-trade here? —I think, if you take the figures of the importations into New South Wales in comparison with the Victorian imports, it would give you an indication of the increased imports into Victoria which would occur under free-trade if you came into the Commonwealth. Also, your exports to the other colonies would proportionately increase. 765. Do you anticipate that we would find a market in Victoria for oats ? —Unquestionably, because you can grow them to better advantage than they can in Victoria.
523
A.—4
766. What is the present price of oats in New Zealand and Victoria?— The present price of similar quality oats is : Victoria, 2s. 2d. per bushel; New Zealand, Is. 6£d., f.0.b., Lyttelton. 767. Then, there are freight and charges to be added on to them?— Yes, about 3d. a bushel. The Algerian oats are ruling at from Is. 7d. to Is. 10d. at present in Melbourne. 768. Still, you think, in the face of that, and the fact that they are growing a surplus of oats now, that there will be a considerable market for oats from New Zealand ?—I think so. 769. Is there any other item of our produce that you think would find a market in Victoria ? Butter, for instance, would not be likely to do so, would it ?—lt would always here in New South Wales ; in Victoria, only during certain seasons. The market always rises during the winter months, and that is the time for New Zealand exportations to the other colonies. 770. That would take place under any circumstances, would it not ?—With a duty of 2d. a pound. 771. Would it stand that duty ?—No. 772. Do you anticipate that there would be such a duty put on it ? —lt is difficult to say. That was the duty here when duty was imposed on that product, and it is the Victorian duty at the present time. 773. Mr. Beauchamp.] Speaking generally, Victoria and Tasmania can grow the same kind of products that we grow in New Zealand?— Yes; but in oats and a few other lines you grow much better quality. 774. Is it possible in either Victoria or Tasmania to produce such heavy oats as we do ?— Generally speaking, it is. 775. Duty or no duty, a certain amount of oats would be used here—that kind of oats?— No. If you take Victoria as an example, they do not use any of your oats. They have machinery now by which they can treat Algerian oats, which grow prolifically here. 776 They are not only used for horse-feed ?—No. 777. You apprehend, in the event of our not federating, that we would lose our market for oats ?—Yes. 778. That, after all, is the principal item, is it not: according to the return it shows that ?— Yes, £180,000. Maize is also shown here as a very large item from New Zealand. 779. But, generally speaking, you can grow maize just as cheaply and of as good a quality as we can grow in the north part of New Zealand ? —Yes. 780. It is essentially a product of a warm climate ?—Yes; we consider our maize better. But your farmers find a profitable outlet here for their maize, otherwise they would not send it. 781. Can Tasmania very largely increase her agricultural area?— She can double it. 782. I suppose the reason that she has not doubled it in the past is because of no market? —Yes. 783. Hon. the Chairman.] Is the land good in Tasmania?— Excellent. 784. Mr. Luke.] I gather that your consideration of this question has been entirely from a trade point of view, not the political aspect ? —Entirely. I have given you my ideas from a trade point of view. 785. Hon. Major Steward.] You state that 75 per cent, of the oats imported into New South Wales was for local consumption ?—Yes, that is what I would consider. 786. Now, what is the quality of the oats grown in Tasmania compared with those grown in New Zealand ? —lnferior at present. 787. The rate of production in Tasmania is lower than in New Zealand?— Yes. 788. Do you know whether, under favourable circumstances, Tasmania could largely extend her oat-production ?—I should say that she could double it with ease. 789. Is there any difference in freight as between Tasmania and New South Wales or New Zealand and New South Wales ? What is the position ? —The freights are about the same. 790. So that, if we were in exactly the same position under free-trade, you think the advantage would be with us?— Undoubtedly, so far as agricultural products are concerned. 791. We have had evidence here that the Tasmanian potatoes are better than ours?—We prefer them, as a rule. 792. Is there not an almost illimitable area of land in Tasmania suitable for growing potatoes ? —The area could be considerably increased. The increase would be slow, as the suitable land is now covered with heavy timber. 793. Would it be sufficiently large to overtake all probable demands from New South Wales for some time to come, under normal conditions ?—One thing that would militate against that is the fact that production there seems to be on the decline. 794. Do you mean that the amount of the yield per acre is falling off, or that there is a smaller area under cultivation ? —The production per acre is falling off. 795. Even allowing for that, there is a large area of land which could be used for growing potatoes that is not so used now ?—Yes. 796. Do you think there is a likelihood of Tasmania being able to supply all your requirements ? —With a favourable season there is a possibility of her doing so. The heavier yields of New Zealand put you in a better position. 797. Would that more than counterbalance the quality of the Tasmanian potatoes?— Yes. 798. Under ordinary circumstances, we still have an advantage of that kind?—l consider so. 799. Supposing you were a New-Zealander, judging the matter directly from a commercial point of view, you would recommend federation because of the advantage we would get from the open market ?—Yes. 800. Is it not a fact that we could always sell in London, at a price, any quantity of oats that we chose to export ?—Undoubtedly, at a price. 801. That applies also to cheese and butter, does it not ?-—Yes. 802. It might not, perhaps, apply to bacon or hams ?—No.
A.—4
524
803. Nor to potatoes ?—No. 804. With those exceptions, most of the agricultural products could be sold in London at the ruling price ? —Yes ; but, I think, at a considerable sacrifice on the average values. 805. What would be the largest possible difference on an average between the net prices that an exporter in New Zealand would get for his produce in London and New South Wales?—l could not possibly say now. 806. Would it range beyond 25 per cent. ?—Taking it for an average of years, I think it would. 807. Would it range beyond 33 per cent. ? —I could not say. 808. Probably not, I should think ?—I do not know. Take the last ten years: New Zealand has had an exceptional advantage owing to the droughts here. 809. I am taking the normal conditions ?—Unfortunately, they have been the normal conditions here. 810. Supposing we found that we export to New South Wales, say, £600,000, which is all that is affected (because in regard to the exports to the other colonies we will still be on the present, or a no better, footing), if we remained out of the Federation, and the New South Wales market was lost to us and we had to sell in London, that would mean a loss of thousands?—As far as New South Wales is concerned. 811. If we had to contribute to a deficiency as the consequence of our becoming a part of the Federation —say, £500,000 —you would not think that a remarkable bargain, would you? —If you came in you could supply the other colonies. Victoria, one of the biggest consumers, is not supplied by you now. 812. At present there are duties imposed by all the States at present in the Commonwealth, with the exception of New South Wales, as against us and the rest of the world. Now, it does not appear, so far as we can see, that those duties will be higher than obtains in Victoria now ? —No, I do not think so. 813. If they be not higher we shall be in equally as good a position with Victoria and the other States, excepting New South Wales, as we were before?—No, you would not. 814. Why not?— Because it would pay South Australia and Western Australia, who import from you now, to import from Victoria or New South Wales, because there would be no duty on the products coming from these colonies. The same would apply as regards Queensland. 815. Supposing we were not to come in, it would further injure us in the sense that these other States would come into competition under more favourable circumstances?— Unquestionably. 816. Hon. the Chairman.] You said that you thought Tasmania could double her production of oats ?—Yes. 817. Do you think that would be the same in Victoria? —They could increase production there by increased acreage. 818. If that is so, do you not think they would be able, to, even under free-trade, compete with New Zealand ? —Yes ; but they do not grow the description of oats that is preferred here, such as you grow in New Zealand. They cannot grow them remuneratively.
Monday, 25th Maech, 1901. Edwaed Dowling, Hon. Secretary of the Australasian Federation League of New South Wales examined. (No. 202.) Mr. Dowling said that his society was affiliated with similar bodies in all the colonies, including New Zealand. 819. Hon. the Chairman.} Can you give us any light upon the question as to whether it would be advisable for New Zealand to join the Australian Colonies ? —Our own aims are to bring in all the colonies of the group. 820. Well, what about New Zealand joining ? —Our league has always considered it very undesirable that there should be two British Powers in the Pacific. In fact, we are carrying out the policy of the late Sir George Grey—that Australasia should have a kind of protectorate over all the islands on this side of the equator, leaving the United States to look after those adjacent to America. 821. Why do you think it a bad thing to have two British Powers in the Pacific ?—We wish, if possible, to prevent, as suggested by Sir George Grey fifty years ago, the increase of undesirable neighbours, like those in New Caledonia, in proximity to this continent. Union is strength, and in that regard all the colonies have hitherto not pulled together respecting colonisation of the islands in the South Pacific. 822. What particular advantage would it be to New Zealand to come into the Federation? If New Zealand remains outside it will be following a policy of isolation like that adopted by Newfoundland, which has proved most prejudicial to the interests of the oldest English colony. •823. Mr. Roberts.} Do you think the people of New South Wales really understand the question of federation ?—Our league has been engaged in educating the people on it for the past ten years. For seven years the league has been working under a constitution drafted by Mr. Barton, and we have continuously endeavoured to educate the people in Federal matters. We have had two referendums in New South Wales, and have published thousands of pamphlets dealing with the question, and have also held many public meetings. The rival parties and the discussions in the Press have also done a great deal of good in bringing the matter down to the people.
525
A.—4
824. Mr. Millar.] Is the present Constitution approved by the people ?—As a league, we were not a party to any draft Constitution. We thought that it should be left to the people, by an elected statutory Federal Convention, to prepare ; and I believe the Commonwealth Act is the most liberal and the best Constitution in existence. 825. Is the league still an active body ? —Our business now is to defend the Constitution. 826. Is there any feeling in the league in favour of unification ?—That was a scheme propounded by Sir George Dibbs. That gentleman desired, as in Canada before its confederation, to preserve local autonomy, and he believed that the best means of doing so was by amalgamation— a kind of union, I would, however, point out, that had proved a failure between Upper and Lower Canada. 827. Has your league ever discussed the question of an extension of the powers of the Federal Government, or does it intend to uphold the existing powers granted to the States ?—The whole matter regarding the Constitution was thoroughly debated. The various other Constitutions were considered in framing our own Constitution. We saw that the various colonies must give and take in this matter. Of course, provision is made that amendments may be introduced, but it is also very undesirable that they should be made too easily. They are far more easily made in this Constitution than is the case with those of the United States or Canada. 828. What I would like to know is whether the league has any policy in regard to this question : do they desire the unification of the States, or do they intend to stand by the powers granted to the original States in the Constitution ? —We believe that the present Constitution should have a fair trial; but hereafter one cannot tell what amendments may be necessary. No doubt, in time experience will show that certain amendments will have to be made; but at the present time we believe that the Union must operate in accordance with its Constitution, and that we ought to, as far as possible, defend it. 829. Federation is for all time, and not for the present ?—lt is for all time; yet the United States, with its iron-bound Constitution, has succeeded in making a number of amendments, and similarly so in Canada. So in our own case demands for amendment will be made, and the same experience will take place here as was the case with those other Constitutions referred to. 830. Those amendments will come in the direction of gradually absorbing the State power? — Some people may think it would have been wiser for us to adhere strictly to the Canadian principle, giving nearly all the powers to the Federal Executive. This matter has been a compromise between the Canadian and the American Constitutions. 831. Merely a temporary compromise ?—The majority of Federalists here believe that our Constitution is a far superior one to either one of those mentioned, inasmuch as we have not the same difficulties to contend with here as they have there. For instance, in Canada they have two distinct races. In the United States, at the beginning of the Union, they had a lot of local jealousies and other matters of difficulty in regard to vested interests, such as slavery, far greater than we have had. We are very luckily situated in that respect. 832. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think the Braddon clause is likely to give rise to friction between certain States at no distant date, especially between New South Wales and States that have a protectionist duty at a heavy rate per head ?—That matter of free-trade and protection we, as a league, have never taken' any part in. I have studiously kept out of the present contest in that regard. Our league is divided on that matter. We have the leading Protectionists and Free-traders amongst us. 833. The great object of those associated with you has been to get the federation—you have not really troubled yourselves very much regarding the details ? —Some of our members, such as Mr. J. T. Walker, in its financial aspect, Dr. Cullen (another of our vice-presidents who is well up in the history of various Constitutions, and who is secretary of the literary committee), and several other gentlemen, have written and spoken concerning the question from various points of view. 834. Hon. the Chairman.] Mr. Beauchamp is asking about the Braddon clause ? —As secretary, I am concerned solely in organizing branches and disseminating literature, and in other ways educating the people on the question. 835. Mr. Beauchamp.] More on the question of the desirableness of federation ?—That is our mission. 836. But in approaching federation you have not really given very much attention to the various details under which the federation should be accomplished or worked ?—We have an immense amount of literature on the subject. The matter of finance is one for financial experts, such as Mr. Dugald Thomson, Sir William McMillan, Mr. J. T. Walker, Mr. Bruce Smith, and others, to answer. 837. Were there many anti-Billitesamongst your members?—l may say this : that at the time of the first referendum there was a division in our league with regard to the Bill as originally submitted, and we did not take any active part on that occasion. But at the last referendum, when there was a United Federal Executive, with representatives from the free-trade and protectionist associations, and from the Legislature and our own league, we took a large share in that fight, which was the biggest of the long campaign. I was one of the three honorary secretaries at the time. 838. With regard to New Zealand, has your league given close consideration to the distance question —the distance that New Zealand is from the capital, and the fact that she is divided from this continent by twelve hundred miles of water? —The fact of Western Australia being even a greater distance from the eastern colonies would be, to a great extent, an answer to that objection. We know, also, that the steam-power now is getting so advanced that what formerly took several weeks to do we can do much quicker now. The trip from England to America can be done in a few days, a very much longer distance than that between New Zealand and Australia. 839. As far as Western Australia is concerned, she is separated only by land, whereas New Zealand is separated by sea distance. The distance between the Federal capital and Western
A. —4
526
Australia can be very much shortened by rail, can it not ?—That means a somewhat similar undertaking to the Canadian Pacific line. It would be a great undertaking, and there is no doubt but that it will be some time before that work could be accomplished. I think that, with such facilities as steam, telegraphic, and cable communication, difficulties as regards the distance will be considerably reduced. 840. Mr. Luke.l Where did your league arise first—in Sydney here ?—ln Sydney. It was given birth to in New South Wales. There was a deputation from the Australian Natives' Association in Sydney (of which I was then honorary secretary), a very powerful organization throughout Australasia. We waited upon Mr. Barton in 1893, when he was a member of the Dibbs Government. He asked me to be one of the honorary secretaries of the proposed movement, and he sent out a circular, and we had a meeting of representatives from all political parties. 841. How long was it from its birth before these branches were established in Victoria? — Shortly after —the next year in Victoria. A branch was started about the same time in South Australia, and another a little later in Queensland. 842. Did those colonies offer their allegiance to the league, or were they canvassed by the league from New South Wales ?—Each colony took action in the matter of affiliating itself with the central league in Sydney, and with branches also in their country districts. 843. How long has there been a branch established in Auckland ?—About two years ago we had a communication from there. I had sent a lot of literature to Auckland, and also to Wellington and other places. I am in constant communication with those places. Only on Saturday last I had a letter from Auckland regarding the necessity for giving evidence of the advantages of New Zealand joining the Federation. 844. What I wanted to get at was this : this league has been established in Australia a great many years, but it is only two years since the league was started in Auckland ? —Two or three years. 845. It was started, I imagine, on its own account ? —Entirely. We generally leave the initiative to Federalists in the other colonies. 846. Does that not rather point to this: Seeing that you had leagues in the colonies of the mainland that started simultaneously, does it not appear as though these colonies had a great question which affected them, which does not affect us in New Zealand in a similar way ? Does not the manner in which New Zealand has so far treated the question indicate that the interests were not identical ? —lt is only a question of time with regard to New Zealand coming into the Union, for time is fighting on the side of federation with regard to all these colonies. The history of Newfoundland shows that its progress has been retarded by its politicians endeavouring to prevent its joining the Union. 847; Newfoundland is not to be compared in any sense with New Zealand ? —ln the great north-west of Canada the progress has been something remarkable, whereas Newfoundland's policy of isolation has been to a great extent almost the death-blow to that colony, although it is the nearest American settlement to England. 848. Do you not think there will always be a difficulty in a Commonwealth of which New Zealand formed a part ? The administration of affairs of an isolated part of the Union, such as New Zealand, would be an administration of railways, postal and telegraphic services, and matters of- that concern? —The same difficulty exists with Western Australia. When we have the Federal capital.in New South Wales, the Western Australian railways, telegraphs, and post-offices will have to be communicated with and worked from the Federal capital, in the same way as would be the case with New Zealand. The improvement and advantages we have now in electricity and other means of communication, however, almost annihilate any distance. 849. Do you not think that sea-distance will always be a greater bar than distance by land ? —We know that freights by sea are far less than those by railways. 850. lam speaking of inter-communication between the people generally ?—I believe that, as far as New Zealand is concerned, it will always be a great resort for the people of the mainland on account of its beautiful scenery and climate, and it would be a national calamity if New Zealand should be in any way isolated. 851. All those conditions will remain. Can you account for the fact that very few Australians go through New Zealand now : is it because of the objection to travel by water ?—You see large numbers, like myself, travelling to the Old Country and America by ocean routes. 852. They are comparatively few, are they not?—No, great crowds are going now; and I consider that a large number of them make a big mistake in doing so, considering that New Zealand, with her magnificent scenery and cool climate, is so much nearer to us. " 853. They will have those advantages whether we federate or not, will they not ?—lf they succeed in having a kind of protective policy here, then, I presume, the products of New Zealand as trade will not come. We know it is not the passenger traffic altogether that pays. You would have a better class of steamer, and that has a lot to do with people travelling. 854. Mr. Leys.] Do you know anything of the financial institutions of New Zealand in detail ?—No, excepting from reading. 855. You could not tell us how this federation will affect New Zealand finance?—Of course, it is a matter of financial concern. We know that New Zealand is now in a very prosperous condition. Ido not know your colony's latest indebtedness per head, but it has been much larger ihan the average amount for the States of the Commonwealth during many years past. 856. You could not give us any information personally regarding this aspect of the question ? —No. I may say, as regards finance, that there is only one matter that 857. From your personal knowledge, can you give us any information with regard to it?—-I vould refer you to financial experts, such as the names I have given. 858. Really you cannot tell us how federation would affect New Zealand ? —As far as the finances are concerned, we have had the matter fought out here.
527
A.—4
859. I am asking of your personal knowledge ?—Those colonies that were opposed to federation always made out that it would be prejudicial to their finances. It was an argument largely used here against federation that New South Wales would have to carry all the smaller States - that all the difficult matters of finance would practically have to be borne by this colony. 860. As to New Zealand you cannot afford us" any information ?—You gentlemen know more about that than I do. 861. Do you believe thai the Federal Government will take over the railways here : they have got power to do so with the consent of the States ? —The policy in Canada is 862. No, here. Do you think they will take over the railways?—l can only reason by analogy. I will give you my reasons. 863. Tell us your conclusions ?—lnasmuch as in Canada the Government in the first instance commenced the railways, and spent some millions of money, and then handed them over to private individuals ; and as in the United States they have subsidised the construction of railways, and given grants of land all along the line 864. That has not been the policy of these colonies?—lt has not. We have advisedly not done it. Great disadvantage is found under the other policy. It was a great mistake that the railways of the United States and those of Canada should have been allowed to get into the hands of trusts and combines. It would have been far better for the Government to have always had control of them. In the same way I believe the Federal Government ought to have the control of all the railways here. That is only my own impression. 865. And they alone will have the construction of railways in future?—l think so; in order to develop the country properly as a whole. 866. Do you think this continental railway will be soon undertaken ?—That is a matter for railway experts ; but unless it can be shown that it will be to some extent a paying concern, I am very much in doubt about its being constructed in the immediate future. 867. Do you not think it will be undertaken, like the Canadian Pacific line, for political reasons ?—I do not know. In that instance they constructed that railway in order to bring British Columbia and the North-west Territories into the Union. In this instance we have Western Australia already in, and there is no necessity for such a bargain. 868. Do you not think there has been some sort of understanding that this railway will be constructed ?—The whole question will be gone into by the Federal Government and financiers and railway experts. 869. Hon. Major Steward.] I understood you to say that your league left the question of finance to the financiers ? —Do not misunderstand me with regard to that. Personally I have left it so, but members of our league have written a number of publications in regard to that phase of the question, and we have had two conferences. 870. You did say that, did you not —that the league left the financial aspect to experts ?—We have gone into the matter thoroughly. I hope I will not be misunderstood in my former remarks on this point. 871. Hon. the Chairman,] You were asked a question by Mr. Leys as to whether your league had considered how federation would affect New Zealand finance, and you said, in answer to that, that you left the question of finance to financiers ?—The financiers I meant are the gentlemen who belong to our league, and who are financial experts—gentlemen like Mr. J. T. Walker, chairman of the Bank of New South Wales, Mr. A. W. Meeks, Mr. Bruce Smith, and other commercial men who have dealt with these problems in their writings. 872. If that is so, then your league adopted federation for what I may term " sentimental reasons," irrespective of other considerations?—Oh, no ; they went exhaustively into the question. We had a conference at Bathurst and went thoroughly into the matter, and a scheme was submitted. A committee was appointed to consider the financial question, and they brought up a report which showed what the probable expenditure would be with regard to federation. 873. Did that report show that the burdens of the people of New South Wales would be increased or otherwise under federation ? —lt showed that loans would be obtained at a very much reduced rate of interest, and that there would be a great saving in other ways. 874. I am asking you whether this financial report showed that the taxation necessary in New South Wales would be larger under federation or otherwise : can you say Yes or No ?—lt showed that there would be, of course, increased expenditure for Federal offices, but it also showed that there would be probable reductions in expenditure in other ways. 875. What is the net result?—l think that, on the whole, we believed it would be financially most advantageous for the development of the resources of the colonies, and that it was otherwise most desirable to have federation. 876. That is regarding general questions ?—To remove the border duties especially. 877. Can you answer the question or not as to whether, after making your inquiry, you arrived at the conclusion that the people of New South Wales would have to pay heavier taxation under federation than as an independent State ? —lt is impossible to do so. The estimates given could only be taken in good faith. It was not possible to give the exact figures until a tariff was framed and its operation noted. 878. I am not asking for exact figures. Did you, or did you not, know whether you would have to pay larger burdens than otherwise ?—We knew this : that we have here in this colony the lightest taxed one of the group, and that we could afford to have more taxation: as, for example, in New South Wales last year it was only about half the amount per head of population that it was in New Zealand. 879. Do you know anything about the condition of New Zealand ?—I have been there twice. I have also read recent works upon it. 880. From your knowledge of it, would you consider that the advantages of federation are so great that New Zealand should join the Commonwealth irrespective of the financial burden that
A.—4
528
federation might impose on them ?—That is a question for the people of New Zealand themselves to decide. 880 a. Your league is an educating body for the purpose of educating the people on this question?— Yes. 881. "What does your league teach the people was the object and purpose of the Braddon clause ?—lt seemed to be the only solution of a great difficulty with regard to the adjustment of the finances. 882. What was the object of the clause?—As far as I could tell, it was a device to try, if possible, to help, I understand, the smaller colonies ; it was not for the benefit of the larger ones. 883. Help them in what way ?—ln giving them some assurance respecting their finances, which would be to some extent dislocated by the taking-over of their Customs revenue, upon which they greatly depended. 884. Do you occupy any public positions besides this secretaryship ? —No ; I am an honorary Magistrate of the Territory. I have given all my time during the last ten years to this question, and have spent hundreds of pounds out of my pocket, because I thoroughly believe in bringing the colonies together. This lesson was taught me by my travels in the United States and Canada, where I saw seventy-five millions of people in the States well employed on territory no larger or better than we have here. There is one matter I noticed with regard to New Zealand, and it is this: I saw it stated by the papers that evidence had been given that the crime statistics of Australia compared unfavourably with those of New Zealand. 885. That has nothing to do with federation. We know that the Federal Court does not propose to deal with criminal matters at all?—I only wish to show that the figures for crime in the New Zealand Year-book are rather misleading, without the explanations given by our Government Statistician being also published. The figures of percentages of crime is much less, for example, in Tasmania than in New Zealand or the States on the mainland. Reasons for these differences are given in the publications of the Official Statist of New South Wales to be greater strictness of police administration, larger number of males of such ages as contribute to the ranks of offenders, differences in the tabulation of returns in the various colonies, &c. Walter Pbbbdy examined. (No. 203.) 886. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name, sir?— Walter Preedy. 887. What are you, Mr. Preedy?—l am a clerk in the Agricultural Department of the State of New South Wales. 888. Mr. Millar.] Could you tell me what the average value of agricultural land is in New South Wales —the selling-price?— You could not possibly say, because it varies so much. In some districts it is worth £40 or £50 an acre. 889. What would be the value of fair wheat-growing land in the Riverina—say, 500 acres?— To purchase it after it is cleared and improved ? 890. Unimproved roughly, and improved if you can ?—-I should not care to give more than £2 an acre for wheat land. The yield in Riverina is about 10 bushels. 891. Can you give us particulars of what the Crown sells the land at unimproved ?—Every district in the colony is quite distinct. The departmental reports [produced] give considerable information as to what lands are available and the conditions under which you can take them up. You cannot say the price until you know how it is to be taken up —whether conditional purchase, homestead lease, and so on. 892. Have you got any map, with the Government values marked on the land, showing the upset price that they intend to put upon any particular portion ?—No; but you can get that information in the reports referred to. 893. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] The selector may, after taking up the land, sell it himself ?—lt all depends ; he cannot sell a homestead lease. 894. Do the homestead selections ever become freehold ? —No. 895. Mr. Beauehamp.] Do you acquire the fee-simple from the State in other cases?—ln ordinary cases you can, after a certain number of years, and payment of rent based on the capital value. 896. What interest do you reckon ?—lt varies from 1-J- to 4 per cent., according to conditions under which land is taken up. 897. What length of time have you to occupy the land before you acquire the fee-simple ?—lt all depends on how you take it up. We understood that you wanted to know about the Agricultural Department rather than the Lands Department. Perhaps it would be better for you to examine one of their officers. They could give far better information than I can on land matters. 898. We wanted to know what is the average cost of cultivating, say, wheat land per acre in this State ? —That is a very hard thing to say, because the districts of the State are entirely different. An estimate was made a couple of years ago by the managers of the Governmental farms as to what it would cost on a fairly big area with pretty modern machinery, and they reckoned it would cost about 15s. an acre to seed, plough, sow, and harvest it. 899. Mr. Millar.] Fifteen shillings an acre?— That was the lowest they could do it, but I have known ie done for much less. 900. Hon. Major Steward.] Wheat ?—Yes. 901. Mr. Millar.] That was the conclusion of the managers of the Government agricultural farms ? —Yes. 902. What I wanted to get at was this : Have you any idea of the total amount of agricultural land in New South Wales ? —Yes. 903. I mean land not under cultivation. I want to get at the total amount of agricultural land available now?—l can give you what is under cultivation now —viz., about 3,000,000 acres. The departmental reports [produced] take all the districts and will probably give you the information you require.
529
A.—4
904. Could you make a return showing the leading facts on the point I have mentioned, and also any other statistics that you think would be of advantage to the Commission from that aspect? We want to get the total agricultural land of the State, the total amount under cultivation, and the total cost of production —I do not mean pastoral land —and if there is any other matter that I have overlooked on which you can supply figures I would be much obliged if you will send them down ? —I will read you the following report, which the Land Department has been good enough to furnish me with : — " Area of Available Grown hand, suitable for Agricultural Purposes. " 1. The total area of New South Wales is computed to be 198,638,000 acres; or, excluding all rivers, lakes, and streams, the area is estimated at 195,882,150 acres, and this might be called the available area of the colony. Of this area, at the end of 1899, 25,374,603 acres had been alienated and deeds issued, 21,453,720 acres were held under incomplete conditional purchase and homestead selection, and 13,354,733 acres leased under the conditional-lease system, which conferred the right to purchase ; 2,635,955 acres had been placed under settlement lease, and the improvement leases in force contained an area of 4,626,632 acres: so that, making due allowance for all other forms of alienation, &c, it may be assumed that about 70,000,000 acres have passed from the control of the Crown, and are therefore not available Crown lands. Deducting this area from the available area of the colony, it will be found that 125,882,150 acres nominally remain in the hands of the Crown; but it must be remembered that about 79,970,000 acres of that area lie within the western division of the colony, and is hardly to be considered as available for other than pastoral occupation. Again, the area necessary for travelling-stock routes, town commons, mining reserves, water reserves, roads, &c, would form a very important factor in reducing the area of Crown lands available for agriculture. Approximately, therefore, about 40,000,000 acres of Crown lands would remain in the eastern and central divisions of the State ; but it is not possible to say what percentage could be classed as lands suitable for agriculture in the absence of specific reports as to the character of the country. " 2. The three principal tenures under which Crown lands can be acquired in this State for the purposes of settlement are as follows : Conditional purchases, conditional leases, homestead selections and settlement leases. The deposits and survey-fees paid by the selector when applying for lands under these tenures are as follows :— " Conditional Purchases. —Deposit, 10 per cent, of the value of the land, which is generally £1 per acre, but may be fixed at either a higher or lower rate. Survey-fee, £4 for 40 acres, and. ascending by a graduated scale to £18 15s. for 2,560 acres. (Note. —No further amounts are collected until the end of three years, when the annual instalments of 5 per cent, of the value of the land commence and continue until the whole amount due is paid with 4 per cent, interest.) " Conditional Leases. —These leases can only be taken in conjunction with a conditional purchase. A provisional rent of 2d. per acre is deposited with the application pending the appraisement of the rent by the local Land Board. A survey-fee has also to be paid, varying from £3 for 40 acres to £12 11s. 3d. for 1,920 acres. If, for instance, a man applies for 320 acres as a conditional purchase and three times that area as a conditional lease (960 acres), the amount to be paid with his application would be as follows : Conditional-purchase deposit, £32 ; survey-fee, £8 ; conditional-lease deposit, £8; survey-fee, £12 lls? 3d.: total, £60 11s. 3d. " Homestead Selections. —Deposit, half-year's rent, fixed at; 1J per cent. (3d. in the pound) of the capital value of the land, and a survey-fee, varying from £3 for 40 acres to £11 Is. 3d. for 1,280 acres (one-third of this fee can be paid with the application and the remainder in two yearly instalments). If, for instance, a homestead selection of 1,280 acres is applied for, the value of the land being £1 per acre, the amount required to accompany the application would be: Halfyear's rent, £8; one-third of survey-fee, £3 13s. 9d.: total, £11 13s. 9d. "Settlement Leases. —Deposit, half-year's rent, fixed at per cent. (3d. in the pound) of the capital value of the land, and a survey-fee, varying from £4 for 40 acres to £34 7s. for 10,240 acres. Thus, an applicant for a farm of 2,560 acres, valued at 10s. per acre, would require to lodge the following sums : Half-year's rent, £8; survey-fee, £18 155.: total, £26 155." 905. Hon. Major Steward.] From your general knowledge of the Agricultural Department, could you tell us whether New South Wales is likely to be able at any time to supply herself ? — I think she will. 906. You think she can eventually ?—She does not at present in all lines, but I think she will be able to supply most things eventually. 907. Prom what you know of the quality of the land, climate, and so on, you think it probable that she will, as regards wheat for instance, do so ?—I think we will be able to supply as much wheat as we shall want. There is no reason why we should not. 908. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do oats grow well in New England ?—Yes. 909. Hon. Major Steward.] We are told that though you can grow sufficient quantities of oats you cannot produce the best quality ? —We have not done so. 910. Do you know of any reason why you should not ?—I should prefer you to ask the Principal of Hawkesbury Agricultural College, whom you will see to-morrow, for this information. All of our farm-managers are away in the country just now, otherwise they would have been pleased to come here and give you all information possible. This year we produced 17,000,000 bushels of wheat—about 7,000,000 more than we required for home consumption. The balance will be exported. 911. Is there room to extend the production ? —There is no doubt but that we can as regards wheat, certainly. 912. Now, as to the quality of the wheat: is the locally grown as good as the South Australian wheat ? —lt all depends where it is grown. There have been complaints about some of our 67—A. 4.
A.—4
530
wheats, because they were soft and weevilly. Our department has been introducing Manitoba and hard wheats. Our experience during the last two or three years shows that those sorts can be grown very successfully here. Millers are giving the same price for home-grown hard wheats as they formerly did for the imported article. .Last year we sent samples to a large exhibition in England, and they took a very high place. I think you may say that some New South Wales wheats were not of the highest class, but they are improving. They were deficient in gluten, but are steadily improving. 913. There is no reason why you should not grow first-class wheat ?—I should say, not the slightest. 914. As you have already grown more than was required for local consumption, have you land that is suitable to extend that to meet the growing population ?—Any amount. 915. There is no probability of there being at any time large imports of wheat ? —I do not see why there should be. 916. Do you grow potatoes satisfactorily in New South Wales?—We do not by any means grow enough for our own consumption. We import largely. 917. Are you capable of producing sufficient?— Around Millthorpe and a few other places are practically the only districts in New South Wales for growing good keeping potatoes. For some reason potato-growing has not gone ahead much. 918. Is it because of the limited area of suitable land ?—No ; there is plenty of land far it. 919. Then, it is quite possible for you to grow sufficient ?—Yes, I think so. There seems to be no reason why they should not be grown much more largely than they are in the colder places of the colony ; the railway freight, however, is dear. Those difficulties being removed will make a great difference. 920. About onions : could you not produce the same quality as in New Zealand ? —We have not done so so far. 921. How are your dairying industries getting on here?—We exported about four hundred thousand pounds' worth of butter last year, and there seems every chance, if the Government look after the export trade and see that only good stuff is sent, of it being a great success here. There is certainly no reason to prevent that being the case. 922. You think it possible to supply yourselves in cheese and butter ? —ln cheese New South Wales is not so good. It is more suitable for butter than cheese. 923. As bacon is practically a waste product of butter, ought you not to be able to produce a sufficient quantity of bacon ?—They do not now, but they will, I think, in years to come. The people here have been importing an improved class of pigs, and the industry seems likely to go ahead. 924. Generally, you think New South Wales is pretty well self-contained in these products ?— I think she will be eventually. Formerly much of the land now devoted to agriculture was given up to sheep. It is only within the last few years that it has been put to agricultural uses at all, and they are now doing pretty well. 925. As you are not able at present to produce sufficient of those particular articles for local consumption, where do you get the balance from ? What about oats ?—They come chiefly from New Zealand ; a few from Victoria. 926. If New Zealand joined the Federation and then came in under free-trade, would she be able to command your market, such as it might be, for oats, or would you get any supply, any deficiency in your own supply, from Victoria or Tasmania in preference ?—lt all depends where we can get them cheapest and best from. 927. The question of price would be operative ?—Almost entirely ; and, of course, quality. 928. Supposing New Zealand does not join the Federation, and does not come under freetrade, and there is a duty on all those articles coming from other countries, do you think that, under those circumstances, any oats you required would be obtained from one of the federated States? —It depends whether New Zealand oats are better than Victorian or Tasmanian; if they are, people would still buy them. 929. Mr. Leys.] Is agricultural settlement extending very much in New South Wales now ? —Very rapidly. During the last five years we increased the area of agricultural land by over a million acres. 930. Notwithstanding that your port is a free-trade one ? —That does not seem to make any difference. 931. Is that state of affairs due to the opening-up of large areas of agricultural land and offering special facilities for people to settle on the land?—lt is due to a large extent to the share system. 932. Is that system extending? —A lot. 933. In any case you think New South Wales will rapidly develop its agricultural industries ? —I feel sure that with fairly good seasons she will. 934. Federation or no federation, you believe she will shortly become not only self-support-ing but a large exporter ? —People here do not seem keen about small things; but in wheat, wool, and so on she will be a very large exporter. 935. In produce, like potatoes, that is perishable at certain seasons you would have to bring it in from colder places ?—I think so. In cool places, where there is good soil, they will keep. 936. We find in Auckland, where it is a warm climate, that although we can grow plenty of good potatoes they will not keep, and we have to get them from the south. In the same way your potatoes would not keep all the year round ; probably yours would be much the same as Auckland ones ?—Yes. 937. There is a probability of New Zealand supplying potatoes to New South Wales during certain seasons of the year?— Yes.
531
A.—4
938. Mr. Bemcchamp.] Is the interest in the frozen-meat trade increasing or decreasing ?— Owing to the bad seasons of late there has not been much comparatively to send away. Two or three big frozen-meat works have been closed up. It will go ahead again when we get a surplus of sheep. Last year the number of sheep here increased by about three millions, but we are still twenty millions behind what we were. 939. The drought has been general ?—This last year has not been so bad. I was in Wagga last week, and the people at the Government farm there told me that this past season had been the best that they had had for some years. 940. Have you any system of Government grading in cheese, bacon, and so on?— No. The Export Board took up poultry. The Government tried to start it, but so far has not proceeded with it to any great extent. The interests of New South Wales are damaged by having no supervision over the export trade. 941. Mr. Boberts.] You spoke of land being occupied by people who lease it from large holders :is the bulk of the wheat grown under that system ?—I know one man who leases about 14,000 or 15,000 acres. 942. What rent would wheat land bring in ? —lt is according to what arrangement is made when working on the halves system. 943. It is equivalent to rent ?—Of course. 944. What is your average yield here ? —Last year it was 10 bushels. In some places it runs as high as 25 or 26 bushels. 945. You have large areas of resumed land here ?—No ; but the leases of large areas of Grown lands have recently expired. 946. Why has that not gone into cultivation ? —Chiefly because of the droughts. 947. Is it for want of population, or because people will not go into the country? —When you realise the very great extent of area that has gone under cultivation here during the last ten years you will see the people do go to the country. 948. There is a large area lying unproductive at the present time, is there no_t ?—I think there is something like seventy million acres lying virtually idle now. It is nearly all out in the west, where they have not had rain for six years. 949. A good deal of it is in the mallee country, where they have had a good season this year ? —If they get good seasons it will come under cultivation, but hot in bad seasons. 950. Are the bulk of those farmers large or small holders under the Crown ?—I should think they are comparatively small. About 500 acres is a fairly big farm. 951. In reference to maize, you import a good deal from New Zealand. That could be well produced here, I suppose ?—lt is chiefly grown up on the north coast, and it will not keep very well. There is no reason that I know of why maize should not be grown satisfactorily here. 952. Is there any reason why New Zealand should continue to supply you with hops ?—They have tried hops here, but labour and other conditions have militated against the success of the industry so far. They may grow good-quality hops successfully in years to come. 953. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You have very good country for maize, have you not ?—I think the yield here is about the highest in the world, but still the growing of this product does not seem to go ahead. 954. Mr. Beauchamp.] It is weevilly, is it not ?—Somewhat. 955. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] That is due to careless growing, I presume ?—More to the climate. There is no reason against our producing the best quality in favourable districts. 956. I suppose it is used a great deal for horse-feed here ?—A great deal; but they do not like it as well as other things. 957. Hon. the Chairman.] Is malting barley much grown here ?—Very little. A couple of years ago two malting companies started here, and they supplied a number of farmers with seed, and they have been doing well with it since then. I believe it will be grown here pretty largely. 958. Is there any reason, any climatic conditions, why it should not be grown ?—No reason at all, except that it is rather an uncertain crop and our climate is rather uncertain. As far as colour is concerned, we sent a large shipment of barley grown in Eiverina to experts at Home, who said that, as far as colour and that sort of thing went, it was the best barley they had had. It is said to be equal to Californian. It has not gone ahead much since then, however. 959. With a favourable season are the climatic and soil conditions favourable to its growth ?— Yes. 960. What about the fruit industry : is it decreasing or increasing in New South Wales ?—lt is certainly not increasing much, but it is a little. I think the reason why it has not made greater progress is that the growers started growing fruit in unsuitable places. Nearly all the fruit of New South Wales is grown in the County of Cumberland, and in some parts it does not do so well as the fruit grown further out from the coast. 961. Are the climatic and soil conditions suitable for it ?—Yes. 962. It is, then, a matter whether people are inclined to go in for it; if they did it would progress ? —Yes. We have a big Government farm at Wagga, and if you were near there and could visit that farm it would give you a very fair idea of the capabilities of the colony in regard to fruit, as they have every kind growing there. 963. Do the orchards last in New South Wales or do they die out early? —In certain places they last as long as anywhere else. You will find oranges growing in the County of Cumberland on trees a hundred years old. 964. Pears and other deciduous fruits ?—ln the county here, where they are chiefly grown, they sometimes get down on to a bad subsoil and die out pretty quickly. A large area of New South Wales is very suitable for fruit —climate, soil, and everything. 965. Are grapes grown largely ? —Yes; in the Hunter and Albury and Cumberland districts. The viticultural expert has been here now for some six or seven years, and he thinks
A.—4
532
very highly of the prospects of New South Wales respecting the vine industry, which, however, is about stationary just now, and has been so for a number of years. 966. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Why ?—-The country is very young. I think things will come gradually. You want to educate the people to this sort of thing. 967. Hon. the Chairman.'] I see that during the year 1899 New South Wales exported fresh fruit to the value of £114,087 ?—We import far more than we export. We imported £350,000. We send a lot of oranges away to Melbourne and elsewhere. 968. Mr. Beid.] Perhaps the figures mentioned include bananas coming from Queensland? —Yes ; a lot would be re-exported. 969. Hon. the Chairman.] I notice currants and raisins mentioned: are they locally manufactured?—No; they must come from Mildura. Currants or raisins are hardly grown at all in New South Wales. If you go to the farm you will see about 10 acres under sultanas, but there is no organized outside attempt to work up this industry. 970. Hon. Major Steward.] Do you dry your raisins here at all ?—There has been a little done in this direction. 971. Hon. the Chairman.] What do these statistics show with regard to raisins and currants? —I have seldom seen any growing, except at the Wagga farm and one or two other Government places. 972. What do these statistics mean ?—They are re-imports. At least, I am satisfied in my own mind that they are. 973. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] With regard to barley, had you not some little difficulty here, owing to the climate, in the process of malting?—l do not think so. Had that been so I think the people I have mentioned would not have gone in for it. 974. It was thought so at one time ?—Yes. 975. Are they successful now?— They have only been started a couple of years. 976. I would like to know whether malting is successful here, if they have to face exceptional difficulties in regard to it ?—I think not. 977. Hon. Major Steward.] Eegarding maize, you stated that at present the maize grown here was too soft? —On the coast. 978. And does not keep. For that reason you have to get your maize from elsewhere. Is it not a fact that just as there is wheat and wheat so there is maize'and maize, and that it is possible that you will, by careful selection, eventually grow a hard one?— The inland maize grown here is as hard as anywhere. 979. If you have the right districts there is no reason why you should not grow the right kind ? —No. [Mr. Preedy extended an invitation to the members of the Commission to visit the Government experimental farm at the Hawkesbury, stating that Mr. Fegan, the State Minister for Agriculture, would be only too pleased to afford them the opportunity. It was decided to accept the invitation and make a visit on the following day.] Alfred William Meeks, M.L.A., examined. (No. 204.) 980. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name, sir ?—Alfred William Meeks. 981. You are a member of the Legislative Council of New South Wales? —Yes. 982. Do you hold any other official position ? — I was president of the Chamber of Commerce for two years —a couple of years ago. lam a partner in the firm of Gibbs, Bright, and Co., of Sydney and the other colonies with the exception of New Zealand. We did have a branch in that colony at one time. 983. The question of federation has occupied a good deal of your attention ?—I have taken a very active part in the Federal movement, and have worked very hard to bring federation about. 984. You know we are a Commission to consider whether New Zealand should come in or not. We have to consider the commercial advantages, if any, and generally the advantages to be derived by New Zealand coming in. Can you give us your opinion as to whether it would be provident for us to join; and, if so, why; and, if not, why not?—My views at one time rather tended towards the idea of New Zealand forming a second Federation with the Pacific islands ; but that was a surface thought rather than a serious one. Having given the matter a good deal closer attention, my feeling is now the other way—that it would be better to have one strong Federation in the south rather than two Federations. 985. What is your reason for that?—On thinking the matter over it struck me that it would be very undesirable to have two Federations so close together. Looking at it from an Imperial standpoint, we see that we have the great Federation of the Dominion of Canada—l hope we shall have the Federation of South Africa in the course of time ; we have the great Indian Empire ; and so it appears to me that it would be a pity to have two Federal bodies within a few hundred miles of one another. The time might arise when these two Federations, if there were two, would be brought into conflict, and that would be a very serious matter. 986. What would be likely to cause conflict ?—That is rather difficult to say. The Pacificislands question is rather a touchy one with Australia, and I think that the feeling in Australia would be rather to prevent any trouble accruing over the control or trade of those islands, that it would be better if New Zealand first, and later on the Pacific islands, were absorbed into one big Federation south of the equator. 987. Is that the only reason why New Zealand should join? —That is the political reason. But I would further say that I also think it desirable from a commercial point of view. I think it is desirable in the interests of New Zealand. Ido not think that any statesman of Australia would at any time oppose the Federation; but there may be some people here with smaller minds, who would, as they call it, rather keep Australia for the Australians. But the man with larger ideas—
533
A.—4.
the leaders of thought, and the leaders of the Federal movement—would certainly prefer that New Zealand should form part of a great Federation, and this from a commercial aspect. It would be a disadvantage to New Zealand if they were treated as foreigners, which they would be, of course, under the Federal tariff. There is no doubt that the tariff of Australasia—it does not matter which party is in power —will be of a much wider sphere arrd character than has been the case in some of these colonies, particularly New South Wales. Therefore New Zealand will be shut out of all the other colonies, so far as her products are concerned, unless she comes into the Federation. If she does join she will have the full benefit of the trade and share in the progress of the Commonwealth. There is no doubt but that we have done a very large trade with New Zealand. Ido not exactly know the figures, but I suppose that this colony alone has done a trade of about £1,500,000, or probably more. That is only one colony. We in New South Wales have been able to do more with New Zealand than some of the other ones, not merely on account of our free port, but also because a good deal of the produce grown in New Zealand cannot be produced in this part of Australia to advantage. 988. The advantages that you see to New Zealand are intercolonial free-trade ?—Yes. 989. Beyond that is there any other advantage ?—I do not know that there is from a trade point of view. Intercolonial free-trade must be of great benefit to New Zealand. The matters which are referred to the Federal Government are, after all, matters which can be dealt with in a broad spirit—they are national matters. Federation does not in any way interfere with local State government or the internal development of a State, its land-laws, or local legislation in regard to general matters, and it would be desirable to have a uniform system throughout New Zealand and Australia in regard to tariff, defence purposes, postal and telegraphic matters, &c. For defence purposes it is very desirable that we should have one system throughout the southern Commonwealth. 990. Supposing you had, do you not think there would have to be a practically separate command in New Zealand ?—I think it would be to some extent, and yet at the same time New Zealand is just as near us, even nearer to the centre of government than Western Australia, nearer than the Northern Territory, and practically nearer than Northern Queensland. It takes six days travelling by steamer and train to get up to Thursday Island, and all that territory up to Thursday Island comes in, and right round to Port Darwin. Western Australia is seven or eight days' journey away from Sydney. 991. Alluding to the postal arrangements, what is to happen to our penny-postage ?—I am strongly of opinion that it will not be long before we have penny-postage throughout Australasia. 992. But suppose you do not? —That is a problem that would have to be faced. The same question arose here, for one of the arguments used was that Victoria had not got penny-postage, and that it cost 2d. to send a letter from one end of Collins Street to the other, and the question asked was : What would happen to the cheaper postage-rate of New South Wales. We risked that, and we now find that Victoria, even before coining in, is preparing for penny-postage on similar lines to our own. Eegarding the telegraphic rates, we had to risk our sixpenny telegrams when we joined the Federation. But we find that there will be no difficulty in that case. I think the reduction in postal and telegraphic rates will lead to such an increase of business that there will be no actual loss. 993. What do you think about the San Francisco mail-service?— Personally I am opposed to subsidising any steam-service not owned by British people. 994. Failing the San Francisco service, what about the Vancouver?— That can go on all right. I have always supported that, and assisted the local agents of the company for that line to obtain a subsidy. I had no interest in the company, but 1 helped them from a broad spirit, because I considered it was the better route, being practically through English territory. 995. Have you any idea of what the Federal tariff is likely to be ?—I have formed some idea. My feeling is that it will be a revenue' tariff, with a protective tendency —protective in its incidence. Throughout the Federal campaign, and through the whole of our discussion, it was practically admitted on all hands that that would be the result of the combination. 996. How do you think it is likely to affect the public finances in New Zealand ?—I must confess that I am not quite well enough up in New Zealand figures to speak concerning them. You know the way the present Act is worded, and that the States have to get back a certain percentage of what is collected, and the endeavour will be to so frame the tariff that no State will be worse off by having joined the Federation. As a matter of fact, New South Wales will receive a much larger amount. 997. Our present receipts from Customs is somewhere over two millions. Under the Federal Act the Government may retain 25 per cent, of the net revenue : do you think they will want that ?—No. I have always been opposed to that particular clause. 998. It is there ? —lt is. But the fact was that all the efforts of our best financiers and experts were unable to frame or propound anything better for the first few years. Like any amalgamation that takes place, there is a certain element of risk in the matter, and no colony could afford to have to exercise too great a strain on the direct taxation, for the simple reason that most of the colonies here have direct taxation—income- and land-tax. Consequently, they have strained direct taxation as far as they could well do it, and therefore it was felt by the majority of people that the revenue from the Customs ought to equal as nearly as possible what the States had already been receiving. At one time there was a proposition suggested that each colony should get back its own. 999. We have had evidence before us that New South Wales will probably in the near future be able to supply all her agricultural wants herself? —All her oats ? 1000. Yes ; all her agricultural wants ?—Of course, there is no doubt we are now developing territory that at one time we looked upon as only fit for sheep. We are growing wheat now in
A.—4
534
parts of Eiverina where it was formerly thought impossible to do so. On the other hand, we have had six or seven years drought, and, although this year has given a very fair yield, yet it is a long way less than we expected. I do not think we can supply ourselves with oats this year. We have never made any great demand on New Zealand for wheat or flour, because it has been found, as you know possibly, that the New Zealand wheat "or the New Zealand flour has not stood the summer here. 1001. We are told that there is a surplus of 7,000,000 bushels of wheat this year in New South Wales ?—There is a good large surplus. We have never made a big demand on New Zealand for wheat for several years past. 1002. Victoria, you know, supplies all her own agricultural wants and also exports?— Yes. 1003. If this colony can, and Victoria does, where is the great advantage of free-trade for agricultural products to New Zealand ?—Of course, if we do manage to supply ourselves with everything the value of my remarks would be somewhat reduced. There are certain lines which under free-trade can be produced cheaper in New Zealand than here. We may attempt to grow things that it does not pay us to grow. 1004. The figures that you quoted as to the imports into this colony from New Zealand include everything, do they not? —The total trade. 1005. Are you aware how much of those imports was for re-exportation? —I could not tell you. 1006. You are aware that a certain portion of it was? —Yes. You have the figures before you, and I did not come prepared with that. lam speaking in a general way. 1007. You say you took a great deal of trouble in bringing about federation?— Yes. 1008. Had you, and those working with you, the idea of the States being merged in the Federal Government ?—Unification, as it were ? 1009. Yes ? —No. We had no idea of such a thing. In fact, I always spoke at the meetings against it. I admit that unification has many advantages, but I always pointed out that it was not to be expected that once any colony had had Eesponsible Government it would consent to cease to exist as a separate body having power over its own territory, and that though unification might be cheaper as a means of government it was never likely to happen. Ido not think there is any chance of its coming. There have only been one or two local statesmen who have spoken or written in very strong terms about that particular phase of the question —that is, in support of it. Sir George Dibbs issued a minute some years ago, and Dr. Maclaurin, M.L.C., also supported the proposal. Beyond those two gentlemen Ido not know anybody else going strongly for unification. 1010. Do you think there is any chance in the future, any probability even, of the Commonwealth of Australia becoming an independent republic ?—I hope not, and I do not think there is any possibility of it being so in the near future. I know that great stress was laid upon this fact by the speakers introducing federation : that it would be a federation under the Crown. I myself think that under federation that feeling will grow, and lessen that other feeling, which years ago was more marked than it is now, which made towards a republic. I think this republican idea is absolutely disappearing. Amongst extreme socialists and radicals there may be some idea of it still, but amongst all the best thinkers and leading men nothing is farther from their thoughts. 1011. Hon. Major Steward.] In connection with your argument in favour of New Zealand joining on the grounds of national defence, you point out that New Zealand is nearer to the centre of administration than is West Australia : I suppose you mean as to actual mileage?— Yes ; I am speaking of Perth or Fremantle as ports. 1012. Do you make any difference as regards the facilities of communication by land and sea ? —No ; because, as a matter of fact, West Australia and Tasmania are practically only connected by sea. 1013. In the event of there being a trans-continental railway built, that would make a difference ?—Yes ; it would then take about three or four days to get to West Australia. 1014. Still, whenever you can get communication by land, is there not a substantial advantage as against sea communication?— Undoubtedly. 1015. Therefore you cannot exactly compare the two places, because they are not on allfours ? —You will find that steam communication will be shortened, and that by-and-by we will have still faster boats running between New Zealand and here. 1016. But there is a strong objection on the part of a large number of people to travelling by sea which does not exist by land ?—Yes. 1017. What is your personal feeling in regard to the tariff, as to whether it is likely to be higher or lower than now exists when it is settled by the Federal Government ? —I think it will be a tariff lower than Victoria. They can do with a lower tariff in one sense by having the whole of Australasia to trade in. A very much less percentage will give the States all the assistance they require. 1018. Supposing that the New Zealand tariff were to be about 22-|- per cent, all round for specific duties, do you think the Commonwealth tariff will be higher or lower ?—I do not think it will. 1019. What, in your opinion, is the tendency of public thought on the Continent of Australia in the direction of setting up a republic here or otherwise ?—I think it is unfavourable to republicanism. I gather this opinion from moving amongst the people a great deal, and I think the tendency is the other way. There is a stronger feeling to-day for the Empire than ever existed. The South African War has worked up the loyal feelings of this young community. The sendingaway of the troops has undoubtedly brought out the latent feeling of loyalty. 1020. You do not think there is any probability of a feeling growing up in a few years to " cut the painter," to use an every-day expression ?—I think not. As I say, the tendency is in the other direction,
535
A.—4
1021. Do you know anything about the agricultural possibilities of this question ?—I have studied it rather from the wheat-export point of view than the general. 1022. Taking it from the wheat-export point of view, is it not a fact that you grew this season 7,000,000 more bushels than you require for lpcal consumption ?—Something like that. 1023. Is it likely that-in years to come you will have to import wheat from New Zealand? —I do not think so ; New Zealand wheat is different from the Australian wheat. 1024. But you at present import oats from us ?—Yes. 1025. Is that because of a shortage in production, or a deficiency in quality?— You produce the better quality, especially in milling oats. 1026. We have evidence to the effect that you have land in New South Wales capable of producing oats, all that you would require here, irrespective of quality ? —I am not so sure about that. I would rather leave that to expert evidence in preference to my own. 1027. Hon. the Chairman.] That is the evidence from the Agricultural Department?—lam prepared to leave the point to their evidence. It is not a question always, to my mind, simply as to whether it will pay us to grow oats against New Zealand. With your enormous crops per acre, and the smaller ones of ours, I think you would get three times per acre more than us. 1028. That will give us an advantage ?—Yes, undoubtedly. Victoria imports, I think, a great quantity of oats ; I know she did at one time. 1029. You also get oats from Victoria and Tasmania?— Yes. 1030. What are the respective qualities ?—We think them rather poor. They are mostly Algerian oats ; mostly husk. 1031. What about price? —They are very low-priced, lower than yours. 1032. Taking the difference of prices compared with the quality, which should command the market ?—Personally, I should say, for use and general purposes, that the dearer one from New Zealand, because there is more food in it. 1033. As regards potatoes, do you grow them at all ?—Yes, in two or three districts. 1034. Is the quality good ?—Yes, very fair; but not equal to Victorian or Tasmanian so far as I know. lam speaking in a general way. 1035. Generally speaking, the Tasmanian are accounted the best?—l think the Warrnambool potatoes are equal to anything, but Circular Heads (Tasmania) always had the name for potatoes. 1036. The cost of importation is about the same from Tasmania as from New Zealand ?—Very much the same. 1037. Therefore if the Tasmanian are as good as ours they are as likely to command the market as we are ?—Yes. 1038. Mr. Leys.] When you said that New Zealand flour was inferior ? —I did not say that. There is more moisture in New Zealand flour, and it does not stand the climate. Before mills were established on a large scale here my firm acted as agents for a great number of millers, and sold a quantity of New Zealand wheat. We found that the New Zealand flour did not suit the climate, and that the buyers of it here had a difficulty during the summer months. The same thing holds good in regard to sending New Zealand flour up to the stations. And in some cases New South Wales stations will not take New South Wales flour even, but prefer South Australian. 1039. I suppose you know that the North Island of New Zealand does not produce much wheat or flour?— Yes. 1040. Do you think there would be much export of wheat from here to the North Island under federation?—l think there is a possibility. It would be as easy to send it from here as from the South Island to the North. If we were one people trade would be considerably developed, and the passenger traffic would be much larger. I think Tasmania herself will reap the biggest benefit from that very fact, because a lot of people will make that island a place for summer excursions. I think if New Zealand were part and parcel of the Australian Union it would have rather a tendency to induce people here to visit New Zealand and learn more of it. 1041. Do you think they know very much of New Zealand now ? —I do not think they do. 1042. Do you think there is any strong inducement for us to go in with a Government that knows so little about us ?—You would have to take a share in the Government, you know. I do not think that we know very much about Western Australia for that matter, or the South Australian people, or the people of Queensland. 1043. We have often heard that argument urged respecting West Australian. Is it not a fact that practically there is no difference between certain portions of New South Wales and certain portions of Victoria, and certain portions of New South Wales and adjacent portions of South Australia—that the districts really merge into each other in the same way that West Australia merges into South Australia, and that their interests are really in common ? — Only that the parts adjoining West Australia and South Australia are practically not opened out. Those districts are sparsely populated. 1044. Are they not all colonies having large interests in the development of the Northern Territory ?—I do not know that they have much to do with the Northern Territory. 1045. Do you think Federal control would contribute to the prosperity of the Northern Territory? —More to South Australia than any other. 1046. Take the northern part of Queensland ?—Yes; the northern part of Queensland is not known very much to the people of the south. On die other hand, you are quite right in saying that the development of Queensland pastoral properties, and also Queensland mines, is largely due to people living in the southern States. We have similar instances here. Broken Hill was developed not by New South Wales, but by people from Victoria and South Australia. We do not reap the benefit from that—Victoria and South Australia do. 1047. Can you not see common interests over the whole of the Australian States that do not exist between the Australian Colonies and New Zealand ? —I have to admit that is the weak point. There is no doubt but that there is more community of interest in Australia than there
A.—4
536
would be between Australia and New Zealand. At the same time, there are a good number of business-people here who have businesses in New Zealand also—several, at any rate. 1048. On that point, according to these statistics, Australia really sends more merchandise in value than New Zealand sends to Australia ?—ls that locally produced or simply stuff that passes through ? 1049. It is not transhipped stuff; apparently it is actual trading?—l do not know, of course, whether these things are manufactured in the colony or transhipped. Cotton piece-goods are marked; they are goods only passing through. Nearly all of these lists handed to me are for goods only passing through. Tea, for instance, goes there, because the China steamers do not now go direct to New Zealand. Some years ago they did. 1050. I only want to put this question on those figures : do you not think, with such a valuable trade as that, that the Commonwealth will endeavour to maintain it, whether we federate or do not federate ?—No doubt they will endeavour to continue the trade with you so far as that is concerned. You mean that there will be reciprocity in some form or another ? 1051. Are you likely, under those circumstances, to deliberately boycott New Zealand if we do not federate?— The fact of those imports into New Zealand, and the fact of their putting a tariff on, would not affect a large portion of the trade which we might do with them. 1052. If it does, then we might retaliate ?—That is so. The tariff would be general, not specially directed against New Zealand. 1053. In the matter of produce, any tariff set up by the Commonwealth would practically be a tariff against New Zealand ?—lt would be a general tariff, with the idea of giving local farmers certain assistance. 1054. With regard to those items of produce mentioned here, do you import much from New Zealand?—No, not much. We have imported maize from South Africa, although we grow it here. 1055. With regard to the Pacific islands, I suppose the merchants of Australia value that trade?— Very much. Sydney has been the centre mostly for the trade. 1056. Looking on New Zealand as one of the islands, do you not think they will value and try to cultivate that trade ?—I do not think there is much chance of the Federal Government giving a preferential tariff to New Zealand, except perhaps in the same way as it might to any other British colony. The idea of allowing a preferential tariff on British goods has taken root and probably will spread. 1057. You do not think there is much chance of reciprocity?—l do not think so. We have experienced difficulty in the past to even get Victoria and New South Wales to come to an understanding about the tariff question. For some years those colonies had a treaty by which goods went across the border free. Statesmen come and go, and those that come often put down what was considered a necessity in the past. I do not think there would be any special duties with regard to New Zealand. 1058. Do you think there is any prospect of a heavy duty on agricultural products ?—Yes ; not very heavy. I think the average will be much less than Victoria. In dealing with agricultural produce one has to deal largely with seasons. The members of the Commission are probably aware that there are several cargoes of wheat leaving Victoria for Valparaiso this year. Years ago no one would have thought of our exporting wheat, but we are sending cargoes away now. Fortunately we had rain this year—there may come a time when we shall require a very large quantity of grain. Even our hay or lucerne crops might fail us, though at the present time we can grow enough for ourselves and to export. 1059. With regard to the South Sea Islands, seeing that the cry is being raised by both parties for a "white" Australia, do you suppose there is any probability of Australia federating in anything like a close way with those islands, containing as they do all that amount of black labour?— At the present time they could not come in with any great power—it is not likely New Zealand would come under that head. 1060. Do you not think it most likely that the principal groups will still remain under the Imperial Government as they have been ?—I think so. 1061. In that case, what is the serious danger of friction between New Zealand and New South Wales ?—lt is hard to foreshadow. 1062. Is it not a myth ?—lt is well to look into it if possible. 1063. Mr. Barton seems to make a point of expelling the few kanakas now in the Northern Territory?— None of the islands are in a condition advanced enough to come into the Commonwealth and to have any particular rights, except Fiji perhaps, and Fiji has only a comparatively small number of natives. The blacks seem to be a decaying power even in the islands. 1064. With regard to the Federal powers, do you think the Federal Government will take over the railways and public debts ?—For some time, no ; I think there is a strong feeling against it. 1065. But ultimately ?—Ultimately, I think there is a possibility. Personally, I was rather in favour of that idea in the first instance. I can quite see the difficulties that there are in regard to the railways, because where you have a large territory, particularly places like New South Wales, or even South Australia —the same thing does not apply to Victoria —it is, of course, necessary to develop that territory. It would be very difficult for any central power to run railways in order to develop another portion of the State at a loss to the Commonwealth. I think every State is justified in losing money in running railway-lines to the outlying portions of the State, but it would be a different thing if the Commonwealth were to attempt it. I think this particular matter is better left alone at present. 1066. Do you think in that case that certain large works, such as the trans-continental railway, will be undertaken by the Federal Government ?—lf they are undertaken at all they will have to be undertaken by the Government. 1067. Do you not think that for particular reasons, such as led to the building of the Canadian Pacific Eailway, these works will be undertaker} ?—Yes; and they will be of great value.
537
A.—4
1068. How will such works be charged'? Will they not come out of the common revenues of the Commonwealth ? —Yes, the expense would have to come upon the Commonwealth. 1069. Do you think there would be a loss ?—Yes, a serious loss. Ido not think any one of these matters will be taken up immediately, for the. Federal Government will go slow in matters of that kind. 1070. Do you think that if it had not been for friction generally between certain of the colonies concerning railway-rates, duties, &c, federation would have come about in Australia as soon as it did ?—That has helped to bring it about. 1071. Do you think it would have been a practical question in Australia at the present time only for that ?—That has had a great deal to do with the working-up of the question. There is no getting away from that fact. 1072. Mr. Luke.] You think the principal inducement for New Zealand to join the Federation is one of free-trade as regards her products ?—That would be one advantage —the chance of trade. Not only agricultural products, but, I suppose, with the climate New Zealand possesses, that there are certain lines that you can manufacture cheaper than we can do here. You would have this market. Your manufactures of woollens are of the finest nature. 1073. Do you think that in that phase of the question you would be at a disadvantage?—l should think not. 1074. We export a few woollens to you now, do we not ?—You can export more with a free port. There has been less manufacturing going on here than in the other colonies. In Victoria the clothing-manufacturers are very much more advanced than we are. They manufacture there and send here. 1075. Would we not find them great competitors in the trade here ?—Oh, I do not know. 1076. They have the means of centralisation and of specialising their goods : do you not think we stand in danger of our markets being flooded with their manufactured goods ?—I do not think so —you can manufacture just as cheaply as they can. 1077. You do not think that those large boot-factories in Melbourne, for instance, would go a long way to wipe out our boot-manufactures in New Zealand?—No; they have always got the expense of sending the goods here. 1078. Is that expense very great? —It runs into money. -I think you can manufacture as cheaply. 1079. Have you any idea of the rates of wages paid in Victoria as compared with New Zealand ? • —No, I have not. 1080. About the Factory.Act: how do you think the manufacturing interests stand as to those places where Factory Acts are in force as compared with the colonies where they are not in force ? What would be the effect of it ? —We hear some complaints on the part of the Victorian manufacturers regarding the Factory Acts, but a similar Factory Act will be passed here in the course of time. 1081. Will it not take a long time?—No; in some instances we are ahead of Victoria. We endeavoured to pass, rightly or wrongly, an Industrial Arbitration and Conciliation Act, whereas Victoria has not attempted it yet. 1082. Do you at present attempt to regulate the wages paid, or the employment of young people as compared with adults ? —We have a Factory Act, which does not cover the ground of the Victorian Act. 1083. Is it not true that your Labour party has been trying to induce legislation of that kind and have up to the present been unable to do so? —Yes. 1084. Is not that a strong argument that they are likely to be unable to do so still ?—There is a strong tendency now in favour of that legislation. 1085. Do you think you are getting beyond the stage of tendency and that it is taking a concrete form ?—Yes, there is no doubt about it. 1086. Do you not think the New Zealand manufacturers would be placed under a disadvantage ?—No. The complaint is that Victorian manufacturers will get the advantage, owing to the fact of their having had protection so long. If their Acts regulating the conditions of factories and wages have not had a prejudicial effect on them I do not think New Zealand will be interfered with. I understand your legislation is much more advanced than ours. South Australia is almost as advanced as New Zealand, and Victoria is getting on that way. 1087. I thought Victoria was considerably behind? —The tendency there is towards a similar state of things. I think the effect of federation will be a tendency rather to assimilate Acts of Parliament dealing with labour and the working-classes. 1088. That will ultimately be the case, no doubt. Do you think that will take place in a short period of time, or will it take a long time to accomplish?—l do not think it will take a long while. If it is found that other colonies benefit, and are able to carry on their manufactures satisfactorily under those particular Acts, there will be a great demand throughout the colonies to the Legislature for legislation of that character. The wage-earning portion of the community will find that other States are under a more advanced form of legislation in that regard, and the demand will be so great that no Legislature will be able to resist it. This legislation here has been only blocked in the Upper House, and the Upper House is always amenable to the powers that be in case of necessity. 1089. They are amenable to reason ?—Yes ; I mean to the powers of the people. 1090. That is an argument that the power behind the Upper House—that is, the people— could in reality force the Upper House to pass that legislation. How is it that that has not been the case here ? —The questions have not as yet been before the people at a general election. At the next general election certain matters will be brought forward and put before the people that have not been previously placed before them. They having been threshed out at an election, the 68—A. 4.
A.—4.
538
Assembly can, if the people have indorsed their proposals, give much stronger reasons for the Upper House passing that legislation. 1091. Have you any knowledge of work in the furniture trade in New South Wales ?—I have no special knowledge. Ido not think that the furniture-manufacture is anything like what it is in the other colonies. I believe that the Victorian manufactures are more advanced than ours in this particular class of trade. I think the Chinese manufactures of New South Wales are grossly exaggerated. 1092. You have no knowledge of the manufactures in that direction here ?—No; but I think the reports regarding the Chinese manufactures in the furniture trade are greatly exaggerated. 1093. Mr. Beauchamp.] According to these trade returns of imports and exports, specie excluded, the balance of trade in favour of Australia is shown to be something like £200,000 : some of those lines may be re-exports ?—Yes. 1095. As a commercial man and a politician, would you not feel disposed to favour a reciprocal treaty in the event of our colony not seeing its way to federate —a reciprocal treaty in the way of admitting certain products? —As a commercial man, I should say, yes ; my mercantile views would naturally lead me in that direction. lam sorry to say that the mercantile interests are very badly represented in the local House of Parliament. In the two Houses put together Ido not think we have six merchants. 1096. There are very few men in the Legislature who would take a view like that ?—I am speaking of our local houses. 1097. Amongst politicians generally there is a decided feeling against entering into a reciprocal treaty, although it may be to the advantage of the country to enter into one ?—Yes. 1098. So far there is no encouragement at all amongst politicians to suggest the advisability of entering into a reciprocal treaty ?—No. 1099. You favour an Imperial zollverein ?—No. Some concession, we acknowledge, might be given to the British. 1100. Is that feeling growing at all in this State?— Undoubtedly. 1101. Have you many local tobacco-factories and distilleries?—We have three or four very large tobacco-factories. 1102. With the low excise duties placed on the tobaccoes, do they compete satisfactorily against imported articles ?—Yes ; they have an extensive local output. There is a very large cigarette-factory also, and it is very probable that much larger ones will be started here very shortly. 1103. In the event of free-trade our revenue receipts from Customs would be seriously affected ? —Excise wouldjiave to be raised in such a case as that. 1104. What is the excise duty on tobaccoes here ?—I could not tell you oflhand. 1105. Sir John Quick is looked upon as an authority on tariff matters, is he not ?—I do not know about that. 1106. He suggests about 30 or 40 per cent.: would that provide for our extensive free-list ? —His idea is to have a protective tariff with a large free-list. At the same time, I think it would cover more articles and be of more general character. It will, I expect, not exceed 10 per cent, from a revenue point of view, and I should think that it would not exceed 20 per cent, from a Protectionist point of view. 1107. Again, with regard to wheat and flour, are there still considerable quantities imported here from America and Canada?—A good deal of flour was imported about two years ago when we were short of that commodity. 1108. The Manitoba flour is quoted here regularly : is there much of it sold ?—Yes. At first it was sold at a much higher price than our flour. Bakers paid £1 10s. a ton more for it than for local flour on account of its extra strength. Even now a large quantity of Manitoba flour is sold here. 1109. Can you give us any idea of the value of the land used, say, in Warrnambool for potatogrowing ? Does that come under your notice at all ?—No ; I think they are paying £1 an acre rent for it. That is, I believe, what the tenants are paying on some estates. 1110. What is the value per acre of good wheat-growing land in New South Wales ?— About £2 10s. to £3 10s. at the outside. 1111. That would be improved land ?—Yes. It would be less than that, perhaps £2 to £3. 1112. How many bushels would that yield in a fair season ?—-Prom ten to fourteen. 1113. Mr. Millar.] You anticipate penny-postage being universal throughout Australia in the near future ?—Yes. 1114. You are aware that the Australian Postal Departments left a large deficiency, and still leave it ?—Yes; but South Australia had a very handsome profit one year. 1115. These statistics before us quote South Australia as showing a decided loss?— That includes the overland line. One year she made a profit. 1116. I am quoting figures for the year 1899?— That is later than my figures. 1117. It shows that the three colonies have a deficiency of £306,454 ?—Yes. 1118. By reducing the postage to a penny that loss will be increased ?—Yes. In New South Wales we have penny-postage in the city and suburbs and within a radius of thirteen miles from the General Post Office, and a similar state of things in connection with various outside centres of population. Outside of the radius mentioned the charge is 2d. 1119. But the other colonies have all got the twopenny-postage ?—Yes ; but Victoria is going in for the penny-postage. 1120. If spread over the Commonwealth it would mean a considerable loss, would it not?—l think the cheaper you make these services the better will be the results. The sixpenny telegrams, it was believed, would yield a loss, but such has not been the case ; and the reduction of the cable charges has had a similar effect.
539
A.—4
1121. It took us seven years in New Zealand to make up a loss in revenue?—lt takes some time. It would be a loss at the outset, but that loss would be reduced in amount every year. The idea that if you reduce the charges it means a loss of money thereby is, I think, imaginary. This was shown in the case of our trams, for when penny sections were proposed the idea was looked upon as dangerous from a financial point, yet we have found the traffic so enormous at the penny rate that it has more than covered the cost. I think the same effect will be found in regard to postal and telegraphic reductions. The cable-rates have been reduced to 3s. 6d., and I feel sure will later on be further reduced to 2s. 6d., and that the company will sustain no actual loss by the reduction in charge. 1122. From a State point of view you are aware that the best revenue portions of the State are already completely served with postal and telegraphic communication. New lines and offices would go to less populated centres ? ---The telephone-rate here was another instance of the way the reduction in the charge works, for when the rate for connection with private houses was considerably reduced the number of messages and the number of subscribers increased enormously. 1123. The postal communication deals primarily with centred population. Take the country districts, where it is an expensive item to open up new country, that will add to the capital cost and appropriate a large portion of the increased revenue ?—That applies more particularly to places like Queensland or South Australia than to Victoria or New South Wales. 1124. We may expect that these departments will leave a loss for many years to come? —Yes. 1125. Do you anticipate that the Central Government will assume greater powers than granted under the Constitution Act, or do you think the powers already granted will be maintained by the States ?—I do not think the States will give up more of their powers, or that they would consent to the Central Government dealing with their lands or the general administration of the States. 1126. Education ?—That will be kept separate, no doubt. 1127. After the Central Government have legislated for all the powers they have now, where are the further powers coming from to legislate for except they amend the Constitution ?—I do not think there is any need. 1128. It will have to be amended '! —I do not think there is need for any further powers. I believe the position of the Federal Legislature will in a few years be a very easy one. 1129. It will soon develop into an administrative body instead of a legislative one ?—Practically. 1130. As a matter of fact, the Federal Parliament is going to become an administrative body of the States ? —Very largely. 1131. Will the fact of the Federal Parliament being established have any effect on future State loans ? Will the State loans be impaired ?—I do not think so; the fact of there being a Federal Government will probably strengthen the borrowing-powers of the State. I believe the State will get better terms, because people will feel that the Central Government is behind the State. Not that the Federal Government will be called upon to protect the State, but the mere fact of the State being under the Act will assist it in its borrowing. 1132. You do not anticipate there will be any trouble at all ?—I really think they must borrow at better rates. They are bound to get a definite and settled revenue from the Federal Government, and that will help their borrowing-power. 1133. Under the powers of the Federal Government the whole of it is practically absorbed, is it not ?—The people will feel, as regards State borrowing, there will not be much fear of anything going wrong now, seeing that they are part and parcel of a great Commonwealth. There will be that tendency, anyway. I would think that the States will be stronger in that respect as part of the Commonwealth than they were previously. Sir Geoegb Eichaed Dibbs, K.C.M.G., examined. (No. 205.) 1134. Hon. the Chairman.] You have been connected with the politics of New South Wales for many years? —Sixty or seventy. 1135. And Premier of the colony ?—I have been Premier of the colony three times. 1136. And a member of the Legislature for how many years ?—I could not tell you, but a good many years. I devoted over forty years to politics. 1137. Did you take any prominent part in the movement for bringing about or in reference to the federation of the Australian States?—l was a member of the first Convention appointed by Sir Henry Parkes. He tried to exclude me from it by putting one of my supporters in. I was then leader of the Opposition, and evidently was not moulded sufficiently to his views. However, the House took the bit in its mouth and put Parkes's nominee out and me in, whether he liked it or not. 1138. You have, at all events, in and out of Parliament, watched the various movements leading up to the formation of the Commonwealth ?—Yes. 1139. May I take it that you are familiar with the Commonwealth Bill ? —-In a general way. 1140. Might I ask you if the Commonwealth as at present constituted meets with your approval?— No. I am against the whole principle of the Commonwealth Bill, which tends to a Federal form of government such as we have got to-day, as unnecessary to the wants of the community. It is a mere blind copy to a large extent —the original Bill was—of what was done in America at the time of the separation, although the conditions were so entirely different. When I joined that Convention I was in favour of the unification of the whole of the Australian Colonies. Having one Parliament would get rid of what is now becoming an incubus—a certain type of legislators. Having one Parliament only you would get really first-class men, and make the States Governments local bodies for local legislation. lamin a considerable minority now, having lost touch with those who were madly enthusiastic for federation.
A.—4.
540
1141. Apart from that difficulty, as it appears to you, do you approve of the financial arrangements ?—No, I do not. 1142. What are your objections ?—I do not approve of the mode of dealing with them in the first start off. Unification would be one pooling of interest of everything, instead of having conflicting interests at issue, as we will have under the present system, for these States will be at issue with the Federal Government before many years. If it does not come about through unforeseen circumstances, it will certainly be brought about by the fact that the principal assets, and the principal indebtedness, of the whole of Australia are supposed to be for public works, and that the construction of these public works—the railways, for instance—will lead to a confusion, competition, and a hostile feeling as strong as the hostility between the colonies ever was, owing to different tariffs. I remember, at the time the matter of federation in this form was being agitated, I pointed out that, inconvenient as was the question of having separate colonies with different tariffs, there would be a greater inconvenience arise if the assets and liabilities were not pooled, the reason being that the railway competition between the States will become so great as to cause irritation between the respective interests concerned. It is great to-day, and you will have a very good idea of it if you read a letter published in the daily papers, signed by Mr Fehon, one of the .Railway Commissioners, who takes up the question, and suggests as a remedy that the railways should be pooled. Each colony is trying to take the trade from the other, and that is what has always been the case. That trouble is looming up, and promises to be a great source of danger. 1143. Do you think it probable that the Federal Government will take over the railways, and that the States will practically be compelled to consent to that, as well as to the consolidation of the debts ? —The Federal Government will yet realise that the Federal form they have adopted is not the most successful form that could be carried out. No doubt it will suit some colonies, but I do not believe it will suit New South Wales. I believe that, if we want to come closer together, we should become altogether as one nation, with one Parliament to make laws. Financially, we are going to get into a big muddle under the present arrangements. With the States Governments borrowing, the Federal Government borrowing, and the Government works being pushed on by each colony, to take from an adjoining State the trade which they think should belong to them, I can see considerable trouble ahead. 1144. What do you think will probably be the remedy for that state of things?— The remedy is to come down to the original idea of unification. This country, "as well as New Zealand perhaps, is cursed with people desirous to serve their country as legislators, and that is to be attributed to payment of members and " one man one vote." The whole country is prepared to offer themselves so long as the £300 a year is obtainable. 1145. Do you think that the unification of which you speak is probable, and within what period of time?— That is a big question. 1146. Do you look forward to the States being absorbed in the Federal Government ?—I would absorb them in regard to all large works, leaving what we call the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales a large municipal body. 1147. Do you think there is any chance of the Federal Government being altered to bring that about? —'No; because of the monetary considerations. This Federation so far has failed in one of the great objects that the more enthusiastic gave as a reason for its adoption when it was before the people here. The idea was that by federation we would bring out men of a higher intellectual class to take part in the new form of government. You have only got to look at the list of those who are standing for the Federal elections to see that many of them are absolutely unknown men. I do not know half of them, although I have been mixed up with local politics for many years. Apparently we are not going to get the best men by that means, for there are very few good men standing. With regard to the candidates for the Senate, it would be a very difficult matter to pick out six men fit to represent New South Wales. 1148. I gather that you do not approve of the present Constitution ?—May I ask this : the idea of your Eoyal Commission, which you represent, is to decide or recommend some policy for New Zealand to take with regard to her joining this Federation, or otherwise ? 1149. I was going to say that as you disapprove of the Constitution, do you think it would be to the advantage of New Zealand to join?— You want a straight-out answer to that ? 1150. Most certainly ?—You had better stay where you are. Ido not think it would be an advantage to New Zealand or to the Federal Government here. New Zealand cannot be governed from the Australian shores. You could not have the seat of government there, and I suppose you would not expect it or ask for it. You are one colony and will become one continent in time. As an onlooker I say New Zealand for herself is better out of the partnership. As a British dependency, if she ever required help—as affecting the flag of England—that help would have to be as cheerfully given by the Federal Government of Australia to New Zealand as help would be given and has been given by New Zealand to the Mother-country. If mutual help as regards defence is required we are still one people. I would recommend you to stay where you are. You have a rich country, filled with every resource and with a magnificent race of people, and what more do you want ? 1151. You said it would be for the benefit both of New Zealand and of Australia that we should stay out? —I do not think you would help us much. The colonies now forming the Federation are practically all parts of the one territory. Tasmania simply drops in for her own purposes, and it would not do to have Tasmania free of some connection. She cannot help herself, and is a portion of the chain, as it were. I look upon New Zealand as an entirely different country, with all that goes to make a great country—natural resources and an energetic people. 1152. It has been put to us that trouble is likely to arise between the Commonwealth and New Zealand regarding the Pacific islands ?—Those islands are practically nearer to New Zealand than Australia. With regard to the question of tariff, that could be easily settled by treaty as well as
541
A.—4
if you were in the fold with us, and I am certain that your being in with us would not practically work either for the people of New Zealand or of Australia. There is no difficulty in the shape of tariff or any question of common agreement. I know New Zealand was anxious to cover some of the Pacific islands, and, personally, I would let her have them. It is more her right than ours, though we really founded them. I cannot see that the alliance between New Zealand and the Australian federated body is practicable. Mind you, we have a lot of enthusiastic people here who believe that the Federal Government will make every sovereign worth two, but I put it down that every sovereign will be worth about 15s. That is the relative position. We could obtain all that we are likely to get under the present federation by the Customs treaties. We have shown that we belong to a great Empire, and that loyalty is the same throughout the colonies and New Zealand, and the spirit actuating us is that we are fighting for a just cause. That would always be so, but not for riot or disorder. 1153. The Federal Government has taken over the Defence Department ?—Yes. 1154. Who are sending these contingents that are now leaving Australia away ?—I suppose they are being sent by the Federal Government. That is supposed to be the case since the Ist January, but it would appear as if each colony is sending their own away as before. It would look as though the Federal body had not taken over the defence administration yet. 1155. Yes, since the Ist of the month?— They have taken it over as one of the bundle of things they are dealing with. 1156. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Accounts are to be kept from that date, but the administration is not yet changed. It has been alleged here by some of the witnesses that there might be a danger in having two British Federations in these seas, instead of one, as they might quarrel?—We have lunatic asylums here. 1157. Do you think it would be better to have the two?—l think it would be better to have one instead of two. 1158. I say safer to have two, instead of one?—Oh, no. There will be no difference between any portion of the Empire, taking England as the centre. There will be no difference between the minor States, or any danger of their coming into collision. 1159. In spite, perhaps, of a somewhat reckless act of some one of them, who might feel inclined to " cut the painter " in a fit of temper, or something of that sort ?—lt would be a long painter to cvt —a matter of twelve hundred miles or so between New Zealand and these shores. 1160. The allegation was made that there would be less chance of conflict if the whole of the colonies in these seas were under the one head ? —That is a point that an orator would make in speaking of the matter. Practically, Ido not see anything in it. 1161. Is it not more likely that, if there was either one of them inclined to be rebellious to the Imperial connection, there would be more chance of checking an irrevocable act if there was another Power in these seas ? —I have in my time lived in republican countries, and I cannot see why Australia should threaten to " cut the painter." And I do not see what advantage it would be to New Zealand to say, " No; it is all humbug ; we do not believe in that," to any step that might be proposed by another Australian Colony towards republicanism. I am looking at New Zealand as an important factor. All the colonies on the mainland have joined, as well as Tasmania. If you were attached to us, and there was a boundary-line by gum-trees, as we say here, I would say come in. But separated as you are you would be idiots to come in. I give you my practical experience, having been in Parliament forty years, and having had a hand with regard to the question of the federation crusade. As its result we are going to have bad government, and a large section in it drifted into chaos. You are one colony. You have one parliamentary House. I would think very seriously before I gave up that position to attempt to be governed from this distance, because under federation you would have to be governed from here. The laws will cause a lot of trouble, and matters will have to be relegated to the Imperial Government afterwards. The States and Federal Governments will come into collision, but there will be no fighting over it. 1162. Mr. Beauchamp.] You made some reference to a reciprocal treaty :do you refer to any reciprocal treaty that might be entered into by Australia and the islands, or New Zealand and the islands, or New Zealand and the Commonwealth ?—You will have to coax them over to give that to you. It is quite on the cards that the treaty will be entered into in respect to British manufactures. 1163. You are the only leading man who has, so far, led us to believe that there is any chance of a reciprocal treaty being entered into ?—-Have you spoken to Mr. Barton yet ? 1164. Yes ?—He is wildly enthusiastic. 1165. At the present time the balance of trade as between New Zealand and the Commonwealth is about a quarter of a million in favour of Australia: in view of that position, would it not lend colour to your suggestion that a reciprocal treaty might be entered into ? —I have a warm feeling that we have rushed into this thing without due thought. After forty years' experience I have arrived at that conclusion. I expressed it years ago, and expressed the opinion also that when Sir Henry Parkes introduced federation he was not sincere. It was only one of his wild-cat shots for the purpose of blocking the Protectionist party, which had gained the ascendency in the House. He started the idea without consulting any of his colleagues. He used it to sink the interest in the question of free-trade and protection by saying to the people, " You are going to have federation, so what is the good of disturbing the tariff." He held office by that process for some time longer than he otherwise would have done. The strongest proof of his insincerity in regard to the matter is that he allowed years to go by without attempting to deal practically with it. He used it merely as a wet blanket on the Protectionist interest, and he succeeded. Later on others, like Barton and Wise, took it up, and Parkes's hand was comparatively forced. Up to the time of his death, beyond having started the idea and making a few windy speeches, he did nothing. His only argument in its favour was that there would be Federal lunatic asylums,
A.—4
542
1166. Is it not a fact that the Commonwealth was practically brought about by the strong agitation of Victoria?—l think Victoria has most to gain by it. Federation has been a rolling ball in politics for years past. Beid is no more a Federalist than I am. Barton is, because he is as thoroughly convinced as a man can be about its advantages. The others have been making a political move of it for a long time. 1167. As far as the financial aspect is concerned, they have made a leap in the dark ?— Certainly, and about a lot of other things. The catalogue of things to be dealt with wholly and solely by the Federal Government should be doubled—quadrupled. We are now beginning to find out where the difficulties are. Get the Daily Telegraph of the 25th January, 1901, and you will see a very able letter of Mr. Fehon's, in which he sets out a remedy regarding the difficulty in connection with the railways. 1168. Would.you reduce the States, under unification, to about the same level as the London County Council ?—Yes; there would be many such councils. There is going to be a collision between the State legislation and the Federal legislation. There will be petty squabbling for years to come. 1169. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the Federal Parliament will be inferior to the States Parliaments in the character of its members ?—Are you speaking sarcastically or not, because the present State Parliament of New South Wales is just about as inferior as you can make it. The Federal Parliament will be about on a par —it is not going to be superior. The question is being reduced to the petty one of who is to be leader, Eeid or Barton. 1170. With regard to borrowing, it has been stated that there would be great advantages accruing from federation in approaching the London market: do you see any advantage?— There would be if there were no State Legislatures borrowing alongside of them. Ido not believe in the people of the same country borrowing, as it were, twice instead of once only. New South Wales wants to borrow money now, and we are going to borrow it to build railways at the instigation of the State Parliament, after a lot of log-rolling, to the border of another State so that we can take the trade from them. You can see what is likely to result from that. The Federal Parliament talk about borrowing on the London market to build a railway through to Perth. They might as well start to build a tunnel to New Zealand. It is to be what they call a national railway — a national railway sop is the word for it. The London money-market will not be equal to these demands. 1171. If the Federal Parliament commences to borrow for such works as you have indicated, will not that fact be prejudicial to State borrowing? Will it not bring down the price?—lt might be ; but you will admit that when a man discounts a bill he looks to see how many names are on it, and I would like to see the bill indorsed by as many as possible—Tasmania, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, West Australia, and possibly New Zealand. I would sooner lend to them as a whole than to any particular State. 1172. If the Federal Government is borrowing on the security of the common Customs revenue, will not that depreciate State borrowing?—To some extent it will, but you will be clear of that so far as the Australian States are concerned. It ought not to affect your borrowing. 1173. I mean, if we were federated? —Oh, lam taking"it that you are trying to fit on your question to a New Zealand point of view. Ido not think that any operation, Federal or State, would affect the money-market as against New Zealand. 1174. If New Zealand came in?— You would really give us better conditions. 1175. What effect would it have on our own borrowing for our own purposes? —That is where lam strongly in favour of unification as against this State business we have got. I only want one source of borrowing. 1176. Hon. Major Steward.'] As regards finance, what is your opinion as to whether, under federation, the taxation will or will not be higher in New South Wales ? Will it not be higher than under her separate Government ?—Undoubtedly. 1177. I think her revenue, so far as Customs is concerned, is raised chiefly from duties on intoxicants and tobaccoes ?—Yes, under free-trade. 1178. She has nothing like an ad valorem tax?— Not at present. 1179. Under federation there will be?— Yes. 1180. The probability is that New South Wales would have to pay more taxation : how much do you think it would be ? —About 50 per cent. 1181. At any rate, a million a year more ? —Yes. 1182. In addition to that, is there or is there not a probability of railways—trans-continental railways —being constructed for political reasons, irrespective of their payable qualities, under the Commonwealth?—l can see them sticking out a foot now. 1183. If New Zealand went in, seeing that the Customs revenues for the first ten years are pooled, New Zealand would have to contribute to the cost of those railways ? —Yes. 1184. Although under the Commonwealth Act the maximum amount of Customs revenue of each colony that can be impounded by the Federal Government is 25 per cent., after ten years that limitation is removed, so that practically there is no limitation after the expiration of that time. Is there or is there not a likelihood that circumstances may arise that very much more than 25 per cent, will be taken by the Federal Government?— That is a big question. It requires more consideration than an offhand answer. I know that the Government think they have more powers than others think they possess. The greater power will probably carry the day, and heavier taxation will follow. The whole tendency of the colonies is extravagance. The tendency is to keep yielding more and more, practically political bribes to secure the support of the various Governments to keep in office. 1185. To the extent of 25 per cent. Customs revenue the several States may have to contribute to the Federal Government, and there is a possibility of its being more in years to come, as you
543
A.—4
say ; therefore the several States will require to raise a larger amount by direct taxation V—That is what it will have to come to. They will be debarred from touching the tariff. They must live within their allowance or go to direct taxation. 1186. We have had expert evidence to the effect that after allowing for the savings of the departments taken over New Zealand's contribution direct will be less than £450,000 a year to begin with. That is independent of the disturbance of finance by the possible fixing of a Federal tariff, which would apply to us, of a less rate than ours, and would therefore necessitate our raising a larger amount by direct taxation. Under those circumstances, do you think there is any compensating advantage that we would obtain ?—I cannot see it. 1187. It has been represented that we would secure possible advantages as regards defence. Now, in the event of possible danger arising, it will arise from our connection with the Empire, will it not ?—Yes. 1188. Then, Australia will be equally in danger with ourselves?— Yes. 1189. Even if Australia would be willing to help us at any time because of common nationality, would she not require all her forces to defend her own shores? —That does not necessarily follow. 1190. You are speaking of the navy ?—I am speaking of the army now. It can be shifted now with almost the rapidity of a navy. 1191. I mean this : do you think that Australia as a continent will be able to help us at all in the event of danger ?—I think she would. 1192. You are aware that in the event of any difference between the law of the State and the laws of the Commonwealth the laws of the Commonwealth prevail?— Undoubtedly, that will be one of the sources of dissatisfaction. 1193. We have penny-postage with practically the whole world with the exception of Australia and America, and with the whole of the British Empire with the exception of Australia. Supposing we came into the Commonwealth—the Postal Department being taken over —it would follow that we would lose our penny-postage ?—Until the Federal Government adopted it, which they will have to do later. 1194. On the whole, you say there are a large number of difficulties and no recommendations to our coming in ?—— 1195. Hon. the Chairman.] What do you understand will be done in reference to the State properties and the State duties under the Commonwealth ? You are aware the Commonwealth takes over, say, defence-works, post-offices, public buildings, and other State properties which are the subject of State duties: what will be done in respect to them ?—Under the present Constitution ? 1196. Yes ; what will happen ?—-They will have to adjust the value of these properties between themselves.
EiCHMOND. Tuesday, 26th March, 1901. Geobge Valdeb examined. (No. 206.) 1. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the Principal of the Hawkesbury Agricultural College?— Yes. 2. How long has this College been established ?—About ten years. We have 3,500 acres, one hundred students, and our chief crop is maize. We also raise considerable quantities of wheat and oats for hay. 3. How long have you been in New South Wales ?—Seventeen years. 4. Have you been engaged in farming pursuits here?— Yes; for about four years before I joined the department. 5. Are you acquainted with the agricultural characteristics of this colony ?—Yes. 6. Can you tell us whether very much wheat is produced in this colony ?—There is a surplus of about 6,000,000 bushels in the colony. 7. Has the land under wheat been considerably increased of late years?—lt has been more than doubled. 8. Are oats grown in New South Wales ?—Yes ; but mostly for hay, very few for grain. 9. Is the soil suitable for grain-growing?— Yes. 10. In what parts ?—Over a very large area of the western and southern districts. 11. Do you think that New South Wales is capable of growing enough oats to meet her own requirements ? —Not for grain, but for hay. i'he land is suitable, but the climate is not. 12. Is the climate and soil suitable for the production of maize in large quantities?— Yes. 13. Enough to export?— Yes. 14. Is the soil and climate suitable to the production of barley ?—Yes ; but not in such a large area as you would have for wheat. I refer to malting barley. 15. What do you mean by sufficiently large area ?—More than sufficient for our own requirements, but not to export largely. 16. What about potatoes ? —There is a considerable quantity grown in New South Wales, but our trouble is that they do not keep well. 17. Are there large areas of land suitable for potato-growing?— Yes. 18. Speaking generally, do you think that New South Wales is able to supply its own requirements in the shape of agricultural products ?—ln some, not in oats for feed. 19. Can she grow enough for export ?—There are some few crops in regard to which she cannot meet her own requirements.
A.—4
544
20. Is the dairy industry in New South Wales progressing?— Yes, capitally. 21. Will she be able to supply herself in that industry?— With butter, certainly; but I do not think with cheese. She ought to be able to export butter. 22. Can you tell us what is the average cost per .acre of cultivating farming lands in New South Wales ?—lt is a very awkward thing to give, because it depends on the nature of the crop. For wheat we can put a crop in and take it off for 13s. to 15s. an acre, and the yield averages 12 bushels. 23. This is poor land, I understand, at Hawkesbury ?—Yes, very poor. 24. Is it highly cultivated here ?—Yes ; it yields from 20 to 25 bushels of wheat per acre. 25. Do these low averages pay in New South Wales ? It is very much below the New Zealand average ?—Yes, it pays. 26. Mr. Leys.] How do you manage to make these low averages pay?—lt is the cheapness of the land which has a lot to do with it, and it is worked in very large areas. 27. Then, I suppose that where these low averages obtain the land is not very highly cultivated ?—Oh, no. 28. Do you know anything of New Zealand farming ?—Yes. 29. If this land were cultivated in the same way that they farm in New Zealand, do you think the averages would approach to near ours ?—No ; the rainfall is not great enough. 30. This land of yours seems to be about as poor as any in New South Wales ?—Yes. 31. And yet you get 25 bushels to the acre ?—Yes; but we have a good rainfall here. 32. Is there any large area of land as well adapted as this for grain-growing within the rainfall area ?—No, and most of it is taken up with maize. 33. How is it that you import maize from New Zealand ?—Because for the last few years we have had a very poor rainfall. 34. We were told that your maize is very subject to weevil: is that so ?—Yes ; but I think we should get over that difficulty by proper treatment and storage. 35. You think it is not that the grain itself is more subject to weevil than the New Zealand grain ? —ln bad seasons, yes ; but for the last four years the average yield has not been good. 36. Looking at the whole of the agricultural products of New South Wales, is it very likely that there would be any large market for New Zealand produce here ? —Yes, in some few lines, such as oats, peas, beans, and other smaller crops, because our climate is not so suitable for them as that of New Zealand. 37. I suppose that year by year you are becoming less dependent than you were on that country for supplies?— For some things. In wheat we have become self-supporting, and also in butter. 38. Cannot you produce hams and bacon as well as New Zealand ? —No; the climate is not as suitable. 39. Not even under the refrigerating process of treatment ? —No ; and the feed is not as suitable, because you can cultivate successfully grasses and other fodder crops that we cannot. 40. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Is there no good land on this farm ?—No. 41. Why was this site chosen for the College?— Partly because it was Government land and available near Sydney ; and, again, because many authorities consider that it is a good thing to train boys on poor land under hardships to teach them to know how to make the best use of it. 42. You think that is a good thing?— Yes. I have had experience of both, and I prefer this. 43. Are you aware that malt is imported from New Zealand? —Yes. 44. This is entirely owing to free-trade, I suppose? Would it bear a duty coming in here?—l think it would. You get a very much better crop of barley in New Zealand than we do. 45. Is there any difficulty in malting in this climate ?—No. 46. I was given to understand that the heat created some difficulty?—l think that there is very little difficulty in that way. 47. Then, you do not think the question of tariff' would very seriously affect the imporation of malt here?—No ; I think it would still come in. They have a difficulty in getting the barley, and they prefer to import it malted rather than import the barley and malt here. Merchants have in many instances made contracts with the farmers to supply barley, but in dry seasons the grain produced is often not fit for malting. 48. Mr. Roberts.} Do you use manure with all your crops? —Yes, in very small quantities. We use bonedust largely, and the refuse from the meat-works. 49. What is the value per acre of the manure you put on ?—lt ranges from about ss. to Bs. 50. Do you use phosphates for your root-crops ?—Yes, bone-phosphates. 51. Is the cost of railage very cheap here ?—lt is very low —about 3s. a ton—for wheat from here. 52. Generally speaking, the railway-rates are very low all over the colony, are they not ?—■ There is not much farming land with rates as low as those I have just quoted, which are low from being very near to Sydney. Take the Eiverina, for instance, which is 300 miles from here: the rates range from about 15s. to 18s. a ton, and even more. 53. What is your average rainfall?— About 32 in. Our rain comes from the north, but in the winter and the summer we do not get much. In November or December, when the maize is in flower, we want a heavy rain to insure getting a good crop. 54. Mr. Beauchavip.] Do you irrigate on this farm?—We only have sewage-plots for utilising the waste water. 55. What conditions do you accept boys on?—A certificate of health, education, and character. We charge £25 a year, including board. The idea is that a boy pays 10s. a week for his board, and gives his services for what he is taught. 56. Can you make the farm pay on those conditions?— No.
A.—4
545
57. Has the College a good reputation : I understand you turn out good farmers ?—Yes. It is by far the largest college in Australia, and we are always fall; we have room for a hundred students. 58. Under what conditions are manures and agricultural lime carried on the railways here for farmers ?—They are not carried free, but at low rates. 59. Have you tried the German manures here? —Yes, but the cost of many of the imported manures is too great compared with local manures. 60. "What do you reckon would be the average cost of land for wheat-growing in New South Wales ?—£3 to £5 an acre. 61. What would be reckoned a payable price to the farmer for wheat ?—About 2s. per bushel would turn in a profit. 62. You spoke of the necessity of importing certain descriptions of produce from New Zealand : cannot these be imported from Tasmania and Victoria, or do you think our quality is superior ? —I think you can compete fairly well in the market both in regard to quality and price. Seed-oats I had to buy from New Zealand for this farm, and also beans and peas. 63. Hon. Major Steward.'] What is the price of farm-labour here? —The minimum wage for labourers under Government is fixed at 7s. a day. Farmers pay ss. to 6s. per day, or up till lately £1 a week with keep; now many are paying £1 ss. and keep. 64. In harvesting wheat do you strip the heads, or reap and thresh as we do ? —Up to late years we did nearly all by stripping, but the binder has come in very rapidly, and also the harvester. 65. It is a more expensive process than the stripper, is it not?— Yes, but it is a better style of farming. 67. It has been stated to us that the maize grown in New South Wales is inferior to that grown elsewhere, being softer : is that so ?—No ; I think that is the fault of the system of harvesting. There is no reason why we should not produce maize equally as good as that produced anywhere else, given proper care, and that proper seed is selected. 68. As regards potatoes, we are told that the Tasmanian potatoes are preferred in this market to the New Zealand ones on account of their better quality : is that so ? —For some years they have been of better quality than the New Zealand ones. 69. And the freight is about the same from the two colonies ? —I think, if anything, it is higher from New Zealand at the present time than it is from Tasmania. 70. Do you or do you not think that Tasmania would command the potato-market principally, or New Zealand ? —I think they would divide it. 71. You are able to grow potatoes here, but they will not keep ?—That is the trouble ; and during certain seasons we must import, and, if we import, New Zealand would stand an equal chance with Tasmania. We would also get a fair quantity from Victoria. 72. Do you think that Victoria is capable of producing more than she does now?—l do not think she is likely to have a much greater surplus than she has now. 73. Is there much importation of beans and peas?— Not very much; but it is increasing. 74. Mr. Reid.] What is the average cost of clearing the bush land ?—-For dry timber about 10s. an acre; green timber costs from £1 10s. to £2, and heavily timbered country much more than that. 75. Is there much available Crown land in this district ?—No. 76. What is about the average size of a farm for growing cereals ? —For maize they vary from 50 to 200 acres, and for a wheat farm they are much larger, varying from 200 and 300 acres up to 1,000 and over. 77. Do you experiment in other crops besides cereals ? —Yes. 78. With beet-root for sugar purposes ?—Yes. 79. Successfully ? —Yes; but the climate of this district is not suitable for sugar-beet; it is too hot. 80. Is it grown successfully in New South Wales?— Yes, at Tenterfield and in other cool districts ; but we do not produce much, because so far the cane is produced cheaper than the beet, and I think it is doubtful if the growing of beet for sugar is likely to increase for some time. Another reason is that there is no beet-sugar factory in New South Wales. 81. Mr. Luke.] What part of New South Wales is suitable for the production of onions?— They are grown on the Hunter and in other parts of the coastal districts; but they do not keep any too well. The only chance is to get the early market before the New Zealand onions come in. 82. Is the ordinary market-gardening profitably carried on in the large cities ?—Yes; it is chiefly done by Chinamen. 83. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you grow onions here successfully ?—Yes. 84. What fruits do you grow?— Peaches, grapes, plums, oranges, and other citrous fruit. 85. Is there any reason why fruit should not be grown generally throughout New South Wales?— Yes ; the want of rain. 86. Can pears be grown well in New South Wales ?—Not really well, because the climate is a little too warm. 87. What fruits do you think you can grow successfully ?—Mostly the stone-fruits, such as peaches and apricots. 88. Apples ?—Yes, in the cooler districts. 89. Do you think New South Wales can ever become an exporting centre for fruit ?—Yes; but more for the canned and dried fruits. 90. What about the small fruits for jam-making?—We have a very poor supply of raspberries and strawberries. 91. Mr. Boberts.] How do you reckon a bushel of wheat at 2s. would pay the farmer?—l gave you the figures. 69—A. 4.
A.—4
546
92. The growing would be Is. 3d., and the railage would cost another 6d. ?—No ; the figures I gave were on truck at the railway-station. 93. And that really means 2s. f.o.b. here?— Yes. 94. Because if you take a 12-bushel crop costing 15s. an acre, and add the cost of the railage and commission in Sydney, it stands the farmer in Is. 10d. a bushel in Sydney ?—Yes. 95. So that 2s. a bushel in Sydney would mean only a profit of 2s. an acre all round ?—-2s. in Sydney would not pay. 96. But that is all it is worth at the present time ?—A little more than that. 97. Do you know John Young's orchard at Molong? — Yes. 98. How many acres has he?—sooacres; principally stone-fruits. 99. Is that one of the largest orchards in New South Wales? —I believe it is the largest. The average size is only from 20 to 40 acres. 100. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] If you had more accommodation here, would you take in more students than the hundred ?—Yes. 101. Would you object to do so?—I would not like many more, for the reason that applicants are in excess of vacancies, and it gives us a better chance to keep good boys, because if a boy does not get on well I can send him away and take another one in his place. 102. You think that a hundred is as many as you can advantageously train?— Yes, because otherwise we would have to increase the area of cultivation. 103. In regard to the teaching, how is that arranged: have the students a day in and a day out ?—Yes. 104. Do they attend lectures on their "in " days ?—On the indoor days, alternately lectures and class-work. Take stock : Supposing there was a day on sheep, we start with a general lecture on sheep, and we then follow it with another two or three hours' wool-sorting, and in the afternoon ■we go out on sheep-management. You must get the theory with the practice, and that is the way we arrange the work. 105. Mr. Leys.] Is fruit-growing considered to be a paying industry to the settler? —That is rather doubtful. 106. Is it extending or declining ? —lt is extending, undoubtedly. 107. But you think there is only a limited district for producing fruits?— Those portions of country with over 20 in. of rainfall are suitable, and also the climate, which means about onefourth of the colony; but you cannot take all that one-fourth as suitable for fruit-growing, because you cannot get suitable soil for the purpose. 108. Are you not preserving fruits now?— Yes, on a small scale. 109. We have been told that the runholders are encouraging agriculturists to go on their lands and cultivate portions : is that done on a very large scale?— Yes, in connection with wheat-growing. The idea was that the squatter could get his land cultivated, say, for about three or four years, and then lay it down in pasture for sheep. Most of our soils are a bit sour when first broken up, but after a year"or so of cultivation they generally improve, and therefore they get the farmers to work it on what they call the share system for several years, and then lay it down in lucerne. 110. Is that likely to lead to an extension of the agricultural industry ?—Yes, I think it will, because the squatter finds that it pays better to let the farmers have small portions on those conditions, and the system is gradually extending. 111. Who finds the capital under that system? —The farmer does the work, and the squatter finds the land and the seed. 112. Hon. the Chairman.] Is fruit-growing carried on in a scientific way in this colony, or in a haphazard way?— Mostly in a haphazard way. There are very few scientific orchardists here. 113. If the cultivation was scientific, would the yield be considerably increased ?—Yes, undoubtedly. 114. Are you much troubled with blight ? —Yes. 115. Are there no means taken by law to keep it down ? —No. 116. Is the phylloxera prevalent ? —Not very. 117. Is there legislation against it in this colony ?—Yes. 118. Mr. Luke.] In stating that wheat cost 15s. per 12 bushels to the acre to produce, do you allow anything out of that for capital account ?—No. 119. That is really grain and labour: is that a fair average cost throughout the average wheat districts in New South Wales ? —I should say so. On some farms they have brought it below that. 120. Hon. the Chairman.] In regard to hops, is the soil against their cultivation, or is it because the people do not go in for them ?—lt is the climate. 121. As regards pears, I am told that in the Orange district they can be grown well?— Yes; it is a colder climate. 122. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Have the small orchardists any difficulty with regard to getting labour ?—Yes, there has been some trouble ; but now we are getting a lot of the work done on the contract system, and it is not so bad. 123. Mr. Leys.] Is good land necessary for fruit-growing? —Although it is not necessary to have good land for fruit-growing, it is advisable to get it if you can. If the soil is of a light sandy nature — i.e., easy to work—it will often pay to take such land up for fruit-growing, even if it is poor, as generally the natural drainage is good, and the low cost of cultivation in comparison with that of the heavier soils allows a considerable margin for the purchase of fertilisers.
547
A.—4
HOBAET. Friday, 29th Maech, 1901. His Honour Mr. Justice Clark examined. (No. 207.) 1. Hon. the Chairman,} I understand you have been good enough to say, sir, that you have no objection to give evidence before us ?—I have no objection. 2. You are a puisne Judge of the Supreme Court?— Yes. 3. And were formerly a member of the Tasmanian Legislature ?—Yes ; and a Cabinet Minister, and a member of the Federal Council of Australasia. I was a member of the Federal Conference called by Sir Henry Parkes in 1890 in Melbourne, which consisted of the members of the Federal Council, with two representatives of the colonies who were not in the Council, and I was also a member of the first Federal Convention ol 1891. 4. We are a Commission appointed by the Crown in New Zealand to inquire as to the propriety or otherwise of New Zealand becoming a State under the " Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act," and we understand that you have taken considerable interest in the question, and especially as to how the different States will be affected financially. We would be glad if you will kindly give us your views as to how the finances of the different States are affected under the Act. Do you approve of the present Constitution under which the Commonwealth of Australia is constituted? ■ —I certainly do not approve of the financial clauses, and I never have. I approve of the framework of the Constitution, and of its provisions relating to the Executive and the Legislature and the judiciary, but not of the financial provisions of it. 5. Will you kindly tell us your objections to the financial?—l speak more particularly as a citizen of Tasmania ; but I think the objections I am putting forward as to the financial proposals apply in a less degree to some of the other colonies. 1 believe that the only just and safe method of securing the several States in the Commonwealth against financial embarrassment is for the Commonwealth Government to take over absolutely the greatest possible portion pro ratd of all the debts of the States, and that until that is done there will be no satisfaction on the part of Tasmania and some of the other colonies. I have written a pamphlet on that question, and an introduction and an appendix to two others. Anything I might state about the consolidation of the debts is only repeating what is in the pamphlet [produced]. 6. But, supposing they are not going to take them over, what is the result you fear?— That Tasmania will be so crippled in her finance that she will have to impose an inordinate amount of direct taxation, which is always very disagreeable, or have to relinquish doing many"things which she has hitherto been able to do. We get from the Customs a much larger proportion of our total revenue than the other federated States of Australia, and therefore we are going to lose immensely more than any other colony is going to in the shape of Customs revenue without getting a quid pro quo. I have no objection to the Bill excepting with regard to the financial clauses. If they provide for taking over the debts, that will settle everything, and Tasmania will be perfectly safe financially, and it will do no injury to any other colony. I believe the other colonies will be safe too. 7. Do you mean for the Federal Government to take over all the debts with the Customs?— Yes ; I want some permanent solution of the financial difficulty. , 8. Do you think that the ten years will be the limit to its being necessary to retain annually one-fourth of the Customs and excise for Commonwealth purposes ?—They are not constitutionally compelled to return anything after that. 9. Have you considered the question of New Zealand joining the Federation ? —Not much, because it seemed to be a foregone conclusion at the Convention of 1891 that she would not come in. She only sent three delegates to represent her there, and I understood from them that there was very little probability of New Zealand coming in, and therefore, in my study of the federation question, I considered New Zealand was out of it. 10. Do you think that Tasmania will be under any disadvantage by reason of her separation from the continent in respect to administration ?—The distance is so short that I do not think we shall be affected by it any more than, or possibly as much as, Western Australia. Although Western Australia is part of the continent, I believe the distance by land, and the uninhabited nature of the intervening country, really places her further from the centre than Tasmania. 11. Do you recollect, at the Convention you speak of, Sir John Hall mentioned the twelve hundred miles of sea as affording twelve hundred reasons for New Zealand not federating: what do you say to that difficulty ?—lt certainly does apply with more effect to New Zealand than it does to Tasmania. It would be a disadvantage, but I would not like to say that it is absolutely an objection to federation. 12. Do you think it would interfere in any way with the administration by the Federal Government in such matters as postal matters, for instance ? —ln that respect you are no worse off than you are now, as far as communication with other colonies is concerned. 13. But would not the administration of the Post Office be prejudicially affected by reason of the distance ? —I am not prepared to say that it would be prejudicially affected ; but lam prepared to admit that, with regard to Tasmania, and more particularly with regard to New Zealand, and, I suppose, in regard to Western Australia, the inhabitants of those colonies would not have the same control over the management of the Post Office that they have at the present time. Ido not suppose the opinions, wishes, wants, and necessities of the immediate surrounding population will be as carefully attended to, or so quickly responded to, as under the present system. 14. Will Tasmania benefit, do you think, by the intercolonial free-trade as soon as the uniform duties are established ? —I think Tasmania will. 15. In what way ? —During the last twenty or thirty years we have suffered very heavily, by reason of intercolonial tariffs against us, in respect of our fruit, jam, timber, hides, leather, and woollen goods. In spite of the tariff against our woollen goods in Victoria, I have information
A.—4
548
that several Victorian houses take them, and they will take a much larger quantity under intercolonial free-trade. We used to do a very large business with Victoria in timber, but first of all they put on Is. duty per 100 ft., then 2s. ; but that did not keep it out, and then they raised it to 35., which has had the effect of practically stopping all export of timber to Victoria. 16. You mentioned that you were a member of the Federal Council: in your opinion, is the present Constitution an improvement on the functions of the Federal Council, or do you thmk the Federal Council would have answered all the purposes required by the Federation ?—I think not. It had no taxing-power, and if you once give a Federal authority taxing-power in the full sense of the word —that is, the power to tax the individual citizen —and give it the right to levy Customs duties, I do not see that there is any halfway house between that and federation. 17. Having arrived at that view, what do you think would be the position of the States in the future : do you think they will be absorbed in the Federal Government ? —No. Our State rights are quite as effectually protected as the State rights of the American States. 18. Mr. Beatichamp.] In taking over the debts of the Commonwealth, would you suggest that certain assets should be taken over by the Commonwealth?— No. I think it is a perfect fallacy to talk about taking over the assets. It has been urged that the Commonwealth ought to take over the railways with the debts, because the greater part of the debts have been incurred in building the railways ; but a large amount' of money has been spent in building roads and bridges, and no benefit could accrue to the Commonwealth by assuming control of such works. The wooden sleepers and iron rails, which are rotting and wearing out every year, are not any security to the English creditor. The security is the population who are living alongside the railway and using it, and the power to tax these people. 19. Then, with regard to such buildings as post-offices, would you suggest that the Federal Government should return to the States a fair percentage on their capital cost ? —That is provided for, I think they have to give them the capital value of the building. 20. As to the present proposal of Mr. Barton to raise eight millions and a half, will that enable the Federal Government to return to the amount of 25 per cent, to each State the sum that at present each State raises in the shape of revenue ? In other words, will it place Tasmania in as good a position as she enjoys to-day ? —I am not quite sure of it, as it is some time since I looked at the figures, and I am now speaking from memory. I believe that less than nine millions will not suffice for his requirements, and I should not be at all surprised to find that he wants more. 21. Are your industries fairly developed?— The timber trade is fairly developed; and there certainly were at one time a large number of people on both sides of the Derwent, and also on the northern coast of Tasmania, engaged in working sawmills; but I am afraid some of them have been shut down in consequence of the check to the exportation -by reason of the intercolonial tariffs, but there is a hope that they will reopen now, or that others will be started in their places. In fact, one large English company is just commencing operations—erecting mills and buying up small ones. 22. Do you apprehend that such industries as flour-mills and boot-factories and iron-foundries will, with intercolonial free-trade, be prejudicially affected by the competition of Sydney and Melbourne ?—I do not think the iron-foundries and engineers will; but it is possible that the biscuit and confectionery manufactures, and such kind of industries, may have to contend with Victorian competition, but the large amount of work done by the iron-foundries will not be affected. 23. You apprehend that other industries will be affected, such as timber ?—I am sure that the timber and fruit will be affected advantageously, and the woollen industry as well. We have now three woollen-mills in Tasmania, and I believe that in ten years, with federation, the quantity of woollen goods produced will be doubled. 24. Is it assumed here generally that there is any sacrifice of legislative independence by federating ? —There must be some. We have given up already all power to impose Customs and excise duties, and, in fact, we can only impose now direct taxation. 25. As to the distance question, you think that there is something in that argument on account of the distance of New Zealand from the Federal capital ?—I am quite prepared to admit that, with regard to Tasmania, the local wants and feelings will not be so quickly responded to. 26. Mr. Millar.] Do you think, Mr. Justice Clark, that the people of Australia gave much consideration to this matter before they voted on it ?—That question might be taken in so many aspects. If you ask me if they understood the legal aspect and what might be called the constitutional law on the subject, I tell you No; that would take you many years of study to thoroughly comprehend. I believe that most of the people who voted for federation voted for it in the desire to get intercolonial free-trade. That is what guided the mass of voters; but in the minds of many intelligent people there was a higher abstract idea which influenced them. Another thing that appealed to the ordinary elector was the question of defence, on account of the disturbed state of things in Europe and the East. 27. Do you think that many of the delegates at the Conference saw what the ultimate result of the financial proposals would be?—No one did. It was a leap in the dark. 28. Now that the Commonwealth Constitution has been established, do you anticipate that the powers of the Federal Government will from time to time be increased over and above that which is granted to them under the Act ? —They cannot expressly alter them except by an Imperial Act. 29. And you anticipate that the powers granted the State will be maintained ? —Yes; the Supreme Court is the authority to declare invalid any Federal legislation which encroaches on the State functions, and we know that in the case of Canada and United States of America the Supreme Courts have repeatedly declared both Federal and State legislation to be invalid. 30. What powers will the Federal Parliament have left to legislate on after they have legislated on the whole of the thirty-nine articles ? —The Commonwealth has a considerably larger number of subjects to legislate on than the American Congress has, and the Americau Congress has not exhausted its powers in over a century yet.
549
A.—4
31. Then, you do not anticipate that the powers already granted to the States will be interfered with?—-No. All the ordinary legislation for the protection of life and property, and the regulating of contracts, are still left absolutely under State control. The Federal Government has no power to employ a single policeman or to regulate, a contract within a State. 32. Does it not appear to you that, by taking the control of the principal source of revenue away from the States, it means simply enlarging the legislative functions of the Federal Government ? —I do not think so, any more than has been {he case in America. 33. We have not the same territory to work as they have in America, and we have not the same power to alter the Constitution ? —Perhaps the best thing would be to cut the big States up into two or three. 34. Have you seen that in New South Wales they are urging the reduction of the number of members in the State Parliaments ?—I see that in several colonies they have the same notion—that it would be saving of expense. 35. Do you not anticipate that the State Parliaments will be gradually curtailed to such an extent as to ultimately result in the abolition of the States and the establishment of a form of local government in the place of the State Parliament ?—That would have to be done by an amendment of the Constitution. 36. In the event of such a thing happening, do you anticipate that Tasmania will be as well governed by Civil servants as she is now ? —You mean if the Commonwealth were transformed into a unified Government ? 37. Yes; which is one of the probabilities you have to look forward to?—I am opposed to unification, but I have always been a strong Federationist. I think it is preferable in many ways. I anticipate that the experience of federation will show the benefits of it so plainly to the people that they will resent any proposal to alter the Constitution. That has been the case in America, where they have strenuously resisted any attempt to centralise. 38. But in the American Constitution it is almost an impossibility to amend it ?—Well, if the body of the people wanted it, it could be done ; and our procedure is almost the same as the Americans. 39. Do you think the credit of the States will be at all impaired in reference to future borrowing by reason of the Federal Government taking over the probable channels of revenue ?—I think the credit will be affected ; and, so far as it will be a check on extravagant borrowing, I think it will be a very good thing. 40. Do you think that you could borrow as favourably, seeing that you have reduced the value of your securities, as you could if you still controlled your full security ? —I suppose that capitalists will look at the amount of indebtedness of the particular State borrowing and the sources of its revenue, and judge for itself as to the stability of its position. Of course, if a State is found to be living beyond its means its credit will be bad ; if it is keeping within the mark its credit will be good, just as in the case of ordinary individuals. 41. Does the Tasmanian Government advance money to local bodies?— They have done so, but there is no permanent law providing for it, excepting advancing annual subsidies to road trusts, but that is not done regularly. In some cases they have advanced money by way of loan, and it has never been repaid. 42. Of course, you know that in Nevv Zealand we advance loans to local bodies, and that the principal and interest is paid back every half-year ?—I quite understand that you could devise such a system and make it a success. 43. Do you anticipate getting back any portion of the 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue that you hand over to the Federal Government? —We must get some back. 44. But do you think they will require the whole of that for Federal purposes, or do you think Tasmania will get some of it back? —It is impossible to say. I think it is quite likely that the expenditure will be increased in connection with the building of the Federal capital and completing the defence-works. 45. Mr. Roberts.] You anticipate that the woollen-mills will benefit under federation ?—Yes. 46. In New Zealand our woollen-manufacturers fear that they could not compete with the Victorian factories. Tasmania apparently has no such fear ?—I have always understood that the manufacture of woollen goods in Victoria has been a failure. 47. We are told that they produce a shoddy stuff which knocks out the bond fide article ?—I cannot say anything about that; but I know that, in spite of the Victorian tariff, we are sending woollen goods into Victoria now. 48. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Would not the fact of the security of a State being pledgeable to the Commonwealth be detrimental to its quotation on the market as a State security ? If the State were borrowing, would it not be looked on as though we were giving a second mortgage rather than a first one?—l believe that, having started with a relinquishment of the right to collect our Customs duties, we have placed ourselves in a position of having our security rather depreciated. I do not think we shall be able to borrow as a State as much as in the past. 49. Mr. Luke.] What is your opinion as to the possibility of developing Northern Queensland by white labour ? —I have had no personal experience of that part of Australia. I have not got the ordinary workman's objections to employing coloured labour in particular localities ; but I have a very strong objection to having a large population of an inferior race in the middle of a superior race, both on moral, social, and political grounds. 50. Do you think it is possible to develop those regions without black labour ?—White labour has been used in the cotton States of America since the abolition of slavery, but I think it cannot be employed on the sugar-plantations. 51. What do you think would be the benefit to Tasmania or New Zealand of the construction of trans-continental railways?—l believe there will certainly be a ground of objection on the part of
A.—4
550
Tasmania and New Zealand to the Federal Government building such railways, in regard to which those colonies, although contributing towards the cost, would reap no probable benefit. But I personally disapprove of the Federal Government taking over the railways. 52. Do you think there is a probability of their doing so?- —I think the longer it is delayed the less people will desire it. There seems to be a floating opinion about that it would be a good thing for the Federal Government to take the railways over with the debts ; but I advocate that the debts should be taken over without the railways. I think the clause giving the Federal Parliament the power to control the commerce conducted by railways gives the Commonwealth all the necessary political control of them. And they have found out in America that the Federal Government has ample power to control the railways for military purposes whenever necessary. 53. Mr. Leys.] If the Federal Government took over the debts, as you propose, what would be the procedure as to future borrowing? Would they borrow on behalf of the States?—No; the States will borrow on their own security, unless the States and Federal Government mutually agree to borrow through the Commonwealth, which they could. 54. After once consolidating the debts, would you again build up a number of small State debts?—l presume that there would be future borrowing, but not to the same extent. You see, the States will not require to borrow for defence purposes, which is a big matter in some colonies ; and they will not be under the necessity to borrow for new postal, telegraphic, and telephonic services. 55. In New Zealand we borrow for such purposes as the acquisition of lands and the cutting of them up, and we borrow for advances to settlers : how could we raise money for those purposes if the Federal Government had all our security ?—You would have to raise on the security of direct taxation, but there is nothing to prevent the Federal Government distributing the surplus revenue amongst the States, if it chooses to do so, without any special legislation. The American Government have frequently distributed surpluses amongst the States for such purposes as building schools and making roads, and, as the members of the Federal Parliament will all be representatives of States, if they wished that system to be followed it could be done, and the surplus revenue could be distributed in the form of bonuses to the States. 56. Does not the fiscal supremacy of the Commonwealth really give it absolute control over State enterprises ?•—lt has that appearance in Australia, for the simple reason that all the Australian States have raised from duties of Customs and excise a much larger portion of revenue than any other country in the world, and there is no doubt we shall feel the want of it. 57. But has not the fact of their not having control of the Customs revenue crippled the American States in regard to undertaking any kind of enterprise ?—Of course, they have not borrowed to build railways, as we have done. The railways in America have been nearly all built by private companies, but the State Governments have very often given them grants of land to help them. There may be a few railways owned by the States in America, but, generally speaking, they are all owned by private companies. 58. Does not their Constitutions largely prevent m&ny of the States from borrowing?— Some are limited that way. 59. What do you take to be the intention of the Braddon clause ?—The object was to secure the States —tc insist on a certain amount of revenue being raised in order to insure a certain amount being returned to the States. 60. Why is that limited to ten years?—l was not a member of the last Convention, and cannot really say why the clause was so limited. 61. What advantage do you think there would be to an isolated colony like New Zealand in the matter of defence if we federated with Australia? —I am rather inclined to think that possibly you might not get the same advantage from it as others would on account of your distance, as one squadron could not be in the two places at once. 62. You think we should have, practically, to rely on ourselves if England lost the control of the sea? —Of course, if the population of Australia increases very rapidly, and we are able to keep up anything like a large fleet of warships, then New Zealand would get assistance from a portion of it, and she would derive an advantage from being in the Federation. 63. Do you think there is any probability of Australia being able to raise a navy of her own within the next fifty years ? —lt is possible. 64. Do you think there is any danger of the large central States of Australia amending the Constitution in the direction of handing over big powers to the Federal Government, to the disadvantage of the smaller States ? —The Act requires the majority of the States to agree to any amendment. 65. Four would be sufficient even if New Zealand came in ? —I think it would be a great public convenience if Queensland were cut up into two or three parts, and the Constitution could not be amended quite so easily then. 66. Do you not think that the fiscal question may force the Federal Government to take over the railways?— The Federal Government now has power to control the railways throughout the Commonwealth through the medium of an Inter-State Commission, and I do not see that it would benefit the States to have the railways taken over by the Central Government. 67. But if the Government absorbed the whole of the Customs and excise revenue ultimately for their own purposes, would there not be a desire to throw the whole of the public works on the Government, and that an amendment of the Constitution might be made in that direction?—Of course, there is no doubt that the State ownership of railways makes the problem very different from what it is in America and Canada, where they are owned by private companies. 68. Do you think there will be much conflict between the States and the Federal Government over questions of that kind ? —I do not think so. We have not got any slavery question to create strife between us and the Federal Government, as was the case in America.
551
A.-4
69. Have you any labour legislation in Tasmania controlling hours of labour and wages ? —We have a Factories Act, which does not go nearly as far as yours. 70. Have you an Arbitration and Conciliation Act? —No. 71. Have you any idea as to how far boy- and giri-labour is employed iv the woollen and other factories here ?—There are boys and girls in jam-factories. 72. Hon. Major Stetoard.] Is there a good market for Tasmanian woollen goods in Australia ? —Yes ;in Melbourne. The senior partner of one of the largest houses in Melbourne told me that he was getting a considerable quantity of particular goods from here, and if we had intercolonial free-trade he would take a much larger quantity. 73. Our experience has been in New Zealand, where we produce a first-class article, that we cannot exploit successfully the Australian market: is Tasmania's success in that direction due to her producing something special ?—I think it is, because this gentleman I was speaking to referred to a particular line. 74. In the event of the duties being removed, you think that a market for woollen goods could be successfully developed from here ?—I think so. 75. How are the new arrangements going to affect your farmers : do they look forward to a large increase in the export of oats ?—I think they are expecting to export oats; but I cannot speak from experience, only from statements I have heard. 76. Supposing New Zealand went into the Federation, and thereby be put on equal terms with other States, would it affect your export trade in produce to Australia ?—lt is quite possible it might. 77. I am referring to the oat-market?— Yes, it might. 78. Do you know anything about the potato-market ?—Yes ; we export a large quantity now to New South Wales from the north-west coast. 79. Do you export to Victoria ?—I think the majority goes to New South Wales. 80. So that the free-trade tariff will not affect that trade with Victoria? —Excepting that the Victorian tariff has kept our potatoes out, and as it is a nearer market it may be a better one. 81. Do you think this question of a united defence has been a factor in the minds of the Tasmanian people in urging them to federate ?—Yes, and I believe it was an inducement to the people of the continent. 82. Do you not think that New Zealand's distance from Australia, a matter of four or five days as compared with your two days, would very much minimise the advantages of our joining in the scheme? —I quite admit that would reduce the advantage unless we look forward to the time when we had something like a navy of our own. Then, I think, you would share the advantage. 83. But until that time arrives our main line of defence by sea must be the Imperial navy? — Yes. 83a. And if England failed to hold the command of the sea, one of the results of which would be that all her outlying dependencies would be in equal danger, I presume that Australia would have quite enough to do to defend herself and Tasmania without being able to spare us any help ?—Yes, in the present state of affairs. 84. Hon. the Chairman.] Is it not a fact that most of the leading politicians in the several States are endeavouring to enter the Federal Parliament ?—Most of the old politicians. 85. Does that not serve to show that they think, at all events, that the Federal Parliament will survive as against the States ?—No, I do not think so ; there are two things influencing them. I suppose they think it is a wider field for political ambition, and I dare say with some candidates the £400 a year is an inducement. 86. Will you be good enough to give us your opinion as to the effect of the establishment of a Federal Court of Appeal upon the present right of appeal to the Privy Council ?—lt does not affect the right of appeal to the Privy Council in ordinary cases. The right is only limited when the powers of the Federal Government or the State inter se are concerned. Personally, I advocated the final appeal being in Australia, and always have done. I wrote upon it. I was one of the draftsman of the Bill of 1891, and we restricted the right of appeal. My own personal view was to abolish it altogether. I believe in judicial independence. 87. Do you agree that the right of appeal to the Privy Council as between subject and subject is not taken away ?—Not in ordinary cases. 88. And the right of appeal is only limited when some constitutional question arises affecting the Constitution of the Commonwealth ?—Yes. 89. Mr. Beauchamp.] Some of the statesmen we interviewed in Sydney expressed the opinion that, unless New Zealand joined the Federation, sooner or later friction would arise through either country desiring to get the supreme control of certain islands in the Pacific : do you share that opinion?—l have not considered the question, but, as it has been just put to me suddenly, I might say that I do not think there is any danger of that kind. 90. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any other matter upon which you would like to give us your opinion, but which we have not asked you about?— One matter you have not asked me about is the question of your growing trade with Canada and America. From what I can see of the future, the trade and commercial relations between yourselves and America and Canada will increase, and I do not think the rest of Australia will have such relationships with those countries as you will have; and, of course, if you join the Federation you would lose all separate control of th& legislation which would affect your interests in that trade. 91. And there is also the fact that the Federal tariff probably would be a lower tariff than the tariff we have in New Zealand? —It would affect the whole question of trade between you, Canada, and the United States, and those interests would be taken out of your hands, although you are more intimately associated with them than the other colonies and will be more so in the future.
A.—4
552
92. Mr. Leys.] That is a reason why we should not surrender the control of our fiscal policy ? —Yes. Many questions might crop up affecting your relations with Canada and the United States which would not be shared by any of the other colonies. There is the Frisco mail-service, for instance, which is of more importance to you than to the other colonies. 93. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] It is a very sore subject ?—That may be, but you are nearer to America than we are, and therefore it affects you more than Australia. Robert Mackenzie Johnston examined. (No. 208.) 94. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your official position, Mr. Johnston? —Registrar-General and Government Statistican of Tasmania. 95. Could you tell us the quantity of oats exported by this colony to Australia for the last three years?— Yes; for the last three years: 1897—137,683 bushels; value, £12,874. 1898— 314,881 bushels; value, £36,623. 1899—865,831 bushels; value, £77,766. 96. How many acres are under cultivation in oats in Tasmania? —It has varied in the course of the last ten years from 20,740 acres to 59,500 acres. 97. Is there much suitable country available for increasing that acreage in Tasmania ?—Yes; I think it could be doubled if there were any favourable market. 98. What is the average yield per acre in oats ?—Taking the average yield for ten years the lowest was 21-79, and the highest was 38-17 bushels. 99. How many acres of hops are under cultivation in Tasmania? —651. 100. Is any barley exported from Tasmania to Australia ?—Yes ; in 1899 we sent 2,047 bushels, of the value of £360. 101. What about potatoes?— That is one of the best of our agricultural exports. We exported in 1899 45,663 tons, valued at £95,000. The acreage under crop in that year was 26,951, which was considerably above the average. For potato-growing a large amount of land is available, and we could more than double the prodtiction if required, especially on the north-west coast. 102. Are there many manufactories in Tasmania ?—The mills, factories, and works that we deem worthy of tabulation are 251, employing 3,552 hands ; 833 are employed in sawmills. 103. You have a very large export of fruit from Tasmania, have you not?— Yes. 104. To what port in Australia do you principally send it ?^-Principally to New South Wales. There is a duty against fruit in Victoria of Is. 6d., and we only exported green fruit to the value of £8,394 to Victoria in 1899, while to New South Wales we exported to the amount of £90,934. Our exports to New Zealand amounted to £4,752, and to Queensland £3,942. 105. Do you think the effect of Tasmania coming under free-trade will be to increase the export of fruit, say, to Victoria and to other parts of the world where there were duties before ?— I think that will be the case as regards Victoria and South Australia. 106. I suppose you know that Tasmanian potatoes are commanding the market in Australia, and that they are alleged to be of better quality than other potatoes ?—;Yes, their quality is always supposed to be excellent, even better than the New Zealand potatoes. 107. Your export, I believe, has been principally to New South Wales? —Yes; out of the figures I gave you £79,757 went to New South Wales alone, while the cost of handling would not be more than £6,000. 108. Now that the duty is removed from Victoria, is it likely that you will get a large market for potatoes in Victoria? —Yes. 109. Supposing New Zealand came into the Federation, do you think she would be able to compete with you in the matter of potatoes ?—New Zealand is the only country that would compete with us, but I think Tasmania would be able to hold her own on account of her quality. I think, however, New Zealand would be able to command the oat trade ; but that would not concern Tasmania much, as she does not export any quantity of oats. The farmer devotes his attention to potatoes and fruit, which pay him best. 110. Mr. Leys.] Is there any large amount of Crown land suitable for agriculture still unoccupied in Tasmania ?—Yes; but the timber covers the land to such an extent at present that we cannot say definitely what quantity of the western country can be thrown open for agriculture. 111. Would there be any possibility of a sudden expansion in your agricultural produce ?—I do not expect much. It would be gradual, with the exception, of course, of those already developed. , 112. Do you import butter and cheese?— Yes; mostly from New Zealand. That is the exchange we can get for our fruit and timber. 113. Then, you are not likely to compete in the Australian markets in those two items ?—We are improving considerably in the manufacturing of cheese and butter. Some of our lands are well adapted for dairy production, and attention is being paid by our dairy farmers to improving their methods and stock, so that I expect a great expansion in dairy produce will take place. 114. Do you import New Zealand white-pine at all?— Very little; mostly kauri. 115. What number of people are employed in the woollen-mills in Tasmania?—l62. 116. What are the other principal industries ?—Mining. 117. What woollen goods do you export from Tasmania?— Blankets, of which we sent away 630 pairs, valued at £487, and tweeds to the value of £121 in 1899. 118. Mr. Beid.] What is your principal market for cereals ?—We have but a small export, and for the last few years we have only grown enough for our own requirements. We have sent oats to the Cape for the troops during the last year or two. 119. Which is the principal grain-growing part ?—ln the north-west, and also for potatoes. 120. And for timber ?—The southern districts have the best supply—in the Huon district. 121. Are all these hardwoods?— Yes; and the greatest quantity is the stringy bark, which is used for building purposes. The black-wood (Acacia melanoxylori) is used for ornamental purposes, such as parts of railway-carriages, and internal fittings in desks and furniture.
553
A.—4
122. What about the Huon pine ?—lt is largely used for household furniture. 123. And there is direct communication between the north-west and Melbourne?— Yes. The harbours there have been improved. 124. And potatoes are largely grown in the north-west?— Yes ; it is the principal potato district, but other fine localties are Huon Island, Brown's River, and other parts in the south. 125. Mr. Luke.] Can you give us any idea of the wages paid in the engineering trade ?—Yes; 7s. to 9s. a day ; and for bootmakers 6s. to 9s. a day. 126. What is the amount of tin-production in this colony ?—lt has been as much as £426,326 per year —that is the export value; but last year's only amounted to £281,947. 127. Hon. Mr. Bowen.~] Do you import malt ? —No ; we exported some to Victoria. 128. Mr. Roberts.] Can you tell us the cost of producing oats here?— No. 129. In reference to hops, is there much land under culivation in hops?— Yes, and it has increased. 130. Mr. Millar.] What is the selling-price of Crown land suitable for agricultural purposes ? —£1 per acre is the average upset price. 131. Would that be timbered ?—Timbered or open ; but very little of our land is free of timber, and a large portion is very hilly. • 132. What are the hours of labour in the different industries ?—Generally eight or nine. 133. Mr. Beauchamp.] I suppose you have not a steady market in Victoria for oats in view of the duty ?—I do not think oats affects us very much, but fruit and fruit-pulp exports we expect to improve under federation. 134. Do you ever have any labour troubles here?— Rarely. The only one was the maritime strike, which was a sequence of the strike in New South Wales. 135. Is there an abundance of labour here?— They are having pretty good times now, as our mining industry has absorbed all the surplus labour, and improved the condition of other trades. 136. Have you any frozen-meat works here ?—I think there is one in Hobart for the preservation of fish and game for the butchers, but we do not export meat. We import small quantities. 137. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there much wheat grown in Tasmania?— Yes; but principally for our own supply. 138. Mr. Luke.] Are there any iron-deposits in Tasmania?— Yes ; there are very important ones in the west and north which have not been touched; there are also coal-deposits, not of firstclass quality ; and au abundance of limestone in the neighbourhood. Hon. William Hbney Burgess examined. (No. 209.) 139. Hon. the Chairman.] I understand', Mr. Burgess, that you have resided all your life in Tasmania, you were a member of the Government, and for many years a member of the House of Assembly ?—Yes. 140. You are a merchant in business now ? —Yes. 141. Have you taken any active part in the Federal movement ? —Generally speaking, I have. I was a member of the 1891 Convention, and I have taken an active part locally in advocating federation. 142. Are you satisfied with the present Federal Constitution ?—On the whole, I am. It may possibly cause us a little local trouble for two or three years with regard to our State finances, but once that trouble is over we shall certainly reap very great benefits from federation. 143. What do you anticipate that trouble will arise from ?—ln a marked measure in Tasmania owing to the fact that such a large percentage of our revenue is derived from the Customs, and the Federal Government taking over all Customs and excise duties, and the revenue from the Postal Department, which have been credited in the past to the colony. 144. Of course, you understand that for ten years they must return to you 75 per cent, of that ? —Yes. 145. Do you anticipate that after ten years they will keep the whole of it?— That is more than I can say. My alarm is only temporarily. It will take some little time for us to settle down, but unless we get a return somewhat near the amount we have been raising hitherto from the sources I have mentioned we have to face one of two things —either direct taxation or retrenchment. 146. Under the present financial arrangements do you anticipate that there will be a deficit in Tasmania ?—I do, of from £120,000 to £170,000. 147. Can that be made up by any reasonable amount of taxation? —Not altogether. A portion will have to be met by economy and retrenchment; and you must not forget this important factor: that during the last three or four years we have been steadily paying off a very large deficit of nearly £500,000. That is practically wiped out now, and it has been wiped out by the surplus of revenue over expenditure. 148. In mentioning how you would have to meet your deficit, have you allowed for a normal expenditure on public works, or would they have to be retrenched or provided for by loan?— Our public works have been of a very limited character during the last three or four years. 149. Have you any local bodies in Tasmania?— Yes. 150. Do they get assistance from the Government? —Only partially. They are supported by local rates as a rule, and receive a subsidy from the Government in proportion to the amount they collect. 151. What advantages do you consider Tasmania would receive under federation?— The free interchange of products in the Australian markets—intercolonial free-trade. Under our Customs and excise tariff we are collecting at present £100,000 more than we require for our needs. Then, there is the general advantage we hope for by becoming a united nation; and there is the additional advantage of a common defence. 70—A. 4.
A.-- 4
554
152. JJo you think the administration of the various Government departments in Tasmania will be as satisfactory as if it were under your own local autonomy ? —I know no reason why it should not be. 153. Do you think they will be as well administered from the Federal centre as locally ?—I hope so. 154. Do you think that the different States of the Union fully considered what the financial consequences of federation would be before they entered into it ?—Speaking for our own colony, I can say that that side of the question has been steadily before the public since the first inception— as far back as 1891. 155. Are your manufactures protected ?—The only protected manufactures that I can call to mind at present that are any good at all are the woollen-mills, candles, boots and shoes, which are protected by an ad valorem duty of 20 per cent. 156. In the event of intercolonial free-trade, do you think they will be able to stand against the larger concerns of the continent?— The proprietors of two woollen-mills in the south, and one or two leading bootmakers, have told me that they would. 157. You say you were at a Conference in 1891 at which New Zealand was represented?— Yes. 158. Did you consider then that the arguments of New Zealand's delegates—that distance would operate prejudicially to New Zealand —were well founded ? —I confess that it had a certain weight with me; but I did not think at the time, and neither do I consider now, that it should operate altogether against New Zealand throwing in her lot with the Australian Colonies. 159. Besides intercolonial free-trade, what advantage would New Zealand gain? —That would be the main gain, because the Australian markets would be thrown open to her produce, and if she declined to go in to a large extent those markets will be supplied by the federated colonies, and some of New Zealand's trade would pass away from her. 160. What produce does New Zealand supply now which could be supplied locally ?—Produce of different kinds is regularly imported from New Zealand during certain months of the year into Tasmania, and dairy produce is also brought into Australia from New Zealand. 161. Is that not produce such as Australia, excepting in times of drought, can provide for itself?—We certainly cannot do so in Tasmania in respect to' certain lines, such as butter, and occasionally cheese and bacon. 162. Do you think that Tasmania could not supply herself with these ?—I do not think that Tasmania can supply herself with butter. Our climate prevents the dairy industry ever becoming a large or important one here. 163. You have a fair knowledge of the Crown lands in Tasmania ?—Yes, fairly good. 164. Is there much land which could be available for extending the agricultural interests of this colony ?—There are such tracts in different districts. For instance, there is a very large tract of country at the head of the Derwent Valley, which has been brought into prominence lately in connection with the proposal to construct a western railway, which would connect Hobart with the west coast, which would then be available for farming. 165. Mr. Beauchamp.] Under the Braddon clause, do you apprehend that Tasmania will have returned to her a sum equal to that which she is now receiving from the Customs ?—No, I do not; and we cannot possibly hope for that, for two reasons : First, because there is the proportion which the Federal Government have the right to withold up to 25 per cent.; and, secondly, on account of the certain loss we have to face in connection with intercolonial free-trade. 166. Do you think the Federal Parliament will continue, at the end of the first five years, to credit the excess duty to the State in which the goods are consumed ? —lt is very difficult to say. Five years is a long period to look forward to, and I should be very much better able to answer that question after the Federal Parliament has met. 167. The present value of our export trade to Australia is a million and a quarter, and it has been estimated that our share of the cost of the Federal Government will be about half a million : do you still think that, under those conditions, the advantages would be great enough to warrant us going in ?—lt would be a terrible price to pay unless there was something behind it. 168. As to the class of politicians that you are likely to get to come forward for the State Parliament, do you think that you are likely to get a better type of candidate than you have under Federation ?—I am not going to express any opinion on that subject. 169. Did I understand you to say that you have here no system of assisting local bodies by way of loans?— Yes, we have, the principal and interest being repayable after a certain number of years by means of a sinking fund. 170. Mr. Miliar.] As a matter of fact, do you think that your State Parliament will be as free to develop this country under federation as it would be as a separate colony ? —I hope so. 171. Do you imagine that the State credit will be quite as good in the English market when the principal sources of revenue have been taken away from it?— With regard to that, you are probably aware that the desirability of pooling the whole indebtedness of the various States was mentioned prominently at the various Conventions. 172. But that has not been done? —No; that is one thing that provision is made for in the Act when the time is deemed fit. 173. You think the credit of the State will not be impaired with regard to future borrowing by virtue of the fact that you have probably handed over all your principal sources of revenue to the Commonwealth ?—I think it will be a very good thing for us to be kept within bounds. 174. Do you anticipate that the Federal Government will be able to acquire greater powers than it holds at present? —I think it is quite possible it may. 175. Do you think there is any danger of their acquiring such power that in course of time it would be thought advisable in the interests of economy to wipe out the State Parliaments ? — I should not like to express an opinion. I have not looked at it in that way at all.
555
A.—4
176. Is it not within the range of possibility?—l would not say that. I think it would be a serious thing if we were deprived of our local State Government. 177. You imagine that the advantage to be gained from free-trade would compensate you for the loss you would otherwise sustain?—l do. Ou-r local industries, such as timber, fruit, jam, hops, barley, potatoes, will be wonderfully developed. 178. Do you not think that the industries of the other colonies will be developed also ?—I do not think they will be able to compete with us in certain industries I have mentioned. I have no fear of their competition in timber, fruit, hops, jams, and the like of that. 179. Are you replacing your timber as you cut it?—We have such enormous areas of timber that we can go on cutting for many years without any fear. This country is densely timbered. 180. Is not Victoria now a large exporter of agricultural produce ?—Yes. 181. Therefore you would not look upon that colony as a good market for the same class of produce ?— We do not export the same class. 182. You do not grow wheat ? —No, only for our local requirements ; but the area in oats is increasing rapidly, and that cereal will be taken up more widely in the future, as there is a good field for it. 183. Are you aware that during the last ten years more land has been put down in New South Wales for agricultural purposes than during the previous hundred years ?—I quite believe that, because I know a good deal of New South Wales, and Queensland also. 184. Then, in view of these facts, do you still think that you will have a very largely increased market in those colonies? —I think it quite possible. 185. Mr. Luke] Do you anticipate any disabilities in the administration of your public affairs on account of the distance ? —No. 186. Do you think your Civil servants will receive the same consideration from the Federal powers as they would from their own State Government ?—They anticipate that they will be placed at a distinct advantage after their transfer to the Federal Government. 187. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that the Federal Government will take over the railways?— That has been talked of. In the Convention the feeling was altogether one of uncertainty as to the wisdom or otherwise of taking such a step. 188. But they have made provision for it ?—Yes. 189. Then, if the debts were taken over, as you suggest, what would be the course with regard to future loans ? Would the Federal Government raise the loans, or the State Governments? —The debts would have to be taken over at per capita, and the advances would have to be on a per capita basis. If the Federal Government would make no further advance, the State would then have to look after their own individual loans if they wished to place them. 190. Mr. Millar.] How does your debt stand in proportion to the other colonies ?—I think we stand at about £48 per head. We stand higher than Victoria, and lower than the others. Queensland or Western Australia is the highest. 191. Mr. Leys.] Do you think you can float loans on such a basis as that? —I think it would mean that we should have to be more careful in our borrowing, and that we should have to borrow to a greater extent locally than we have done in the past. 192. Do you think there would be any large surplus returnable to the States from their Customs and excise after the payment of the interest on the debts and the cost of the Federal Government? —As far as we are concerned, we would be quite content, I think, to cry "quits." Take the interest on our debt: it would represent pretty well the sum that we expect to get back. 193. In that case all the security you could offer for future loans would be in your power of imposing direct taxation ?—Practically, yes. 194. Then you arrive at this position : do you think you could borrow anything like as largely, or as well, as you have been borrowing in the past ? —No ; I think I said before that I think we have borrowed too largely in the past. 195. With regard to your estimated loss of from £120,000 to £170,000, as you do not actually collect it, you only lose it from an estimated revenue point of view. You do not really pay the money ?—No ; because the intercolonial free-trade is responsible for the larger proportion of that loss. 196. Seeing that that amount of loss is not collected in Customs taxation, would there be much difficulty in distributing it through the various forms of direct taxation ?—lt is always difficult to place direct taxation on the people. 197. Did you not have at one time an income-tax here?— Yes; and we did not like it, and we got rid of it as quickly as possible. 198. But we have it still in New Zealand?— But you do not like it any the better for that, I am sure. 199. Then, if you find difficulty in raising £120,000 to £170,000 by direct taxation, would you not be very much crippled in carrying on your public works out of direct taxation ?—We should be, unquestionably, because our borrowing in the past has been so heavy. 200. Under such circumstances, such schemes as we have been carrying on in New Zealand as the purchase of lands for settlement and advances to settlers would be practically impossible, would they not?—l am not sure about that, because you get back an asset in the shape of the land you purchase ; but in parting with money for a certain class of public works you may obtain no return whatever. 201. But the first step is to raise the money in London, and the London creditor looks rather to the power of taxation than to the profitableness of these schemes ? —That is so. 202. Then, if we were thrown entirely on direct taxation, do you think we could borrow the enormous sums we have been borrowing in recent years?—l do not think we could in Tasmania, but I am not so well conversant with your colony.
A.—4
556
203. Hon. Major Steward.'] What amount did your income-tax produce when it was in vogue ? —'Roughly speaking, about £40,000 a year. 204. I think there is some misapprehension as to some questions put to you with reference to the supposed annual deficit, which you estimated at from £120,000 to £170,000 ; but you explained, on the other hand, that you already collected £100,000 more than was actually necessary, which has been used to pay off your deficit ? —Yes. 205. If that £100,000 is taken into account it follows, does it not, that your deficit will only be from £20,000 to £70,000 ? —Yes, clearly; so long as they keep the expenditure down, and the revenue keeps buoyant, that must be so and the people reap the benefit. 206. And this gap will be closed in one of two ways—either by reducing the expenditure or by raising more money by direct taxation ?—Yes. 207. Then, assuming the deficit remained -at from £20,000 to £70,000, the restoration of your income-tax would about settle that ?—lt would go a long way towards it. 208. Hon. the Chairman.'] What advantage do you think would accrue from the Commonwealth taking over the debts as provided for in the Constitution ? —We should be able to borrow at a much lower rate of interest as a federated Australia than we should as individual States. 209. You think that they might be able to borrow at a much less rate of interest, and therefore the Commonwealth would pay less for the money than the States ? —Yes. I am in favour of the debts being pooled, and taken over on a per capita basis. 210. But you would not be relieved in any way of the interest upon your debts ?—Clearly not. Hon. William Crosby, M.L.C., examined. (No. 210.) 211. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a merchant in Hobart ?—Yes, connected with shipping. 212. Have you followed the progress of the Federal movement in Tasmania? —Not particularly closely. lam one of those who voted against federation. 213. Why are you opposed to federation ?—Because I do not think it will suit Tasmania under the present Constitution. 214. What are your objections to it ?—I think we are very much better off with the control of our own affairs. All that was necessary was to have enlarged the Federal Council previously in existence, and to have established intercolonial free-trade. 215. It has been objected that the Federal Council had no taxing-powers, and that there might have been a difficulty in procuring them ?—I do not think so. It only required an effort to bring about such a change and it would have been done. Ido not think any reasonable request at that time was refused. 216. I take it, then, that you do not consider the securing of intercolonial free-trade a sufficient compensation for Tasmania parting with her local autonomy ?—-I do not think so. I may be wrong—l hope I am —but I think much trade will centre in Melbourne and Sydney, and Tasmania will be simply what Geelong is to Melbourne. 217. You think that the importance of the States individually will diminish? —I think so, and that has been already shown by the way in which Tasmania has been treated by the larger States, and the remarks which have been made as to this being a small place unworthy of consideration. 218. But you have a representative in the Federal Ministry ? —We have, but he is not a full member ; and the remarks of Mr. Want and others have clearly shown that when it comes to a matter of importance Tasmania will be ignored, as she is not sufficiently powerful to make her voice heard in the councils. 219. Do you think that will arise through the comparative smallness of the population as compared with other States, or on account of your being an insular State at some distance from the continent ?—Both. 220. Then, do you think that objection will probably apply to New Zealand also ?—I do not compare New Zealand with Tasmania. New Zealand has such a different climate, such a different soil, and such a progressive people, that there is no comparison to be made between the two colonies. Here the best portions of the lands are given up to sheep-walks, and large areas are in the hands of a few people, whose selections were made in the early days, and are still held by their descendants. There are very rich soils in some places, and comparatively poor in many other parts. 221. Do you think there is still a large amount of Crown land not yet alienated and which would be available for agriculture ?—I have not travelled much through the interior of the country, but confine my knowledge of Tasmania mainly to the coast. lam credibly informed that there are lands available in the interior which have not been properly explored, and before they can be brought into cultivation they must have roads or railways. That is a difficulty which will prevent these lands being available for many years to come. 222. Your Customs revenue having gone from you, how do you think Tasmania will get on in contracting loans for such public works as those ?—That is a difficulty that will have to be met somehow. 223. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that under federation such industries as boots and shoes and candles will be dominated by the competition of the large industries of Sydney and Melbourne ? — Yes ; as the greater the production the cheaper the goods can be manufactured. There has been a failure here in the bootmaking trade recently, and prior to that another factory had to close in consequence of Australian competition. 224. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I gather that you think the old Federal Council would have answered the purpose better than federation if it had been modified and the other States had come into it ?— That is correct. 225. Mr. Roberts.] You said you would not compare Tasmania with New Zealand, but are your reasons for opposing federation in Tasmania applicable to New Zealand also ?—lf I were a New-Zealander I should say, " Stand alone." 226. Mr. Beauchamp.] You have been in New Zealand ?—Only to Auckland,
557
A.—4
227. Do you know the conditions prevailing in that province?—My principal connection with it is as agent here for the Shaw-Savill Company. 228. And, owing to the distance we are from the Federal Government, you would strongly advise us not to federate ?—lf I were a resident in New Zealand, with the knowledge I have to-day, I would rather stand alone than federate with Australia. You are less dependent on the Australian markets than Tasmania is. Hon. Sir Bdwaed Braddon, K.C.M.G., examined. (No. 211.) 229. Hon. the Chairman.] You were formerly the Premier of this colony?— Yes ; for five years and a half. 230. And for many years a member of the Legislature? —Yes. 231. And you attended some of the Federal Conferences in Melbourne, Sydney, and Adelaide? —I was a member of the Federal Convention in 1897 and 1898, and attended a Conference of the Premiers of the different colonies in January, 1899. 232. Therefore you took an important part in the framing of the present Constitution ?—I think I might say that I did. 233. Are you satisfied with the Constitution as it at present stands ? —Quite satisfied. I do not say that in every respect it is exactly as I should have wished it to be, but legislation is largely a matter of compromise, and I am quite satisfied with the compromise which was made— it was generally beneficial. 234. Do you think federation will be an advantage to Tasmania?— Most decidedly. 235. In what way will she gain ?—By the throwing open to her of the Australian markets, and by the development of her industries and trades which will result from that industrial expansion. 236. How do you think the public finances will be affected by federation ?—Of course, that depends a great deal on the uniform tariff; but I am very hopeful that we shall obtain a tariff such as the Free-traders may honestly accept which will give us a sufficient revenue to meet our local demands. In expressing that view I know it is opposed to the views of the Government Statistican and to the Treasurer. However, that is my opinion. 237. What tariff do you consider would be necessary to bring about the result—an 81-per-cent, tariff, or more or less?—l prefer to put it rather as to the amount of the ad valorem duties we should prescribe; and I think that, taking the specific duties that already exist in regard to Customs and excise on beer, wine, spirits, tea, sugar, tobacco, cigars, and cigarettes, we should with a 12-J-per-cent. tariff on all the rest of the imported commodities (excepting, perhaps, luxuries, such as jewellery and plate, which might very well bear, in my judgment, a higher duty) get on very well. 238. Do you think the industries of Tasmania would benefit under federation ?—Yes. 239. Do you think they will be able to compete successfully with the large industries on the mainland, and which can command so much larger capital ? —I think in all probability that a great deal of capital will be drawn away from the mainland to Tasmania by reason of our greater advantages in the way of water-power and climate. That is the case with regard to the woollen-manu-facture now. Owing to the superior quality of the Tasmanian water—not the water-power, but the superior quality of the water —Tasmania has for the last few years been sending woollen goods into Victoria in the face of a 30- and 40-per-cent. tariff, and when we have inter-State free-trade that trade must expand. 240. Are you aware what the total export of woollen goods from Tasmania was for the year 1899 ? —I cannot tell you that, but I can tell you from a reliable source that there are more orders for woollen goods waiting for our manufacturers than they can supply. 241. We have it from the Government Statistician that in 1899 the value of the woollen goods exported from Tasmania to Australia amounted to about £608. What other advantages do you think will accrue to Tasmania through federation ?—ln respect to defence, she would gain an immense advantage, because the Commonwealth would have to take proper precautions for the defence of a State which is peculiarly open to attack, and which if it were held by an enemy could be made the base of operations against any point in Australia, and consequently a menace to the whole of Australia. 242. Do you think that Tasmania is likely to suffer in respect to the administration of the public service by reason of her distance from the Federal capital ? —I do not think so. 243. Under the clause known as the Braddon clause the Federal Government have the right to retain not more than 25 per cent, of the net Customs and excise revenue for ten years, or for so long as Parliament may thereafter direct. Tasmania loses that amount of her Customs revenue, and how is she going to make up the loss?—lt must be remembered, to begin with, that Tasmania is at the present time collecting more revenue than she actually requires. We have been paying off a floating debt (which is now nearly effaced) at the rate of from £80,000 to £100,000 a year, and our Customs revenue has been collected, in excess of current requirements to that extent: and then the greater part of the expenses which will fall upon our share of the Customs revenue will be for services transferred, for which we have had to pay as long as they have been under our own immediate control. 244. After the expiration of ten years is the Federal Government, in your opinion, likely to retain the whole of the Customs revenue for Federal purposes?—l do not think so ; but I hope that not very long after the end of ten years all the State debts will be transferred to the Federal Government, and that then very little will be required to be returned to the States in the shape of Customs and excise duties, because that revenue now is practically chargeable and ear-marked for the payment of our interest. Under that clause of mine, which you were good enough to call a " clause," but which in Sydney they still call a " blot," the Federal Government can take as much from the Customs and excise revenue over and above one-fourth as may be required to pay the
A.-4
558
interest on any State debts transferred. Ido not think the smaller States will assent at the end of ten years to any such radical change in regard to this particular clause as would be made if the clause were repealed or allowed to drop. 245. The clause was proposed by you, was it not, for the purpose of protecting the small States ?—-Yes, for the purpose of insuring that the smaller States should have at least three-fourths of their Customs and excise revenue returned. 246. And they called your clause that you have mentioned " the Braddon blot " ?—Yes, not understanding the terms properly. 247. But apparently those who called it so desired to get hold of all the securities which you have secured to the States by having three-fourths of their Customs revenue returned to them ; and if it had not been for that clause probably the whole of the Customs revenue of the States would have been taken by the Federal Government ? —lt might, and also a rebellion might have taken place. 248. Was that feeling shared in Victoria or not ?—No; the Victorian members voted for it solidly. 249. But not the larger State of New South Wales ?—I think that New South Wales statesmen might very well grow accustomed to the operation of this clause, the operation of which will be modified from time to time as the debts are taken over. I think the Hon. George Eeid, who was opposed to it at the outset, is now prepared to accept it. Sir William Lyne highly approved of it when I moved it, and supported it. He was the one New South Wales representative who did. 250. What advantage do you think New Zealand would gain by joining the Commonwealth ? —She would gain those trade advantages which I pointed out as likely to accrue to Tasmania, and I think that for New Zealand it would be a great thing, inasmuch as federation would secure such a complete union amongst all the British Powers in these regions as to insure what the majority of us desire to see —namely, the proper control of the islands in the Pacific. I think the Home Government when it had to deal only with one large Government would be disposed to go a great deal further than they are disposed to go now in regard to annexing—if you like to speak of it in that way—or exercising State control over those islands which are not annexed to Europe. It would insure the absence of friction between the Commonwealth and New Zealand, and there would be no conflicting claims which the Secretary of State could regard as reasons for not adopting the bold policy which some people desire to see carried out. 251. Do you think that securing the advantage of free-trade is sufficient justification for a colony like New Zealand giving up its local political independence ?—I think it is a factor to be reckoned with, although it does not entirely dominate the question. I think that and other advantages would recompense her for parting with some portion of her political independence. The trend of events all over the world is in the direction of forming large Union-Empires, and I think—of course I speak with very considerable diffidence, and with a great ignorance of New Zealand's ideas and wishes — that in the course of time New Zealand must inevitably become a part of the Australian nation, and cannot possibly remain a separate community, still under the British flag presumably. 252. Do you think there is any probability at any very distant time of the Commonwealth of Australia becoming a republic ?—God forbid ! 253. Are there not those in Australia who favour it?—l think that feeling has entirely died out. It did exist to some slight degree, no doubt; and it also existed in New Zealand, for when I was Agent-General in London I read a paper before the Colonial Institute in defence of Australia, and that was one of the points I had to take vp —the alleged disloyalty all through these colonies. 254. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Through New Zealand?— Even in New Zealand. 255. Hon. the Chairman.] How long ago was that ?—Eleven or twelve years. My paper was a reply to three or four writers who had defamed these colonies by declaring that they were disloyal, that we intended to repudiate our debts, and that our financial position was rotten all through ; and I heard sane men of business, men in the great financial world of London, argue that it would be a good thing to appoint a committee or a board of control to regulate our finances, so that their securities might be made the safer. At the present time I never hear a breath that has about it even the slightest tinge of disloyalty against the Mother-country. Here we have a Constitution which is the most liberal in the world, and whose highest boast is that it is a Constitution under the Crown. 256. Do you think there is any probability of the States being absorbed by the Federal Government in course of time ? —No. 257. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you think that the chief objection on the part of New South Wales to the Braddon clause is owing to the fact that under federation she will be oompelled to raise one million more per annum than she did prior to federation ? —I have no doubt that operated at the time, and since the clause was passed Mr. Reid has admitted that New South Wales has got to raise one million more by way of Customs than she is collecting now, and I have no doubt that is the chief objection to it. 258. Do you think the debts of the States are likely to be taken over by the Commonwealth ? —At the earliest possible moment, I should think, because there is no doubt that when they are taken over they can be converted at a lower rate of interest, with a saving of something like -J per cent., which would mean, on all our debts, when the whole conversion was complete, something like a million a year. 259. Several of the leading men we have interviewed have expressed the opinion that in the event of our federating with the Commonwealth friction is bound to arise sooner or later with respect to the control of the South Sea Islands. I judge from your remarks that you entertain almost the same view?—l should be very sorry to say anything about friction arising, but it is quite possible that friction will arise, and that it will be used as a weapon against 'not only New
559
A.—4.
Zealand but Australia by the Secretary of State. When a request was made for an island to be put under British protection by either Australia or New Zealand the Secretary of State might very well say, " No, I cannot do it; there is such a difficulty between Australia and New Zealand that it is impossible for me to move in the matter " ; but I hope such friction is improbable. 261. Mr. Millar.} Do you think the industries of Australia could be built up under a 121-per-cent, tariff?— They have had a very fair start in some cases with a 30- and 40-per-cent. tariff, and ought now to be sufficiently built up to be able to run alone on such moderate protection as they would get under a tariff and the incidental charges. Twelve and a half means a handicap of about 17-J- to the outside manufacturer. 262. Are you aware that the difference in the wages paid by the Australian Colonies and those paid in Germany and England is considerably more than 17-J- per cent. ? —I recognise that, and I would not take those two countries into account, inasmuch as Germany does not pay anything like the wage,s they pay in England. 263. But, still, the market will be thrown open to Germany, as there is no undertaking to give special consideration to British goods ?—There should be, inasmuch as when the Premiers met Mr. Chamberlain in the Jubilee year all, with the exception of Mr. Eeid, pledged themselves to support a tariff which would give a preference to Great Britain. Mr. Eeid said he could not do it, because his tariff did not impose duties on anything imported from Great Britain, but whenever it happened that a tariff was introduced imposing duties on British commodities he would support the proposal to give British goods the preference. That is to say, we all pledged ourselves to it. 264. Do you not think that the inevitable result of federation will be to centralise capital in all the large centres of population ?— Ido not think so. 265. Has not that always been the case in older countries?—l do not know of any example that would make us fear that consequence here. For example, I believe capital would be largely drawn to this centre by reason of the advantages I have pointed out. 266. So that you do not fear any competition from the Australian industries with a 12-J-per-cent. tariff?—l do not think so; but then lam a Free-trader—a Free-trader who recognises that under a Protectionists' tariff you do not get your revenue, because protection means prohibition if it is to be effective protection. 267. Then, it comes back to the single-tax? —I have not come to that yet. 268. Do you consider the credit of the States may be affected in regard to future borrowing by reason of the fact that the Federal Government have the first call on certain revenues ?—No ; I think my clause protects all the States. 269. For ten years ?—Yes. Originally it was carried to be a standing clause only to be altered by an amendment of the Constitution. 270. But they have taken away the postal revenues as well ?—Yes. 271. In the event of Australia going in for penny-postage, will not that bring about a larger deficiency than at present exists in the Postal Departments of the various colonies ?—There will be, of course, a considerable reduction in revenue at the outset, but I quite expect that the expansion in business in the Post Office will compensate for that, and past experience justifies that belief. 272. Do you not think the people, as they gradually see the powers of the State Governments being absorbed by the Federal Government, will clamour for the abolition of the State Governments?—l do not see how there will be any such growth of the power of the Commonwealth Government, because the Constitution absolutely limits that power. There are certain functions and services which are transferred to the Federal Government absolutely and exclusively, and there are other functions and duties which might either be performed by the Federal Government or by the States. Old-age pensions is one of them. The Commonwealth can go in for such a scheme and so can the State. 273. But the subjects which they have been given power to legislate on are amongst the most important things they could legislate about ?—Some of them are of the highest importance, others not so; but, as to all, the national Parliament can legislate more effectively than the State Parliament. 274. Do you not think that what I have mentioned is within the bounds of possibility? We had the experience in New Zealand on a small scale that the people clamoured for the abolition of the provinces and for a unification of the governmental power ?—Well, I do not see that anything I could say on that point would be of any particular value. We know that the people at every opportunity will cry out about something or another, and they might as well cry about that as anything else. 275. But the New South Wales Press is already advocating the same thing, and pointing out that the whole of the work should be done by one Parliament: have you noticed that ? —I do not think the people of the States will accept that if they give the matter calm consideration. They greatly value their autonomy and wish to maintain it, even against the temptations, or in spite of the necessity, to reduce expenditure. I have no doubt there will be a movement to reduce expenditure, and perhaps even the salaries of members of Parliament may be reduced, although it is rather hard work to do that on account of the difficulty of getting members to vote for a reduction in their own case. I have no doubt, however, that will come. 276. Turning to social legislation, are you aware that we in New Zealand have legislated considerably in advance of any of the other colonies in that respect ? —Yes, or anywhere else. 277. In the event of our joining the Federation, do you think it would be possible for New Zealand to retain that legislation on her statute-book and to successfully compete with other colonies who have only a restricted legislation ?—I am not acquainted sufficiently with your legislation to enable me to give an answer to that question which would be satisfactory to myself, but I cannot understand why with the limited power given to the Federal Government by the Constitution there need be any such interference with your local legislation as would be resented in New Zealand.
A.—4
560
278. No, it is not in that respect I mean ; but our manufacturers are bound down by legislation which to a certain extent is restrictive, although it is not felt to be so. I have not found these restrictions existing to any great extent in Australia. Would not our men suffer in that respect if we federated?— They have a very stringent law in Victoria to prevent " sweating." 279. But would it not be impossible for New Zealand to maintain that legislation and to compete with manufacturers in respect to whom such restrictions did not; exist ? We have the Workers' Compensation for Accidents Act on the same lines as the English Act ?—We are very close to having the same legislation as they have in the United Kingdom in that matter. We are going in that direction. 280. Well, that Act practically means with us compulsory insurance for the employe, and then we have an Arbitration Court, which fixes the wages and the hours to be worked in the factories ? —Yes. 281. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You refer to the effect of New Zealand standing out, but I presume you only meant in regard to the South Sea Islands'?— Yes, with regard to those islands, which are very frequently the source of friction and trouble. I said the general wish was for the expansion and the consolidation of the Empire. 282. Whether New Zealand joined or not she will still belong to the Empire, will she not?— Yes, but not to the nation of Australia. 283. Do you not think that the main thing is the connection of the colonies—of the whole British race—with the Empire?— Yes; I am one of the believers in Imperial federation, and I think the union of New Zealand with Australia would be a step in that direction. Mr. Bcauchamp : It would hasten the Imperial zollverein. 285. Mr. Luke.] Do you think these outlying States have the same community of interest with the continent as those on the continent have with one another ?—I hope to see them with the same community of interest. 286. Will not the strip of water always be a bar against that?—l do not think so. 287. For instance, one reads very little in the Australian papers about Tasmania now ?— Tasmania is not a large place. 288. And we read little about New Zealand in Australian papers : does not that show a want of community of interest ? —I think we all take considerable interest in New Zealand on account of its advanced legislation and its splendid progress, but I think you will find that there is frequently more interest taken in the " parish pump " than in the largest affairs of an Empire. 289. Is not a trans-continental railway and irrigation - works talked about, which would more particularly affect the continental States, but not such insular States as Tasmania and New Zealand ?—They have talked in a dreamy sort of way about a trans-continental railway, but I do not know whether the Federal Government will undertake such a work, or whether they have the power to construct irrigation-works. Of course, they can undertake the railway-construction in any State with the consent of that State. But I take a very wide view of these things, and consider that what is good for any one part is good for the whole country. 290. Do you think it is possible to preserve a "white " Australia?— That is a very big question, but it depends, to my mind, upon whether the sugar-cane can be grown or handled properly by white men. If it is, as some people say, impossible for the white man to work on the sugarcane, I say get a darker-coloured person. 291. Rather than sacrifice those interests?— Yes, and the lives of white men. I have my own views on that point, formed by my experience in India. Instead of getting these kanakas (as to the method of whose engagement there is a great deal that is undesirable) I would like to see the Indian coolies employed, who are sent out under the control of the Indian Government, which prescribes the conditions under which they are to be paid, cared for, and finally returned to India. 292. From your experience in India, do you think it is possible to carry on the cultivation of sugar in Queensland without employing coloured labour ?—I have had considerable experience in India, and none in Queensland, but if the Northern Territory is what I imagine it to be I do not think it is a fit place for a white man to work in. 293. Mr. Leys.] Do you think if the Federal Government took over the debts they would also take over the railways as part of the assets against those debts ?—I think there is a tendency that way. although it is not such an easy operation. The debts will have to be taken over, as the Federal Treasurer can get them converted in London, and, although you can take over debts of a million now and a million at another time, you cannot take over a railway a mile at one time and a mile at another. 294. But if they assume the responsibility for the debts at one operation cannot they convert them as opportunity offers ? —I do not know exactly whether the Federal Treasurer would be pleased to handle these debts until he could effectually dispose of them by reducing the interestcharges ; and, of course, if they take over the debts absolutely, it might follow at once that they take over the railways too ; but there is a great objection which was felt in the Federal Convention to allowing the Commonwealth to take over these debts at onee —until they had seen their way to getting them converted —because the profit to be made out of conversion comes after the Federal Government takes the debts over. The great point with the investor in England who holds these securities is that there will be extended security given by the whole of the Commonwealth, and not by a single State, and that security becomes his the moment these debts are transferred, although the Federal Treasurer might not be in a position to place them. But if the Federal Treasurer goes to the financial people in London and says, " I have got ten millions of these 3-J-per-cents inscribed stock: what will you convert them at?" he would only effect the conversion on such favourable terms as I have indicated. We had a division in the Convention on the subject; some were for at once taking over the whole of the debts, or, at any rate, up to £42 per head of the population, but by a majority of eight that proposal was thrown out, and it was decided to give the
561
A.—4
Federal Treasurer the power, with the approval of the States concerned, to take their debts over as opportunity offered, and therefore the security of the whole Commonwealth will never be given until the debts are actually handed over. 295. Do you think the extra security given by a.Commonwealth guarantee will be sufficient to induce the holders of high-price debentures to make any great sacrifice in interest ?—-There are other reasons, and one that presented itself to me when I was Agent-General in London was that the Commonwealth stocks would be more valuable than the State stocks individually are, because it would be possible to place them, just as it is to place Consols, at an hour's notice, while it is not possible to do that in the case of State stock. That is one great point with the bulk of investors, because, of course, a large quantity of our stock is held by people only for from day-to-day purposes, it being often necessary for them to realise on this stock at a very short notice; and another thing is that they would stand on a higher plane in regard to the investment of trust funds. 296. To what extent now in point of interest do you think facilities for conversion would be offered by the holders of existing debts ? Would it amount to \ per cent. ?—I think so ; and that is the answer of several who have had experience, both as Australians and of the London moneymarket. 297. Do you think it probable that the Federal Government would ever take over debts without taking over the railways also ?—I think they will be made to take over the debts at once in their own interests, in order to save that \ per cent, interest-charge, which would mean a very large indirect revenue to them. If they could save £1,000,000 a year that would be a tangible asset, which they might do very much with. 298. Do you think that after such consolidation the States could borrow with any advantage on their own securities ?—I think some of them would. 299. Do you think their loans would be depreciated from the fact that the Federal Government had taken away the bulk of their revenues ?—I do not know that they need be if the State were fairly prosperous and the British investor took the trouble to inquire as to its condition. 300. Do you think their securities would be any better than ordinary municipal loans ?—I should hope so. I should look at the local government of one of these States as something more than the glorified municipalities that the States of Canada are. It would be a country run by a Governor, two Houses of Parliament, and it might have a Government with very considerable wealth at its back. 301. Do you think there would be any difficulty in getting good representatives from a distant colony like New Zealand to go to the Federal Parliament, or that, if there were any difficulty, it would tend to produce professional politicians ?—I think your Parliament is rich enough in men with a ripe knowledge of public affairs to provide a sufficiently good class for the Federal Parliament. I do not know New Zealand, and, unhappily for myself, New Zealand is surrounded by water, which always makes a point of being very rough. 302. You think, then, there is a substantial difference between a sea division and a land division ? —There is a substantial difference always in the stretch of ocean which separates New Zealand from Tasmania ; but my answer to your previous question is that I should think that the difficulty would not be experienced in New Zealand, where you have men of means and leisure. Of course, it very much depends on that, as many men are not in a position to leave their homes and spend three months of the year in Melbourne. 303. Do you think the Civil Service would be equally as efficient if directed from the Federal capital ?—I do not see why it should not be if they get good men who are capable administrators. I am guided by my Indian experience in that respect, where one sees the most perfect form of administration directed from Simla, right up in one corner of that tremendous territory.
Satubday, 30th Maech, 1901. Eobeet Mackenzie Johnston recalled. (No. 211 a.) 304. Hon. the Chairman,] I omitted, Mr. Johnston, yesterday, to ask you to give us your views on the financial aspect of the question of federation, and the Commission will be glad if you can tell us how the finances of the States will be affected by federation, and also how the finances of New Zealand would be affected if she joined the Federation ?—After passing over your revenue, and making allowance for the expenditure you save on the departments transferred, New Zealand would require, I think, to make good a shortage of £2 3s. Bd. per head. One estimate I made of the shortage came to £1,438,000, but a large portion of that will be returned by the method which insures that a certain amount must be returned by the Commonwealth in the proportion of three to one. It is familiarly known as the "Braddon blot," and provides that out of four parts three would be returned to the States. 305. Assuming that we get back the 75 per cent, of the Customs, what do you think would be the shortage in the case of New Zealand then ?—I have not made it up with respect to New Zealand, but I shall be very glad to forward it to you. ! See Appendix.] As New Zealand stood out of the Federation, my calculations were confined to the six colonies only. 306. Have you any objection to making us a table showing the amount of revenues transferred in all the States for the years 1899-1900, and for New Zealand separately ?—I will give you the latest figures available. [See Appendix.] 307. And also the expenditure transferred in the case of defence, postal telegraphs, Customs? —I will do so. 308. Do you think the States did not sufficiently consider the fiscal question before going into the Federation ?—They have admitted so. I considered that they ought to have looked more 71—A. 4.
A.—4.
562
carefully into the fiscal questions in order to see that while certain functions were left to the States they were also left the power to carry out those functions successfully. In addition to that there is this fact: supposing we desired to project a great system of roads, or railways, I question whether, in the crippled condition we should be in, apy person would be justified in lending us any money without the consent of the Federal Government; and that is where I see the difficulty that threatens in the near future—that is, the advantage of belonging to a Commonwealth, and all those disadvantages which have made the question so disturbing a factor in Ireland in regard to the real or imaginary evils arising from a lack of home rule. 309. Are you of opinion that the smaller States will not be benefited by federation?—l am of opinion that until this fiscal matter is better understood there will be a great deal of difficulty. 310. Hon. Major Steward.'] Practically, your opinion is that federation was necessary to the carrying-on of the functions of colonisation as regards the individual States ?—All the smaller States that have not the same elastic power in regard to their finances as New South Wales has with its vast revenue from land-sales, and, better still, its land rentals. Another condition is that no two countries at the same point of time can be in the same position as regards how far it is necessary to impose taxation per head. The United States at the present moment can better protect herself, as regards a protection policy, with 9s. per head than New South Wales can carry on her government by a free-trade policy with a certain amount of Customs and excise up to £2 per head, and better than we could have done it by imposing taxation to the amount of £2 2s. 6d. her head. But the United States gradually lessens her tax per head, because her population grows at a greater ratio than the necessary cost of government. 311. In the event of a State proposing to undertake a large local work, such as the construction of a railway necessitating borrowing, what is your opinion as to the effect on its credit in London would be the fact that it was only a State of a Commonwealth, instead of being an independent colony; would it be able to borrow as favourably on its own resources as it could before the Commonwealth took over part of its revenues ?—Not if the investor knew our condition, and he would be likely to know it. 312. Then, not only would the States lose largely the power of initiative with regard to local works, but also, if they proposed to borrow, they could not borrow on such favourable terms ?—I do not say all the States, but those that are in a disadvantageous position, as in the case of some of the smaller States. 313. Mr. Leys.] Do you assume that under the lower Federal tariff the whole of the Customs revenue will be pretty well absorbed for Federal purposes, and that the demands for the payment of interest on the existing debts and for future loans will have to be entirely met from direct taxation ?—The existing Constitution provides that the Commonwealth may take over the debts, and if it does take them over each State must pay its own interest as at present, so that the smaller States are not materially benefited, excepting that they change the State creditor for the Commonwealth creditor, who is more closely affected by the adversity or decadence of any of the States. 314. You have not worked out New Zealand's position sufficiently to say what proportion of Customs revenue we should lose ?—At present you have a very large surplus, and you would require to lower your taxation to your needs before you can talk about your actual needs ; still, your surplus is always available to you to make up your past indebtedness, and you would lose that surplus. I find that your shortage, independent of that surplus, would be £2 3s. Bd. per head on the basis of last year's statistics. 315. Assuming that the total amount raised by the Commonwealth would be £8,500,000, that seems to be about the figure ?—Do you mean to include New Zealand in that ? 316. No ; I mean on that basis could you work out for us what our probable shortage would be ? —I do not know how they have made it up to £8,500,000, because not many weeks ago it was said that £6,000,000 would be sufficient. I estimate that about £7,500,000 at least will be required to be raised yearly as Customs and excise revenue by the six federating States. The other question is whether the standard of living in New Zealand would be lowered. You have such a heavy Customs and excise tariff that it affects the consumption, and if your consuming-power was below the average now it might be raised when products were cheaper. The Australian Colonies' success in the past has largely depended upon the freedom and power that each State had in making their own laws, and in working towards their own ends. 317. You think that complete fiscal control is necessary to the conduct of colonisation as we have hitherto conducted it in these colonies ?—I think for the States that are behind in the race it would have been better if they had maintained home rule a little longer, and I consider that interState free-trade could have been attained under the present powers while preserving local control over State finances. 318. Mr. Roberts.] Do you mean that £2 3s. Bd. per head is the proportion per head of the shortage that New Zealand would require to find ?—That would be the amount that New Zealand would require to expect as a return from the surplus, and if they returned you £2 3s. Bd. you would be just where you are now. 319. Mr. Millar.] In regard to the conversion of loans, as a financial expert do you see any great advantage to the colonies from a general conversion of their loans ?—A very great advantage if it had taken place some nine years ago, when I gave them a plan whereby nearly one million could have been saved to the whole of the colonies ; but since that time the higher-rated loans have been running out, and they have been renewed at much lower rates, so that you cannot expect the same advantage now; but, still, there would be an advantage in their being consolidated. As regards the development of the country in the future, I see a danger in that the Commonwealth has taken away the power which hitherto enabled each State to make and extend its roads and railways while still leaving with the States the responsibility of maintaining them. If they took over the railways with the debts, then the interests of the smaller States would not be in the same danger.
563
A.—4
320. What rate of interest do you anticipate getting in carrying out this conversion ?•—3 per cent. 321. Then, there would not be any advantage to New Zealand as a State, seeing that she is already getting her money at 3 per cent. ?—The question should not be looked at so much from the standpoint of the present moment as from what the all-round effect would be in the near future. 322. Do you anticipate that money could be borrowed by the Commonwealth at a lower rate than 3 per cent., or will be borrowed lower than that ?—I believe if matters go on as they are doing —that the credit of the Commonwealth improves—money may be obtained effectively at a much lower rate. 323. Mr. Beauchamp.] With respect to conversions, has it been practically demonstrated that there is any real saving to a country by conversion after you have made proper provision for the premiums demanded by the holders of stock prior to surrendering?— Yes, it has been so demonstrated. 324. Looking at the matter simply from a commercial standpoint it means this, does it not : that you are practically transferring the responsibility from the people of to-day to the people of the future ?—A reasonable share of it. It is not transferring a burden to ask those who are going to derive far more benefit from loan expenditure on railways, bridges, roads, &c, than you yourself to bear a reasonable share of it. 325. In respect to the statement which you are going to prepare for us, will you disregard the sum that we might require to claim in respect to the interest upon the properties transferred with the departments ? —I think it would not be an advantage to you to deduct that amount, because it would simply form a new element of expenditure on the part of the Commonwealth, and would have to be snared in by each State. 326. Hon. the Chairman.] In reference to the possible difficulties you have mentioned that the smaller States might experience in respect to their finance, there is a provision in the Constitution Act to the effect that for a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter until the Parliament otherwise provides, the Parliament may grant financial assistance to any State on such terms and conditions as the Parliament thinks fit. Apparently they have recognised the difficulties you have mentioned ?—That was one of the concessions made when some few years ago at Adelaide I analysed the effect in one of my pamphlets of the financial clauses, and it so impressed some of the members of the Conference that this clause was introduced in order that the Commonwealth, if any State was in a difficulty, could make the deficiency good. But what would arise if such colony got into that position because of defective management, and called on all the other States for assistance ? Are the smaller States going to help it ? Such matters will cause friction. 327. Mr. Millar.] Are you aware that trustees in Great Britain can invest in New Zealand stock ? —I have heard that such is the case. 328. Would that have any effect on the price of our stock in the London market ?—Yes; of course it would be a set-off against any other matters that were affected in their minds although not in ours. 329. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] How is it that Tasmania, with its climate and other advantages, is importing dairy produce from New Zealand ? —I have been asking our farmers the same question. We have some very fine dairy lands, but they have not hitherto been paying sufficient attention to the dairy industry in the light of modern science, but now they are getting experts to teach them, and I am hopeful that in that respect we shall improve. 330. Mr. Beid.] Is it through the want of natural advantages, or want of industry on the farmers' part ?—I think that possibly we have a lot of small people engaged in the industry who have not the means to carry out modern ideas. The climate is very favourable. 331. Is there plenty of good dairy land up the Derwent ? —Yes. I think that in the next few years things .will rapidly improve. Hon. Neil Elliott Lewis, M.E.0., examined. (No. 212.) 332. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the Premier of the State of Tasmania?— Yes, and AttorneyGeneral. 333. And you have been a member of the Tasmanian Legislature for some years ?—Since 1886. 334. What part have you taken in the Federal Conferences and Conventions ?—I was a member of the Convention which framed the Commonwealth Bill, and I was also a member of the Federal Council, and attended its last meeting. 335. And you are also a member of the Federal Cabinet ? —Yes, without portfolio. 336. Are you satisfied with the provisions of the Commonwealth Bill in regard to the smaller States?— Yes. The whole question is a matter of compromise. We would have preferred to have had some alterations, but we could not get all our own way, and I personally was quite satisfied to recommend the adoption of the Commonwealth Bill to the people of Tasmania, and I worked as hard as I could in that direction urging them to vote " Yes " on the referendum. 337. You think that federation will be an advantage to Tasmania ? —Yes ; in particular having free ports for many of our staple products in the other colonies will be a great advantage. I might particularise timber, potatoes, fruit, jams, and some classes of cereals. 338. How do you think the finances of the smaller States will be affected by federation ?— There is no doubt that we shall have some difficulties to contend with for a few years, but I feel convinced that they will right themselves in time. A year or two in the life of a nation is a very small space of time, and all our troubles will be overcome in due course. 339. What do you think will be the effect on the manufactures of the smaller States?—l look forward to Tasmania becoming a very important manufacturing centre, as we have so many natural advantages—a great water-power and a good climate.
A.—4
564
340. You do not fear being dominated by the larger concerns on the continent, which command capital ?—I do not fear but that any of our manufacturers now established will be able to hold their own. 341. How do you regard the surrendering of the legislative independence of the States ?—lt is only a modified surrender. We only surrender such matters as are of general common concern, and we retain to ourselves very important functions. Our railways, Crown lands, mines, and all questions of production, and the producing interests remain with us. Our timber industry is another, and also our fruit industry, and all those remain with us for our local Parliament to deal with. 342. You look forward to the Federal Government constructing the railways?— Not in Tasmania. 343. But on the continent?—lt is quite likely that they may construct one or more main trunk lines in course of time. 344. And, if so, do you not think that the policy will be forced upon them through inconvenience and other matters of taking over the State railways on the continent ?—I question that very much, excepting the main trunk lines. In all these States railways have been constructed to develop the property of the State rather than to provide an absolutely paying and profitable investment. 345. Do you not think that the necessity for obtaining uniformity of tariff will cause the Government to acquire the State railways on the continent ? —I do not think they will acquire all the State railways. Ido not think they will acquire more than the main trunk lines, and Ido not think the States would agree to hand over all their railways with, possibly, the right of constructing further State lines. 346. How do you think the smaller States will be able to make good the deficiency which will be caused by the Federal Government retaining 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue ?—Of course, if they retain the full 25 per cent, we should get so much less returned to us, and it would mean that we should have to raise very much more by direct taxation. At the same time, I cannot think that for some years, at any rate, the Commonwealth Parliament will require anything like 25 per cent, of the net Customs revenue. 347. Do you think the insular position of Tasmania will be any disadvantage to her in Federal matters ?—I cannot think so. 348. In reference to the colony we represent, how do you think distance would affect us supposing we were to join the Commonwealth ?—I speak subject to correction, but Ido not think you are further away from Melbourne or Sydney in point of time than Western Australia is. 349. Do you not think that the long sea-distance of New Zealand from the mainland would be detrimental as affecting the administration ?—I hardly think so. So much is now done by cable that it seems to me that whether you are on the Continent of Australia, or four days away, you would be in constant touch with the centre of the Commonwealth. 350. What advantages do you think would accrue to the Colony of New Zealand by her joining the Commonwealth ?—As far as trade matters are concerned, I am not sufficiently conversant with your trade to answer definitely, but I should think that, in regard to all the products we send into other States, you would be able to send them in also. It would depend naturally upon the tariff imposed whether there are to be preferential duties given to English colonies or not; but the main advantages that I see would be that you would form part of one nation in the Southern Hemisphere rather than stand alone and remain isolated. 351. What is the principal advantage in the formation of a single nation?—l think the union of these colonies must strengthen us in the matter of defence, and in the eyes of the world. 352. Do you not think that even as separate countries they must mutually assist each other to the best of their ability in time of trouble ?—I suppose they would. 353. Mr. Beauchamp .] Your industries are protected here, are they not ? —Yes ;■ to the extent of about 20 per cent., and with the raw material coming in duty-free. 354. Do you think those industries would be affected by inter-State free-trade ?—I do not think they have got anything to fear. The woollen-manufacturers certainly have nothing to fear. 355. It has been represented to us that in regard to several industries, owing to specialisation in such centres as Melbourne and Sydney, the industries of the smaller States would be prejudiced by inter-State free-trade : do you think that is so? —In Tasmania we have no very large manufactures or important ones, excepting the woollen-mills, and they have been able to establish a market for themselves in New South Wales by reason of the excellence of their quality. 356. You produce a very fine quality of woollen goods, do you not ?—They have that reputation. 357. As to the powers of the States to raise loans, do you think they would be able to raise them as satisfactorily in the future, seeing they are now part of a Commonwealth, as they have done in the past ?—I do not see why they should not. 358. Do you think they could get their money as cheaply as the Commonwealth could ?—They might not do it as cheaply as the Commonwealth, but, I believe, as cheaply as they would have done if there had been no Federation. 359. It has been stated by several gentlemen in Australia that in the event of our not federating with Australia some friction might arise between New Zealand and Australia with regard to the South Sea Islands : have you any opinion on that head ?—I think it is very likely. 360. In spite of the fact that we both belong to the same Empire ? —The only way in which we can deal with these islands is by representations to the Home Government, and it is quite possible that the Commonwealth Ministry might make different representations to those made by the New Zealand Ministry for the time being, and so friction might be caused. We know that differences of opinion have arisen at different times with respect to the administration of these islands, and different representations have been made by different States.
A.—4,
565
361. You think it might place the Imperial authorities in an awkward position to be asked to decide the claims of either New Zealand or Australia to dominate these islands ?—They might be placed in an awkward position, and it would cause far more unpleasantness between New Zealand and the Commonwealth if the representations made" by the one or the other were ignored or were refused by the Mother-country. 362. Mr. Millar.] I think you said that you considered one advantage of federation to New Zealand would be from the trade point of view ? —I did throw out that suggestion ; but lam not a business-man, and I have not studied the question sufficiently from your trade point of view. 363. Would you think for a moment that a good market could be found in a colony which was exporting the same products that you produce?—No; but you already export a considerable amount to the Australian Continent, I understand. 364. It is only 14 per cent, of the whole of our export, and, excluding specie, it is only 8 per cent. So far as Tasmania is concerned, have you not always been able to find a market in New South Wales for the whole of your agricultural surplus ?—We only have the one market. Take potatoes, for instance : the price in Sydney rules the market here, and if two or three shipments go into Sydney at the same time the price immediately drops, to the loss of our farmers. We have no other market open to us. 365. Have you at any time, of your own knowledge, produced more here than you could find a market for in New South Wales ?—I do not think that a great deal more has been produced than we have been able to dispose of, but very often it has not been disposed of to advantage. 366. I presume the same thing will apply to Victoria? —We can produce more when we have more markets open to us—markets which are closed now. 367. But, still, the price will be regulated by the figures you charge?—l take it that it will be regulated rather by the price we can obtain in other States. We shall not be confined to one market. We shall have Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australian open to us. 368. But the moment you go beyond what they can be imported from New Zealand for you cannot increase your market beyond that price, can you ?—lf there is a big export of potatoes from New Zealand, that would become a very important factor to us in the matter of price. 369. As a member of the Federal Cabinet, do you anticipate that the powers of the Federal Parliament will be increased as time goes on, or do you anticipate that they will be always tied down to the powers granted under the Act ?—I cannot see at the present time any direction in which they can be increased with advantage. I do not anticipate any infringement of the State powers. 370. In the course of a few years when the Federal Parliament have legislated upon all those subjects that they are given the power to legislate on, what would be its functions then, or what would they have to do, because the revenue-raising departments have been taken over ? —I do not think that legislation on any subjects ever comes to an end. That is my experience. 371. But they have no further creative powers ?—I fancy that those subjects will be sufficient for them to deal with for a long time. 372. Tinkering with legislation?— That is not it; it is rather " progressing"" legislation than tinkering. 373. But they cannot develop any new legislation on any matter outside the thirty-nine articles ?—I do not think it would be desirable to let them have that power. The matter has been fully discussed, and everything that could be thought of that they could deal with with advantage from a Federal point of view has been included in those thirty-nine articles. 374. What do you think is going to be the effect of federation on the progressive spirit which has been evinced of late years in regard to legislation for the social development of the people ?—I think most of the social problems have been left to the States to work out, and there are very few questions of that kind left to the Federal Parliament, speaking from memory, excepting conciliation and arbitration. Those are the only two social questions which have been taken over by the Federal Parliament. 375. Assuming, for instance, that there was a general feeling in New South Wales that the hours of labour should be reduced, from forty-eight to forty-four, how could the people of New South Wales legislate for forty-four hours and still be able to compete with Victoria, where they were working forty-eight hours ? —That is a matter entirely for each State to consider for itself. 376. But would it not be impossible for New South Wales to compete against Victoria, where they are working four hours more per week ? —Well, the people here can work longer hours than they can in Queensland, on account of the better climatic conditions, and I suppose it is the same in New Zealand. I think each State must know its own surrounding conditions better than the Federal Legislature, and in respect to social matters will have to work out its own destiny. 377. But what would happen to a State that was working shorter hours while this process of educating the other people was going on? —I think the tendency would not be to level down, but rather to level up to the higher ideal. 378. Mr. Roberts.'] In reply to Mr. Beauchamp, you mentioned that your woollen industries would be benefited by federation. The returns show that in the woollen industry in Tasmania there are 162 employes altogether, and that your exports for 1899 of woollens only amounted to £528 ?—Of course, that industry here is in quite a small way, and the exports of last year would be larger than they were in 1899. The industry has only been started during the last few years, and is growing up very gradually, and I do not know that it has a large amotint of capital at its back. 379. What opinion have you upon the coloured-labour difficulty ?—I hope that a great deal of it will be able to be dispensed with altogether, through the introduction of machinery. 380. Do you think white men will be able to do the work in the sugar-fields in tropical districts ?—I have been so informed, but I have not been in Queensland, nor to the sugar-planta-tions.
566
A.—4.
381- And your aboriginal race in Tasmania is extinct ?—Yes. 382. In New Zealand the Maoris are enfranchised, and they also have representatives of their own in Parliament, so that in the event of New Zealand joining the Federation some amendment to the Constitution will be required to enable the Maoris to be counted in the quota : what is your opinion of that matter? —Of course, they are not a race that is disqualified from voting at elections. 383. Mr. Luke.] Is there not a possibility that the taking-away of the chief sources of revenue from the States will hinder the carrying-on of such works as roads and bridges by reducing the power of the States to raise money for those purposes ?—lt would depend very much on the amount returned by the Commonwealth Parliament. If it raised a fair revenue, such as is required by the majority of the States, there ought to be no hindrance in carrying out a proper publicworks policy from year to year. 384. Is it your opinion that a colony so far distant as New Zealand is would be at a disadvantage in having to contribute towards great Federal undertakings, such as trans-continental railways, from which it would reap no benefit ?—lt would be a slight disadvantage, as it is in the case of Tasmania, but I cannot see that it would be an insuperable objection to New Zealand joining the Federation. 385. Will not the four-days journey always be a bar to community of interest ?—Western Australia is in exactly the same position, and did not object in any way to sending her representatives to attend the Federal Conferences from any considerations of the length of the seajourney. 386. Would we not suffer in respect to local matters which required prompt attention ?—I think considerable powers would have to be given to the heads of departments, as it would not be possible to submit all matters to the Federal Ministry. 387. But is it not likely that the smaller States will be overshadowed by the larger ones, as has been hinted at in the case of Tasmania ?—I do not think so. I think the Federal spirit would always predominate, and the isolated States would always get fair-play. I think the time will come when the Prime Minister will select his Ministers quite independently of the idea that each State must be represented in the Ministry. 388. But is there not already some feeling of jealousy in that respect amongst the States ? — I think the State differences will become less and less as time goes on. We have been divided on many questions for many years, and have been independent self-governing colonies. It was not reasonable to expect that this feeling would die out through the stroke of a pen—by the passing of an Act of Parliament. It will require time. 389. Is it your opinion that the Civil servants of the outlying States will receive the same amount of consideration as the Civil servants who are nearest the seat of the Federal Government will receive ?—I fancy one of the first duties of the Federal Parliament will be to consider a proper Civil Service Bill, and if that Bill is passed, and a Public Service Board established and the service classified, they will all receive equal justice under the Act. ■ 390. Will a Civil Service Board be appointed?— Uniformity of classification will have to be provided for, and it would be very difficult to do it except by a Board. It might be done by a Eoyal Commission ; but probably an independent Board would be preferable. It is one of the most difficult questions that the Federal Government will have to face. 391. Mr. Beid.] With regard to the right of appeal to the Federal High Court, do you think that will be taken advantage of by Tasmania, rather than the privilege of going to the Privy Council ? —We have had very few appeals from Tasmania—l think only three or four—since we have had a Supreme Court, and it is very difficult to say whether appeals will be more frequent to the Federal High Court than to the Privy Council. 392. In regard to section 73, do you consider that the right of appeal to the Privy Council is in any way limited ?—I do not think it limits the right of appeal, but that it is concurrent. 393. Do you consider section 74 limits the right of appeal ? —Yes ; but on constitutional questions the Federal judicature should be the sole interpreter of the Constitution. 394. You hold that section 73 gives a general right of appeal ?—Yes. 395. Mr. Leys.]' Will Tasmania have to resort to direct taxation to make up the deficiency arising from the absorption of its Customs revenue ? —I expect so. 396. If that is the case at present, how will she provide for loans in the future for her own colonisation-works ?—Only by direct taxation. The less we receive from the Customs duties the less the taxpayer pays under that head, and the more opportunity there is to obtain direct taxation. 397. Then, if you raise further loans for roads, &c, the only security you can offer will be this power to impose direct taxation ?—And the amount we receive as our share of the Customs duties collected by the Commonwealth. 398. But is that not more than absorbed now by the present liabilities of the Commonwealth ? —It is for the present year or two; but, of course, one does not know that it is always going to continue. We had some bad years, when the Customs duties fell off very considerably ; but they are on the increase now. 399. But do you not think that surrendering the control of the Customs will seriously restrict the power of the States in carrying on colonisation-works ?—We must show that we are able to collect a certain amount more from direct taxation, and if we do that the British people will lend us the money. 400. Do you think direct taxation is such an elastic means of raising money as Customs and excise ?—No; but, of course, we have not much direct taxation here at the present time. We have not got an income-tax, although we had one for four years ; but it was dropped, as the Parliament preferred to retain the Customs duties to reducing them and making it up by direct taxation. 401. But if you wanted a million loan for a new railway, or additional roads, besides the direct taxation you have to impose to provide for your present deficiency would you not have to impose
567
A.—4
still further direct taxation to cover the interest on that loan ?—lf the population and the revenue remain the same as they are now there is no doubt that we should be restricted in our borrowingpowers. As the population and revenue increase, so shall we be able to borrow. 402. But is it not the case that the Federal Government in settling the future tariff will have regard rather to existing liabilities than to the future desire of the States to borrow ?—We all want to go on with progressive works, and, as the Federal Parliament is representative of all the States, there is no doubt that the wishes of the States will be carefully considered in framing the tariff from time to time. 403. But, in the case of New South Wales, will not one million more be raised out of that State than she actually requires ? —Of course, New South Wales stands in an exceptional position, through having an enormous revenue from its Crown lands ; and that is the reason New South Wales has been able to get on so well with a small Customs revenue. 404. Will not the result of that be that colonies like Tasmania and New Zealand will suffer more severely from the Federal control of Customs and excise than other colonies ? —lf you exclude New South Wales, I think Tasmania is in very much the same position as other colonies ; and, as to the revenue derived from the sale of Crown lands in New South Wales, I always consider that the Crown lands ought to be looked on as the capital of a country, and ought to be applied in that way to the reduction of its indebtedness, rather than to purposes of general revenue and expenditure. 405. With regard to the South Sea Islands, seeing that every application with regard to annexation or alteration in the conditions of the islands must be made through the Imperial Government, do you think it at all likely that serious friction will arise between the Commonwealth and New Zealand in the event of our not federating ?—Friction once did arise between Queensland and the other colonies. 406. Well, would not the same conflict arise if they were federated ? —Then the majority decides. 407. But would not New Zealand still be as discontented as if she were out of the Federation? —I do not know that she would be. In the one case she would say, "This is an unwarrantable interference by people that have nothing to do with it," and the other party would say, " We have fought the battle in the House and we have been defeated, and that is the end of it." 408. Does it not amount to this : that if the interests of the Australian Continent and the interests of New Zealand were in conflict New Zealand would go to the wall ?—I do not think so. The conflict would probably be between two of the States —say, New Zealand and Queensland, for instance—and the rest of the Parliament would act as jurymen and decide between their conflicting claims. 409. Hon. Major Steivard.] Is there any reason why Tasmania'should not follow our example with regard to dairy factories '?—None ; and we are following it as fast as we can by establishing factories and importing cattle. If the present policy is carried out, in the course of a year or two we shall not only produce sufficient to supply ourselves but to export. But your agriculturists are a long way ahead of ours, and the assistance you have given them is also a long way ahead of what we are giving our people. 410. If New Zealand joined the Commonwealth she would be on an equal footing with the other colonies with regard to open markets and ports, and then, of course, she would become a competitor with Tasmania in those markets. Seeing that is the case, would Tasmanian legislators view New Zealand joining the Federation with favour, or otherwise ? —I cannot speak for them. I can only give my personal opinion. Of course, our people would have to face that competition; but to have the whole of the Australasian Colonies united would be a splendid thing, and I would very much prefer to see that union and to face the competition with you than to have the Commonwealth markets open to us to your exclusion. 411. Is it your opinion that the Federal Parliament would be so willing to welcome New Zealand that they would be prepared to admit her on terms equally as advantageous as those in the case of the original States ?—lf I were a member of the House I certainly should admit New Zealand on equal terms with the original States, and I believe a majority of the members would also, provided it is done at an early date. If it is done within the first four or five years I believe the feeling in Australia would be in favour of your admission on exactly equal terms. 412. Do you think it is probable that a similar provision to that made in the case of Western Australia, with regard to the Federal tariff coming into operation in that State, could be expected in our case ?—Of course, Western Australia is still in such a curious position through the sudden inrush of a large male population that their case could not be dealt with at all on the same footing as the other States ; and if you can show cause for such exceptional treatment, no doubt, Parliament would take that into consideration and treat you exceptionally. 413. Supposing New Zealand found, after she had made application for admission, that under the Commonwealth scheme her system of finance would be disturbed to the extent of a million a year, would that be a differentiating circumstance which would entitle her to special consideration ? —If that were so ! 414. You are also aware that the Native race in New Zealand is admitted to equal privileges with ourselves, and we had an answer from a high legal authority the other day to the effect that he thought it would be necessary to get a special Act of the English Parliament to enable them to be counted :do you think that would be so ? —I have never thought of that, and I would like time to consider it; but, as far as the population is concerned, section 25,1 think, does not apply to the case of your Maoris, but possibly section 127 would. Speaking quite offhand, Ido not know why their inclusion should not be made one of the conditions of your admission to the Union. 415. Seeing that the Postal Department is taken over by the Commonwealth, what would be the position with regard to our penny-postage ?—That would come under the Post Offices Act. At
A.— 4.
568
the present time all the State Post Offices are being conducted under their own separate laws. In Tasmania we have penny-postage in the towns and suburbs and 2d. outside. That is not altered. 416. Do you think the existing regulations will be maintained until there is a general postage Act which will apply to all the colonies ? —That will be the business of the first session of Parliament. 417. Hon. the Chairman.] Supposing New Zealand should not join the Federation, do you think there is any chance of a reciprocal treaty being granted between the Commonwealth and New Zealand in respect of the interchange of commodities produced by the two countries ? —There is nothing to prevent it, and if it could be shown to be mutually advantageous I have no doubt that it might be done. There is always a difficulty in the way, and Tasmania's attempts to get such a treaty were not a success. It was a good many years ago, but the result did not encourage us to make another attempt. 418. What was the attempt in the direction of ?—lt was before I was in Parliament, and I am speaking from memory. The Protectionist party in Victoria were too strong to allow the particular proposals to be carried out. They were to admit our timber and fruit free, and we were to admit their sheep and cattle free. We took the duty off sheep and cattle, but when it was proposed in their Parliament to remove the duties on certain classes of timber and certain fruits the agitation against it was so great that it was abandoned. Hon. Staffobd Bied, M.E.C., examined. (No. 213.) 419. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are the State Treasurer in Tasmania, Mr. Bird ?—Yes. 420. And you have been in the Parliament of Tasmania for many years ? —Yes, for nineteen years. I have held office in two Ministries. 421. And you have given consideration to the Commonwealth Bill, we understand, more particularly as it affects the finances of the various States ?—I have. 422. Will you kindly tell the Commission your views as to how the finances of the States will be affected by their federating ?—I have given consideration to that question chiefly from the point of view as to how it will affect Tasmania, and the difficulty that will arise in our case, seeing that we have depended very largely on the Customs duties for our revenue. We are raising at the present time from Customs about half a million annually, and under any Federal tariff that is likely to be imposed it is hardly to be expected that Tasmania will raise more than £300,000 of the revenue to be gained under that tariff. Of course, the amount will depend on what the total revenue is that is wanted. It may be seven millions, eight millions, or nine millions that may be required ; but if it be seven millions our contribution is not likely to be very much more than £250,000 to £300,000, and if it is nine millions probably from £350,000 to £360,000, so that we shall have a large deficiency between our present receipts from Customs and those we would get under the Commonwealth tariff. According as the Federal tariff might raise a revenue from seven to nine millions so our deficiency will vary from £100,000 to £200,000. 423. How would that amount be made up ?—At the present time we are raising about £100,000 more than we need to meet our annual requirements, and with that surplus we are paying off an old deficit of some £450,000, so that we could afford to do with a Customs revenue of from £50,000 to £100,000 less than we are now getting, and if the Federal tariff be what we deem it is likely to be we shall probably find ourselves £100,000 short. Of course, that is merely speculative, as none of us know what the Federal tariff may be; but we expect to have to provide £100,000 in consequence of the change, and the only sources to which we can go are wealth and land—direct taxation, in a word. With regard to the land-tax, the general feeling in the State is that we are taking quite enough from the land, and there would be a very great outcry if it were announced that we should have to increase that tax, or the tax on company dividends, which is now Is. in the pound. 424. Do you think you would be able to raise £100,000 additional by direct taxation in Tasmania?—l do not. 425. Then, how can you provide for the execution of your public works ?—Of course, the question of reducing our expenditure in various ways will have to be considered. We might reduce the number of members of Parliament and save a little there. We might cut down, as was proposed but not agreed to, the salary of the Governor; or we might cut off some of our annual subsidies to road trusts and public bodies of that kind ; but there is no doubt that for the requirements to meet the natural progress of the colony we shall find ourselves very much hampered. That is the difficulty that many of us have seen in connection with the present Constitution Act, and that dread is becoming more apparent throughout the colony. There will be a stoppage of public works unless the difficulty could be met by throwing the burden of raising money for such works on the local bodies, but that would simply mean transferring the burden from the State to the local government, and would not relieve the people to any extent. 426. Do you anticipate getting any financial assistance from the Commonwealth under section 96 of the Commonwealth Act ? —I do not anticipate anything from that, nor do I like the idea of it. I regret very much that the financial provisions of the Act are what they are. They are going to throw difficulties in the way of Tasmania, and here I might say that I was one who looked on federation favourably in the earlier stages of the discussion, having been at the first Convention in 1891. I was then anxious to see the colonies federated, believing then, as Ido now, that it might be, if on a fair and sound financial basis, a good thing for all; but the financial provisions as embodied in the Bill were, to my mind, so unsatisfactory that when it came to advising the people before the referendum I was one of the very small minority in Tasmania who advised delay, thinking it would be far better for Tasmania to stand outside the Federation for, say, five years in order to see how the Act worked, and if we then saw that it was working satisfactorily to this State we might join.
569
A.—4
427. Do you think that at the time the referendum was taken in the various States, the people had fully considered the financial aspect of the question ?—-No, I am sure they had not. 428. What are the principal advantages you thick Tasmania will gain by entering the Federation ?—lntercolonial free-trade is the chief, and the obtaining of a larger market for our produce. And there is a good deal in the union for defence purposes, but we cannot forget the fact that that will involve extra expense, our share of which we shall have to bear. 429. Do you think that New Zealand, if she came into the Commonwealth, would be prejudiced by reason of her distance from the continent ?—To some extent, yes. So far as freedom of intercourse in respect to commerce is concerned, you would probably benefit, and so would some of the States in the same way by their intercourse with you. Tasmania might find that her timber and fruit-exports to New Zealand would benefit, and you might also benefit in respect to your timber and some of your manufactures by having a free-trade market in all the States. 430. The bulk of New Zealand's export trade is done with England, and having regard to that fact, do you think that the mere securing of intercolonial free-trade would be a sufficient recompense for New Zealand parting with its local autonomy as a separate colony ?—I should doubt it very much. 431. Mr. Leys.] I see that your Customs and excise taxation only amounts to £2 9s. 10d. per head, while ours amounts to £2 18s. Then, in addition to that, we have a land- and income-tax, which limits our power to increase the direct taxation. Now, in view of these figures, would we not suffer more than Tasmania through the Federal control of the Customs and excise ?—Yes; you would undoubtedly have a larger shortage, proportionately, than we should have. Those States which are now raising the largest amount of taxation through the Customs would suffer the most. It is in consequence of that that Western Australia would have had a bigger shortage under the Federal arrangements than we will have but for the special provision which allows their tariff to be adjusted during a period of five years. 432. Speaking as a Colonial Treasurer, do you not think a State like New Zealand would be very much restricted in regard to being able to carry on its colonising-works through parting with the complete control of its fiscal policy ?—Well, I think you would be in the same position as Tasmania in that respect. I feel, looking forward to the statement I have to make this year to the House in regard to the finances, that it is a very unpleasant thing indeed to have lost the control of our finances (for that is what it comes to), and that we cannot have a financial policy such as we think would be best for the State, simply because our power to propose such a policy is taken from us. We are restricted through not knowing what the Federal legislation will be in that respect; and just as I am feeling that position very much at the present time so I can quite conclude that New Zealand would necessarily feel it also. 433. Do you think that would retard the development of the country very much ?—lt must to some extent, because you would be debarred from taking in hand those important works which are necessary to progress, through being limited in your resources by the control of the finances having been taken out of your hands. 434. What do you think the effect of free-trade will be on the manufacturing industries ?—I should say that the effect may be injurious in regard to the smaller factories and industries, as they may be driven out by the competition of the larger concerns. On the other hand, there will be a compensating advantage, as some industries will benefit by having a larger market, and will be able to do better than when existing under conditions of isolation. 435. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think that the general expansion of trade which will be brought about by federation will compensate for the financial loss that some of the Sates might sustain, and that that loss is more than likely to be made up in the course of five or ten years ?—There is no doubt that with a larger market and a larger production a manufacturing State would gain much advantage. Generally, I think the freedom of trade between the States will be advantageous, but it is not going to cover the financial difficulty arising from the shortage I have pointed out. The loss of the protection which some of the smaller States have hitherto enjoyed, and the extra competition created by inter-State free-trade, will also cause some suffering in the first instance. 436. Do you think your manufacturers will be able to supply all local wants, although they might not be able to export? —Certain classes of manufactured goods we shall be able to supply ourselves with. We are doing a good deal in woollens, boots and shoes, and we can supply ourselves with those; but when it comes to some sorts of machinery, and certain classes of implements, we have to go to other countries for them, and shall have to for sometime to come. The Commonwealth as a whole will have to go to outside countries for some classes of manufactured goods. 437. You do not manufacture furniture largely in this colony?— Sufficient, generally speaking for our local wants, but not for export. 438. What are the hours worked in the factories here, and what are the wages ?—I think the eight-hour system prevails, and that the wages are rather less than they are in Victoria. Ido not think the cost of living here is any more than it is in any other State. 439. Is the tendency of your people rather to go on the land than to seek a factory-life ?— There is not much movement towards factory-life excepting in respect to the class from which the domestic servants are drawn. There is a disposition amongst that class to go into shops and factories, so that they can have their evenings free; but there is not a big movement in the direction of factory-life, speaking generally, because we have not developed our industries very largely in that direction. 440. Are the young men going on the land ?—Yes ; but, of course, the mines are a great attraction for many of our young fellows. Our land-sales are going up year by year. 441. Mining is your chief industry, I presume?—l would not say that; it is one of our chief industries. 72—A. 4.
A.—4
570
442. Hon. Mr. Boioen.] You do not mention, in the possibilities of direct taxation, an incometax?—l included that when I referred to taxes on wealth. We had an income-tax here for four years of Is. in the pound on incomes derived from property and Bd. on incomes derived from personal exertion; but it was considered an obnoxious tax, and pressure was brought on the Government to repeal certain sections of the Act, with the result that it was swept away, with the exception of the tax on dividends. 443. Mr. Beauchamp.] What amount did you raise by means of your income-tax ?—About £35,000. 444. And what was the chief objection raised against it ? —On account of its inquisitorial nature, and also on account of the feeling that you should not tax the personal exertions of the people. They do not object so much to a tax on property and earnings from business investments as they do to taxes on salaries. 445. What exemptions had you under the Income-tax Act ? —All incomes under £150 were exempt; over that and up to £400, £120 was exempt. On incomes of £400 and over there was no exemption. 446. Having strongly advised the Tasmanians not to enter the Federation at once, I presume you would give Ne.w Zealand the same advice ? —I should say wait for some years until you see how things work out under the Commonwealth before you attempt to join. Hon. Heney Dobson examined. (No. 214.) 447. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a barrister practising in Hobart, a former Premier of Tasmania, a member of the Federal Council, a member of the Federal Convention, and a member for ten years of the Tasmanian Parliament ?—Yes. 448. You have taken considerable part in the framing of the Commonwealth Constitution Act?— Yes. 449. Are you satisfied with the provisions of that Act as it affects the various States ?—I am, because it leaves the settlement of the financial difficulties, which are very great, to the people. The Convention was unjustly blamed for not settling the financial difficulties, but when we sought for a simple and fair way of dealing with them, and ascertained that any adjustment would make the richer colonies contribute towards the revenue of the poorer ones, I think we rightly left it to the people's representatives in Parliament, and those representatives will be responsible for the settlement they make. 450. Taking Tasmania as an instance, you know that the Commonwealth have taken over the Customs, and are entitled to retain a certain portion of that revenue for Federal purposes, and that there will be a deficiency in the finances of the State : what is your opinion on that matter ?— There will be a yearly deficit of about £130,000 with a tariff of eight millions and a half. The Treasurer will be short by that amount, but the people will get the relief. 451. What is the Treasurer to do to make up his requirements?—lf the amount of the deficiency is calculated on the basis of the amount of Customs and excise each State contributes £130,000 will be required; but if the duties are returned on the basis of population the deficiency will only be £50,000. If you are going to be one people with one destiny, the Tasmanians argue 'that we should have the one purse, that we should pool the whole of the Customs and excise revenues, and not receive therefrom an amount in proportion to what each State raises, but treat the people of all States as citizens of one Commonwealth, and give each citizen an equal share on the basis of population ; but that is simply making the richer colonies contribute part of their income to the support of the poorer ones. 452. Having entered the Commonwealth, do you not think that the smaller States, such as Tasmania, will be handicapped very considerably in the matter of contracting loans for their public works ?—I think so ; and lam personally glad of it, because we have already spent too much money in this State. I was very much struck with the fact that in three sittings of the Convention I do not think a quarter of an hour was taken up in discussing how the States would be situated as regards their borrowing-powers. Our Customs will be gone, our direct taxation will be exhausted in making up even part of the shortage, and the security we should have to offer for State loans might be ample, but it would not be one-half of what it was before federation. 453. How are the different requirements to be provided, for ? —We have spent two millions and a half on roads ; and what is wanted is not so much more capital expenditure as, I think, the power to compel each road trust to levy a minimum rate —say, of not less than 6d. in the pound. In addition to that, in regard to the sale of land, although we sell at £1 per acre on fourteen years' credit, 10s. per acre is taken at once and spent immediately on the roads in the neighbourhood, provided 500 acres of land are selected in that locality. With the enormous expenditure of the past, and with the capital expenditure from land purchase under a proper rating Act, we should have to rest content without borrowing much further for roads. As a matter of fact, most of our buildings are built, and we have overdone expenditure on our harbours and railways ; but our railway system pays hardly 1 per cent., and we really want a rest from this public-works expenditure. 454. Do you think the colony is sufficiently developed ?—With the exception of the mining industry, yes. I believe there are great possibilities for fruit-growing, and for the development of the timber industry. Most of our land fit for agriculture has been brought under the plough, or laid down in grass, and is supplied with fair roads, with the exception of some land at the Wilmot, to which we are building a railway. The land in Tasmania, excepting a third of it, is entirely useless for agricultural and almost so for pastoral purposes. Almost all the good land is alienated. 456. You mean to say that of the entire balance there is very little land suitable for settlement ? —Very little. 457. Is there no bush land?— The good bush land is up where we are building the Wilmot Eailway on the north-west.
571
A.—4
458. What special advantages, excepting intercolonial free-trade, do you consider Tasmania will gain under federation ?—I think intercolonial free-trade will be of more benefit to us than to any other colony, because the products which suit our soil and climate, such as timber, potatoes, hops, fruit-pulp, and jams, are produced in -such quantities as leave an enormous surplus available for export after the home market has been absolutely satisfied ; therefore our producers want free-trade; in fact, it is essential to their welfare. Federation does not affect wool, but I often wonder where the colonies would be if the Mother-country put Id. a pound on wool. I need not, therefore, include wool in the industries that will benefit under federation, because it is an industry in which we have free-trade. 459. Do you not think that Australia can produce all the fruit it requires ?—I think they could ; but we have a better soil and climate, and can produce it cheaper than they can. Our keepingapples are unmistakably better than those of other States. The other advantages in favour of federation are in respect to defence, quarantine, immigration, &c. ; but there were so many questions which had to be settled by united action that we felt we must have some form of government common to all the States. The old Federal Council did not meet the case, but I was always in favour of working up through that Council and developing, according to our requirements, into this higher national life. New South Wales after creating the Federal Council belittled it, and never joined it, so that this larger and national federation movement was really forced upon us. 460. Can you suggest to us any advantages which New Zealand would gain by joining the Federation ?—Having devoted many months to thinking out the advantages of federation and to putting them before our farmers (who are mostly Protectionists) with New Zealand out of it, I am hardly doing justice to myself or to the subject by answering your question without more thought, but I should say at once that if—as is probable —the railways are taken over that would be, I think, a detriment to you. It might be very inconvenient for you to have your system of railways managed by the central office at the capital when you are four or five days' journey by sea distant from such office. The same inconvenience might arise in the control of your post and cable service, and the Federal Ministers would have to give your Minister, or the Federal officer in New Zealand, a free hand. With reference to intercolonial free-trade, you are practically the richest colony in the Empire, and I believe that intercolonial free-trade would give you advantages and would prove a benefit to you 461. Do you think it would be of sufficient advantage to warrant New Zealand parting with her autonomy ?—Probably not yet. I think you would do better to postpone your decision. Wait until you have the problems of federation discussed by responsible men, which was not the case in the Federal Conventions, because the men comprising those Conventions had no responsibility—■ they had not to go before their constituents. Wait until yotPsee how the financial difficulties and other problems are adjusted and solved by the statesmen who will be responsible for their actions. 462. Mr. Beauchamp.] I take it that you are quite content to pursue a waiting policy with regard to your public works ?—I am, and we must do it. 463. Do you think that your people will permit that state of things to continue ?—Not unless they see it is a necessity, and I believe they will so see it, because they have been spending money in a most reckless fashion. One-half our debt is not paying 1 per cent., and the other half is paying little or nothing directly, and therefore you will see how great a drain our unreproductive public works are. Our railways are not paying 1 per cent., and in that respect we are in a worse position than any other colony, although the railways are slightly improving in this respect. 464. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] With regard to the adjustment of accounts between the States, do you hope that the richer States will be prepared to contribute to the assistance of the poorer States ?— Mr. Eeid, when, he was a member of the Federal Convention, speaking for the Mother-colony, said he would be prepared to enter into an arrangement which would be generous and fair ; and really the shortage of Tasmania under a uniform tariff will be so great that something may have to be done for her at first by the Federal Parliament granting her subsidies. I have seen all that from the first; but I have supported federation because our industries have been killed by the enormous protective duties of Victoria, and we have been deprived by Acts of Parliament of the natural markets the Creator has given us, and must have inter-State free-trade. 465. And you think that, as far as Tasmania is concerned, only time is required to put things right ? —I think we shall grow, but the first five years is our trouble. Our mineral industry is growing, and will continue to develop ; but we must keep down this enormous public-works expenditure, and not increase our interest-liability. 466. Mr. Luke.] Briefly, you do not think that federation has the same attractions for New Zealand as for other places ?—I do not, and there is no precedent for federation in the case of a colony like yours, which is four or five days' steam away from the other States. Then, there is also the fact that you have the market for most of your products in the Old Country, besides your other many advantages. 467. Do you think there is any probability of a reciprocal treaty being arranged between the Commonwealth and New Zealand ?—There you ask me a question in regard to which the electors are my masters. I have been promising our farmers protection against the outside world, which includes New Zealand now. Inter-State free-trade they are prepared for, but they are frightened of your New Zealand producers, and I do not think our farmers would have voted for federation if they had thought there would be reciprocity with New Zealand, or that your products would be allowed in duty-free. They might have voted for it had you been one of the federating States. 468. Supposing we allowed some of your goods in duty-free ?—I do not think we have much to give you in return. You might take a few apples or hops, but you can easily supply yourselves with these products. 469. Your timber is always in demand with us ?—Yes, for certain purposes. We once tried to get reciprocity with Victoria, and we agreed on four or five items, and passed the Bill, but when
A.—4
572
the proposal was placed before the Victorian Parliament the Protectionists were so strong that it was killed. 470. Mr. Leys.] Are there many people employed on public works in Tasmania? —Yes, a great many, and sons of farmers and small settlers leave" and neglect their land to obtain constant employment at fairly good wages. 471. What would be the effect of their being thrown out of employment ?—Disastrous; our revenue would slump down and down, particularly our Customs duties, and that is why I am frightened with regard to our reckless expenditure. I believe the labour-market will be disturbed, and we shall be somewhat embarrassed when the expenditure on public works is reduced. 472. Do you think New Zealand would suffer in a similar way through the restriction of its public works?— Yes. I cannot help recollecting your Vogel policy, under which you spent many millions, for which you no doubt have a splendid system of public works and railways, but I think the depression in New Zealand was very great after the money was spent. 473. Do you think we should have to take a rest if we federated ? —You would have a more limited security and a reduced revenue from which to pay the interest on the capital to be borrowed. 474. We should, in fact, have to go to direct taxation for future works ? —Yes ; or else go in for a poll-tax or trade licenses; but that is direct taxation. 475. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any other matter you wish to mention and which we have not asked you about ?—I was rather struck with Mr. Seddon's idea of a separate Federation, and I rather approved of it, but when I come to think that Fiji is twelve hundred miles away from New Zealand I begin to see that there are difficulties in the way of it. I certainly would like to see the whole of the colonies, including New Zealand, united in one national Commonwealth, but in your case the disadvantages and difficulties are great. 476. Do you think there is likely to be friction between us and Australia over the South Sea Islands? —I have hardly considered that point; but, as regards the New Hebrides and the French, I would like to see the Empire and Commonwealth buy the New Hebrides, because we cannot allow the state of affairs at present prevailing there to continue much longer. Depend upon it, Australia, being now united, will fight for her rights and take up a stronger position in this matter than a small country like New Zealand acting alone can do.
MELBOURNE. Tuesday, 2nd Apeil, 1901. David Martin examined. ' (No. 215.) 1. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your name? —David Martin. 2. Your official position ?—Secretary for Agriculture for the State of Victoria. 3. Can you tell us about the quantity of oats under cultivation in Victoria?—ln 1899 there were 271,280 acres under cultivation. 4. Can you tell us what the average yield is ?—The total was 6,116,046 bushels. 5. What class of oats are grown here ?—Mostly Algerian. 6. What is the quantity of oats exported from Victoria in 1899 ? —I have not got the exports, but for the last year the exports have been exceptional, on account of the large export to South Africa. 7. Is the area under cultivation of oats increasing in Victoria?— Yes ; this year on account of the great demand. 8. Is there plenty of land suitable for the cultivation of oats?— Yes. 9. Is wheat grown much here ?—Yes ; very much more largely than oats. 10. What was the surplus of wheat this year ? —There were 21,165,693 acres under cultivation. The yield being 15,237,948 bushels. 11. Is maize cultivated in Victoria ? —Only to a limited extent, and a good deal of it that is cultivated is not allowed to seed ; it is cut for green feed. 12. What is the area of potatoes under cultivation ?—55,469 acres, and the yield 173,381 tons. 13. Does the State of Victoria export potatoes largely?— Yes; we supply the northern colonies to a very great extent. 14. Are onions largely grown in Victoria?— The production for the year is 398,100cwt. We supply the northern colonies and the shipping. We are now developing a trade to Africa. 15. Are New Zealand oats largely imported into Victoria ?—To a fair extent. Some few years back there was a very large importation. 16. Since the duty has been put on ? —I have no doubt there has been a falling-off. In the last year or two we have been able to supply our own requirements. In many cases New Zealand oats have been retranshipped to supply orders in Africa. 17. Is fruit grown in Victoria ?—Yes, very largely. 18. What is the area under fruit ?—The total acreage is 54,573. It includes nearly every kind of fruit. Apples and pears are the principal crops ; also quinces, plums, cherries, peaches, apricots, nectarines, oranges, lemons, loquats, medlars, figs, passion-fruit, guavas, pomegranates, persimmons, raspberries, strawberries, gooseberries, mulberries, olives, almonds and filberts, and currants. 19. Do these fruits grow well in Victoria?—ln their own particular districts. Our climate , varies considerably.
573
A.—4
20. Are these fruits grown in large quantities in Victoria ? —Apples and pears especially. 21. Are they exported ? —Yes. 22. Where to? —London. Our exports to London last year amounted to £7,280. 23. Is the area of land under agriculture in the" State of Victoria increasing to any large extent ? —I do not think it is. Of late years we have gone very much into dairying, and given up cultivation. 24. What is the export of butter and cheese ?—We commenced exporting in 1889. Up to the end of last year the total value of butter was £7,369,615. That is within ten years. 25. What about cheese ?—That amounted to £41,582. We are not likely to be cheese-exporters to a large extent. 26. Do you know what has led to the change from grain output to dairying output?—lt pays better. Another very important factor is that when growing grain you get the money for it only once a year, whereas in butter-making you get your money every fortnight. 27. When you speak of the money for grain being obtained once a year, do you not mean that they have to wait for a profit sometimes for two, three, or four years ?—lt depends on the seasons : for instance, in the mallee country they have been carrying on at a loss for the last four or five years. 28. Hon. Captain Russell."] How often do they take crops from the land here ?—Wheat is our staple. They should not take it for more than three years, in my opinion. At the end of that time sheep or cattle ought to be put on. 29. Do they sow green crops ? —Only to a limited extent. 30. Artificial grasses ?—ln the southern districts, such as Gippsland, they sow grass, but not much in the northern districts. 31. After they have taken out those three crops of wheat the land is left to take care of itself ? —Yes; they leave it practically for sheep—with native grass. 32. How long is it before the land is sufficiently recovered to take another crop?— After two or three years' rest. 33. After it has been cropped, say, twice for two or three years has the land deteriorated as sheep land ? Have not those crops of grain taken a great deal out of the land ?—Probably at the end of three years it would have recovered itself again. 34. They could have the second period of cropping without manure?—We are strongly advocating the use of manure now. 35. We may assume that in the future arable land will have to be manured before crops can be taken out ?—Yes. 36. Does the same practice prevail as regards oats ?—No, not so much ; the land in which they grow oats is much stronger land. 37. With the exception of some favoured parts they cannot go in for rotation of crops—they cannot grow potatoes and mangel-wurzel and such things to use the land ?—Not in some portions of the colony with root-crops. Eape to a limited extent is sown for feeding purposes. 38. All over Victoria? —Great portions. 39. Has the outcome of oats increased during the past ten years ? —I do not think so. 40. Is oats a grain well suited for Victoria ?—They are good feed-oats. There was a strong prejudice at one time against the variety grown, but that has been overcome. 41. Is the New Zealand oat a better oat than that of Victoria ?—lt is better in appearance, but not for feeding purposes. 42. Does a bushel of New Zealand oats contain more feeding qualities ? —No. 43. In oatmeal is it better ? —Millers here prefer good Algerian. 44. Should you imagine that with the disadvantage of the handling of freights Victoria will be able to compete with New Zealand ? —No ; they will be able to compete against us. 45. You think that if there was free-trade with New Zealand we could compete with you?— Yes ; your crop per acre is much larger than ours. 46. I see that your crop here is roughly 22 bushels ?—That is a fair average. 47. What is the average value of the land on which oats are grown?—£s to £15 per acre. 48. That would be the selling-value of oat land ?—Yes. 49. I suppose the area under cultivation in Victoria is practically the only portion suitable for cultivation? —There is a large area not suitable. 50. The land under cultivation now is not a quarter of what could be cultivated ?—No. The greater portion of our best land in the western district has been thrown out of cultivation in favour of dairying. 51. You said that quinces were grown here?— They are made into jam. 52. They are not exported ? —No ; there is no market for them. 53. Hun. Mr. Buwen.] You say that the oat land is considered better than the land used for wheat?— Yes. 54. It is generally the other way in New Zealand ?—You have to consider the climate. In our extreme northern districts oats would not grow to any extent. 55. What is the routine in oat-growing after the crop is taken off: do they take three crops of oats as of wheat ?—Not usually. 56. After that?— They go in for a change of crop. Peas are grown considerably in moist districts. 57. Are there circumstances here against the ordinary rotation of crops?— The rainfall is not sufficient in northern districts. 58. It is not likely that the manner of cultivation will be improved ?—Yes; by manuring and other methods. 59. Is that artificial manure ? —Yes.
A.—4
574
60. What price for oats is considered sufficient to pay the farmer here ? If land is worth £10 to £15 per acre, it would not pay to grow oats on that ?—Not where they have to rent the land. 61. Would 2s. a bushel pay them? —Yes. 62. Mr. Roberts.'] Do you grow malting barley he*e ? —Yes ;we have not exported so far, but I am at present inquiring whether there is a market at Home for malting barley. We expect a surplus this year. 63. How do the figures run for butter in the last three years?— Last year was an exceptionally good one ;it amounted to £1,233,850. The year before that was £888,000. The year before it was £670,000; the year before that it was £942,000. It depends entirely on the seasons. 64. You consider that last year's exports was quite an abnormal one ?—Yes ; that was 1899. 65. You said oats could be grown at 2s. a bushel: it is worth about 2s. 6d. for wheat at the present time ?—Last season wheat was down to Is. 10d. in some of the northern districts. 66. That did not pay ? —They had to live on it. 67. The average this year is 7 bushels to the acre? —8 bushels. It can be produced at a profit at 2s. 6d. 68. Mr. Millar.] Have you any idea what the expenses are for ploughing and harvesting?— In the mallee they reckon it at about 10s. per acre. That includes ploughing, seeding, and harvesting. It can be done for 10s., but in some cases it costs 15s. They grow wheat in the mallee country. 69. Mr. Luke.] I understood it to apply to oats? —They do not grow oats in the mallee. 70. Mr. Millar.] Outside of the mallee country what do you think is a fair price?—Up to £1. 71. Does your department arrange the market-prices of the different agricultural products?— No. 72. Mr. Beauchamp.] In what year were oats heavily protected?—3s. per cental. I could not tell you the year. 73. Prior to that duty a very large quantity of oats was imported from New Zealand?— Yes. 74. Since the imposition of the duty the imports are very small?— Yes, in comparison. 75. Can you tell me the quantity of oats imported into Victoria just prior to the imposition of that duty?—No; that could be got from the Customs. 76. What is the present selling-price of good seed oats here ?—ls. 10d. to 2s. 77. Is there much land here worked on co-operative principles?— They work on share principles. The landowner provides the land, and in some cases fences it in and puts up the dwelling. The farmer provides the seed and the labour. 78. Do they share equally?— Yes, generally. 79. What description of manures are generally used here?— Both imported and local made. 80. Are the German manures used ?— Yes. 81. Principally bonedust and ordinary blood-manures?—l think so. 82. Can you give the average price at which wheat can be sold at a profit here ?—2s. 6d. 83. Is that at the siding or in town ? —At the siding. 84. Are there many large areas available both for growing grain and for pastoral purposes in 'Victoria ?—There are large areas at present used for pastoral purposes that would be excellently suited for cultivation. 85. What is the price of wheat land?—£2 10s. to £3 10s., as against oat land £5 to £15 per acre. 86. There are still very large areas that could be brought under cultivation, both for wheat and oats ?—Yes ; but the farmers prefer to pay attention to dairying, as it pays them better. 87. There are. large quantities of grapes grown in Victoria ? —Yes. There are over two thousand people engaged in growing grapes. 88. Is the cultivation increasing ?—No. 89. It has not been a profitable industry, owing to the ravages of phylloxera ?—ln some districts vignerons have been quite ruined. 90. The vines can be grown on poor land?— Yes. 91. Mr. Luke.] Do you export mutton? —Yes. 92. What quantity ? —We exported to the value of £49,650 last year. A good deal of that would come from Eiverina. That is an increasing trade. 93. Can you tell us what is the average wage paid to farm-labourers in Victoria?—lss. to £1 per week and their keep. 94. Mr. Leys.] A statement has been published that the area under oats has increased by 90,000 acres during the last year ?—lf that is so, it is due to the African market. I have no official information about that. We make up the agricultural returns in February. 95. Has sugar-beet been grown here to any extent?— Not to any large extent. We established a sugar-beet factory in the Gippsland district, but it was a financial failure. Now the beet is only being grown experimentally. 96. Was a Government bonus offered?— There was, but it is not continued now. 97. Who established the factory?— The cultivators with Government assistance. 98. What was the cause of failure ?—They had two bad seasons, and the capital was not sufficient. The Government had assisted them to a certain extent, but would not assist them any longer. 99. Do you think beet can be produced successfully for sugar in Victoria ?—I do. That has been proved. 100. Do you think that in the future it is likely to be tried again?—l hope so. 1 could not say for certain. 101. I notice you exported in 1889 fruit to the value of £31,699 to New South Wales : do you know what kind? —Mostly apples, pears, and plums.
575
A.—4
102. Is fruit-growing regarded as a profitable industry in Victoria? —Some people make it pay them remarkably well, others say they cannot make it pay at all. 103. Is it extending or declining?—l think it is extending. 104. Is the jam-making industry increasing?— Yes. I may say that we have had a new market opened for that in South Africa. 105. What is the value of the hams and bacon produced in Victoria during 1899?—£104,281. 106. Are they exported at all?—I think to the northern colonies mostly. West Australia would take a considerable quantity. 107. Can oats be produced at a profit here for 2s. a bushel ?—Yes. 108. Are the agricultural portions of Victoria much subject to drought ? —The wheat districts are very much so. 109. How often do those droughts occur on an average ? —We have had four years of drought in succession in the northern districts. Harbison Oed examined. (No. 216.) 110. Hon. the Chairman.'] What is your name ?—Harrison Ord. 111. What is your official position?— Chief Inspector of Factories for Victoria. 112. How long have you held that position ?—Since 1893. 113. Can you tell us what is the number of persons employed in factories in Victoria ?—I can only give the figures for the year ending December, 1899. They were—3l,649 males, 17,897 females ; total, 49,546. 114. What about boys and girls ?—I cannot give those separately. 115. What constitutes a factory in Victoria?—-In the majority of trades any place in which steam or mechanical power is used in preparing or manufacturing articles for trade or sale, or where four persons are employed. The exceptions are the bread-making and furniture trades, in which one person constitutes a factory, all being governed by the method of preparing or manufacturing articles for trade or sale. The Act only apply to cities, towns, and boroughs, so I have no statistics regarding persons outside such places. 116. Could you give us a list of the factories in Victoria, showing the numbers of persons employed in each?— Attached to my report for the year 1899 there is a table, a copy of which I hand in. [See Appendix.] 117. What is the largest number of hands employed in any one factory in Victoria?—l could not say just now. 118. What is the number of working-hours per day on the average ? —For all females and for all males under sixteen the hours are limited by law to forty-eight. In the majority of places for adult males it is forty-eight hours. 119. Is that by statute? —No ; it is only by arrangement. 120. What about the rate of wages for an adult made ?—ln my report I give the average wage, in the same way that I give the number of people employed. It varies immensely, from £2 7s. Id. —-which is the average wage in a very small trade—down to 10s. lid., where women are employed in dressmaking and mantle-making. 121. Have you any Arbitration or Conciliation Act out here? —I believe there is one, but I have never known it to be brought into force. 122. A voluntary one? —Yes. 123. Mr. Leys.] You have a minimum-wages Board here ?—We have what are called special Boards. The procedure is very much the same as of the Conciliation Boards, except that it is done by the Government and the resolution of the House. 124. How is that Board constituted?— There are different Boards for different trades. There are now twenty-seven Boards in existence. 125. How is it set up ?—ln 1896 Parliament gave power to the Government of the day to appoint special Boards, consisting of not more than ten and not less than four persons, to fix the prices to be paid by persons engaged in the manufacture of clothing, boots and shoes, bread, and furniture. The Governor in Council can appoint those Boards. In 1900 the power was greatly extended, so that a Board could be appointed for any trade carried on in a factory or workroom in Victoria if a resolution in favour of the same was carried in either House of Parliament. Originally there were seven Boards appointed; under the new power there were twenty-two Boards constituted. 126. Can you give us a list of the trades now under the scope of those Boards?— Millet broom, stonecutters, pastry-cooks, coopers, printers, woodworkers, saddlery, cigar trade, brick trade, pottery trade, woollen trade, tinsmiths, plate glass, engravers, jam trade, confectioners, jewellers, tanners, fellmongers, vehicle, clothing, boots, bread, shirts, butchers, furniture,* mantelpieces,* bedding,* underclothing. 127. What is the process by which a trade can come under the Board?—Up to 1896 all they had to do was to satisfy the Government of the day that there was some reason, such as sweating or long hours, but now they have to satisfy the Minister or some member of the House that for various reasons a special Board is desirable. In those cases which I have just read to the Commission some of them were moved by the Government on the ground that there was practically unanimity on the part of both employers and employes in their desire to have the wages fixed. A number of firms would be paying very good wages, while others would be paying low wages and have long hours. On that Mr. McLean moved resolutions in the House. 128. Does that cover the majority of the industries in Victoria ?—No; it only applies to trades carried on in factories or workrooms. It would not apply to any dispute with wharf-labourers, or general labourers, or in ships. It is nothing like as wide as the powers given in New Zealand.
* One Board deals with these trades.
A.—4
576
129. Have you found that employers resist being brought under fclie control of the Board ? — In many cases there has been an absolute desire for a Board. In others there has been a passive resistance, while in others there has been an active resistance. There has not been a great deal of resistance to the appointments of the Boards. 130. Has the Board power to fix the working-"hours as welF as the wages?— No. For males over sixteen all the Board can do is to say, " We will fix Is. an hour for males over sixteen or journeymen." Then, most of the Boards fix forty-five or forty-eight hours, and they say, "If you work them longer than that you must pay them extra." 131. Are the Boards appointed representative of the trades?— Under the Act itself half of the members of the Board must be representative of the employers, and the other half must be representative of the employes. They are elected by the employers and employes respectively. If they do not elect them, the Governor in Council can appoint them. 132. Who appoints the Chairman?— The majority of the Boards here consist of five employers and five employes, and those ten, or the majority of them, can appoint a Chairman. If they do not agree, then the Governor in Council appoints the Chairman. 133. Have the decisions of the Board, as a rule, given satisfaction ? —I think, considering the immense issues at stake, and the tremendous powers of those Boards, that they have given satisfaction. It is surprising to me that there has not been ten times the trouble. 134. Is there any appeal ?—No. 135. How long do they fix the wages for?— There is no limit, except that the Board under the new Act will be constituted for two years. It could be called together any time by the Minister of the day or the Chairman of the Board. 136. There is no finality ?—They have to.give a fortnight's notice. They can alter it. I think it is highly desirable that they should be able to alter it. 137. Some extraordinary statements have been published about sweating in Victoria : are those statements correct ?—I can only say that I have no knowledge of it, nor do I think it exists to any great extent now. Means are provided to prevent it. Of course, there are low wages paid in some of those trades. Every one has his own idea of what sweating is. 138. In the clothing trade we have heard that there is sweating?— The man who is paying sweating rates in the clothing trade must be breaking the law. The .minimum wage is £1 for women and £2 ss. for men. The piece-rates are higher. I absolutely deny, so far as the head of a department can, that there is sweating. There may be evasions of the law. Employes can sue for arrears. The department can prosecute. 139. Here is a letter written by Mr. Lemon in regard to the report on sweating. The writer says, " One of the trades referred to was that of the soap- and candle-workers, who gave evidence to the effect that a large number of the employes were working sixty hours per week, and the wages were reported to range from £1 ss. to £1 18s. 6d. . . . One firm employing full-grown men at 155., and putting on boys at 65." ?—I am not denying that there may be sweating in trades not affected by the system. Ido not know whether those statements are true or not. 140. The soap- and candle-manufacturers do not come under the Act ?—The employes have just applied to the Minister to move resolutions, and the allegations you have just read have been supplied to the Minister for the purpose of strengthing his hands. 141. Is labour well organized in Victoria?—lt is a very difficult question to answer. If you ask me candidly for my own opinion, I do not think it is. 142. Would there be any difficulty in such a large industry as the soap- and candle-workers in securing the benefits of the Act ? —I think my report, showing that 328 males of sixteen years and upwards (who received £1 and upwards in wages) were employed in the soap and candle industry in 1899 and receiving an average wage of £1 16s. 10d., shows that, while individuals may be paying the rates indicated, it is clear that a large number are paying more. 143. Is the information you are giving us supplied by the employers ?—Yes; we are at liberty to question the employes. I think the Chinese returns are not as accurate as they might be, but those from Europeans are accurate. 144. What number of Chinese are employed in manufacturing in Victoria?—l have under my supervision only those making furniture or employed in factories. In 1899 there were 408 Chinese in the furniture trade, and in laundries, 165. The Chinese go in for cabinetmaking, but not upholstery. 145. It has been asserted that they have the entire furniture trade in their hands?— All I can say to that is that there are 1,103 males and 120 female Europeans working at the furniture trade. The Chinese have a cheap class of cabinetmaking in their hands. 146. Is the furniture trade under the 3cope of a Wages Board ?—Yes ; it was the first. It came into existence in 1897. The wages are regulated by the Board, and the employes should be paid not less than Is. per hour. 147. It is not true that there is any sweating in the furniture trade as regards Europeans?— No, it is absolutely untrue. The only way in which sweating might happen is when a man makes furniture on his own account, or chooses to enter into a league with the employer, but that would not be sweating. 148. Can they maintain Board wages in the face of this Chinese competition ?—Yes, because they do not compete very largely for the cheap class of goods. The Chinese have the common work in their hands. 149. Have you a Shops Act?— Yes ; it is a very strong measure now. It limits the hours that women and men may work in the metropolitan district. It limits the hours in which women may work throughout the whole country. It fixes a half-holiday for every shop employe in the colony. It limits the hours in which shops may be kept open to 10 o'clock on Saturdays, and 7 o'clock on other nights.
577
A.—4
150. Is it compulsory to close shops at 7 o'clock ?—That is overridden, because we have a provision which enables a majority of shopkeepers to petition and get regulations for certain classes of shops. 151. In those circumstances, you cannot practically enforce the closing of shops?—We do, either at the hour fixed by the Act or the regulation. Some of the shopkeepers close at 6 instead of 7 by petition; but they are all subject to the fifty-two-hours limit, which protects the employes very largely. 152. Fifty-two hours is the maximum limit ? —Yes, in which they can be worked without the permission of the Chief Inspector. 153. Do the shopkeepers as a class oppose it ?—I think the majority of the shopkeepers would be heartily in favour of a uniform hour. They are greatly dissatisfied with the present haphazard way in which shops are kept open under regulations. 154. What about fixing the day for the afternoon holiday?— The shopkeepers in each municipality can fix their own, and many have fixed it. As a rule, it is Wednesday in the metropolitan district. The shopkeepers have the alternative of closing on Saturday. 155. Is there any strong desire by the trades to get a Conciliation and Arbitration Act on the New Zealand lines?—l am not aware of it. They want some means for going outside the Factories Act. 156. Has there been any public agitation within your own knowledge ?—I noticed that at the last elections questions were asked, and the Premier promised to introduce a Bill. 157. Are wages paid to any extent in excess of the minimum wage fixed by the Wages Board ?—Yes ; in many trades it is a real minimum. 158. You do not think it becomes a maximum wage ?—No. The better workman will not work unless he gets his price. The clothing trade was in a terrible state before the Board was established. We had cases in which mothers and girls combined were only making 10s. In one case that I have in my mind a girl is now earning £1 10s. At present girls are earning wonderful wages. 159. It has worked a marvellous change?— Yes. 160. Mr. Beid.] When a Board gives its decision how is it enforced?— The department enforces it. We very seldom go to some places, because we know they comply with the law?—ln other places the Inspectors go round and question the employes. There are very heavy penalties imposed : for the first offence any sum up to £10; for the second offence it is not less than £5, nor more than £25 ; for the third offence it is not less than £50, nor more than £100. The registration of the factory may be cancelled by the Chief Inspector after conviction of the occupier for a third offence. 161. You have a system of inspection?— Yes. 162. Are there many Inspectors employed ? —Nine male and four female Inspectors; and then I have the assistance of about thirty police Inspectors in the smaller districts; that is for the whole of the colony. 163. Does the Factory Act apply all over Victoria? —Only to cities, towns, and boroughs. 164. The boroughs can only be constituted, as a rule, if they have a certain population?— Yes. 165. What means have you for finding out new industries ? —We should not extend the Act unless some great reason was given, even if a large factory were started outside. 166. You would not necessarily take that factory into consideration? — There are large factories at Braybrook with which we have nothing to do. 167. There may be large factories throughout the colony that may not be under your supervision?— There are three mills in Ballarat under my supervision. There is one mill just outside which is not. The Ministry of the day could extend the Act. 168. You do not find the tendency to extend it?—We could extend the Act within twentyfour hours. 169. Mr. Luke.] Are the persons constituting the Boards experienced in their line of business ? —They may or may not be. In the majority of cases they are people actively engaged in the trades. It is the same with employes as employers. 170. The eight hours per day is not enforceable by statute ? —Not for males over sixteen. I think in the majority of cases in large factories it is general. 171. What is the limit for young people to go to work ? —They are supposed to have a Fourth Class State-school certificate. 172. Do boys of thirteen as a rule pass that standard ? —I could not say. 173. Do all apprentices get wages in factories ?—Every person employed in the factory must receive 2s. 6d, per week as a minimum—boy or girl. With regard to girls in the clothing trade, no premiums are allowed to be taken under any circumstances; but with boys they can take them. 174. There is no limit as to a premium ?—No. 175. Is there any limit as to the time for which apprentices shall serve ?—The Board usually fixes that. 176. What is the usual term of apprenticeship in a furniture trade ?—For apprentices five to six years. 177. In the clothing trade? —Seven years. In the boot trade five years, both for males and females. In the clothing trade it is seven years for males, and five years for females. 178. There is no limit to the proportion of apprentices to workmen ? —-Yes ; the Boards have control over that. 179. What is the term for apprenticeship in the engineering and boilermaking trade ?—We have no Boards in that trade and in no branch of it. We have just received some petitions for Boards. 180. Mr. Beauchamp.] I suppose the only Acts you have in force protecting wages are the Labour and Factories Acts ?—Yes. 73—A. 4.
578
A.—4
181. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act is a voluntary one? —Yes. 182. Has there been any attempt to introduce one on the lines of the New Zealand Act ?—I believe Mr. Best and Mr. Trenwith introduced one last session. 183. Are you of opinion that crying abuses in regard to any particular trade have been remedied by the bringing into force of the Minimum Wages Act?—l have no doubt whatever. Our system is a little cumbersome in the way we elect the Boards. 184. Do you think there is a chance of legislation being passed to make it less cumbersome — to regulate any particular trade in which there may be abuses at the present time ?—At the present time it requires a resolution of the House. I think, myself, that the Ministry of the day might very well be trusted with the power. New Boards would have to wait some time before Parliament meets. 185. We saw a statement in this morning's paper that there are about ten thousand Chinese employed in factories in Victoria?— They are not employed in factories. 186. A great many are employed in factories?—l know of them all. Every Chinese must be registered. 187. In the furniture trade there are 488, and in laundries 165?— Yes. 188. Have you particulars of other trades ? —That is the total. I think there is one Chinese who is a watchmaker. 189. Mr. Millar.] What is the object of making the Factories Act apply to cities, towns, and boroughs ?—That is to save the expense of applying it to large districts. 190. Do you think the Act ought to be operative all over the colony ? —No, Ido not. I think the present provision is ample. 191. Do you not think it is right for a factory in the country to be regulated as to sanitation the same as in a borough? —It is equally right. 192. Could you not adopt the New Zealand system and appoint the police of the district?— We do that here. I have not had any cases brought under my notice. The very fact of the power being in existence is a great check. 193. Is there any provision made against giving workout of the factories?—lt is not prohibited. They have to keep an account of what they give out. 194. Does the Wages Board extend to a contractor outside of the employer ?—No one escapes ; it applies to every one without exception. The clothing trade and every one employed in making clothing for sale comes under it. 195. Suppose a woman and her two children receive certain work from a clothing-factory, how do you get at the wages ?—The factory would have to keep an account of the work given out, and the price paid. The lady Inspectors, of whom we have four, would visit the house and ask what was paid. We depend on the women themselves to give information. They are registered as outworkers. 196. I have your report here to 31st December, 1898 : have you been able to deal any more fully with the Chinamen than your report shows? —No. 197. You say, " They beat us all along the line " : you still find that is the case ? —Yes. 198. You say your statistics with regard to the Chinese are valueless, because you say you could not take their word ?—That is so. They prove conclusively by figures that they paid very much higher wages than Europeans. 199. Does your Mr. Ellis still report on the same lines as this : " Furniture-makers will have to close up because of Chinese competition " ?—I would not express an opinion like that. The furniture trade is improving, and the machinery and cabinetmaking is enabling them to hold their own. I think that statement is far too sweeping. 200. You admit that as far as the Chinese are concerned ? —The only thing I can prevent them doing is working too late at night, and then it is difficult to prove it as to laundries. 201. There appeared in the Age of 25th January an account of a meeting in the Trades Hall. It was stated that in the sugar-refining business the hours were nine and a half to ten per day, that a large number of boys were employed, and there was a large amount of Sunday labour ? ■ —The whole of these facts were presented to the Minister of Labour the week before last, and they have now been referred to me to report on. I have not had time to touch them yet. 202. Subject to the approval of the Minister, after you had gone into this matter could you give us further information ? —Some of these I shall not be able to do anything with. Trades such as hairdressing do not come under the Act. The others I will inquire into and get the particulars. 203. You see it would be a very serious matter for the workers of New Zealand to come into the Federation if such conditions exist. In New Zealand men are given a fixed wage, and by law have their hours regulated ? —I take it the Commission does not believe that these wages are the general rule. These people are taking the extreme case of the sweater, and the average employer here in spite of all that is said is not a sweater. In the soap and candle trade the employes receive an average wage of £1 16s. 9d. 204. In taking out that average you take every one employed: suppose one were paid £7 a week ? —Proprietors and general managers are not included. That is shown at page 34 of my report for 1898. If the employer includes them, we do not include them. 205. Take, for instance, a large engineering shop : you would include the whole of the foremen in the different departments?— Yes. . 206. So far as the average wage is concerned, it is misleading to give as an average journeyman's wage £1 16s. per week, because you have to take in amounts considerably higher than journeyman's wages ? —I have mine arranged in the average way. The average wage goes from £2 7s. Id. down to 10s. lid. I think the fact of that immense range with all these hundreds of trades is a fair indication of the wages paid.
A.—4
579
207. I maintain that no man who is receiving a higher wage than the average should be included. Ten shillings per day is the average. You include the foreman's weekly wage along with the journeyman's wage?—l have always regarded foremen as a superior kind of journeymen. 208. Is the Workers' Compensation Act in force ?—No. 209. You have an Employers' Liability Act practically the same as that of England ?—Yes. 210. With regard to the minimum wage of 2s. 6d., does that apply to shops?— Only to factories. 211. Save you found in Victoria the shops are the biggest sweaters of the lot ?—No; I do not think the shop-people are as badly paid as in the factories. Undoubtedly there are shops in which employes receive nothing. 212. Our experience in New Zealand is that the bulk of the girls receive nothing for twelve months ? —That is the same here. 213. Could you give a copy of the returns for 1899 in which you show the average wages? —Yes. 214. The hours of labour in the bulk of the organized trades are eight ?—Yes. There are exceptions. 215. From your knowledge of the labour conditions throughout the continent, do you think the conditions here are superior to those of New South Wales ?—I know very little of the conditions of New South Wales. lam told that in the clothing trade the wages are very much higher here in consequence of the Board. You would see advertisements in the Sydney Press for machinists at 13s, and 145., whereas the minimum here is £1. When you see 13s. and 14s. advertised, you will understand that they employed people for less than that. 216. Can you say how federation is going to affect the matter? —So far I have not had any evidence put before me that high wages means increased cost. In the clothing trade the immediate effect of the great increase in wages was a better system. Good wages almost invariably means increased production. 217. Is there a general trend in Victoria towards the specialisation of work in factories ?—Yes, to an immense extent. 218. The industries of Victoria are in a much more forward condition than in the other colony ?—There, again, I cannot speak from personal knowledge. 219. Would it be possible to give the number of hands employed in the three largest factories in the principal industries of Victoria ?—I am prohibited under penalties from supplying names. 220. Could you say in the engineering trade 1, 2, 3, and give the number of hands employed? —Yes. 221. Keep the females separated from the males, and the number employed under eighteen years of age ?—Up to this year I have only been able to get the wages up to sixteen. This year I will have them up to twenty-one. In my new report I will be giving that information. I will give it to the Commission according to the information I have. 222. Say, boots and shoes, clothing, engineering, cabinetmaking, soap- and candle-works?—l will supply three in each, and call them A, B, and C. 223. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are the average wages paid in the sugar-works?—l have the figures only up to sixteen for 1889. The average wage for sugar-refining was £1 15s. 7d. The average wage for 210 persons of sixteen years of age and upwards and receiving £1 or over was £2 2s. 7d. 224. That is very much in excess of what was represented to us ?—I think the great fault is that employes single out exceptional cases. 225. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you a Masters and Servants Act ?—Yes, but it is practically inoperative. 226. Mr. Leys.] Is there distress here ?—There has been considerable distress in the boot trade, but that is common to the world. The only cases which have been brought very prominently under my notice are two trades in which machinery has been introduced—namely, boots and printing. 227. Do you think there is an excess of production? —I believe we have machines here that do the work of twenty men. 228. We have been told that the Victorian boot-factories could supply all Australasia with boots ?— I have heard it stated that five of them can do it, but, then, that was immediately contradicted by some other leading boot-manufacturers. It is very hard to say. 229. It is a fact that the boot-factories are largely in excess of the requirements of Victoria?— They could produce an excess undoubtedly. 230. Do you know any other lines of business in which there is a large capacity for production ?—Even in the boot trade we are often asked for permission to work overtime. I hear a statement like that and a week afterwards I will be asked for permission to work overtime. 231. Do you not think it suits manufacturers to keep surplus labour and work their machines irregularly ?—I have not the faintest doubt that all manufacturers like to have a surplus. That is why I say the wages are good now, because there is not a surplus. A surplus is always used to cut down wages. 232. Do you think the unemployed are mostly unskilled workers ? —I think so. The really good workman, to my mind, gets employment even in the boot trade. 233. With regard to compensation to workmen, is there no movement to bring the new English Act into force in Victoria ? —Sir Henry Wrixon introduced it here, and I have recommended every year that something should be done. Some of the cases we have are iniquitous— when children are injured and get no compensation. 234. Does the feeling lead you to think chat the Act will be passed ?—lt is difficult for any one to say, but I cannot imagine there will be any difficulty,
A.—4
580
235. Does the opposition to such acts as that come from the Upper House ?—lt has never been passed by the Lower House. 236. Is it true that there is very dense poverty in the working population in Melbourne ?—Of course, as regards the trades under the Boards, it i-s untrue. I am poor compared with the intensely rich. I think our population is wealthy compared with the European standard. 237. One witness says he never saw such poverty as he saw here?—l think that is utterly absurd. It is common knowledge that we have not the poverty here that they have in England, and never will have. 238. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Are there not people unable to get work ?—There is work for every one, I think ; but on the farms it is notorious that very low wages are offered. 239. Are there people in Victoria who refuse to work ? —I do not think so.
Wednesday, 3rd Apeil, 1901. Hon. Alexander James Peacock, M.L.A., Premier of the State of Victoria, examined. (No. 217.) 240. Hon. the Chairman.} What is your name ?—Alexander James Peacock. 241. You are Premier of the State of Victoria ? —Yes. - 242. What portfolios do you hold ?—Treasurer and Minister of Labour. 243. You understand, Mr. Peacock, that we are commissioned to ascertain whether it will be for the advantage of New Zealand or otherwise to enter the Federation of the Commonwealth of Australia. We want to ask you some questions —amongst others, what is your opinion as to how the finances of the different States will be affected under federation, more especially having regard to what has been called States. You are aware that under the Commonwealth the Federal Government take control of the Customs ?—Yes. 244. What do you think will be the effect of that upon the finances of the different States? — In what way ? 245. In one way, as to how their revenues will be affected-?—lt is such a big order at this stage that 1 would not like to express an opinion. I understand you are not publishing the evidence. 246. We are publishing it to Parliament afterwards ?—Until we have ' had some little experience it is hard to say, as we are in a transition stage. The view I have put before the country since I have taken the Treasurership is that we will have to be particularly careful in the State of Victoria. The abolition of our inter-State duties means that the revenue we have received at the borders will be gone. Of recent years we have not received so much from duties on account of the drought; still, our revenue, as you have noticed, has been increasing. People seem to think that they ought to get more out of the Government. We will have to be careful in the State of Victoria, as there is going to be increased expenditure. It is pure guesswork as to what it is going to cost us. 247. The Federal Government can retain up to 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue for ten years ?—Yes. 248. Do you imagine that will be continued, or that the Federal Government may require more than the 25 per cent., or that they may legislate for retaining the whole?—lt would be a big order to express any opinion on the point as to what would happen ten years ahead. 249. There is the " Braddon blot"?—We Victorians supported that, because we wanted to know exactly where we would be landed. By having that 25 per cent, fixed in the Act for ten years we would know where we were drifting. 250. There was considerable opposition even to the period of ten years being fixed ?—No. 251. Why was it called the "Braddon blot"?—It was called that by Mr. Eeid, who was opposed to anything of the kind being placed in the Constitution. Those who held there ought to be some limitation in that direction could suggest nothing better. Finally, when the Premiers' Conference was held they discussed the question over again. Whilst it was adversely criticized by those who were opponents to federation and others, nothing was suggested by them in the end. There was never anything suggested in its stead in the nature of a workable scheme. 252. May I ask you how do you think the public finances of Victoria will be affected by federation ? What do you anticipate the tariff will be ? —A moderately protective one. 253. A lower one than you have now ?—\es. '254. How will that affect your finances here? —I do not think it will affect us adversely. 255. You will not have to make any sacrifices?— No. 256. Take the smaller States —Tasmania, for example ?—Yes. 257. How about South Australia?— Yes; they have such a big debt too. It is a serious matter for them. 258. How are they to make up their deficiency ? —lt would take us all our time to deal with our own little affair here. We have gone into certain expenditure, and we will have to be careful. 259. Suppose the smaller Stetes require to raise certain loans and have parted with their Customs, how are they going to do it ? —lt will be a very difficult matter, and require serious consideration. 260. You cannot give an opinion ? —No; even with my short experience as Treasurer of nearly two months we cannot forecast anything as to how things are going to turn out. 261. How do you think New Zealand will be affected by federation, having regard to her distance from the central seat of Government ?—I think there will be a great difficulty. Sentimentally, I would like to see New Zealand in the Federation, but there are great difficulties. I think, for
581
A.— 4
example, our farmers would be hostile to your people coming in. There is the question of New Zealand oats. I shall never forget after the Conference Captain Russell attended here, and after the Convention in Sydney, one member put it very forcibly that federation was no good, as if New Zealand came in her oats would come in. 262. Are the oats better?— Yours are better lam told. 263. Victoria supplies herself with agricultural produce ?—Yes. 264. Why should the farmers be afraid of New Zealand?— You know what farmers are : they are most difficult people to deal with politically. You cannot shift them. 265. Assuming that everybody in the Commonwealth were anxious to have New Zealand in, do you think the distance would be a great disadvantage ?—Yes. 266. What about the postal arrangements ? We have our penny-post :do you think that would be preserved to us ? —I am certain of that. There would be no difficulty about that. 267. What advantages do you think New Zealand would gain by coming in?— She would get the whole of the Australian market. 268. And intercolonial free-trade?— Yes. 269. Anything else ?—There is the defence question ; but I have not studied that. 270. Is there any other matter you think would be of advantage to New Zealand ?—No, except the question of union in the southern seas. The people are of the same race, and their sympathies are similar. 271. Is there any large trade with the Pacific islands ?—Not much; it is done with New South Wales principally. 272. Whether New Zealand comes in or not, that would not affect Victoria as regards trade with the Pacific islands ? —No. 273. Have you any opinions of your own on the coloured-labour question ?—Yes ; I feel very strongly in favour of a " white " Australia. 274. Do you think that is possible? —I have only been in Queensland on three occasions. I admit that, as the State has encouraged an industry of that kind, it would be very difficult to suddenly abolish it. Personally, I favour the views of Mr. Barton in gradually eliminating the traffic. I have seen so much trouble caused in administering the Factories' Act in regard to aliens. The Chinese are able to defeat us. When dealing with the Wages Board I fought strenuously against the view of having an elective Wages Board. I said the Government ought to appoint men, and be responsible for their appointment—men who have had the confidence of both sides of the House, but the House was against my view. When we came to the furniture trade Board we found that there were more Chinese voters than Europeans. Then we had to pass a Bill in regard to that. The Chinese are able to defeat us. 275. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you think it possible by legislation to keep coloured races from coming into Australia? —I very much doubt it. 276. You know of no case in history where the European has laboured continuously for generations in the tropics ? —I cannot remember. 277. You seem to have some apprehension about State finance ?—Yes. 278. Is it likely you larger States will have to come to the rescue of the smaller States ?— When a referendum was taken that aspect of the question was put. Having once become united, the result will be in exactly the same way as the State now deals with a portion of its territory in the case of a flood or bush-fire —the State as a whole recognises the need of a small community and helps. When we have once got into the Commonwealth and are all really one, then the same view will arise. 279. You think that in all probability, in the course of a few years, the Commonwealth will have to absorb the liabilities possibly of the smaller States ?—I do; generally becoming more of one State. 280. In other words, that federation will more or less be sacrificed to unification ? —Yes. 281. You think that unification in the hereafter is within the reach of possibility?— Not exactly in that way. For example, difficulties will arise as regards the finances of West Australia. When we are all united together, if the West Australian State finances are being adversely affected the Commonwealth as a whole must stand by them in the interests of the people as a whole. 282. Do you think there is a possibility of the absorption of State powers by the Federal Government? —Gradually, I think, certain powers now remaining with the States will be referred to the Federal Government. 283. Do you think the tendency will be to intensify State powers, or to gradually obliterate them in favour of unified power of the Commonwealth ?—I certainly think it will be in favour of uniformity. 284. Will not that be disadvantageous to New Zealand, seeing we are so far off?—l think so. I remember Sir John Hall referring to this matter. 285. You think there will be the tendency to aggrandise the Commonwealth at the expense of the States ?—I do not call it " aggrandise," because it will be in the interests of the people. 286. Perhaps to absorb ? —Yes; I believe our railways will be taken over, and also the Victorian legislation. I think our Victorian legislation is fairly perfect. South Australia is passing an Act exactly on the same lines as I passed some years ago. 287. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] As to the tropical question, it will affect territorially half of Australia ? —Yes. 288. In looking forward I do not consider it is possible all that area can be brought into use without coloured labour? —That is a matter on which you can only get definite information on the spot from those who have experience. I have never offered any opinion on that point. 289. As to the smaller States, you were saying it was possible they would have to be relieved. Take the case of Tasmania: I think there was an idea on foot that Tasmania would be best helped
A.—4
582
by being incorporated with "Victoria: do you think if that is possible that idea will recur? —I do; it would save the expense of government. 290. Do you think such a movement as that would be likely to come from the smaller States ? —Yes; after they have the experience of a few years and see how the finances will be affected, the proportion required for the Federal Government will be so much, and they may require extra taxing for carrying on the government, that there will be a crying-out on the part of the people. Tasmania does most of its business with us, and then its mining interests, which really saved it, are entirely due to the investment of capital from here. 291. Is that idea in the air? —I never heard it mentioned recently. 292. Mr. Boberts.] The New Zealand farmers do not fear federation; our manufacturers do. They hold that, the manufacturers being on a larger scale here, they could not compete with them on an equal footing ?—Our woollen-people, for example, are frightened of your woollen-mills. You have nothing to fear with the good products you turn out. 293. Take the boot trade: they are much afraid that you are manufacturing here larger quantities than you use yourself, and that your manufactories will be dumping down on our shores considerably under cost?—l should not fear it. 294. Your manufactories are on a large scale ? —Not as large as they might be. The boot trade was lost to Victoria when the great strike took place some years ago. 295. Mr. Millar.] After the first two or three years do you expect any portion of the 25 per cent, from the Customs duties will be refunded?—l think so. I have great faith in Sir George Turner as Treasurer. He was blamed that he did not immediately proceed in favour of the Bill, without looking carefully into the finances. The people have been able to see that he was advising them that whilst sentimentally it was a grand thing it was his duty to point out how the finances would be affected, and that each citizen would have to pay more than he would under the old condition of affairs. 296. There is a strong desire on the part of Australia to have penny-postage introduced. You know that the departments of all the States have deficits. In the event of penny-postage coming in that deficit will be increased ?—Yes. 297. Do you think that will absorb a large portion of the 25 per cent. ?—Yes, we will have that experience here after our penny-post. 298. As far as the Federal Parliament is concerned, it will be a gradually increasing expenditure? —Yes; the experience of the Commonwealth will be the same as we have had here when our finances fell off by a couple of million pounds. Our expenditure on our State pensioners rose when we could least afford it. Everything combined against us. So it will be with penny-postage. The States are uncertain as to what is to come back to them. If penny-postage were carried out immediately it would adversely affect our finances. 299. That is one department in which you anticipate a considerable loss?— Yes. 300. If the Federal Parliament passes an Old-age Pensions Act, that will absorb a large amount ?—Yes. 301. Do you not think that those two amounts will absorb the 25 per cent. ? —I think so. 302. They are committed to the old-age pensions ?—As part and parcel of the Barton policy ; but I think they will raise the cry that Victoria is trying the experiment, and that the New South Wales Act will be comirg into force on the Ist July. 303. Those two States will require a large amount of money ?—Yes. 304. The population of the other States is comparatively small ? —Yes. 305. If it applies to Tasmania, which is one of the older colonies, there will be a considerable expenditure there? —Yes. 306. You have no idea what the expenditure on defence will be ? —No. 307. What do you anticipate will be Victoria's contribution after two years? —I have not gone into that question. 308. Do you think there is any man in Australia who could tell us of the financial effect ?— No ; it is all guesswork. 309. In fact, it has been a leap in the dark ?—Yes; I would not take any notice of estimates. 310. Your Factories Act applies only to cities, towns, and boroughs? — Yes; but we have power to extend it. Theie was a great dread on the part of country districts that they were going to be brought under this " extremely socialistic legislation." We admit that rates of pay are not so high in the country as in the city. We have reserved power to extend the Act when complaints are being made. We have an Upper House here, you know, which is a fixed and powerful one. 311. Your Factories Act constitutes four employes a factory?— Yes, except in the case of Chinamen, when one Chinaman is a factory. 312. How can you keep a check on sweating when nothing under four is under control of the Government ? —There is a difficulty. We wanted to make every one a factory, but we had to take what we could get. 313. In New Zealand we have two. You had some deputations waiting on you lately, and, according to the report, a bad condition of affairs was shown ?—That was a body of men not under the operation of the Wages Board, and they are agitating to be brought under it. 314. There were thirty trades represented. Do you think this statement is correct: that in the sugar-refining business the men worked ten hours a day, and a large number of boys are employed, who work for 12s. a week ? —Those trades have asked to be organized since the passing of the Factories and Shops Act. Following- on that they waited on me and asked to be brought under the Act. It was very strange that the Upper House passed it. On the motion of a private member of either House, without the Government of the day coming down, a majority can create a Wages Board, The men got organized, collated these figures, and asked me to move the resolu-
583
A.-4
tion. I said I would have their information analysed. The employers who originally opposed the legislation are now in favour of it. 315. It gives the fair employer a chance? —Yes. 316. With your experience, how do you find the Wages Board acts? —Eemarkably well, except in one case. The Eev. Mr. Edgar was selected by Goth sides to act as Chairman of the Clothing Board. They took nearly two years to complete their log, and there was not a casting-vote given by the Chairman. The manufacturers who were opposed to it do not complain. 317. What powers have these Wages Boards ?—The operators have fought hard to have power. They are to have no administrative powers. 318. There is power to regulate the number of boys and girls ?—Yes. 319. You have no Apprentices Act in force in this colony?— No. 320. Is there any feeling in Victoria that there ought to be a Court of Arbitration?— Yes. 321. If that is done the Wages Board would go?— That has not been raised. Mr. Trenwith and Mr. Best went to your colony and got a lot of information. 322. Have you any legislation in the interests of the workers outside of the Shops and Factories Act?— No. As a Government we are pledged to work on compensation, and also to arbitration and conciliation. 323. How do you think federation is going to affect the manufacturers unless you have an Arbitration and Conciliation Board ?—lt is a remarkable thing that the public did not cry out about it. From my experience as a member of the Convention, the question of uniform factory legislation might have been raised. It shows that care should be exercised in dealing with a public question. It was not suggested in the Conventions that the Commonwealth should take over factory legislation, yet our Act was in operation. 324. Is it not a fact that the hands of each State will be virtually tied as to labour legislation ? —No. 325. If you in Victoria" desire to have an Bight Hours Act in the interests of your own employers and employe's, you dare not bring it into force so long as you know that New South Wales is working on different lines ? —Yes; it will not be prevented. 326. You cannot do it in your own interests, because if you are to touch the conditions of the manufacturers that did not apply to New South Wales it would unduly affect your people here ? —Yes; that was one of the reasons that caused our labour people to pass it. The same argument was used as to old-age pensions. I said it would be used as an argument for dealing with it in our respective States. When it was put in our people said it ought to be dealt with by the States, because it was said the Federal Parliament could not deal with it for years. The general tendencies will be to bring the higher-paid States down to the level of the lower to enable them to compete. 327. In New Zealand we have a lot of what is called "restrictive legislation," and it will be absolutely impossible for New Zealand to maintain that legislation and enter into competition with New South Wales under the conditions we have at present, because freight and charges amount to a mere nothing ?—That is how some of your people will view it. 328. You said you had a lot of trouble with the Chinese here. In the report of your Labour Department the Chief Inspector said that the Chinese were too diplomatic for him : is there no way of crushing them out ?—The suggestion is that they should pay a heavy license-fee. 329. Something like a poll-tax ?—Yes. 330. I suppose it would be somewhat difficult to carry that out ? —lt would. 331. They can come to Victoria from New South Wales and other colonies now ?—Yes. The old-time Chinese diggers have been going down, but the population in the cities is increasing. In my constituency in the country the Chinese are dying out. 332. Do you not think that in the course of a few years the people of Australia will cry out against the expenditure incurred by the State Parliament ?—Yes ; undoubtedly, there will be a reduction in expenditure. 333. If the State Parliament is brought down to the position of being only a little better than an ordinary Eoad Board the people will want to know what is the use of it ?—The State Parliament will still have the Lands Department, and the Mines and Water Department, which the Federal Parliament could not deal with. After the Federal Parliament has dealt with the tariff, all the other questions they have power to deal with will not create much fighting. It will not sit long. When the tariff is passed there will be a general consensus of opinion throughout Australia that the tariff ought to remain for some time in the interests of businesspeople. 334. What functions will there be for the Federal Parliament after they have taken over the main revenue-producing departments and legislated on the thirty-nine subjects referred to them ? Will they not develop into a purely administrative body, having control of purely revenue departments ? —The Federal Parliament will not have much to do, but they will be liable to be called together in the event of emergency. 335. Do you think it is going to pay a State such as New Zealand to contribute £500,000 per annum for the pleasure of having one administrative body taking control of the finances ?—That is not for me to say. 336. Mr. Beatichamp.] You said that probably the farmers would be hostile to federation?—■ Yes. 337. One witness expressed the opinion that had New Zealand evinced a strong desire to become portion of the Commonwealth one of the strongest objectors would have been Victoria : do you hold that view ? —No; there would have been a bigger vote in the farming districts against the acceptance of the Bill. Mr. McLean raised the point that our land would depreciate in value if the Federal Bill were accepted, and prices would go down to the level of the prices of New
A.—4
584
South Wales. It did not have that effect. The farmers here believe in protection for themselves and free-trade for everybody else. 338. One of the questions raised is that unless we federate with the Commonwealth possibly friction may arise between the Commonwealth and New Zealand in respect of the control of the Pacific islands? —I-think that ought to be left with you people. Your trade relations are with them. 339. Sydney has a large trade with the Pacific islands?—l do not think there is anything in it. 340. It is highly improbable that any friction will arise between us? —I do not think so. 341. Do you think the Commonwealth will take the State debts over?—l would not say that they will do so at an early date, but ultimately they will. 342. With regard to our Arbitration and Conciliation Act, do you think it possible that an Act on similar lines will be passed by the Commonwealth?— Not for some time. 343. Do the Wages Boards answer, in your opinion?— Yes. 344. As to the Chinese, we saw a statement in the morning paper in which it was stated that there are something like ten thousand Chinese employed in factories in Victoria : that is an exaggeration ?—Yes. 345. You have a method here by which you register the numbers ?—Yes. 346. As to the " white" industry, we have been told that there is something like £8,000,000 invested in the sugar industry, and the product is about £2,000,000 per annum ? —Yes. 347. If it can be shown that this industry cannot be carried on except by black labour you would give way?— Yes. 348. We have some particulars given us about the boot industry. It was said that New South Wales under free-trade had produced something like three million pounds' worth in one year, as against two million pounds' worth in Victoria?—lt is remarkable how they can use figures. 349. Mr. Luke.] You said that the farming classes were against New Zealand coming in ?— Yes. 350. How do the towns look at it ?—They favour it. 351. The large manufacturing industries, such as engineering, bootmaking, and furnituremaking, you think, would be favourable to New Zealand coming in?— Yes. 352. Did I understand you to say that the Boards have power to regulate the number of boys in factories? —Yes. 353. Have they been called on to enforce their judgments in Courts of law ?—We do that. 354. Have you had to do it often ?—Not very often. The manufacturers usually accept the conditions. 355. If the Commonwealth took over the railways, that would mean that they would undertake the construction of new lines?— Yes. 356. In that event New Zealand would be prejudicially affected, inasmuch as she would not have the same interest in those lines as the other colonies ?—You would be at a disadvantage in that way. That ought to be reserved. The Federal Parliament ought to know your circumstances. There would be conflicting interests. 357. You think there would be reserved to New Zealand additional powers in addition to those reserved to the States within the Commonwealth ?—Yes. 358. As regards the Civil Service, you think the Federal Parliament would set up a Civil Service Board to regulate the public servants ?—I think so. 359. Would New Zealand be prejudicially affected as regards appointments supposing she came into the Commonwealth ? —She would if she came in later on when the appointments had been made. Sir George Turner does not believe it will be necessary for the Federal Parliament to have a large body'of State officers or to create a new public service. 360. If they gradually absorb the powers of the State they must multiply the Civil Service ? — Yes. It is marvellous how some of our officers here have, under the new Service, viewed the matter. Officers wanted to get transferred to the departments that were going over. Others in the Post Office and other departments viewed it differently and did not want to go. 361. Supposing we entered the Federation, would the Civil Service of New Zealand be affected? —Only so far as the big plums are concerned, but not the general body of your Service. 362. As regards Imperial federation, do you think it would be an advantage for New Zealand joining the Commonwealth of Australia, or would it hasten Imperial federation ?—1 believe it would hasten it. Personally, I would like to have some form of Imperial federation. I believe it will ultimately come to it. 363. Do you think the advantages of trade which entering the Commonwealth may open to us in an open market will be a sufficient equivalent for resigning our independence?—l have never been to New Zealand, and could not express an opinion. 364. The difficulty, you see, in our joining is the open market ?—Yes. 365. Mr. Leys.] Do you think federation would have come about so soon in Australia if it had not been for the friction in border disputes?— Yes. 366. You think that was the main thing ? —Yes. 367. That would be no argument for us to come in—we have no such difficulties ?—That is so. It was really the Australian Natives' Association that carried federation through. Although the average Australian might not like certain items in the Bill, yet, in view of the Imperial spirit, no power would stop the people from voting for the Bill. As we are all on the continent, our interests are identical. 368. There are interests common to Australians that would not be common to Australians and New-Zealanders ? —Yes. Tasmania was unwilling to come in, but Tasmania had to come in. They could not remain out whether the Bill was good or bad. 369. In many instances it may be to the advantage of Australia as a whole for the Federal Government to take over State powers, but it might be to the disadvantage of New Zealand, as
585
A.—4
she is entirely disconnected ?—lf you came into the Commonwealth you ought to have certain powers reserved to you by which you would be able to legislate on certain matters for yourselves. Although the Federal Parliament might be able to legislate on those particular questions for the whole of Australia and Tasmania, you ought not to be legislated for by the Commonwealth Parliament on those particular points. 370. Do you think, if New Zealand proposed to join, that the Federal Government would be disposed to give us such special conditions?—l do. I think the people of Australia would recognise that. 371. Supposing we do not come in, do you think there is any chance of our having reciprocal commercial relations?—l do. The politicians may not favour that view, but the people of Australia would favour it. The people know we are all Britishers, and would say, "Why should there not be reciprocity." 372. You recognise that the distance is a serious obstacle ?—Yes. It is said that £500,000 would be the cost to New Zealand, but from a defence point of view that would be of great advantage to the interests of New Zealand. 373. You think there would be no difficulty in arriving at a mutual agreement as to defence if we stood out ?—I only know of your wants and desires by what I have read, but I think New Zealand could come into the Commonwealth from the point of view of defence and still reserve to itself the power of dealing with certain matters. Take old-age pensions, for instance : there should be uniform legislation in Australia, because of the way our people shift about. 374. As to tropical Australia, I suppose there are matters there that the Federal Government may have to deal with that would be of no advantage to New Zealand? —Yes. 375. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Has any friction arisen with regard to the Wages Board and the clothing trade ?—They have just started it. 376. Have the members of the Board resigned?— That is so with the woollen-mills. The fellmongers objected to come under it at first. The Act does not say that five operatives, or five actual employers, have to be elected. The operatives were afraid some of them might be " spotted," and they elected a secretary of the trades-union. There were only ten on the roll of employers. Five were elected, and they came to me and said, " We are not going to sit with these men, because one is the secretary of the Trades' Hall of Ballarat." I said, " "Xou will have to take the responsibility of your actions." I appointed one of the Supreme Court Judges, and he is working with one on each side. 377. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think there would be any objection to New Zealand coming into the Federation ? —No. 378. Mr. Beauchamp.] You say the Commonwealth, in your opinion, would allow New Zealand to reserve certain powers ? —Yes. 379. Hon. the Chairman.] Will you look at clause 96 of the Commonwealth Bill, as regards the granting of assistance to certain States ?—I think that would apply to Tasmania, or possibly South Australia 380. There would not be free gifts to them ?—No. 381. Certain advances in the nature of loans ? —Yes, providing for their payment, or reduction from the proportion going back to the particular State that has received assistance ; exactly as we had to do in times of distress in connection with one of our Municipalities ?—The State came to their assistance, and they were able to repay it afterwards. Captain Robert Muirhead Collins examined. (No. 218.) 382. Hon..the Chairman.] What is your position ? —Captain in the naval forces and Secretary for Defence for the State of Victoria. 383. How long have you been in the colony?— Since 1880. 384. Do you know New Zealand ? —I have been to Auckland in Her Majesty's navy on three occasions. 385 You are aware that defence is one of the matters taken over by the Commonwealth Government ?—Yes. 386. Do you think it would be of any advantage to New Zealand in the matter of defence to join the Commonwealth ? How do you think New Zealand would be affected in the event of war? —I think, chiefly from a naval point of view, the time must come when Australia will have its own naval force. I have held that opinion for some time. The defence of Australia will depend entirely on naval questions. It is not a military question. The part that Australia will play will be largely naval. When Australia sets up a naval establishment of its own, as it undoubtedly will, it certainly would affect New Zealand. New Zealand could scarcely stand a navy of her own unless she got more wealth than anticipated. 387. At what period of time do you anticipate the Commonwealth of Australia will have enough funds to support a navy of her own ?—I think the initiatory stages could be taken early. I think the present auxiliary squadron should not be maintained on its present footing. The Imperial Government should provide suitable vessels, on the cost of which the Commonwealth might pay the interest, but the Imperial Government would undertake the manning. 388. If New Zealand did not come in, do you think the British navy, under certain financial conditions, would be withdrawn from New Zealand ? —The protection of the British navy would not be entirely withdrawn as long as we remain a part of the Empire. I think the protection of these waters by a naval force will in the future be very important. When the Commonwealth of Australia becomes more powerful they will want to have some control in naval affaire, as they now have in military affairs. There might then be a Federal Council, in which the colonies will be represented, and which will deal with the defences of the Empire and the expenditure. I am not quite sure-if that will work out satisfactorily. 74_A. 4.
A.—4
586
389. Do I understand you to say that land forces will be the most important factor in Federal defences? —I certainly think not. Ido not think Australia should be called upon to maintain a large standing force. All that is required is a military force to protect herself. Directly you consider Australia as part of the Empire, then the question can be looked at from a different light. A body of experts might consider that the role which Australia could most effectively carry out as her share of Imperial defence would be military, and not naval; that she could raise a certain number of forces trained in a way that could not be raised and trained in another portion of the Empire, and also could be strategically available for portions of the East. In that way opinions might go against the establishment of naval forces in Australia. The Imperial naval force might be extended by giving assistance to the training of men locally. 390. Do you think, in the event of war in the near future, that Australia would be able to render assistance by land forces to New Zealand ?—lf British naval supremacy remained New Zealand could not be attacked in force ; and as any attack on such condition could only be a raid it is difficult to see in what manner military assistance could be rendered by Australia. If British naval supremacy was gone Australia would have enough to do to look out for herself. 391. What is the total land force in the whole of the Commonwealth of Australia, including Tasmania ?—I should think, between twenty and thirty thousand. 392. New Zealand has enrolled fifteen thousand at present: do you think Australia would be able to spare very many out of that twenty-five thousand to New Zealand ?—I do not think she could assist New Zealand. 393. About small-arms ammunition, is that manufactured locally in Australia ?—Only in Victoria. 394. Is there sufficient machinery available there to supply all the requirements of small-arms ammunition in the Commonwealth ?—No. 395. Supposing you had a navy here, how long do you think it would be before Australia could manufacture its artillery ammunition ? —They could manufacture the small ammunition for the field-guns in a very short time. 396. For the navy?— That would mean the expenditure of an extensive plant. The Imperial Government might see fit to assist. If they saw fit to assist Ido not think it would be many years before we could do something. 397. Do you mean supplying the capital, and the colonies paying some of the interest?— And supply orders. The people at Home have drawn attention to the Home factories not being able to meet their demands, and also it is for the interest of the Empire to have supplies of war material here, and probably in Canada and the Cape. It is greatly to the interest of the Imperial Government that such establishments should be maintained in the colonies. 398. Having regard to the comparatively rapid changes in the classes of vessels used in naval warfare, do you not think that the most effective and cheapest defence for the Commonwealth of Australia would be to subsidise to some extent the Imperial navy, and rely on that ?—They would not be able to stand the expense of their own ships at present, although there are some who think they might. If the Home Government supplied the ships they could afford to pay the interest. 399. Is that not on the same lines as paying a subsidy towards the maintenance of the fleet? —It is on the same lines, but you would have your own men and officers. 400. Might not an arrangement be made between the Commonwealth and the Imperial Government by which the colonies should furnish a certain number of men annually towards manning the ships in these waters ? —With permanent men there might be a difficulty. There might be a means by which reserves could be maintained, who could be available for training during the year, and in time of war. In that case the Home Government would pay the Imperial rates of pay, and we should pay something additional. 401. Is not the maintenance of sufficient naval reserves a serious problem in Great Britain?— Particularly with firemen. 402. And with seamen too? —If they like to go to the expense of training establishments they could increase the numbers. 403. Is not the keeping-up of a permanent force a great expense ?—Yes. 404. Mr. Leys.] Do you think, in view of the naval conditions in the colonies, there is a favourable field here for recruiting for the navy? —I think there is in Queensland, Victoria, and New South Wales. I think we could raise a considerable reserve. 405. On what terms of pay could you man the ships with a permanent force ?—On the basis of what we pay our permanent forces here—about ss. per day. 406. What amount do they pay the Imperial men?— About Is. 7d. 407. Do you think that will be profitable to the colonies ?—The Is. 7d. carries pensions, while the ss. per day does not. 408. How long do they have to serve in the navy to get a pension ?—Twenty-one years. 409. Do a very large percentage earn pensions?— Yes. 410. Do you not think that for a great many years to come the present system enlarged would be more advantageous to the colony than to embark on such a scheme as manning our own ships and having separate commanders?—l think for a few years to come I would take the initiatory steps for establishing reserves here, and training men on the ships now here, which we do not do now. 411. Do you anticipate a large increase in the expenditure on defence on the part of the Federal Government ?—Yes. Unless that is very firmly controlled I am sure there will be a large increase. There is nothing so insidious as military expenditure. 412. There does not seem to have been much spent in Tasmania on defence : do you think the Federal Government would have to bear much expenditure as regards that ?—We are beginning to see signs of it now. The rates of pay are so much smaller. The proposal is that
587
A.—4.
they should be brought up, and it will be the same in all the States. Great pressure will be brought to bear. 413. Do you think it will be possible to resist that pressure?—lf you have a sufficiently strong administration. 414. Will it not be a reasonable thing that they should all be paid at the same rate?— Yes. 415. We have an ammunition-factory in Auckland at present : do you think, if New Zealand entered the Federation, it would be more advantageous to close that factory and manufacture the ammunition at some central arsenal in Australia? —No. New Zealand ought to have a factory of its own. Supplies ought to be removed from any danger of interruption as far as possible. One factory might do for some years for the Commonwealth, but after some years that one factory would not be sufficient. 416. You said, in reply to the Chairman, that you thought Australia might assist New Zealand with land forces : do you think she could assist New Zealand if England were at war, and lost control of the sea? —I should think it would be very difficult for all of us in that case. 4] 7. If England still had control of the sea, do you think we should require such assistance from Australia?—No, I do not. 418. Mr. Beauchamp.) In the event of a general attack being made on Australia, would you not require the full strength of the Commonwealth navy to defend your own shores —that is, if you had a Commonwealth fleet: would you not require a navy of very large proportions? —The maintenance of the navy would be primarily for the protection of your commerce, and the ships would be on the trade routes. What would be wanted for New Zealand would be additional ships. 419. Probably it would be better to continue the arrangement we have with the Imperial Government than to look to the Australian Colonies? —I think so too. 420. Do you hold the opinion that the great engagement of the future is likely to be at some point distant from Australia, probably in the English Channel rather than here ?—I suppose the engagement to maintain supremacy would take place somewhere in that quarter. I think the time is not very far distant when the Pacific is going to play the role the Mediterranean played in past times. 421. The great difficulty would be. the question of transport for large distances?— Foreign Powers are establishing very large fleets in the Pacific. 422. It is from Japan that we might expect greater danger than from a European Power?— Or from Russia. 423. You provide no pensions for your men ?—All those who were in the Permanent Forces before the Act abolishing pensions came in. 424. Mr. Millar.} Have you noticed any desire on the part of the Victorian youth to follow the sea as a profession ?—No ; I cannot say that it is very strong. We have applications from parents very often, because the boys are difficult to control. 425. Are those applications for training as midshipmen ?—To train them as boys. 426. Is it not a fact that we have to face a very serious problem in the fact that our mercantile marine service is being largely manned by foreigners ? —There has been an uncomfortable proportion of foreigners, but there has been a dispute about it. 427. So far as the mercantile marine is concerned, the percentage is somewhere about 80 per cent. ? —Of foreigners. 428. Lord Brassey states that about one-third of the British mercantile navy consists of foreigners ? —Principally of Swedes —in the mercantile marine, not in the British navy. 429. Judging by the experience of the past, you think special inducements will have to be offered before we can train up a naval force ? —Yes. 430. What is the pension allowed to naval men ? —lt depends on whether the man is a petty officer or not. It varies from Is. a day to about £30 or £40 per annum. 431. An A.B. would get Is. per day? —Yes. 432. Do you not think it possible to have a good naval reserve in the colonies consisting only of colonials, on the same lines as the British navy ?—Not with the same conditions. 433. Could you not compel them to have twenty-eight days' drill ?•—Yes. But you could not get over the six months at sea, as they have to do with the Royal navy. In the first five years of engagement they have to put in six months at sea on the man-of-war. 434. Would it not be possible to get that reserve from the men now on the coast —a sufficient number to form a nucleus of a reserve ? —Yes. 435. It would be only a question of money ?—Yes. 436. With such a reserve as that it would be of great assistance to the Imperial navy in the meantime ?—Yes. 437. You know that in New Zealand we deal almost entirely with naval defence ?—Yes. 438. Do you think it possible to defend the coast of New Zealand with less than four vessels ? —I think that would be sufficient. 439. With regard to our land forces, you think that Australia would be able to give some assistance. On the basis of population Australia would have to have about sixty-five thousand Volunteers to place herself in the same position as we are ? —We have a tremendous number of rifle-club men who with very little drill would be available to pass into the line. We have nearly twenty thousand in this State ; and they do not count in the numbers of the Defence Force, but they are practically a reserve. 440. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Did I understand you to say you thought it would be more advisable that a fleet should be established by Australia than that she should contribute with all the colonies a larger sum according to population ?—I do not think the Australian Commonwealth Government intend to leave the management of naval affairs entirely to the Imperial Government, any more than they would leave their military matters, but that the control of the naval force will have to be
A.—4
588
assumed by the Commonwealth Government some day, and therefore they will have to raise their own force. 441. Do you not think it would be better for every part of the Empire that there should be one fleet that could be sent anywhere, rather than that there should be fleets in different parts of the world ?—You would have to be sure that the fleet was kept up to a sufficient strength. 442. Assuming the colonies contributed differently to what they do now? —Theoretically, I think it would be a better system if worked out practically—that is, if the Commonwealth could be sure that the Imperial Government would maintain the fleet in its proportionate strength. 443. It has been said that the best defence of these colonies would perhaps be effected by a battle fought in the British Channel ? —I think that to attain the best results the naval defence of the Empire should be worked as one. 444. Hon. Captain Russell.] Can you give us any idea of the number of Naval Eeserve men in the State of Victoria ?—We could get a thousand to fifteen hundred here. 445. As to having a Commonwealth navy, would the colonial youth stand the discipline essential to a man-of-war ? —I think they would. The discipline on a man-of-war now is not the discipline that was enforced when I went to sea. The more you recruit from an educated class the better becomes the discipline ;in fact, there is the less need of a rigorous discipline. In South Africa you will find that the discipline there is not the discipline of years ago. 446. You think that if there were a fleet here the colonial youth would submit to the rigid discipline that is essential ?—I do not think there would be any difficulty as to that. 447. On a declaration of war, would the Admiral on the Australian Station assume control of a Commonwealth navy ?—Yes, I should assume that they would pass under the control of the Admiral. 448. Would you say that the Admiral should take command of the fleet irrespective of local politicians?—l think so. The power would not vest in him of moving the ships from Australasian waters. 449. Do you think he would not be able to say, " I am going to take the Australian squadron and fight in the New Hebrides " ?—That would probably be in Australian waters. He would then have the power. 450. Suppose there was a strong combined squadron of our enemies in Chinese waters, do you not think the Admiral would be justified in going to the assistance of his brother-Admiral to squash the combined squadron ? —This would depend on several conditions. 451. Hon. the Chairman.'] The Governor-General is Commander-in-Chief of the Forces of the Commonwealth ?—Yes. 452. If any military operations are to be carried out, it is for him to say what those military operations are to be? —As Commander-in-Chief, I do not think he has any power to interfere with the actual disposition of the forces. 453. As to what the operations are to be and as to how they are to be carried out would rest with the Officers Commanding the Forces ? —Yes. 454. As to what the operations are to be, does that not rest with the Governor-General as Commander-in-Chief ?—I doubt it. It is an intricate point. 455. Assuming it is, has the Governor-General anything to do with the naval forces?— No. 456. Have you a training-ship for boys here ?—No; there is one in Sydney. 457. What is done with the lads when they are qualified as seamen?—l think some of them take shore appointments. I think a very small proportion of them go to sea. It is a mere educational establishment. We did have a training-ship here, but it was abolished, as it was not considered a success from a reformatory point of view. The boys who were bad corrupted others. 458. Do you think that a training-ship for lads whose parents are dead would be of use ? — Yes. The question is what would be a sufficient number to keep it going. James Jemmison Fenton examined. (No. 219.) 459. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the Government Statist for the State of Victoria ?—Yes, under the title of Assistant Government Statist. 460. How long have you held that position?— Practically since Mr. Hayter's death in 1894. 461. Can you tell us the number of persons employed in manufactures in the Colony of Victoria?—ln 1899 it was 60,070. 462. Can you tell me just the number of persons employed in any one manufacture ?—We can tell you classes of factories, but we do not mention individuals. 463. We got in New South Wales the number of factories, and the persons employed in each ? —I could give it without mentioning names. 464. Mr. Roberts.] There is an estimate made in 1898 of the sheep in Victoria? —It is an estimate based on the quantity of wool exported, and the average weight of a fleece. The last reliable figures are for 1891. From 1891 to 1894 they were made up by a kind of estimate which has been discarded as unreliable. We collect statistics (agricultural) from farmers very perfectly, but we do not collect from squatters. We have no stock registration like they have in New South Wales and Queensland. 465. Mr. Millar.] Are these figures (60,070) taken from the census returns ?—No; they are from returns collected annually by collectors appointed by the Municipalities. 466. I see there is a difference in your figures and those of the Chief Inspector of Factories ?—' They are not reconcilable. The latter include shops, and relate only to the prinicipal towns of the colony. We collect factories only from the whole colony. 467. 60,070 people are engaged in factories, outside of shops ?—Yes. New South Wales and Victoria have agreed to take all places in which the business is purely a manufacturing one employing four hands and upwards, all sellers being carefully excluded. We also include all factories with less than four hands which use steam-power.
589
A.—4
468. This 60,070 is not actually the number of individuals employed in manufacture ? —lt does not include workers in factories employing less than four hands not using machinery, such as the smaller bootmakers who employ only one, two, or three hands. 469. Does it include manufacturers outside of _the district?— The return refers to the whole colony. 470. Can you tell me the number of persons engaged in agricultural pursuits ? —The last census would give it for 1891. At present we can only give the number of cultivators—that is, the holders of the land. There are nearly forty thousand holders of agricultural land. The acreage they cultivate is 3,378,000 acres. 471. Has your department kept any record of the range of prices in sales, year by year, of oats, potatoes, or wheat? —We compile statistics on the subject obtained from the municipal collectors, who return the price of wheat locally about the time of the harvest in February or March —just after the harvest; but very often the price is regulated by the agricultural statistics which are subsequently published. 472. Can you tell us the area under cultivation for vines in Victoria for 1899 ?—27,550 acres. 473. What was the value of grapes produced from that area in that year?— The value of the grape products, including wine and brandy, was £351,316 in 1899. That includes grapes not made into wine. 474. Is that an increasing or a decreasing industry ? —Phylloxera tended to retard it. I think it has been improving of late years. 475. Is the production of dried fruits increasing ?—I think so. They come almost entirely from Mildura, on the Eiver Murray. 476. Can you tell us the area of land available for agricultural and pastoral purposes in Victoria?— Exclusive of 23,200,000 acres of land of all kinds alienated from the Crown, there are 1,100,000 acres of Crown lands in occupation under pastoral leases, 8,500,000 acres under mallee pastoral leases, 116,000 acres under perpetual leases in the mallee country, 3,100,000 acres under grazing-area leases, 417,000 acres under grazing licenses for auriferous lands, 48,000 acres under village settlements, and 4,500 acres under swamp leases. These lands were all occupied ; and there were, besides, 11,467,000 acres available for occupation —viz., in the mallee country, 2,067,000 acres ; in other parts 9,400,000 acres.* These figures are approximate. They will be found on page 793 of the Victorian Year-book for 1895-98. The land available for occupation embraces pastoral lands in the mallee country 2,067,000 acres, and in other parts of the colony 1,873,000 acres. Agricultural and grazing lands, 6,300,000 acres; auriferous lands, 1,087,000 acres ; swamp lands, 83,000 acres ; may be sold be sold by auction, 36,000 acres ; area excised from reserves under Act 1347, 12,000 acres. 477. Mr Luke.] What is the increase of population in the last five years? —There are two statements of this, one showing the recorded increase, and the other the estimated increase after allowing a percentage for unrecorded departures. (The true percentage cannot be ascertained until after the taking of the census of 1901.) The recorded increase between 1894 and 1899 was 1,775, but after making the usual allowance for unrecorded departures there was a decrease of 13,035, which was increased at a conference of Australian statisticians held in Sydney in 1900. 478. What was the increase between 1881 and 1891 ?—I have seen it in print that there is a large shrinkage in population in the last ten years. The increase between 1881 and 1891 was 278,059. 479. Can you send us returns more up to date ?—I can send on a return showing the excess of births over deaths, and the difference between recorded arrivals and departures by sea. 480. Can you give us the estimated population in 1891 and the estimated population in 1900? —Yes, I can give the latter to 30th June, 1900. In 1891 the enumerated population was 1,140,405, and the estimated population on 30th June, 1900, was 1,168,136. The population according to the census of 1901 will soon be available. 481. The percentages of births over deaths are disclosed?— They are shown in the statistics. The percentage of births over deaths is 17 per cent, on the average. I will let you have these returns in a day or two. 482. Mr. Leys.] Are the agricultural statistics made up for this year yet ?—We publish the wheat- but not the oat-crop. It will be ready in a day or two. 483. There has been a statement published that the area in oats had increased 70,000 acres this year as compared with last: can you let us know whether that is correct ?—Not till the statistics are ready for publication. They will be published any day now. 484. Can you tell us what is the proportion of the imports into Victoria from New Zealand for transhipment ?—I should say, a very large proportion. For instance, we imported 35,000 centals of oats in 1899. Of that quantity only 2,292 went into consumption. 485. Do you think you could let us have the figures for this year in the same direction ?—Yes —i.e., for 1900. 486. Have you given any attention to the question of Federal finance ?—Yes. 487. Have you formed any estimate at all of what amount of revenue from Customs and excise is likely to be returned to Victoria under the fiscal arrangements of the Commonwealth Bill ?—I have prepared statistics for federation purposes dealing with the question, and there were two reports by the Victorian Accounts Committee—of which I was a member —also treating of the same subject, one of which was published. We know what each State raises by duties on inter-State products under the present system. It was generally reckoned in 1895 at £1,000,000 for the States as a whole. Through the remission of the intercolonial duties that revenue will be lost, and will have to be made good somehow, either by extra taxation on foreign goods or by direct taxation. In Victoria in 1900 the amount raised by Customs and excise was about £2 per head. In the Austra-
* Of this area, 3,800,000 acres are temporarily held under grazing licenses, renewable annually.
A.—4
590
lian Colonies as a whole it was £2 Is. 9d. per head. If New South Wales had a protectionist tariff such as was in force prior to 1896, it would probably have been as high as £2 4s. 6d. Consequently— assuming the loss by remission of inter-State duties are made good by increased taxation on foreign imports—Victoria may suffer a loss to the extent of the difference between £2 and £2 4s. 6d. per head. 488. Have you the figures for New Zealand per head ?—New Zealand is very high, but not so high as Queensland or West Australia. It was £2 17s. 4d. in 1899. 489. Looking at these figures, do you judge that New Zealand would lose heavily under the system of Federal finance? —You cannot say " lose." There would be a remission of Customs taxation undoubtedly. 490. Would there be a great loss to the State Treasury ?—They would undoubtedly get back some of the revenue lost in other ways. 491. There would be a considerable diminution of revenue?— Yes; but, on the other hand, there would be a corresponding gain to the people through the remission of so much taxation. 492. How would that taxation have to be made up, provided we still required that same amount of revenue for State purposes ?—By fresh taxation, and probably by the growth of other sources of revenue. 493. By direct taxation in some form ?—I think so; but it is possible the revenue from other sources may expand under federation. For instance, in New South Wales, where there was a very heavy expenditure on the celebration of the landing of Lord Hopetoun, that, it is said, was made good by the increase in the railway revenue, &o. Then, again, the amount derived from the income-tax might increase, through the expansion of private incomes, to such an extent that the general revenue as a whole would show no diminution. Moreo/er, an expansion of trade under federation would tend to make up any loss arising from the resumption of Customs taxation. 494. Can you suggest any other advantage from federation to New Zealand except intercolonial free-trade ? —lt would have the Australian market for its products. 495. Can you suggest any other advantage? —Its insular position is a bar to some advantages that New Zealand would otherwise gain by federation. 496. Mr. Roberts.] As to the birth-rate of the various colonies, you have noticed there is a serious decrease in the births per thousand ?—Yes. 497. What is that owing to? —To begin with, we are not "sure of our population estimates since 1891. There have been many movements of population. The fall in Victoria I attribute to the depression, the exodus of people to Western Australia, and the consequent reduction in the marriage-rate. 498. In New Zealand there has been a decrease? —I suppose there has been a fall in the marriage-rate too. In times of depression the marriage-rate falls. Oats imported from New Zealand into Victoria. Total imports ... ... ... ... ... ... 59,381 centals. Imports for home consumption ... ... ... ... 320 „ Major-General Fbancis Downes, C.M.G., examined. (No. 220.) 499. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you? —I am Major-General and Commandant of the Military Forces of Victoria. I was the first Imperial officer sent out to Australia as Commandant. I was Commandant in South Australia altogether for thirteen years, and here as Secretary of Defence for three years. I have been in command of the forces here since November, 1899. 500. Your attention has been directed to Federal defence ?—lt has to a certain extent, but we have had so much on in the last eighteen months that I cannot say I have gone into it fully. 501. We are the Royal Commission from New Zealand, and amongst other things we are commanded to inquire how federation would affect New Zealand in the matter of defence : could you favour us with your views on that point?— Any views I give have not been thought out to any great extent, because it has not come before me; but, from a military point of view, Ido not see how New Zealand becoming a portion of the Commonwealth would in any way increase the defensive powers of either one or the other, for this reason : We are all under the same flag, we have all got more or less the same common interest; if New Zealand was in danger, whether it was affiliated with the Commonwealth or not, Australia would go to her help. If the Commonwealth of Australia was hard-up, lam certain New Zealand would go to her help. So Ido not think federation would affect the matter. You could not very well have the troops in New Zealand under the command of the officer up here ; they are too far off for him to deal with. You would require to go entirely on your own legs. lam speaking now of land defence. 502. We have in New Zealand some fifteen thousand Volunteers and Permanent Forces : would you regard from that fact that New Zealand ought to be able to look after her own line of defence? —I think so ; but it seems to me if New Zealand was pressed lam sure Australia would go to her help if she could. 503. Whether Australia could or not would depend, of course, on England having command of the sea? —Yes ; if England loses command of the sea New Zealand is shut off altogether. 504. At present New Zealand contributes to the cost of the Australian squadron : can you suggest any better means of defence for New Zealand than that?—No, I cannot. The Australian squadron, I imagine, will be very much increased in time. I assume, as time goes on, the Commonwealth of Australia will get a navy of her own. If New Zealand was part of that Commonwealth New Zealand would take her share of that, and the ships would act in unison. The naval powers ought to be under one head. Perhaps the best defence of Australia might be in the China Seas on one occasion, and near the Cape of Good Hope on another occasion. The squadrons of Australia and New Zealand would be massed together in that case. The naval defences of both countries would probably be increased, and would be separated entirely from the military.
A.—4
591
505. Do you consider it will be a considerable number of years before the Imperial squadron will be withdrawn from these waters ?—I think there will always be an Imperial squadron as portion of the Pacific squadron, and I imagine that will go on for some time. The Imperial Australian squadron will, I hope, continue indefinitely; but there may be at the same time as the Commonwealth goes on a desire for a squadron of its own, which will work with the Imperial squadron, but still be more for the defence of these waters. 506. We have in New Zealand a small-arms-ammunition factory : in your opinion, would it be prudent for the New Zealand Government to continue that ? —Most undoubtedly, and I hope we shall have the same here too. Supposing we were together in the Commonwealth, even then you would require it, because you would be shut off by the sea. 507. You have a small-arms ammunition factory here?—lt is a branch of the one in New Zealand. I hope that will be largely increased, as it is not equal to our demands. The other States have not joined in with us in regard to it. 508. Do you look forward to artillery ammunition being made here?— Yes; and to powder, cordite, small-arms, small-arms-ammunition, clothing, and saddlery. 509. Eventually they should all be manufactured here, and we should be entirely independent of Great Britain in regard, to them ?—I do not think it should be so with the guns, because we do not want large numbers, and we could have a few in reserve. I think these States should be independent of Great Britain. In speaking of the States I speak of New Zealand also. 510. Do you expect to have a military college established in Australia ?—That should be done. 511. Is there any probability of its coming? —I trust so. I happened to be on a Eoyal Commission in 1881, and that was one of the subjects we considered, and the report was accepted by the various Ministers. There should be a State military college. At each Conference that assembles the matter is brought up. 512. Is there any school of instruction for officers in any of the States in Australia?— There is no definite school. We have our local school and lecture-room, and an officers' class which they can attend three or four times a week, but that is not a proper school. An officer should go to a school for two or three months. 513. There is none like the Chelsea School in England ?—There is an artillery school at Sydney which continues for about six weeks or two months in the year. That is the best form of school we have. The other States have not voted enough money for it. 514. Mr. Beauchamp.] If we contributed to the cost of the Federal squadron the same benefits would arise ?—Certainly, provided the disposal of the Australian squadron was in the hands of the naval Commander-in-Chief. 515. With the headquarters in Sydney ?—ln Sydney or Melbourne. 516. It would be only by the Imperial navy withdrawing a number of ships from these waters that we would have the same advantages as you by contributing to the cost of the Commonwealth ?— Yes. I do not think the land forces could be controlled from here with four days' journey by sea. 517. Mr. Luke.] There is a military college in Canada?— Yes. 518. Do you know anything of the constitution of that ?—Not of the details, but it has answered admirably. It has worked so well that the English Government for some years have given commissions from it direct into the Engineers and Artillery. People I have met who have been connected with it tell me it answers admirably. 519. Would you contemplate the establishment of such an institution in the Commonwealth ? —Yes ; a purely military college. 520. Mr. Leys.] Do you think the Federal Government will have to largely increase the naval and military expenditure to make it efficient ? —lt will have to be increased, no doubt about that. Not so much in the numbers of men, but there will have to be more liberal conditions in regard to the pay—or, rather, the retiring-allowances—of such men. If you keep an officer until he is fifty years old it is not fair to turn him adrift without anything to fall back on. I would not advocate any large increase in the regular forces —I mean men paid every day in the week, and whose sole duties are military matters. 521. Do you think there may not be an increase in the Permanent Forces for the defence of northern and Tasmanian ports ? —There should be a force in Tasmania; another at Port Darwin when fortified. Sydney and Melbourne are the principal ports, and we have a sufficient amount of regular artillery there. We have to depend on manning the forts, in case of mobilisation, on the garrison militia artillery. 522. You spoke of the military college, and you seem to contemplate a more complete military equipment than at present ?—We must accumulate stores here, and that means a large increase of money. Then, we must instruct our officers, and have places to which officers can go to be refreshed periodically. That means an increase of money. Ido not think, in regard to the increase of the regular forces, that there should be a large increase. 523. Do you think 50 per cent, would be too much to estimate the probable increase of expenditure?— Yes; it should be under 50 per cent. Approximately, I should think that would be more than would be required. 524. Hon. Major Steward.] I assume that the only possible danger of invasion of New Zealand at any time will arise not from any complication between herself and a European Power, but between Great Britain and a European Power ? —Yes. 525. If that were so, the same cause that would render New Zealand an object of attack would equally render Australia an object of attack ?—Yes. 526. That being so, both being in the presence of a common danger, is it likely that Australia, after providing for the defence of her own coast, would be able to send assistance to us ? —lt would
A.—4
592
mean a big thing for any one to attack Australia and New Zealand simultaneously. If an attack were made on New Zealand, Australia could send some of her men ; if an attack were made on Australia, New Zealand could possibly send some of her men. There would be no possibility of attack on both places at the same time unless Great Britain were to lose command of the sea. 527. In the event of circumstances arising such as we are now contemplating —namely, an attack on either Australia or New Zealand —would not assistance naturally be sent from one to the other—not only because blood is thicker than water, but so as not to make it a base for the enemy ? —I do not think federation will alter the position at all. We are the Power in the Pacific, and, whether it is Australia, Tasmania, or New Zealand, we are all united in a common cause. 528. Whether there is federation or not ?—I do not think it would make one iota of difference. 529. Hon. the Chairman.] What is the annual allowance of ammunition to Volunteers in this State? —It varies. The rifle-clubs get 200 rounds per annum free; the Eangers and Mounted Rifles get 210; and the Militia get 170. 530. At what price is ammunition sold to them for practice?—Martini-Enfield ammunition is sold at ss. per hundred rounds, it being estimated at cost price at 12s. per hundred. The Martini— cost price 10s.—is sold at 2s. 6d. per hundred. I believe Victoria is far more liberal in the reduction she allows than any other State. 531. Is there any limit to the amount sold? —Practically the only limit is that it is in the store. I imagine all these things will come under more definite regulation when the new Defence Act is passed. When the new Act is passed all the States will be under one system, and the price will be the same in each State. 532. Have you any reason to suppose that the regulation will be any less liberal to the Volunteers than now?—l cannot say. It is less liberal in New South Wales than in Victoria. They must all be put on the same footing. 533. Is there any other matter we ought to be informed about ? —I should say you should keep all your supplies well up. I have no doubt you have had the same difficulty in New Zealand as we have had here. We found it difficult to get stirrup-irons, bridles, girths, &c. Thomas Kennedy, M.L.A., examined. (No. 221.) 534. Hon. the Chairman.'] Where do you reside?—At Cobrain, on the Victorian side of the border. lam a member of the Legislative Assembly. lam a native of Victoria. 535. We want you to tell us, if you will, something about the agricultural industry in Victoria : does Victoria produce sufficient agricultural produce to supply its own demands?— Speaking generally, yes. 536. Sufficient wheat ?—Yes. 537. Does it export wheat ?—Yes. 538. Largely ?—The statistical returns are not compiled for this year, and climatic conditions are an important factor on the exportable surplus every year. Throughout the past three seasons we have had abnormally bad seasons throughout the wheat-bearing regions of Victoria, consequently our wheat-supply was fully one-third below the average. That would reduce the exportable surplus. 539. Is the quantity of crop under wheat extending to any considerable extent ?—lt was at a standstill for a good few years, say, in the early nineties, but towards the latter end of the nineties the areas had been increasing in the mallee country. It was only in those years that we were fully seized of the value of the mallee country for wheat-growing purposes. While this increase has been going on in the mallee country, there has been a reduced area in what were, prior to that time, the larger wheat-growing districts—the Goulburn Valley, for instance. 540. In normal seasons, when you have no drought, what is the average yield of wheat in Victoria? —About 12 bushels. 541. Is Victoria able to supply herself with oats? —That is a question I could not speak definitely upon. She is able to supply her own requirements, but there are classes of oats which we have not been growing in Victoria for a considerable time—oats for milling purposes. The Algerian is looked upon as a good milling-oat. Climatic conditions have a good deal to do with it. There are seasons in which oats grown elsewhere than in Victoria are of better quality for milling purposes. In the area most suitable for oat-growing they can get better returns from the land for other purposes. 542. Does Victoria export oats ? —Yes; recently to a very considerable extent, since the demand has sprung up in South Africa. 543. What is the average yield of oats?— That I could not say definitely. Eoughly, about 25 bushels per acre. 544. Is barley profitably grown here ? —Yes. 545. Is there much land under crop for barley ?—Yes ; we grow all grades of barley sufficient for our own requirements. Of late years the value ruling for malting-barley is so low that farmers have ceased to grow it. I live in a district where the maltsters admit that we grow the best malting-barley in Australia. We did produce enough for our own requirements, but the value decreased, and we found we could put the ground to better use. 546. There are no difficulties arising from either the soil or climatic conditions which would prevent malting-barley being grown here ? —None whatever. 547. Is the quantity of land under crop for oats increasing?—l think it has been a diminishing quantity. 548. What will the farmers here consider a fair price for oats ?—ln the district of which I have a personal knowledge of all the different cereals produced, if we can get ss. a bag for oats, that is a good price. That would be 4 bushels to the bag—at the railway-siding. 549. Are potatoes largely grown in Victoria?—l can only speak generally, because we do not grow potatoes in the district in which I live. There are districts in Victoria where they are grown.
593
A.—4
550. Have you been engaged in agricultural pursuits yourself ?—Yes; I am farming at the present time. 551. Are New Zealand oats imported into Victoria ?—I could not give you definite information on that point. 552. Is there any necessity for Victoria to imp*ort New Zealand oats?— There are seasons in which we do not grow oats of as good a quality as are grown in the other colonies. I have it on the authority of millers that these oats are much better for their purposes than the oats grown in Victoria in the same seasons. In the cooler districts, where oats could be grown, they are not grown. 553. Do you grow maize ?—Yes, in a few localities. It grows well in the Snowy Eiver Valley. 554. Mr. Leys.] Can you make 12 bushels of wheat to the acre pay ?—Yes, at 2s. 3d. per bushel, current value at the railway-siding. 555. Would a less price than that pay ? —ln the normal seasons, with that average, I say, speaking from a personal knowledge, that the grower could grow wheat in the northern district of Victoria at 2s. per bushel. 556. What do you reckon is the cost of putting in wheat ?—lt is being contracted for in my district at the present time. They contract to plough the land, sow it, and take it off, and cart it to the station for 16s. per acre. 557. What is the value of the land?— They are selecting land on the New South Wales side of the river now, and it costs about £1 for the fee-simple. On the Victorian side of the river it ranges from £4 to £5 per acre. That is improved farming land. 558. What value do you reckon for oat land, as a rule ?—ln the Murray Valley and the Goulburn Valley, until you come back up the Goulburn, there is not much oats grown for market purposes. They are grown chiefly for feed. In the Goulburn Valley, from Murchison, coming south towards Nagambie and Seymour, the lands range from £5 to £10 per acre. 559. What would be the railway freight from there to Port Melbourne ? —From the border where I live, 155 miles, the railway freight at the present time is about lls. per ton. It costs about 4d. per bushel for wheat, and that covers agents' commission. 560. We have been told that the farmers here are very much alarmed at the prospect of New Zealand coming into the Federation : do you think there is anything in that ? —No; the Victorian farmer has no more fear of coming into competition with New Zealand than he has with New South Wales. 561. If the duties were removed to-morrow, do you think there would be a large amount of agricultural produce imported into Victoria from anywhere ?—No; it would not be imported into Victoria for use here. Speaking as a farmer, with a knowledge of the general conditions, I say that we have a considerable amount of produce coining from New South Wales to the seaboard for shipment. 562. A greater proportion of New Zealand produce that comes here now is for transhipment in the same way ? —That I do not know, except from the information I have had from millers. 563. As to hams and bacon, is Victoria self-supporting in those lines ?—lt is an industry to which the farmers have been giving considerable attention of late. Assuming we import some at the present time, the difficulty of getting a regular market prevents the farmers from producing two or three times as much as they do now. Applications have been made to the Agricultural Department to find if we could not get a market in Great Britain for hams and bacon. We can raise it as cheaply as any part of the world. 564. You do export dairy produce very largely ? —The ham-and-bacon trade is capable of considerable expansion in Victoria. 565. You- anticipate that the removal of tariffs in the other colonies will enable you to become a great competitor ?—I think it will be an immense benefit to the whole of the producers, because each colony trying to find a market for a large quantity will induce us to have a continuous supply. The same with our meat. We have never been able to establish that in the markets of the world, because the supply has been intermittent. 566. Do you think the tariff is likely to be a high one ?—Necessity governs the situation. 567. I am looking to the possibility that New Zealand may not see its way to come into the Commonwealth, while we may have to face a high tariff?—lt is only a matter of conjecture ; but, in the light of past experience, I would be inclined to say that each State will look after its own interests first. 568. The exports to New Zealand from Australia at present are much higher in value than the New Zealand exports to Australia : under those circumstances, is it likely that the Commonwealth will boycott that trade ?—lt will resolve itself into the question, Can the Commonwealth give attention to the products raised by other places —can she produce them within the confines of her own borders ? 569. Do you think it is probable that there will be heavy protective duties ?—My own idea is to give our own citizens the first consideration, and if it is possible for the State to encourage any industry, to do so. Say, for instance, we were importing bar-iron from New Zealand in considerable volume, and it was possible to establish that industry in the Commonwealth, it is natural to assume that the Commonwealth would try to establish it. 570. You think they would not look to the balance of trade ?—No. If they get the trade within their own confines, that would be equally as valuable as trade with the other ends of the earth. 571. In the event of New Zealand not coming into the political Federation, do you think there is a reasonable prospect of commercial reciprocity ?—lf there are mutual advantages, I should imagine there would bo a possibility. That has been the chief cause of the federation of the States of the Commonwealth. We found it impossible to get reciprocity between the different States. To—A. 4.
A.—4
594
We have made attempts to have reciprocity between Victoria and New South Wales, at the wish of the people, for the last thirty years, but we never could attain it. That is why we eventually federated. 572. Have you given any attention to the effect of federation on the State finances ? —Yes. 573. How do you think Victoria will be affected ?—I think she has everything to gain. 574. Do you think the amount returned from Customs and excise revenue will be sufficient to cover the State requirements ? —Yes. The total cost of Government in the first stages will be increased somewhat. There is a probability of the cost of the State being reduced, but eventually the sum total will not be increased to any appreciable extent, and there will be a considerable impetus given to trade generally. Producers depend on railway facilities. I think, eventually we will all have the benefit of a great gain, and I do not think there is the slightest danger of our finances being disturbed in any degree. We approached this union when Victoria was emerging from the greatest depression that has ever overtaken her, and when we were in a very bad condition financially. We are just feeling our legs after our terrible depression. Following that disaster of 1893, we were struck with the lowest level of prices that we ever saw in Victoria; then we had abnormally bad seasons. Notwithstanding that, we have improved our position materially. 575. Will the smaller States be affected ?—lt may be that through the Customs and excise there will be a loss, but no State will allow the other States to suffer. 576. Under what terms are they likely to make advances to the smaller States ?—That would be a question purely for the Federal Parliament to determine. 577. Mr. Beid.) Is your district the chief farming district of the colony?— One of the chief. 578. Where are the others ?—From the foothills of the Australian Alps to the South Australian border is the north and north-western territory. The dividing-range divides the southern district from the north. The western district is utilised for oat- and wheat-crops and dairying. The eastern portion, known as Gippsland, was devoted to agriculture in the early days, of late years to grazing. 579. Would the same conditions as to prices which you have described apply in those various districts ?—The northern and north-western districts are the wheat-growing districts of Victoria. There is no attention given to wheat-growing in the southern portions. Oat-growing is not pursued to the same extent in the southern portions as it was twenty years ago. They are devoting more attention to sheep-farming and dairying, as giving a more certain return. 580. Mr. Beaucham'p.] You said oat lands were worth £5 to £10 per acre : does the cost of production include seed ?—Yes. 581. Can you give the average cost of wheat land?—£4 to £8. That cost of production applies to the wheat land. 582. What does it cost , for oat lands for production ?—I could not say of my own personal knowledge. In putting in oats in the Valley district they put them in with the drill, and that costs more. 583. Is it the mallee country which can be brought into cultivation at low cost ? —Yes. 584. That is the scrub which you roll down and burn and then scarify ?—Yes. 585. In harvest do you simply strip ?—Yes ; the harvester is displacing the stripper. 586. Are there very large areas in Victoria that can be brought under cultivation for oats and wheat "> —Yes. 587. In addition to domestic requirements, you could supply New South Wales requirements? —I think so. What was fifteen years ago practically the granary of Victoria, in the locality bounded on the west by the Lodden, we grew 18,000,000 bushels of wheat. We grow very little wheat there now. They are growing wheat on the cheaper lands of the mallee. 588. We are -told that the desire for federation was due to the friction caused by the tariffs between the colonies, the trouble about the rivers, and differential rates? —Those were the chief causes. 589. Behind all that there was probably a sentimental feeling?— Yes. The greater part of Eiverina and western New South Wales has been settled mostly by Victorians. The younger generation of Victorians, who have been trained to farming pursuits, are going to New South Wales, where there is more land obtainable under exactly similar conditions as regards soil and climate as the part of Victoria they went from. 590. That trade has been taken away to New South Wales ?—lt is not that, but they find the difficulties in making a living on the same area of land are greater—l mean that the possibilities of making a living are not so great in New South Wales as in Victoria. 591. Mr. Miliar.] Is there much land not cultivated in Victoria which is suitable for cultivation ? —Yes; in the district where I live the average holdings are about 450 to 550 acres. Taking that district, which is typical of the north-eastern part of the colony, the people there do not cultivate much more than is sufficient for the requirements of their stock. They use the ground chiefly for dairying and fattening. The land is in use for some purpose. 592. Is there much land in Victoria not used ? —No good land ; it is all used in some way. 593. So that any increase in crops would be at the expense of something else ? —Yes. 594. What are the wages paid to farm-hands ?—lt varies according to conditions. Some years ago (from 1893 to 1895) our industrial population was in a bad condition. Taking the last year as an example, the agricultural labourers were not easily obtainable. To-day, in the district in which I live, a ploughman or a farm-hand gets £1 ss. a week and keep. Competent men are not obtainable. 595. There has been a big withdrawal from the country of troops going to South Africa ?— Yes. 596. Taking a fair average, one year with another, the wages would be about 15s. ?—No, they are above that. A man who is worth having would have to be paid £1, and in the harvest-time you cannot get men for less than £1 10s. to £2 ss. I paid at last harvest, myself, £2 ss. and keep.
595
A.—4
597. Do you anticipate that the Federal Parliament will gradually absorb the powers of the State Parliaments ?—No, I do not think so. The Federal Parliament will govern everything of common concern. The different States have found it a great disadvantage for each of them to be speaking with a different voice from that of the others. The powers vested in the Commonwealth are specifically defined in the Constitution Act. 598. How much will be left to the State Parliament? —The education of the people, the land administration, the railways, and other things. 599. Do you not think the education system should be uniform throughout Australia ? —I do. 600. Do you anticipate that the railways will be taken over ?—I hope so. 601. What would be left for the States apart from lands and mines'?—l cannot see the possibility of the Commonwealth taking over the lands. 602. There is no difficulty in the way of the Commonwealth taking over the lands ?—lt is not impossible. 603. Do you not think it probable that the people of the different States, when they find that the powers of the local Parliaments have been reduced, will cry out for their abolition?—No, I do not think so, because if everything were transferred to the Commonwealth the cost of administration would not be diminished in the slightest degree. More effective administration of internal matters can be obtained from the local Government. 604. Do you not think there will be everlasting friction between the States whilst different classes of legislation affect different matters ?—No ; the powers of the Commonwealth are fairly defined. 605. Have you local government in Victoria?— Yes ; cities, boroughs, and shires. 606. Do you not think the probability is that municipal bodies will be formed to take the place of the present Parliament ?—I visited Tasmania many years ago, and saw some peculiar things there. The Municipality controlled a section of the police and the Parliament another section. That was not satisfactory. To my mind, matters can be as effectually dealt with under State control as under the Commonwealth. 607. Mr. Roberts.] You said the production of wheat was increased owing to the settlement of the mallee country ?—That is an area of country of about 11,000,000 acres. At one time it was considered waste land, and was left to the dingoes and rabbits. Eventually some enterprising pastoralists took it under lease with conditions as to vermin-destruction, and they carried out experiments. I refer to Mr. Lascelles, who has been a benefactor to Victoria. They found that they could bring new land under wheat at a very low cost. That has all tended to the alienation of the land by settlers. Some hold it under license or lease, and the rentals go towards payment of the fee-simple of the land. The rent varies from about £1 per square mile to about 3d. per acre. Wherever the land is under tenure giving the right of alienation there are conditions as to improvement. 608. You said the average yield of oats was 25 bushels. I see the average for 1888 to 1890 inclusive was 8-J- bushels for wheat and 20J for oats ?—About 1884 what we know as the northern district was the wheat-field of Victoria. Of later years we have extended it into the mallee country, which is lighter yielding. In old days the yield was heavier, because it was better land. Our average yield has been reduced since we have extended to the mallee. They look upon 8 bushels in the mallee as a good crop. Two shillings per bushel is obtained for that. 609. Hon. Captain Russell.] What becomes of the mallee land after they have taken the crop off?— They continue to crop it for about four years. Then they allow it to go back to grass for a few years. The carrying-capacity for stock purposes is very light. The carrying-capacity is very much improved.by having the scrub rolled down. 610. Will it grow turnips ? —No, I do not think the climatic conditions will justify the attempt to produce those. 611. You rob the land of certain essential elements and then you have to leave it alone for a time?— Yes; the land in that country becomes foul with wild oats and cockspurs, owing to the fact that they have to cultivate it dry year after year. The seeds are not germinated before it is ploughed down. The mallee is not oat country, but wheat country. 612. In your own country what do you do?—ln all that country they like to get the crop off at the cheapest possible cost. For instance, they will plough an area of land in the winter season of the year, when it can be ploughed very cheaply. 613. What price is payed for ploughing?— About 4s. to ss. per acre would be the maximum. They will probably put in sorghum, and it requires no further cultivation. They graze that off in the autumn. They get a good crop, and let the land go back to grass again. It is unusual in the northern valley to take more than two crops in succession. Lucerne does well, but native grass is equally as profitable. 614. How many acres to a bullock ?—We always gauge it by sheep. In normal seasons the box lands will carry two sheep to the acre right through the season. That land goes from £4 to £8 per acre, according to improvements. If there is permanent water and fences it will go to £8 an acre; according to the fencing and water, down to £4. In all that country there are patches of irregular soil. 615. Are you ever devoid of water owing to drought ? —On parts of the settled lands. 616. What happens to the stock then ?—ln a few instances where they might lose their stock it is simply a question of carting water. That generally arises through the improvidence of the selectors. 617. What is the average rainfall of the district ?—About 18 in. We have got through two consecutive seasons with 10 in. and 12 in. 618. Hon. the Chairman.] Can you say whether the farmers of Victoria look to South Africa as a probable market for the surplus produce ? —lt has been a considerable factor during the last
A.—4
596
twelve months. Hay and oats would have been practically unsaleable in Victoria during the past twelve months if it was not for the outlet in South Africa. Looking ahead, we cannot see anything that might approach the same volume. The average Victorian uses it for his stock, as the price would not pay him. If they had not got the South African market the price would have been lower. 619. There would have been no necessity for Victoria to import the articles you mention ?— There is no necessity for Victoria to import for her own requirements except under abnormal conditions. In 1898 we had not been producing very largely either oats or hay, owing to the low values before that. We were met with a very dry season in 1897, and absorbed all the surplus stuff in hand; 1898 was a very dry season, and not only were the crops abnormally light, but there was no surplus from the previous year. Prices were high, and I think during that year we did import. 620. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] The farmers go in for fattening lambs ? —Yes ; there are a considerable number of lambs bought by the freezers. 621. Do you think there will be an increase in the export of lambs from here? —The low price of grain may stimulate the production of sheep. 622. Mr. Luke.] Are the implements used by farmers usually made here?— Largely. 623. Have you seen any of the New Zealand implements here ?—No. 624. You think Victoria will continue to manufacture? —Yes; we have been exporting to New South Wales. There are large manufacturing firms here. We can produce all our own requirements. We imported reapers-and-binders from America. We are going to make them here. The average price is £50 ; the price in America is £20. 625. Mr. Beauchamp.] In the mallee country is there much artificial manure used ?—lt is a subject they have been giving attention to during the last two or three years. They have been going in the dark, as they have not had the soils analysed. , 626. You have a Department of Agriculture?— Yes. 627. Has that been availed of by the farmers? —Not except during the last twelve months. Eight Hon. Sir Geoege Turner, K.C.M.G., Federal Treasurer, examined. (No. 222.) 628. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are the Federal Treasurer, Sir George ? —Yes, lam Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Australia, and was formerly Premier of the State of Victoria. 629. Did you attend any of the Conventions in reference to the Commonwealth ?—Yes ; one in Adelaide, Sydney, and Melbourne. 630. We want to ask you some questions upon the financial aspect of the matter, and as to how the finances of the different States will probably be affected by the Commonwealth Constitution. Take the State of Victoria, for example : what do you think will be the effect of that State having to surrender a portion of its Customs revenue to the Federal Government ? —lt all depends upon the uniform tariff that is adopted. 631. I suppose it would be hardly right to ask the Federal Treasurer ; but I suppose it may be taken, in any case, that the tariff will not be as high as existing either in New Zealand or in Victoria in the past ? —I cannot say. That is a matter that the Cabinet will have to discuss. It has never been discussed by the Cabinet yet. 632. For ten years at least the 25 per cent, of the net revenue of Customs will be taken by the Federal Government ? —lf the Federal Government desire to spend the money they have power to use the 25 per cent. 633. If they do, how are the different States to make up the loss to the Treasurer of that money ?—Partly by the increased prosperity which is going on year by year, and, if necessary, partly by somexneans of direct taxation, if there is any loss; but it does not follow that there will be any actual loss, as the States save the excess of transferred expenditure over transferred receipts in Post Office and Defence Departments, which is a large amount, and the uniform tariff may cover the new expenditure. 634. What do you think will be the effect upon the States in reference to borrowing money which they may require for the prosecution of public works, seeing that the Customs revenue is handed over to the Federal Government ?— Ido not think it will have the slightest effect. The people who lent money in England lent on the general credit, not on any particular item of revenue. 635. Take New Zealand, for instance, a colony which raised a very large proportion of its revenue from Customs : do you not think, if the power of levying duties of Customs is handed over to some other authority, that will materially affect the credit of the colony ? —I do not see why it should. The colony must always raise by some means a sufficient amount to pay its interest bill. 636. In New Zealand, for instance, the interest bill approximates very nearly the amount raised from Customs; and, if that is so, and these Customs pass beyond the control of the Government of New Zealand, do you not think the Government would be very seriously handicapped in raising future loans ?—I fail to see why it should be so. You have more than sufficient revenue left to pay your interest bill, and your interest bills would be the first things you have to pay, or else repudiate. 637. New Zealand has in the past gone in for a system of advances to settlers and considerable railway-construction : having regard to the fact that a considerable portion of the Customs revenue might be alienated, do you think she would be able to continue that policy of public works ?—Not if the Federation chose to pass such a policy as would prevent the raising of revenue through the Customs. We in Victoria get two millions and a half. If the Federal Parliament passed such a law as to prevent us getting more than a million we would be in a terrible fix. The Federal Parliament is not going to do anything which would render any State insolvent. 638. Taking the Customs revenue of New Zealand as two millions per year, could you say what would be the probable amount New Zealand would have to contribute from that towards the cost of the Federal Government ?—What is your population ?
A.—4
597
639. Eight hundred thousand?—We here, with a little over a million, would have as our share £120,000 per annum. Yours will probably be about £80,000, taking it on a population basis. It is the desire that the new tariff should bring in sufficient to give back to the States practically the same amount of revenue they have at the present time, plus the new expenditure —that is, that the State shall be left exactly in the same position as now. Whether the tariff will enable that to be carried out or not time alone will tell. No matter how you may frame a tariff, it may not answer your expectations. The only new expenditure likely to be incurred would be some additional defence expenditure, and if that amounted to any large sum it would have to be borrowed. There would only be the question of interest on that. 640. Mr. Millar.} We have been told that under the Commonwealth one of the great advantages of federation will be the reduction of the rate of interest due to the conversion of loans : has the Federal Parliament any intention of taking over the debts of the States and converting the loans'?— There has been no opportunity of considering any of those matters ; but, personally, I think those debts will be taken over, and that gradually they will be converted and consolidated. We are not going at once to have a large conversion scheme. You cannot expect bondholders to give up bonds bringing in 6 per cent, for bonds which will bring in 4 per cent. Any one who thinks that knows little of the British money-lender. They will expect to get as good a return as now. The only means of converting and consolidating will be when loans are about to mature, and then people holding stock which has one or two years to run may be glad to get Commonwealth stock exchanged at a lower rate of interest than the stock which they hold, as they might not be able to get as good an investment when the stock fell due. Those who say " convert the whole lot and save a million or two yearly in interest " are talking nonsense. 641. Can you see any permanent advantage to a State in having the loans converted ? —No, except as they fall due. 642. As a matter of fact, that argument is often used by Treasurers who want to get hold of a sinking fund?— With our sinking funds I bought up the stock. 643. You use it for the purpose for which it was created?— Yes. 644. That has not been the case in many of the States ?—No. 645. Do you anticipate a gradual growth of the powers of the Commonwealth and a decrease of the powers of the States ? —I think it is probable that the. Commonwealth will take over the debts and the railways, but I do not think anything else will be interfered with. Matters like mining and education will not be interfered with. 646. Do you anticipate any friction between the States ?—I do not think that is likely to arise, as the powers of the Federal Parliament are strictly limited. If the States had certain powers given to them and the Federal Government had the residue, then there might be friction. 648. Do you not think any progressive movement in any one of the States will be likely to be retarded ?—I do not think so. 649. Would it be possible for Victoria to pass an Act reducing the hours of labour unless the same conditions existed in New South Wales? —It might bo more difficult for competition, but I think what would be done here would force the hands of the people in the other colonies. We are all copying the advanced legislation of New Zealand. It is a question of public opinion and of those interested. 650. There may be the same public opinion, but it is not expressed so unanimously owing to the larger population here than in New Zealand?— Perhaps it is accounted for by the fact that you have had such good times, and could very easily afford to give the benefit. When times improve here our people will press to get equal benefits for the workers. The workers are strong, and they have the sympathy of tens of thousands of people who are not workers. 651. Do you not think it would be better for the Federal Government to have that power, and to apply it at once ?—Yes. 652. It would save friction? —Yes. 653. There are still further powers which might have been granted to the Federal Parliament ? —Yes; if we had thought of factory legislation we certainly would have made it one of the subjects for the Federal Parliament to deal with. It is hard for us to give certain benefits for the workers here and for New South Wales not to give it. They can compete with us on better terms. 654. The £80,000 from New Zealand would be the direct' expenditure ?—The new expenditure. 655. That is on the assumption that there are only certain things to be done : does that include the contribution in the event of penny-postage being established, or old-age pensions ?—No; we have penny-postage now in the State of Victoria. The old-age pension scheme would certainly increase the expenditure of the Federation by an enormous amount. That is not practicable under existing conditions, as we must return three-fourths of the Customs revenue to the States. It is financially impossible to provide for it now. 656. If you retained one-fourth of the Customs duties of New Zealand it would amount to about £527,000 ? —Assuming the full amount were retained. That is not only to cover the new expenditure, but the loss on the Post Office, and the heavy expenditure on defence, from which there is no revenue. We reckoned the loss on services taken over—post-offices, defence, lighthouses, and similar matters—at about £1,200,000, and that the new expenditure occasioned by federation would be £300,000 per annum. 657. The New Zealand Post and Telegraph Offices left a profit of £80,000 last year, excluding interest on the cost of construction ? —Yes ; for a number of years you get back exactly what you collect, less your share of the new expenditure. The expenditure so far is a very small proportion of the expenditure we estimated. This-month it will be heavier because we have the elections. We will also have the payment of members next month. I think £30,000 a year is a prettylarge amount for the new expenditure. I think it could be kept well under that, although we have to pay here about one-third on the basis of population. New South Wales would have to pay a
A.—4
little over one-third, and the other colonies the balance. Our share would be £120,000, and yours would be £80,000 —that would be the real cost. 658. Mr. Beauchamp.] To provide for some of the smaller States, do you think that at the end of ten years the practice of returning 75 per cent- of the Customs duties will be continued in order to save the imposition of direct taxation ?—At the end of ten years the gradual increase in the receipts will be quite sufficient to keep the States solvent. 659. And still enable the Government to make a large return ?—Yes; a steady increase must go on with the increase of population, and we are all getting over our bad times. 660. You think the debts and railways will be taken over ?—Yes. 661. In that case the Federal Government, in order to provide interest on the debts, would be compelled to retain the whole of the Customs revenue ?—Yes ; and possibly might have to call on the States to pay a little more than the Federation collected, but the States would save the interest. 662. Could our postal services in New Zealand be administered as well by the Federal Government as they are now ? —I think we should have a deputy or commissioner in charge of New Zealand with large powers of administration. 663. I suppose we may take it that there would be no objection raised to money being obtained to meet exigencies in New Zealand ? —That would have to be done in the same way as it is done in Western Australia. 664. We could be taken into the Commonwealth on somewhat better terms than as an original State?—l think you ought to come in as an original State, w T ith special consideration for any of your difficulties. 665. Mr. Luke.] Do you think it is possible to carry on the sugar industry in Queensland and preserve a "white" Australia? —Our information shows that it is so. They had in 1890 50,000 acres under cultivation, and close on to ten thousand kanakas were employed. In 1899 they had 110,000 acres, with only a little over nine thousand kanakas employed. Machinery will gradually be adopted for doing some of this work. 666. But a certain amount of labour will always be necessary : is it possible for white people to carry it on with improved machinery? —According to the information at my disposal, that is so. I would not like to say so definitely, because I have not been there. I know that all the districts interested have sent representatives to Parliament who are strongly opposed to black labour. 667. You know that the present Bill excludes Maoris from being counted: if New Zealand joined the Federation, could provision be made whereby the Maoris could be counted ?—The Maoris are an entirely different race from our aboriginals. 668. On sentimental and other grounds New-Zealanders think they ought to count?—lf that were the only difficulty I personally would be glad to meet New Zealand. Ido not regard the Maoris as being on anything like the same grounds as our aboriginals. 669. You have already mentioned that special powers should be given to New Zealand as regards administration ; but in the great Federal undertakings that will ultimately come within the scope of the Federal Parliament would there not be a" community of interest growing up here with which New Zealand would have nothing in common, in view of the twelve hundred miles of ocean coming between us ?—That might possibly be so. Ido not know that distance would prevent proper management. You would probably have officers there with very large powers of administration. 670. I refer more particularly to the expenditure of money in the carrying-out of large railway undertakings: could anything be devised by which certain powers will be given to New Zealand as an equivalent ?—You might provide that any of our railways across the continent should be chargeable only to the continent, and that New Zealand should not be called upon to contribute. 671. Probably it would be a reasonable thing to expect that the Federal Parliament would subsidise fast steamers to bring New Zealand closer in point of time ?—As far as I know the feeling of the people in Australia, they would go a very long way indeed to get New Zealand into the Federation, although some of our farmers think that you, having the run of our markets under federation, would be able to injure them by your more prolific products. 672. Supposing we did not enter the Federation, is a reciprocal tariff possible ?—I do not think there is the slightest possibility of it; all previous attempts at such proposals have failed. 673. Mr. Leys.'] We are very anxious to get at something like a basis for working out the effect of federation on the State finances : do you think we can take Mr. Barton's statement of a gross tariff to produce £8,500,000 as being near the mark ?—I think that will be the amount as nearly as possible. 674. You think if we took that as a working basis we should not be far astray ?—No; I think that would be approximately correct. 675. You think the railways and debts will be ultimately taken over : in that event, would railway-construction be a Federal function ? —Yes ; otherwise you might have the States constructing railways which would be competing against the Federal railways. 676. I can see that that might be of great advantage to Australia, but it might not work so advantageously to New Zealand. Do you think any special condition could be obtained by New Zealand to secure to itself the right of constructing railways? —I think some provision of that sort would have to be made. Here we have one continent, and you have your own islands, and in matters of that kind you would probably have to have larger powers than we could have in our own undivided country. 677. In Tasmania we found they are confronted by the fact that when their Customs and excise revenue is gone the amount returnable will be less than will cover their State requirements ?—They cannot tell that. 678. That is their impression ?—They cannot possibly tell that until the uniform tariff comes into operation. At present they are getting back every penny they pay in, less their share of new expenditure —a very small sum.
598
599
A.—4
679. You would not suggest that the present rate of Federal expenditure is anything to go by, seeing that the Federal Government machinery has hardly commenced to work? —We reckon £300,000 a year, of which they pay a very small proportion ; this would be the outside expenditure, and the Federal tariff would have to be so framed as to include that £300,000. They may not have to pay any portion of the expenditure at alt. 680. They have been leaning on a higher Customs revenue than the Federal Government is likely to impose ? —That is so. Tasmania is one of the States as to which difficulties may arise in framing a tariff which will give it enough, and yet not give all the other States far and away too much. Therefore a special provision has been inserted in the Act by which financial assistance can be given to any State if necessary, because it would be far better for us as States to allow a portion of our revenue to go to Tasmania than have a very high amount of taxation on ourselves, and give us more money than required. 681. Is not Queensland in the same position ?—I do not know sufficient of Queensland's financial position. I always calculated on Queensland being out of it, and I have not 'yet started making calculations in regard to that State. 682. Our average Customs revenue in New Zealand per head has been considerably larger than that of Tasmania, and very much larger than that of Victoria. The tariff takes a very wide range in New Zealand, so that we would have to contemplate the position we would be in in the event of a great shrinkage in our Customs revenue. Assuming that the Federal requirements, including interest, absorb the Customs revenue, in what way are we to provide for future works ? —You would have to provide that yourselves if you stayed out of the Federation. 684. We have now entire control of the Customs revenue for our own purposes: in the other case the Federal Government will levy the Customs taxation in view of the requirements of all the States ? —Certainly. 685. That seems to be the difficulty in Tasmania. Can you suggest how Tasmania is to provide for future works ?—You can only do it by borrowing for them. 686. On what security ?—The security of the good faith of the colony. 687. How is she to meet interest on non-productive works ?—lf she had to borrow the money she would need to have some means of raising the interest, unless the general advance from year to year in the income of each of the. States will allow them to bear the extra burden without extra taxation. Our revenue five years ago was six millions and a half; this year it is eight millions. It is now for nine months £300,000 better than it was for the nine months of last year. 688. You anticipate that the return from the Federal Government under the head of Customs will be large enough to enable you to cover loans without additional taxation ? —The extra revenue derived from all other sources, and the steady increase from Customs, will give each of the States an increasing revenue on the whole, and enable them to meet the interest. A State should not borrow more than a million or a million and a half a year. We are borrowing about a million and a quarter a year. A State that spends much more must ultimately get into trouble. 689. We found that in New South Wales financial experts appeared to think that the finances of federation under the Braddon clause will break down : do you anticipate that ?—lt will prevent heavy expenditure like old-age pensions. Ido not see how it can break down. 690. Others seem to think that the requirements of the various States were so different that it would be found unworkable ?—The Braddon clause had nothing to do with that. The Federal tariff certainly has. The first object the Federal Government must have, in view of keeping the solvency of the States, will be to frame a tariff to bring back to each State the amount collected at the time of federation, and, if possible, a further sum to cover the new expenditure. The Braddon clause will not affect that, because it simply says that we must not spend more than one-fourth of the Customs revenue, and return three-fourths. 691. The opinion was that the Braddon clause imposed such a restriction upon the Federal Government in framing its tariff that it would be quite unworkable?—lt does not impose any restriction on the framing of the tariff. It imposes a restriction on the amount the Federal Government can spend of the States' money. You can frame your tariff to bring in any amount you like over four times the expenditure. You must frame your tariff to bring in at least six millions under the Braddon clause, because you have to spend a million and a half, and you must return three times that to the States ; but you can bring in eight or nine millions. You are not restricted in that direction. 692. You are compelled to return 75 per cent, to the States, which is really a controlling factor?—lt is a controlling factor to prevent extravagance by the Federal Treasurer. If he wants to run into a quarter of a million extra expenditure he has to raise a million to do it, which is an impossibility. 693. Do you think federation in Australia would have come about but for the conflict of the border duties, and the difficulties about irrigation, and the differential railway-rates ?—I think the main object was to get rid of the border duties, and in addition to that there was a very large amount of sentiment, especially amongst the younger generation. Then there were the rival railway tariffs, which certainly had an effect. We go into New South Wales territory and allow 50 or 60 per cent, discount on the freight-rates. The necessity for a uniform system of defence also had a large influence. The question of sentiment was a very strong moving power, more especially amongst the younger generation. 694. These conflicts do not apply to New Zealand ? —No. 695. Can you see any benefit in regard to New Zealand beyond intercolonial free-trade ? —That ought to be of great benefit to you. If all our ports are open to you, with your great pro-ducing-power you ought to be able to send a large amount of produce to us. 696. We have been told that there may be some conflict between the Federal Government and New Zealand with regard to the South Sea Islands ?—I do not think there is any more danger than if
A.—4
600
there was no Federation. We are not likely to get on bad terms with New Zealand under any circumstances. 697. Hon. Major Stetvard.] As to New Zealand's share of cost of the Government, £80,000, on the same basis would you take into account the interest and the cost of works such as the trans-continental railway ? —No, that is not taken into consideration. We do not take that into consideration in the £300,000, but only interest on the cost of public buildings taken over. 698. In the event of such works as the trans-continental railway being constructed, if New Zealand were in the Commonwealth she would have to pay her Customs revenue to the Commonwealth subject to the right of your taking 25 per cent, of it ?—Yes. 699. No doubt if the trans-continental railway were constructed the interest on the cost of that line would be paid out of that 25 per cent. ?—lt would be unless some special provision were made to guard New Zealand's interests. 700. Therefore we should have to contribute to it although we might obtain the most indirect benefit from it ? —That is so. 701. It would be a fair assumption, if she came into the Commonwealth, that New Zealand being so far away should obtain some special consideration ?—I should say that, as to all large works in which New Zealand could not benefit the same as Australia, it would be fair that she should receive some special consideration. 702. That she should be exempted from the charge?— Yes. 703. Or that, on the other hand, some compensating advantages might be given ?—Yes. 704. In order to bring us nearer to the seat of Government in Australia it might be necessary to put on fast steamers, and a large subsidy might be involved ?—Yes. 705. That might be a fair consideration ?—I think, as to the point you mention with regard to the trans-continental railway, it would be unfair to expect the people of New Zealand to pay for what they could not get the benefit of. 706. What is your view in regard to the postal arrangements already entered into ? You are aware that we have at present, so far as the whole of the British Empire is concerned except the Australian Colonies, a penny-post in operation : are the existing contracts to remain ?—You certainly could not break any existing contract. When we take over any department we take over all the obligations of that department, and no Government of any kind would attempt to break a contract already entered into. I fail to see how a contract made between two parties could be broken at the option of one of them. 707. Supposing after we entered the Commonwealth a greater power than ourselves took charge?— Neither ourselves nor a greater power could break the contract. No Parliament would dare to enact what would virtually be repudiation. 708. You consider that the arrangements we have already entered into with regard to pennypostage outside New Zealand could not be , interfered with?— Not during the currency of the arrangement. At the end of it you would have to come under the uniform law. 709. With regard to old-age pensions, we have .an Act in New Zealand? —We have a temporary scheme here. 710. You arrange for 10s. a week? —Yes. 711. Ours is practically 7s.? —You allow a man earning less than £1 a week to receive a pension. Wo do not; we do not allow more than 10s. a week. You allow him to go to £52 a year. 712. One of the powers of the Federal Parliament will enable them to deal with old-age pensions. Supposing it passes an Old-age Pensions Act, then our Act will be different from yours ? —It must be uniform. 713. Hon.' the Chairman.] We have been told that Victoria can produce pretty well all the agricultural products she requires, and export them: do you agree with that ?—I have not sufficient knowledge to give a definite answer as to that. We do not produce all our requirements in many things. As to many others, we do produce more than we require. 714. You spoke of free-trade being an attraction to New Zealand to come into the Federation. If what is said just now is correct, there is not much that New Zealand can send to Australia that she cannot produce already, except kauri-gum and so on? —I know that some years ago, when the matter was being discussed in our Parliament, it was said, with regard to oats, that your return per acre was so enormous as compared with ours that you would be able to sell cheaper here than our farmers could. . 715. Are you acquainted with the agricultural products of New South Wales ?—No. 716. You could not say whether they can supply all their requirements?—So far as I saw, they appeared to import about two millions and a quarter of foodstuffs every year in New South Wales. 717. As regards the clause in the Constitution Act which enables the Federal Government to grant financial assistance to certain States, what do you understand is to be the nature of that assistance? —It would probably be by taking over a portion of their debts, and paying interest on them. I think assistance in the way of cash would look too much like charity. I think Parliament would probably try something other than giving cash assistance, probably by way of loan, repayable by a sinking fund. 718. We have seen it stated in the papers that Mr. Barton has said that the Federal finances will require a tariff to produce eight millions and a half: if that is so, would not that modify somewhat the evidence you have given to us as to the effect of the Federal Government being entitled to retain 25 per cent, of the Customs duty?—lt would enable them to retain a larger amount if they so desired. The State's Treasurer would have a correspondingly greater difficulty in adjusting his State finances. As the representatives come from the various States, and as the people in the States would take care to make the representatives understand that there must not be large expenditure, and they must be heavily taxed, I do not think there is much fear of the onefourth being spent. The pressure of public opinion would be too strong.
601
A.—4
719. Mr. Barton is reported to have said that it is no use talking about less than that being sufficient for Federal purposes ? —That is on the assumption that the total expenditure is a million and a half. If you are going to spend two millions and a quarter, then you will have the States short of that amount, which they would have to raise by direct taxation. 720. In that case how much would be the contribution from New Zealand?—lt would be largely increased. The representatives sent from the various States are to a very large extent men who have been in political life. They know if they do anything which would enable the Federal Government to incur heavy expenditure, and by that means cause the local Government to put on new taxation or resort to drastic retrenchment, they would get the blame. They would take good care there was no extravagant expenditure. 721. What do you consider is the principal attraction to the States in Australia becoming members of the Federal Parliament? Do you think it will lead to the probable ultimate extinction of the States ? —I do not think there is the slightest possibility of that. There is such an enormous quantity of work for the local State Parliament to do. 722. Mr. Millar.] How do you propose to assess the value of the buildings you take over? Are you going to take them at the valuation of to-day, or the cost-price ?—lt would be done by arbitration under our Lands Compensation Act. It would be at a fair value. There is not much in that, because, although we have to pay interest, the States find the money. 723. You would take over our Marine Department, controlling the lighthouses, and so on, and take it exactly as it stands ? —I think we would take only the principal lights ; we would not interfere with the harbour-lights. 724. You would collect the light dues ?—There would have to be some arrangement. 725. There is a lot of administration which it would be impossible for a central body to look after ?—A central body could not administer the river-lights. That would have to be left to the local Parliament, and what proportion of the dues would be allowed would be a matter of arrangement. 726. There are a lot of Government wharves included?—l do not think the Federal Government would have anything to do with wharves ; they would be internal matters. 727. You would only take over the coast-lights ?—I think that is all.
Thursday, 4th April, 1901. Brigadier-General J. M. Gordon examined. (No. 223.) 728. Hon. the Chairman.] Will you kindly tell us your name and rank ? —Brigadier-General Joseph M. Gordon, Commandant of the Military Forces of South Australia. 729. How long have you held that position ?—Since 1892. I was in the Royal Artillery. 730. We have, amongst other things, to consider the question of New Zealand federating with the Australian Commonwealth, and as to how the defence of the Colony of New Zealand would be affected under federation. Will you kindly give the Commission your views as to what advantages would occur, in respect to defence, from New Zealand joining the Federation ?—I think, from a military point of view, taking the whole question not so much as one of internal organization, but for the purpose of the defence of Australasia, it would be of the greatest advantage that the military forces of these portions of the southern sea should be under the control of one Commander-in-Chief, who would rule and guide the different States in regard to the action that might have to be taken in time of war; otherwise there might possibly be a difference of opinion between the General Officer Commanding in Australia and the General Officer Commanding in New Zealand at the most critical moment, and that would be a disadvantage. 731. Do you know New Zealand?— Yes, very well. 732. Do you think there would be any difficulty in transporting troops from New Zealand in time of war to Australia, or vice versd ? —ln the event of the shipping being available, I do not see any difficulty. There would be no more difficulty than is experienced in sending them continually from England to Gibraltar. 733. We have a small-arms-ammunition factory in New Zealand : do you think it is advisable that that should be maintained there?— That opens up a very big question, and it is this: the most essential point in connection with the defence of Australia is, to my mind, uniformity of armament, and that is a most important reason why there should be federation. I am speaking from experience on this point, because for the two years before I went to South Africa—from 1898 to 1900 —I was appointed by these colonies Military Adviser and Inspector of all stores in London in the place of Colonel Harman, who died. At that time the Government of New Zealand had seceded from the arrangement that was then in force, as they wished to have an officer of their own. Another officer was appointed for New Zealand, but, as a matter of fact, the work was done in my office. Now, if we had not uniformity of armament we should have to maintain all sorts of branches in New Zealand, which would also have a different military officer from the Commonwealth, and it would be very little advantage to establish arm-factories if we were going to have in any State of Australasia a different arm from what other States had, because you would require an entirely separate class of machinery. Even without federation New Zealand, in respect of its armaments, should be guided, as far as possible, by what the Commonwealth does ; and in any case it is most essential, I think, that you should continue to have a small-arm factory of your own, so that you could turn out everything you require in that direction. 734. Hon. Captain Russell.] I suppose, General Gordon, we might assume that so long as England has command of the seas there will be nothing but filibustering attacks on these colonies, or do you think it would be possible to land a force of over a thousand men ?—So long as we have the command of the sea we need fear nothing, but the whole thing depends on our having command of the sea. 76—A. 4.
602
A.—4
735. Supposing England lost command of the sea, could Australia send men to New Zealand's assistance, or New Zealand send men to Australia's assistance?— They could, but they would have to take the risk, in the same way that we have to risk going across an enemy's land ; but I think it would be risked if New Zealand wanted assistance. 736. Do you think it is within the bounds of possibility, from your South African experience, for a European Power to land a sufficient army that could do permanent injury to Australia or New Zealand ?—That is rather difficult to answer offhand. I do not think you could prevent them settling for some time. It would be a military occupation simply of certain chief towns, but Ido not think they could overrun or take the country. 737. Should you say from your experience of New Zealand that with our organization and potentialities for modern defence we could hold our own irrespective of Australian troops coming to our help ?—What is the population of New Zealand ? 738. Eight hundred thousand ?—How many fighting men could you muster ? 739. We have fifteen thousand enrolled Volunteers, and with a conscription we could have, perhaps, between two hundred and three hundred thousand men ?—That would suffice in your case probably. 740. Supposing we were federated for defence purposes, what responsibility would lie as between the Officer Commanding in New Zealand and the Officer Commanding in the Commonwealth ?—Practically the same responsibility as exists now between the General Officer Commanding in Ireland and the Commander-in-Chief in London. The General Officer Commanding in Ireland has the full control of all administration in Ireland, subject to the approval of the Com-mander-in-Chief. He carries out his instructions ; but for practical purposes the General Officer Commanding in Ireland has full and absolute control. Similarly, I take it that the Commander-in-Chief here would have the power of appointing the General Officer Commanding in New Zealand, in the same way as he has the power to appoint the General Officers Commanding in the several districts into which the Commonwealth would probably be divided under the new Act. 741. If a hostile force landed in New Zealand I suppose the Officer Commanding there would be practically independent ? —Supposing there were war, he would be practically as independent as General Buller was in Natal, with Lord Roberts working away at Kimberley. General Buller tried to communicate with Lord Eoberts in many cases, but he could not; and the General Officer Commanding in New Zealand would have to be responsible to the-Federal Government, through the Commander-in-Chief, for the conduct of the war there. 742. Do I understand you to imply that the selection of officers to command the local districts would rest with the General Officer Commanding in Australia?— The final approval would, and there could be no appointments made without the approval of the Commander-in-Chief. 743. And that you look upon as essential ? —Most essential. I take it that the Commander-in-Chief would take the responsibility. They could advise him, but he has to be responsible to the Commonwealth Government, and he would probably put his foot down. 744. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Considering the want of coaling harbours on the part of foreign Powers, is it likely that any Power would be able to land anything but a filibustering force in these colonies so long as England holds the seas ?—I do not think they could, excepting the French from Noumea, where they have any amount of coal. They have coal there enough to last five or six years. 745. I presume that Noumea would be blockaded by the English fleet ?—We would try it. 746. With regard to sending away a land force from Australia, in the event of any disaster to our navy, would there not be a great difficulty in communicating as between Australia and New Zealand? —We had no difficulty in landing 250,000 men in South Africa. 747. I mean in the event of Britain losing command of the sea? —Then there would be difficulty. 748. Then, I suppose the best thing to be done would be for us to defend our own coasts ?— If such a thing occurred as New Zealand being interfered with, or being actually taken possession of, even for a time, by an enemy landing, then it would be for the nearest friend, to do his utmost to help you. 749. I understand that you attach the greatest importance to the necessity of keeping uniform our defence system in the time of peace ?—Yes, and particularly the armament in the shape of rifles and ordnance. In Sydney, Adelaide, and Melbourne you will find different guns, necessitating different ammunition. We should be able to make everything we require for our armament, our rifle ammunition and heavy-gun ammunition as well. 750. I presume that uniformity could be insisted on m these colonies whether they federated or not?—l am afraid not. 751. Not by the advice of headquarters?— The Colonial Defence Committee has been at it for years, but you cannot tell a self-governing colony that they shall do " so-and-so " —at any rate, it has not been done. The question of uniformity is not a new thing; it is as old as the hills, and it was considered long ago, but it has not been carried out in spite of advice we have received time after time from the military authorities. 752. Mr. Millar.] In working out the scheme of defence for Australia do you simply take Australia as it stands at present ?—No ; that has been worked out in regard to the States, but I think it would be advisable to include New Zealand. 1 include New Zealand in Australia for practical purposes. 753. Have you considered what effect the annexing of the Pacific islands would have on the question of defence ?—lt would simply throw a great responsibility all over Australasia. If you give protection in one place you must accept that extra responsibility. 754. Would it not considerably increase the naval expense ?—No doubt it would, and the naval question would come in, because that question will presently become a Commonwealth one, as the question of the colonies contributing to the navy will have to be reconsidered. If the English
603
A.—4
Government ask for a further subsidy towards the navy and the colonies grant it, it will carry with it the providing of extra ships. 755. If we annex these islands, would it not be only right that we should pay for it ?—Do you propose that they should be annexed to the Government of New Zealand or to the Commonwealth ? 756. There is a difference of opinion : Australia does not think it right that New Zealand should have them, but geographically the majority of them are much closer to New Zealand than to Australia?—lf these islands are annexed and handed over to the Government of New Zealand to look after it may cost you more, and probably will, to control their affairs. 757. Has the Conference of Commandants dealt with the question from that point of view?— No. 758. I presume they will take it into consideration seeing that it is a live factor ?—The matter will hardly be relegated to the present Conference, because the present Conference is arranging for an Act dealing with discipline and administration only, and the matter you refer to is one of policy. 759. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you formed any idea of the probable amount that would be required to carry out a complete system of defence for the Commonwealth ?—I think it would be quite half a million. 760. Would that include, or not, subsidies to be paid to the factories that might be established here for the manufacture of munitions of war?—ln the first instance, another important question arises in that connection : whether the federal Government will undertake the inspection of these factories, or whether they will allow them to be established under a system of giving grants of land and bonuses to private companies in order to start the factories. They could grant land and certain privileges, and could make contracts with a company for a certain time, but with the stipulation that after fifteen years the Government should have the right to take the establishment over as its own. That would mean a saving to the Government in respect to the starting of the works. 761. Mr. Leys.] If such companies as you describe were established, would you deem it a proper condition to insist upon the maintenance of an ammunition-factory in New Zealand as separate from the Australian one?—l think it would be most advisable to have one in New Zealand, for if New Zealand had to depend upon Australia for its ammunition the possibility might be that you would be left in the lurch at the very time that you wanted it. The same thing happened in Australia in 1885 when the Russian scare was on. We sent Home early for two million rounds of ammunition, but never got them, as every factory was full of orders, and there was no spare ammunition. We had to do without it for months. At the beginning of the South African War we cabled for ammunition, but never got it, and if you had to depend on Australia for your munitions of war you might be in the same position when war broke out. 762. It has been suggested to us by an expert in defence that the establishment of a central factory under Government control in Australia is the most desirable thing on account of the cheapness of such a system ? —That is questionable ; I think New Zealand is quite important enough to have a branch one. The central one is of the utmost importance, but you are so very far away that a branch is desirable. Then, you would have the additional advantage of your money being spent in your own colony, where the workmen were employed. 763. Do you think it probable that Australia will set up a fleet of its own ?—I do not. 764. Do you think it is desirable ?—I do not. 765. Do you think the present system of contribution to the Imperial fleet is the most profitable and best ? —I think it is ; but I would qualify that point by saying that there should be a sort of condition attached to that subsidy. The present arrangement says they are not to go outside Australian waters, but that is simply ignored, because I remember reading in a paper where Admiral Bowden-Smith said "if he wanted to go outside Australian waters who was going to tell him not to go ? " The condition I think necessary is that there should be some arrangement by which the services of the large body of coastal seamen employed in these colonies could be utilised. They would make excellent reserve-men, but they are wasted here because they are not properly encouraged ; nor can they be trained locally to defence-work. 766. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you think they would submit to man-of-war discipline?— You have had an examnle set you very lately by South Australia, which sent the gunboat " Protector" to China manned by Naval Reserve men, who have earned the highest encomiums for their admirable conduct and services. Similarly, our citizen soldiers have earned the highest praise in South Africa. 767. How would you embody such a force as that?— That is more a naval question, and lam only speaking of the general principle. 768. Mr. Leys.] In your estimate of half a million did you include the cost of interest on the additional coastal defences that will be necessary?—l think that all comes out of loan, and it has been the practice in the past to take it out of loan. lam only speaking of the money required to carry on the defences from day to day, including cost of rifles, ammunition, equipment, clothing, ranges for rifle practice, and the cost of the general conduct of affairs. 769. Do you think that any large amount of loan-money would have to be spent upon the defences of Tasmania and the northern ports?— There will have to be some, but I could not give the estimate offhand. I take it there will be £1,000,000 spent in five years. Take Port Darwin, which may be left alone or fortified. 770. Do you contemplate establishing a Commonwealth army or relying mainly on the Volunteer Forces ?—You might have to rely on the Volunteer Forces as against a regular Force. A branch of it might be called Militia, whom we call our partially paid Force, the men of which, when they turn out, get 3s. or 4s. a day. There is also the Volunteer Force getting a capitation
A.—4.
604
grant, but they are all Volunteers and not regulars. At the start of the Commonwealth what you call your standing army will be as small as possible, and the defence of Australia will depend entirely on the Volunteers. 771. Have you formed any estimate of the number of the subsidised force you would have?— I have an idea the numbers to be raised will depend on the amount of money Parliament votes, but the probability is that the number will be what it is now, only that there may be a reserve required for the protection of each State, which was the idea when we drew up the Federal scheme previous to the Commonwealth being established. The number that was put down for such a scheme was from thirty to thirty-two thousand men, in addition to what each State kept up for itself. 772. Then, the total force would be—what ?—Between fifty and sixty thousand. 773. Hon. Major Steward.] In the half-million estimate you spoke of of course there is no provision for forts, guns, or submarine mines for harbour defence ? —To a certain extent they are included. If you require to replace a submarine boat it would come out of that money, or a new boiler for an old boat would come out of it, or anything required to keep the present defences in working-order. 774. You told us that there is a large depot of coal in New Caledonia: is that authenticated? —So lam given to understand by pretty good authority. I cannot say it is so, but we have very good reason to believe it is. 775. Have you any reason to believe that Germany has any coal depots for military stores in the Pacific ? —No ; and no other nation I know of, besides France. 776. In respect to factories for small-arm ammunition, do you recognise the necessity of our continuing our small-arm-ammunition factory, as well as there being one on the mainland ? —I do. I think it is most advisable. 777. With respect to uniformity and equipment, do you propose to rely upon contracts with private firms for such things, or to have a central Government factory for supplying them ?—The clothing should be a State matter, and I see no necessity for a central factory for the supply of clothing any more than one for boots. 778. Do you think it desirable that there should be more training-ships for boys in the colonies ?—I do ; but my idea was that the ships of the Australian squadron which are in reserve should be manned for a month with Naval Eeserve men, who should cruise in them and attain a knowledge of their business by actual training on board a man-of-war. Then let the ship come back and take another crew on board and train them in the same way. Let her go to Adelaide, and send another ship on to Brisbane, but keep them in commission, and depend on it the boats would be twice as well off as laying in Sydney Harbour doing nothing, while the Naval Beserves would get a chance of getting a training on a modern man-of-war, and would then be available to reinforce the crews of the ships of the squadron in case of war. 779. I mean as regards training up boys to the sea, do you think there are sufficient trainingships to allow of their being trained, or should we have more vessels specially for the purpose of training boys? —I think local training-ships are desirable. 780. Hon. the Chairman.] Is the establishment of a military college part of the defence scheme here ?—I think it is most necessary. 781. Do you think it will be done?—l think it will have to be done. 782. You spoke of the necessity of uniformity of artillery and ordnance, but would not that be a matter of years ?—As soon as the Defence Department decides what scheme it is going to have those orders will be put in hand, and that is the time to start making the ordnance uniform. The field-batteries will cost the Government about £11,000 or £12,000 each. I sent one to New South Wales costing about £11,500 —that is, with six guns and everything complete. 783. What is the strength of the Force in South Australia?-—About 3,200 Volunteers, and 1,500 members of defence rifle-clubs, who are liable to service. 784. What is the allowance of ammunition to the Volunteers in South Australia?—We have no Volunteers; they are all partially paid, but we make them go through the complete course of musketry instruction. They get their ammunition free for class-firing, and we give the rifle-clubs sixty rounds per annum per member, while those who qualify as marksmen get another sixty rounds free. 785. At what price is the '303 ammunition sold to the rifle-clubs ? —Half-price. I give them as much as they like, to encourage shooting as much as possible. 786. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you approve of the partially paid system ?—Yes. 787. Do you think it is a preferable system to the capitation system?— Very much more so. 788. What is the relative efficiency between the partially paid man and the man who is only capitated?— There is a marked difference ; the partially paid man is more efficient. 789. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you any reason to suppose that such lines as the German and Messageries Maritimes could carry a sufficient number of trained men who could be used against us in time of war ?—Many of the men in their crews are Naval Eeserve men, and are all under liability to serve. In the case of the French, their officers have to be Naval Eeserve men ; but I could not speak about the Germans. Some of these boats can also be converted into cruisers. 790. Mr. Leys.] How is your estimate of half a million increase in the defence expenditure divided as between the colonies?—l could not say for certain. 791. Is your estimate for a much larger force than at present exists ? —No ; it is the estimate of what the Conference recommended—namely, thirty thousand men extra; but that was at the time when each State was separate, and when we had no idea of federation. It would be a mobile force of thirty thousand; but now there will not be the necessity for that, because the Commanding Officer would be able to move from one State to another any body of men he liked. That he has not the power to do now.
605
A.—4
792. Then, you estimated that you would have fifty thousand men engaged in one form or another in the defence of the Commonwealth ? —Quite that with the rifle-clubs. 793. We were told by General French that there were only twenty-five thousand ?—I do not think he counted the defence rifle-clubs. The figures, I think, are—Victoria, 7,000 ; New South Wales, 12,000; Queensland, 6,000; South Australia, 4,500; Western Australia, 2,000; and Tasmania, 2,000. In addition, there are the reserves and defence rifle-clubs, comprising many men whom we never hear about, but who are available when they are wanted, and who, under the new conditions, will have to get a retaining-fee to enable them to be called upon. 794. I understand that this thirty thousand would be more of a paid force than the outside Volunteer Force : is that correct ?—These thirty thousand were paid men in each State— Volunteers, and partially paid according as each State decided. 795. But are they all of higher skill than the ordinary State Volunteer? —No, the same skill. Jambs Eitchib Johnston examined. (No. 224.) 796. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the firm of Johnston and Sons, ironfounders, Williamstown ?—I am managing director of the Time Foundry, South Melbourne. We are engineers and ironfounders. We have been established thirty-seven or thirty-eight years, and employ on an average three hundred hands. We manufacture boilers, mining machinery, and do general marine engineering and repairing work. 797. What is the average rate of wages paid in your works ?—The lowest tradesman's wage paid by us is 10s. a day for eight hours, and the highest 135., but there are not many getting that wage. 798. Does your firm manufacture for export ?—Yes, a fairly large amount. 799. Have you exported any of your manufactures to New Zealand ?—Yes, within the last month, roughly speaking, about fifty thousand pounds' worth. 800. Is there a duty against you there ? —Yes, of 5 per cent. We send dredging machinery there at the present time, and a few boilers only to Dunedin. To my knowledge there are no differences in the conditions of labour as between New Zealand and Victoria. 801. Are the men as able to work here and do as good a day's work as the men in New Zealand?—l think so. 802. Supposing New Zealand came into the Federation, and the duty were removed, would that make any difference to you as regards sending machinery to New Zealand ?—I do not think so. The reason we got so much work from there was because the New Zealand shops had too much to deal with, and could not cope with the demand, or deliver the dredges in the requisite time. 803. Are you acquainted with any of the ironfounders in Dunedin ? —Yes, with Burt and Co. and Sparrow. 804. Taking those works as an example, supposing New Zealand were in the Federation, would they be able to successfully compete with the foundries in Victoria?—l could hardly say that. Ido not suppose we could compete against them there, or they against us here, on equal terms. There is such a little difference between the shops that the freight itself would be a serious item. 805. Mr. Luke.] What are your hours of labour here ? —Eight hours a day, or forty-eight a week, and if we work overtime we have to pay 50 per cent, over and above the usual wages. 806. What are your overtime hours? —The tradesmen's are " time and a half," which starts immediately after 5 o'clock. 807. There is no two hours " time and a quarter " to begin with? —No, but there used to be. 808. Are your apprentices restricted in proportion to the journeymen ?—No. 809. Is the proportion very large ?—That I cannot say, but the young fellows or apprentices I saw in A. and T. Burt's were in a very much larger proportion to the journeymen than in any shop I have been in. 810. In what department ? —Engineering. 811. What would be about your proportion here in that department?—We have no apprentices in the boiler-yard at the present time, and we have, I should say, six in the engineering department —six altogether. 812. What number of engineers would you have altogether?—On an average, fifty. 813. Do the unions regulate the rate of wages ?—Yes. 814. Then, these men who get the 13s. a day are, I presume, " leading" hands?— Yes; they are the best men we have got and do special work. 815. You have no Workmen's Compensation Act other than the English Act ?—I do not think so. 816. Have you had much trouble as regards cases of injury ?—No ; in fact, I only know of one case since we have been in business. 817. As regards this dredging machinery you manufacture, I gather it was more a question of time than price?—l think so. I think our prices were higher in every case than the New Zealand prices. 818. Have you delivered all your contracts for dredging machinery?—We have only one in the shop at the present time, which is being kept back for want of the money. 819. Are there other firms making dredging machinery here ? —Yes ; the Otis Company have manufactured, I think, eleven, but they took the work at such a price for the first four or five dredges that the other shops could not look at them. 820. I suppose Melbourne would do better work, as far as the machinery is concerned, than the New Zealand shops?—No, I could not say that, because when I was in Dunedin Mr. Sparrow showed me a hydraulic plant he was making, and their shops at the present time are just as fully equipped as we are here. Burt's shop is a wonderful one, taking it all through.
A.—4
606
821. Do any of your departments work on the piecework system ? —No. 822. The unions do not permit of it, do they ?—No. 823. What proportion of apprentices to journeymen would you have ?—We have only six altogether. 824. How do you make your tradesmen in Victoria?—We get them from other shops. We take very few apprentices, just a few who have partly learnt their trade in other shops, and those shops are also very pleased to take our apprentices. 825. You depend largely upon the tradesmen, then, turned out from the shops in Victoria?— Yes. 826. Do many come here from other colonies ?—Not very many. 827. Do you have any New Zealand workmen over here?— No. We have a great dearth of boilermakers at the present time. 828. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is your foundry one of the largest in Victoria ?—Yes. 829. Is there not a large foundry in Castlemaine?—Yes, Thompson's. 830. How many hands would the establishment at Castlemaine employ ?—Five hundred, on an average. 831. Do you think they would be quite unable to compete with New Zealand ?—They compete against us here, but they do not pay the same wages, and, as regards overtime, they only pay the actual time worked, no " time and a quarter." 832. Has there been any attempt made in this State to pass a Workmen's Wages Lien Act ? —Not to my knowledge. 833. Have you had any experience of an Act of that nature which is in force in New Zealand ? —No. 834. Mr. Millar.] In New Zealand the Workmen's Lien Act allows 25 per cent, of the contract price being held back for one month after the delivery of the dredge, in order to enable all claims to be paid: are you aware of that ?—Perhaps that is the reason why I have not got my money. 835. I think you said you had only one dredge left in hand ?—For New Zealand, but I have one at the present time for New South Wales, and one for Java. 836. I presume that is owing to the fact that the local shops have got over the congestion and are quite prepared now to take new contracts ? —I suppose so. Our largest turnover is about £170,000 a year. 837. You have hydraulic facilities : do you employ carpenters and boilermakers for them ? —Yes; and pay them 12s. a day. We have got to do it. 838. I think you had a telegram from Dunedin as to how you were dealt with in connection with that matter?— From Mr. Chapman, solicitor, yes. 839. Perhaps you are not aware that the boilermakers there are fixed at lls. ?—-No ; but you have a Conciliation and Arbitration Board there, and there was a case coming before them, and so that telegram may have been in connection with that. 840. The statement was made that you were paying lower wages in Victoria and in New South Wales than were paid by the other States for that class of work ?—Of course, I gave our rate of wages cheerfully in any case, no matter how it affected as. 841. How do you anticipate that it is going to affect you under free-trade?—l have never feared the New South Wales people, although they pay lower wages. The men I have work a good deal better here than the men I have seen in Sydney, but Martin's people at Gawler have got a monopoly practically, and are not affected by the unions. 842. I suppose Melbourne arranges and fixes the rate of wages here?— Either Melbourne or Sydney, and yet' they get lower wages in Sydney than they do here. They pay as low as 9s. in Sydney, while here we have to pay 10s. as the minimum wage. At the present time in Sydney I do not think they are paying more than 9s. 4d. for boilermakers. 843. So far as we can learn, in Sydney the largest number of the employes are young lads employed at 2d. an hour? —Is that so ? 844. Is there much of that kind of thing going on in Victoria ?—No. I should be very pleased to let you have a good look round. If you are paying boilermakers lls. in Dunedin, then you are paying more than we are; I take it that is because there has been such an immense amount of work going on in connection with the dredging industry, but very shortly things will come down to their normal level. 845. In New Zealand the men are classified, and get paid accordingly ? —I am very glad to hear that, because that is the trouble here —the unions do not classify the men. 846. What do you pay a man who has to go out of your yard to work on board a ship at the wharf? —Is. a day extra; it is called " dirt money." 847. How do you find wages in New Zealand compare with the wages paid in Victoria in your industry ?—I could not say. 848. What did you say was the minimum wage to boilermakers ? —los. 849. And to blacksmiths the same?— Yes. 850. Is that the general rule throughout the foundries of Melbourne ? —Yes ; but there is one exception : I do not think the Otis people are paying that in their boilermaking department, as it is a non-union department. What we call the labourers or handy men do the work in their shop which union men in our establishment would only be allowed to do. 851. How many hands do the Otis Company employ ?—I think about four hundred, partly union and partly non-union hands. I think only in the boilermaking department is it non-union. 852. Are they the largest concern in Melbourne of the kind?—l think they would be classed as the largest in Melbourne. 853. Mr. Luke.] Is there much moulding done here by machinery ?—I only know of one place in South Melbourne.
A.—4
607
854. What class of moulding?— They have practically gone into sewerage-work proper. 855. Then, there is not a great amount done by machinery ?—No. 856. Are the men working the machines paid the usual moulder's wage or are they classed as skilled men ?—lf they do general work you pay the minimum rate of wage, but if they have to make pipes they have a set task to do by a certain time, which is really a system of piecework, although they only get so-much a day. 857. Do any of the shops manufacture locomotives? —The Phoenix Foundry does, but none of the shops in Melbourne. One firm did a few years ago. 858. Are Eoberts's, of Bendigo, big engineers ?—No. 859. Have they exported quantities of dredging machinery to Dunedin ?—No. 860. Mr. Leys.] Do you know any class of manufacture in your trade which is likely to be exported to New Zealand under intercolonial free-trade ?—No ; I do not know of any agricultural machinery which would be sent there, as I have no knowledge of tha.fc line. 861. You do not think the New Zealand iron trade has anything to fear? —No ; your men are quite able to compete with us in an open market. 862. Has there been any attempt to bring your industry under the Wages Board ?—No. I do not think they would do so ; but I have been trying to get them to do it, because our position is that we are paying higher wages than the smaller shops, and therefore I should be very glad to see the whole trade brought under the Wages Board. 863. Do you think that is the feeling generally of manufacturers in the iron trade ? —Martin's, the biggest men in our trade, think that we cannot compete with your iron-foundries in the New Zealand market. 864. Do you not have to pay a higher price for coal and coke than they do in Sydney?—We are paying now £1 Is. or £1 2s. per ton for engine-coal, and 17s. for slack. 865. What do they pay in Sydney ?—I have no idea; but we must pay higher because of the freight. 866. Do you think that the cheapness of the coal and freight will not be a material item in assisting the industries of Sydney ?—No; and for your information I might tell you that I have tendered for things very frequently in Sydney. The dredge that we made for Java was open to Sydney and Victoria, and we were successful against Sydney on that occasion. Two or three months ago I tendered for five boilers for one mine. I sent them to Sydney, and I competed successfully against the Sydney people. 867. How do you account for that if coal and wages are cheaper in Sydney than here and if you can get but little more work out of the men than they can in Sydney ?—We go by our profits ; but perhaps we are satisfied with less profit than they are. 868. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you find that matters run smoothly here between employer and employed without an Arbitration and Conciliation Act ? —They are running fairly smooth now, and we have had very little trouble for many years. The only thing is that we would like to see all places under the one system, so that we should all be on an equal footing in regard to competition of trade. 869. Mr. Luke.] Are there many little shops like those you referred to ? —A good number. 870. Do they affect the market-price ? —Yes, unless it is a very big job. Hon. Allan McLean, M.P., examined. (No. 225.) 871. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Australia? —Yes, and at the present time the leader of the Opposition of the Victorian Assembly. I have been elected without opposition to the House of Representatives. I was formerly Premier of the Colony of Victoria. I have been in Parliament a little over twenty-one years. 872. Are you well acquainted with the agricultural interests of the Colony of Victoria?— Yes, fairly so. I represented an agricultural and grazing district —Gippsland North—in the Victorian Assembly. I represent the electorate of Gippsland in the House or Representatives. 873. Is the agricultural interest in Victoria an increasing one ? —Yes, it is. I believe it is increasing steadily. 874. As regards wheat, is the production of that increasing in Victoria ?—Yes ; the quantity of land under wheat is increasing year by year. Some years when we have a very dry season the crops are light, but the area under cultivation is steadily increasing. 875. Is that likely to increase through the mallee land or any other cause? —I am inclined to think it will increase in the mallee district. That country seems to be more suited for the production of wheat. The climate is dry as a rule, and they get very light crops, but on account of the pliable nature of the soil they can cultivate it at a very small expense. 876. Do you know what is the average crop per acre in the mallee country ?—I could not say very well. I should not think it would average over 8 bushels per acre. 877. What is the average price per bushel ?—I should not think on the ground it would average much more than perhaps a little over 2s. 878. Can you tell us what is about the price of cultivating and harvesting an acre of that mallee land ?—I have seen one man with a team turn up from 10 to 12 acres per day. 879. About harvesting ?—They generally use the stripper. In regard to the mallee harvesting, you could get better evidence than mine, because I represent the eastern end of the colony. I can only speak from passing through it. You could get the evidence of men living there. 880. From what you know of it, what do you think would be the average cost of cultivating for wheat ? —lt must be very low from the fact that such small returns seem to pay. 881. Would an average crop of 8 bushels per acre pay? —They seem to make it pay ; they continue at it.
A.—4
608
882. In lands, not mallee lands, what is the average wheat-crop ? —The average is different in different districts. In the district I represent 20 bushels of wheat per acre would be considered a poor crop. They do not go in very largely for wheat there. They seem to think fattening and dairying pay best. That applies pretty well to the whole of Gippsland. 883. Are you acquainted with the agricultural district of Victoria generally ?—I have been all through it many times. 884. As regards oats, is the production of oats increasing in Victoria ?—I do not know that it is very largely increasing. I think it is. I think there is a steady increase. The statistics show a steady increase. 885. Are they able to supply their own requirements in Victoria in oats ? —There is no doubt they could supply more than their own requirements if they did not find anything else pay better. , 886. Do you know what is the average yield of oats in Victoria?—l could not say from memory, but in Gippsland they generally look for a return of 45 to 50 bushels per acre. I have seen them get as high as 70 bushels to the acre. You could not put the average generally as anything approaching that. 887. What do you think is the average right through Victoria?— That would include the drier districts. It would be very much lighter. I should not like to say. 888. It was 26 last year ?—I was going to say about 25 bushels. They could produce much more than they do if it would pay them. 889. Do you think that the Victorian farmers need fear the competition of New Zealand in oats ? —So far as I could ascertain in making inquiries, they seem to be able to produce better crops. Before we got the duty on they used to undersell the Victorian farmer. 890. Does the oat produced in Victoria answer all the purposes for which it is required in Victoria?—lt seems to; but I have heard horse-trainers say that the New Zealand oats were better. I knew some owners of racehorses preferring New Zealand oats and paying the duty. 891. As regards potatoes, are they largely grown in Victoria?—ln some parts. In the western district they grow potatoes very largely. In my district they do not seem to grow them largely. They export some to Melbourne, but they do not produce much more than the local requirements. 892. Can they supply themselves with potatoes?— There is no difficulty in growing them. It is much the same as the oats. Tasmania, for instance, used to export here successfully and compete with the local growers. I think it is probable that they could, but the Victorian people seem to go in more for grazing and fattening. 893. As regards hams and bacon, can they produce all they require ?—There is no doubt they can. There is no difficulty in the way of doing it. 894. You are aware that Victoria has lately exported largely agricultural and dairy produce ? —Yes. 895. Is there much land in Victoria suitable for agriculture that is not at present used for that purpose ?—There is a great deal of land in Victoria that is admirably suited for agricultural purposes that is applied to grazing. 896. So far as fresh meat is concerned, is the supply of that abundant in Victoria? —Yes. They have exported a good deal the last few years. They import some live-stock into Victoria from New South Wales—cattle and sheep. 897. As regards fruit, is that profitably grown in Victoria?— Yes, in the northern districts especially—up Eutherglen and Mildura, and other places. In the Gippsland districts they produce apples very successfully. There are not many that seem to go in for that, especially in the cooler districts, such as Gippsland. In some of the northern districts they do. 898. Do you know if fruit is exported from Victoria?—lt is to some extent. They send apples and other fruit home to England from here. 899. Is there any climatic or other disability against the raising of fruit in Victoria ?—No, I am not aware of any. They are sometimes troubled with the codlin-moth. 900. How about droughts ?—The droughts affect production generally in the northern districts, but a good many go in for irrigation. It is rather expensive, but they seem to do it successfully. Mildura is an irrigation colony pure and simple, and they go in for the production of fruits and vines there almost exclusively. They had some difficulty the first few years in getting a supply of water, but they say it pays. 901. You are a member of the Federal House of Representatives: I take it you have taken considerable interest in the Federal question ?—I have taken an interest in it, but I was not a supporter of the present Commonwealth Bill. 902. What objections did you see to it? —There were several. In the first place, I thought the Constitution too rigid. There was not sufficient room for amendment, but that was modified at a subsequent conference of Premiers. When the first vote was taken it was carried in all the colonies except New South Wales. New South Wales failed to get the statutory majority. The consequence was that there was a conference of Premiers. They modified several of the provisions I objected to. There was one provision I objected to on behalf of the Victorian producers and graziers which was not modified. You are aware we have high border duties at the present time, and these were to be abolished suddenly on the adoption of a uniform tariff. I objected to the sudden abolition, because at that time, if you take the item of live-stock, we wore importing livestock very freely from New South Wales, and paying £1 10s. on cattle and 2s. on sheep. A sudden abolition of that would mean a reduction in price. I saw it would be a heavy loss to the Victorian grazier and farmer ; but since then the great drought in Queensland and New South Wales has thinned the live-stock to such an extent that prices are nearly equal. To show you the great difference in price at that time, dealers used to go and buy stock in the other colonies, pay duty,
609
A.—4
and sell them at considerable profit. My firm are stock and station agents, and a great number passed through our hands. There is nothing like the difference now that there was then, so that if the duties were abolished now it would not be felt to the same extent it would have been felt two years ago. That was one of the objections I urged. I wanted to get the abolition spread over a period of five years, reducing it 20 per cent: each year, in order that the price might be gradually assimilated. I did not like the financial clause. Taking it on broad grounds, I thought that leaving the debts with the States and handing over the principal sources of revenue to the Commonwealth was not good financing. 903. You mean Customs ? —Customs, excise, and Post Office. I did not think that was good financing. It appeared to me that one of the great benefits accruing from federation was raising the credit of the colonies. I always thought, and still think, that the credit of the Commonwealth would stand higher in the money-markets of the world than the credit of an individual State, and, that being so, it appeared to me that the body that had the power of raising taxation—that is, the primary and principal power, the one that had the principal sources of revenue handed to them : — should have the responsibility of meeting the debts. On the other hand, against that there was the undoubted fact that the improvement of the credit of the Commonwealth would increase the value of the securities, or, rather, of the stocks, on which we borrowed the money—the debentures and other stocks. I thought it was only a reasonable thing that the people should derive a portion of the advantages accruing from the increased prices of these stocks. I presume that must be the reason that induced them to put such a provision in the Bill. 904. After the expiration of the ten years provided for in the Barton clause as to 75 per cent. at least of the duties of the Customs going back to the States, what do you expect is going to happen?—l am inclined to think the Commonwealth will take over the railways and the debts themselves at that time. 905. Do you think that will be for the benefit of the States ?—I think it will, because the credit of the Commonwealth will stand higher than the credit of the individual States, and we will be able to borrow more cheaply. 906. Do you look forward" to the States being absorbed in the Federal Government ?—That is, reducing the number of subjects with which they can deal ? 907. The States practically being abolished—-instead of being a Federation becoming a Union? —I hardly think that is likely, not at all in the near future, because there are so many matters that require local attention. I think they must keep up the local Parliaments for a very long time, if not permanently. It is possible that some of the matters on which the States now legislate may be handed over from time to time to the Commonwealth. 908. Do you not think, if that is so, the States will be reduced to the level of mere County Councils?— There is no doubt their prestige will be somewhat diminished, and the range of subjects over which local legislation will extend will be reduced, but, still, I think State Parliaments will always be required. 909. So far as New Zealand is concerned, have you considered whether there will be any advantage to New Zealand in her joining the Commonwealth ?—I have always thought it would be to the advantage of New Zealand. 910. In what way ?—ln regard to the credit of the Commonwealth for one thing. I think she could borrow more cheaply through the Commonwealth than on her own individual credit, and then it appears to me that the Commonwealth will be the dominant Power in these southern seas, and I think it will be for the advantage of New Zealand to form a portion of that dominant Power. 911. Do you think the Commonwealth will take over the debts and railways? What security will New Zealand, or any of the States, have to offer for any future lines ?—They will always have the power of direct taxation; but the necessity for borrowing would almost reach the vanishingpoint if the railways were handed over. I do not know how it is in New Zealand, but here we borrow chiefly for railway-construction. If the railways were handed over the Commonwealth would borrow. 912. Do you mean to say there would be no public works required?—We do not borrow much for other public works unless of a reproductive character. We do borrow sometimes for schoolbuildings. They are not directly reproductive. 913. Mr. Roberts.'] Have you been in New Zealand at all ?—No; I only know of the conditions of that colony by reading of them, and meeting farmers from that colony. 914. You mentioned one man working 10 or 12 acres per day?—ln the mallee. They use an instrument they call a " cultivator ";it is almost like a scarifier. The land is like an ash-bed. They run this through it, and one team of horses can draw it. It makes eight or ten furrows. There is no ploughing after the first breaking-up. That does not apply to any other part of the colony. Others could give you figures more accurately than I can about the mallee. I have had a good deal to do with the mallee in land-administration, and I have travelled through it and seen the cultivation there, but I could not give you the figures as to the cost of the particular operation. 915. Suppose we asked Mr. Lascelles?—He is the best man, and a thoroughly reliable man. I would take his figures before those of any one else. 916. Mr. Leys.} I notice that the average last year of wheat was 8-34 bushels for the whole of Victoria: I suppose that average is very much lowered by the poor cultivation in the mallee country ?—Yes, it is. 917. When you speak of this high production of wheat in Gippsland, that, I suppose, is more like New Zealand farming ?—lt is not so much the method of farming as it is the soil and climate. We have very rich soil in Gippsland, and the climate is more favourable than in the northern districts. Gippsland is probably more liable to other drawbacks than the northern district. For instance, there is more rust in the wheat in Gippsland than in the north. I have known the caterpillar to be more destructive there in oats. The principal obstacle to farming here is that fattening and 77—A. 4.
A.—4
610
dairying pays remarkably well, ami they are more easily worked. That induces them to go in for these things in preference to farming. There is no doubt the rich land in Gippsland would give the best crops. I have seen over 60 bushels of wheat and over 70 bushels of oats per acre, and maize will run over 100 bushels in the valley of the Tambo and Snowy River. 918. Those averages seem to be really higher than New Zealand ? —Those are not averages, but maximums. 919. You said an average of 45 bushels of oats ? —I have not looked into the figures, but lam speaking of crops that come under my own observation. I am living in a particularly fertile part. About my immediate neighbourhood these crops are common. 920. What would be the value of land in Gippsland on which these crops could be produced ? —There was a property sold the other day and subdivided, and the average price was £26 per acre. It ran up to £37, but the average was £26. 921. Would that be a fair criterion of that rich land?— Yes. You get it from a minimum of £18 or £20 to something about £35 or £36 per acre. That is exceptionally good land. It is in the valley of the McAlister, the Avon, Mitchell, and Tambo. 922. Is there any very large area of such land that could be brought under cultivation if prices paid ?—I should think in the valley of the Avon Eiver there must be about 30,000 to 40,000 acres. In the valley of the McAlister there would be a larger area. There is another class of land that runs from £10 up to between £15 and £16 per acre. I should think altogether in the valley of the McAlister there would be about 100,000 acres of rich land. On the Mitchell the land is better. The Mitchell flats average about a mile in width, and probably extend over twenty or twenty-five miles. On the Tambo it would be less still. 923. Still, there is a very large area you could bring under cultivation?— You must remember that that land gives a very good return for dairying and fattening. To give you an instance : I bought a paddock myself in the valley of the Avon Eiver. I gave £18 10s. for 740 acres. I turn off nearly four hundred bullocks in each season on the average. Take this last season : I began sending stock to market from the beginning of June. From June I have sent a truck every week, and sometimes two trucks from that same paddock. This cattle averaged over £10, but I had to pay considerable prices for stores. There would be a profit of about £3 per head. 924. I notice there has been an increase according to the statistics of last year, published to-day, of 90,000 acres in oats. The total last year was 362,427 acres of oats. I presume the production of that large area must be for export, and not for local consumption ?—Last year there was the South African market opened up. There was a good deal of horse-food sent there. The Victorian farmers are under the impression that the New Zealand farmers could compete successfully against them in our own markets. 925. The outside market must fix the price ?—Yes, if we produce in excess of our requirements ; but the place that can produce the cheapest will be the place that can get the bulk of the market. Ido not think any Victorian farmer would go exclusively for export if he had any hopes that what he provides would be consumed in the colony.. 926. Do you know the present price of oats in Melbourne ?—No, I do not. 927. Do you personally think there is any prospect of New Zealand finding markets for agricultural products in Victoria if the duty were removed ?—I think they would send a good deal of horsefood here—oats and barley chiefly. I think we can produce maize here as cheaply as they can. 928. As to the financial question, do you think these financial clauses would result in putting State finances in difficulties ?—No ; I am inclined to think a satisfactory arrangement would be made between the State Governments and the Government of the Commonwealth by which the Commonwealth would take over the debts. I think that would put it right. With regard to New Zealand, I think if New Zealand came into the Commonwealth, on account of her great distance from Australia, it might be necessary to make some special provisions in her favour. I think New Zealand might require to have local control over some matters which on the Continent of Australia could be dealt with by the Commonwealth control—railways and postal communications, and there might be others. There are thirty-nine subjects handed over to the Commonwealth from the State Parliament. In reality there are more, because there are other matters, as it says, " Until the Parliament decides otherwise." If I looked over this for an hour or two with a view of considering the case of New Zealand I have no doubt I could point out several of those that could be more advantageously dealt with locally on account of its distance, so I think it would be necessary to make some concessions. 929. You do recognise that the distance is a difficulty ?—There is no doubt. It would make it more difficult to deal with some matters on the continent here for New Zealand than if she were as close to us as Tasmania is. 930. Do you think there is a disposition to give us these special advantages ? —I think so, so far as it would not injuriously affect the rest of the Commonwealth. So far as I can gather the feeling of those I come in contact with, there is a very friendly feeling towards New Zealand, and I think they would be disposed to make reasonable concessions in that way. 931. Do you think they would be inclined to enter into reciprocal arrangements if we did not federate ?—The greatest difficulty I see in the way of reciprocity is that here our manufacturers would benefit perhaps, and your own farmers would benefit, whilst our farmers might be unwilling to make concessions in favour of our manufacturers. Still, on the whole, the feeling is so friendly that it would be possible to make satisfactory arrangements. 932. It has been suggested that if we did not federate there might be serious difficulties between the Commonwealth and New Zealand with respect to the South Sea Islands : do you think that there is any danger to be apprehended from that ? —I have always felt that in the interests of the safety of Australia we should have possession of the islands of the Pacific, or, at any rate, the British flag should float there. Of course, our greatest safety is the distance from
611
A.—4
the base of operations of the great military Powers of the earth. So long as we can keep the Pacific islands under British rule, chat will always be a great source of safety to Australia. lam inclined to think the Commonwealth Parliament will do all they can to have a dominant influence over the islands of the Pacific. 933. That would have to be done through the Imperial Government?— Certainly; that is one of the reasons that makes me think it would be desirable if New Zealand formed a portion of the Commonwealth. 934. Assuming we did not go into the Federation, do you apprehend there would be any difficulty in making friendly arrangements ?—I do not think there would be any difficulty in entering into trade negotiations so that the trade of the islands would not be injured. It would be only for the purpose of defence that the colonies would like to control the islands. 935. That would be an Imperial matter? —Yes. 936. Hon. Major Steward.] Is dairying carried on extensively in Gippsland?—Yes. 937. Is it for the manufacture of cheese or butter ?—Both, but butter chiefly. 938. Do you work on the co-operative principle ? Have you factories established ?—There are a great many factories. In many cases we have central factories, and then a number of creameries around the district that act as feeders to the central factories. In Maffra, where I come from, we have a concentrated-milk factory, and they export a quantity of their produce. In a number of other centres they have butter-factories, fed by a number of creameries. 939. Are they under Government supervision—Government instruction or inspection ?—ln what form ? 940. Do you have instructors going round showing them how to manipulate things, and the best way of producing butter and cheese ?—Yes ; we have some experts in connection with the Agricultural Department that go down and deliver lectures. They have no power. They give a lot of instruction. 941. Have you a system of grading of exports ? —Yes. 942. Is there room to extend the industry in North Gippsland? —It is extending everyday, and I have no doubt it will extend. 943. There is room for considerable expansion ? —Yes. 944. Are you capable of supplying the requirements of Victoria?— Dairying is carried on in other parts besides Gippsland. The western district is also very fertile. The dairying industry is carried on extensively. Last year they must have exported two million pounds' worth in addition to our own requirements. 945. You supply not only the consumption of Victoria, but quantities for export ?—Yes ; I think we will become very large exporters in the future. 946. I presume until the completion of federation you had to pay duties on products sent to the other colonies—New South Wales, for instance ?—There was a duty in New South Wales some years ago, but it was abolished within the last few years. 947. New South Wales took butter from New Zealand last year to the value of £30,000, and cheese to the value of £43,000 : how is it that the butter and cheese were not obtained from Victoria, which is so much nearer than New Zealand, if you have a large surplus?—l do not know what the reason is. I know we have been exporting considerable quantities to New South Wales. I remember making up a return about a year ago. I do not know whether dairy products entered largely, but I was surprised at the magnitude of our exports in the farming products to New South Wales. 948. If there was an export from New Zealand to New South Wales of seventy thousand pounds' worth of butter and cheese, while in Victoria there was such a large surplus, how is it that the requirements of New South Wales were not obtained from Victoria? Is it because the article from New Zealand is better quality, or because it can be placed in the market very cheaply ?—lt is the market for the outside world that has dominated our prices for the last year or two. I got the details from the Government Statist. Taking the products of the farm, the orchard, and the dairy, New South Wales for the last three years imported £3,340,000 more than she exported, whilst Victoria exported £5,452,000 more than she imported ; or, in other words, New South Wales fell short of supplying her own requirements to the extent of nearly three millions and a half, and Victoria had a surplus of nearly four millions and a half. 949. Of late years, to the best of your belief, New Zealand and Victoria have been on an equal footing as regards supplying New South Wales, as there was no duty on butter and cheese. Supposing we did not go in for federation, and supposing there is a duty imposed which would fall on butter and cheese, would not Victoria in that case command a market in New South Wales as against us ?—lt is quite possible, we being so much nearer. .950. Is there any malting carried on in any part of the State ?—I believe there is, but I could not give you much information. lam not sure what the quantity is. 951. Malt could be made here satisfactorily of good quality ?—I have not heard any complaint against it. 952. New Zealand exported to New South Wales last year forty thousand pounds' worth of malt. Supposing we remained outside the Federation, and came under the duty, while you did not come under it as part of the Federation, is it probable that you could supply the market entirely ? —I see no reason why we could not, so long as it pays. No doubt we would be able to do it. 953. Is the maize grown in Victoria as good as the maize that is imported from Auckland?— I think it is. I think they produce maize here of excellent quality. I think the average last year was something over 64 or 65 bushels to the acre. I have seen a great many crops go over 100 bushels. 954. There is sufficient land suitable to enable you to produce all you could require ? —Yes; we could do that in Gippsland alone.
A.—4
612
955. As to hops : they are grown in Victoria ?—They are, but they are diminishing in quantity. One of the principal causes is the fluctuating prices. Brewers seem to use a great many substitutes for hops. 956. It is because the demand has been somewhat intermittent ?—That has been largely the reason. They have been troubled to some extent by the red spider. 957. There is no reason why you should not produce enough for your own requirements? —I think if the demand was steady they could supply it locally. 958. Mr. Beaiichamp.] Did you say in your district you could produce 70 bushels to the acre? —Not often, but I have seen several such crops. 959. That would be an abnormal crop ?—Yes. 960. What would be a normal crop ? —5O bushels would be a good crop. 961. As to the extra quantity of land brought under cultivation for oats in the last year, was that in anticipation of the demand in South Africa being maintained ?—I think so. 962. Not with the reason of supplying the other States?—No; and in China too. 963. You shipped large quantities of fodder of all descriptions to South Africa and China ?— Yes. 964. You turn out a very excellent quality of oaten chaff? —Yes. 965. Is it not a fact that the cheese produced generally in Victoria is not of a good quality ? — It varies very much. They have not reached the same perfection in cheese as in butter. 966. Have you any system for grading butter and cheese ? —They grade for export. 967. Both butter and cheese? —Yes. I think they grade the cheese. We passed an Act providing for grading some years ago. 968. The mallee country is a great wheat country ? —Yes. 969. Is it not affected by droughts?— Yes ; that accounts for the light crops. If they had a fair rainfall they could produce fair average crops at very low prices. 970. As to the Customs tariff, do you think that will be fixed by the Federal Government at such a figure as to be able to return to the States the amount they at present have?— Yes; that seems to be the desire. 971. So as to obviate the necessity for fresh taxation? —Yes. John Danks examined. (No. 226.) 972. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you ?—I am an engineer and a brassfounder by trade, but a merchant by profession. 973. Is your business concern a large one ? —lt is the largest in the colonies of that class. 974. How many hands do you employ ?—ln the sale department perhaps forty to fifty. In the factory alone 219. 975. What are the principal articles manufactured by your firm ?—Every description of brasswork used for engineering, water-supply, gasworks, and gas-fittings, with ironwork used for the same. 976. Do you export any part of your productions beyond the State of Victoria?— Yes ; I have exported largely to Western Australia the last three or four years, and lately to Queensland. I have a large brass-foundry and lead-mill in New South Wales, the largest in that colony. 977. Do you export to New Zealand ?—Yes. 978. To any large extent ?—Only in sheet-lead and lead-piping. 979. Have you any branch in New Zealand ?—I did have one in Christchurch—John and Thomas Danks —but I handed it over to my brother eight or ten years ago. 980. Is your brother's business in Christchurch in any way worked in connection with yours ? —No, I handed it over to him. 981. Do you export to New Zealand independently of your brother's business ?—Yes, but not much. It is chiefly sheet-lead from New South Wales and lead pipe, and lead for making bullets. 982. Are those reshipments or manufactured? —We make them both in Melbourne and Sydney for the ammunition-makers. The lead is procured from Broken Hill; it is all New South Wales lead. 983. What is the average wage paid to adult males in your business ?—The average wage is 10s. We pay 11s. and 125., and shop foremen perhaps ss. more, and the ordinary hands about Bs. per day. There are no females employed in my business. The hours of labour are forty-eight for the week. 984. Have you any difficulty with those employed ?—No; I have never had any difficulty in my life. lam on the best of terms with all my men. My managing-man has been with me for forty years. I have made him and others shareholders in the business and changed the firm into a company. 985. Is your business in any way under the Wages Board?—No ; we have no Wages Board. 986. There is a Wages Board we are told ?—We are not under the Factory Act at present. The Wages Board has not been created for the brassfounders. There is no Board connected with our trade. We expect it to be formed in the course of a few months. One is now being formed. We do not take apprentices. We teach the young men their trade, and if they require it we give them a certificate that they have served their time with us. 987. Have you any rule as to the number of boys employed to the number of men in your business ?—No. There are ninety-one boys, who earn less than £1 per week. It is a trade that could employ boys in any quantity, because the manipulation of the work is of such a light class that boys must be employed to carry it out. We carry on die-sinking, stamping, and electroplating. The trade has to be carried on in many divisions to meet the requirements of the trade. 988. Mr. Boberts.] Can you produce lead here at a lower price than it can be imported?—We produce it in free-trade Sydney as against the imported lead. I have a lead-mill in Sydney and a lead-mill in Melbourne,
613
A.—4
989. Mr. Luke.] This number of 219 hands does not include the men employed in Sydney ?— No. I have not a note of the number of hands employed in Sydney. I should think, seventy to eighty. 990. Is that average of 10s. per day you have given me given to thoroughly experienced mechanics? —Yes. 991. To what class of men do you pay Bs. per day ?—Ordinary mechanics—ordinary men who could carry out the one job. 992. You have no union to regulate the rate of wages?—No; we do not acknowledge any union. 993. Do the men ever complain about the proportion of boys to journeymen ?—No; some people complain who know nothing about it. 994. The men themselves do not complain?— No. I should like you as a Commission to look through my establishment—and take it at any moment, or some set time, and look at it for yourselves. You will have an idea of where men can be employed and where boys can be employed. For the little things that require deft manipulation you must have boys. 995. To what class of men do you pay lls. or 12s. ?—Good mechanics. 996. Do you export a large quantity of brass fittings to New Zealand ?—We expect to export them to every colony. We do not at present. There is no demand at present in New Zealand for them ; your own industries supply your wants. 997. Do you think under federation, supposing New Zealand joined, that New Zealand manufacturers could compete for your own local requirements ?—I think they would. I know Messrs. A. and T. Burt's establishment; they are not to be beaten. They carry on their work well. Theirs is the largest. Ido not know the one at Auckland. Burt's can hold their own against any one. 998. Federation might not prejudice your business or help it ? —I make special water-meters, which I supply to Western Australia, Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria; it requires special appliances and special men. 999. As regards specialities, you think you may find a market in New Zealand ?—Yes. 1000. Do you work forty-eight hours per week ?—Yes. 1001. Do you pay overtime rates for overtime ?—Yes ; I think it is " time and a quarter " the first two hours, and "time and a half" after the first two hours. 1002. A good deal of your raw material, I understand, is manufactured in the colonies—that is to say, tin and copper? —We get tin from Tasmania and South Australia. 1003. The raw material largely in your business is produced in the colonies ?—Yes. Our brass castings for the last twelve months for our own workshop alone —we do not work for any outside firm in iron or brass—have been 9 tons 6 cwt. per month. 1004. Do you manufacture engines ? —I made a few. We do not touch that business. We supply engineers' sundries. 1005. Mr. Leys.] What becomes of the large number of boys you employ as they grow up?— We do not grow them fast enough. 1006. Do they find their way into other trades as they grow up ? —I have some now working in the shop learning electric work. They learn the rudiments of brass finishing and fitting together to fit them to go into electro-shops. Sometimes they go to engineers. While I carry on as a brassfounder I do engineers' work, such as sluice-valves, and my men are so well brought up to the trade that other men take them away. 1007. Was not this Wages Board set up with the consent of the employes ?—We told them we would co-operate with them. 1008. It is'not against your wish?—No; we work amicably with our men. 1009. Mr. Luke.] Do the apprentices pay anything by way of premiums ?—No. 1010. For what length of time do they serve ?—They are only bound till they are twenty-one ; but if they begin at seventeen or eighteen they have to make an arrangement afterwards. 1011. What is the average time?— Seven years ; some, say, five. 1012. Do you indenture your boys ?—No ; we have no premium or indenture. 1013. Hon. the Chairman.] Is there any other matter you would like to speak on ?—I believe federation would be a great boon to all the colonies. It would cause an interchange of things we do not have. I believe New Zealand would come more to the front with federation. In New Zealand you have not a pipe-founder yet. I do not see why you should not make pipes in your own place to supply yourselves. I have a pipe-foundry, and make all classes of pipe up to 6 in. usable for local water-pipes. I think New Zealand should take to that branch of the business. Hon. Febdbeick Thomas Deeham examined. (No. 227.) 1014. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Derham ? —I was Postmaster-General in Victoria from 1886 to 1890, in the Gillies-Deakin Government. I am now the president of the Victorian Chambers of Manufactures. It is a body of manufacturers associated together to protect their interests. There are from four hundred and fifty to five hundred members. I have only a general knowledge of the manufactures outside of my own business. My business is that of biscuitmanufacturer, flour-miller, and fruit- and vegetable-preserver. There are no imports to speak of in any of these lines. We export to other places. 1015. Are you acquainted with New Zealand at all ?—I have never had the pleasure of being there. 1016. What are the wages paid in your business ?—To men of the labouring type from £1 10s. upwards, and men of the better type £2 2s. 6d. to £2 ss. There is a large quantity of female-labour. Girls coming in at about fourteen years of age start at 7s. or Bs. and go up to £1. There are no apprentices. There is a large quantity of boy-labour. Boys commence about the same age as the girls at about 7s. and go up to £1 per week at about eighteen or nineteen years of age.
A.—4
614
1017. Do you export to New Zealand at all?— Very little. Apart from my own business, there is not a great deal of exporting to New Zealand. 1018. Mr. Leys.] How many employes are there in your establishment ?—ln busy times about a thousand, including country branches. In the fruit districts we have four small creameries. 1019. Are you under the operation of the Wages Board ?—We are. They have only just commenced so far as our work is concerned. In the year 1898 there was a great agitation in Melbourne against sweating, which existed at that time I am sorry to say. We as a chamber were very anxious to put it down. We called the manufacturers together outside of our own chamber to give evidence in answer to the charges made against manufacturers of sweating in their establishments. <We could not come to any finality, because we had no parliamentary authority, and we could not get anything definite. We asked the Government of the day to appoint a Eoyal Commission to inquire. For some reason we never got the Royal Commission, but public opinion was aroused against sweating, and under cover of a movement to stop it Parliament introduced this Wages Board system, which, unfortunately, gave the Wages Board power to fix wages without limit. We were quite willing for legislation. We tried to think of something else which would put down this sweating, such as moral suasion, but that was too slow. We consented that they should legislate up to the point of requiring employers to pay a living-wage. A living-wage is a very difficult thing to define. The only definition I venture upon is to say it should be sufficient to provide food, clothing, shelter, and, if possible, something for a rainy day, and that all wages should bear some relation to the earnings of the tiller of the soil. That was disregarded, although I believe it was thought very well of by some experts. The outcry was very great against sweating; but I greatly fear that in attempting to do away with sweating by means of Wages Boards with unlimited powers they will do injury to the industries. It will discourage enterprise. Employers do not know what is coming next, and have been deterred from embarking on any fresh enterprise through this uncertainty. Directly you introduce this element of uncertainty you undermine confidence. Many men have told me that if they had their money out of their business they would clear out. The principle of control where there is responsibility is ignored by a good many people. 1020. Do you think the New Zealand system of fixing wages for a period of years is better than your Wages Board system of an unsettled character ?—A fixed settled term would be better. 1021. It is usually two years in New Zealand. That is generally the period fixed by the Arbitration Board, although there is nothing in the statute fixing it for any period ? —That would be better. You buy land, erect buildings, and put in machinery, and you do not know what your future is to be. In general the rates fixed are too high, but they have not been extravagant. There was a fear that with the influence of politics we might have the wages fixed absurdly high, but that has not been the case up till now. In some trades they are too high. In some trades the Act has practically broken down, because the rate has been fixed too high. Taking the breadbaking trade, the Board fixed the wages in that trade at Is. per hour—forty-eight hours, £2 Bs. Consequently, the men getting more than £2 Bs. were brought down to £2 Bs.—a large number of men were getting less than £2 Bs.; the weedy ones do not get the wage, as an employer cannot afford to give it. It has led to a large amount of deceit. The Inspector goes into the baking-house and asks a man what wage he is getting : he says he is getting the minimum wage, whereas in reality he is not. 1022. Is the inspection rigid under the Factories Act? —It is'not sufficiently rigid. The Government, from rather a penny-wise-pound-foolish policy, has not put on a sufficient number of Inspectors. We say if there is a law it should be obeyed. Honourable men do not evade the law, but dishonourable men do, and gain by it at the expense of honourable men. 1023. As a class, do you think the employers are favourable to this ?—I think they would be quite willing to submit to legislation up to the living-wage. 1024. In what direction would you suggest the amendment of this system ? —That the Wages Board should not have unlimited power to fix wages. The men have the idea that the employer can pay anything they choose to ask. In the pastry-cook trade the men asked for Is. 6d. per hour. The employers offered 9d. It was settled at 10d. The men asked for an extravagant rate. 1025. In New Zealand there is an appeal to an Arbitration Court, which is presided over by a Judge of the Supreme Court, and the decision of that Court is final: would that meet the case in Victoria ?—lf they were limited in their powers with regard to the rates of wages. Ido not think any Court should fix rates of wages beyond a certain point. 1026. Although the employers are willing to pay a minimum wage, you think it should only be fixed by unions, and not by State interference ? —I have not quite come to that. I am afraid the unions could not do it. The men are not loyal to their own unions. Ido not like legislation, but lam afraid we cannot help it. I think the arm of the law should be introduced, but should not stretch out too far. 1027. If the State steps in, how is it to proceed short of fixing some wage?— The policy should be laid down under the Act that the Board should not fix the wage above the living-wage standard. The wording of the Act is " lowest wage." There is a confusion between living-wage and minimum wage. My contention is that the Legislature should not interfere beyond the livingwage. 1028. If a definition of that kind were put in the Act, would not that lead to a good deal of litigation as to what constituted a living-wage? —If Parliament takes upon itself the power of stating what wages shall be paid it ought to define the term. 1029. Mr. Luke.] Are these Boards constituted of men of experience ?—Employers on one side and employes on the other.
A.—4.
615
i.030. Cannot they say what is the minimum wage ?—A Chairman, not being an experienced man, settles the difference. He is never a man experienced in business affairs. 1031. What is a living-wage in one instance may be too high or too low in another ?• —Yes. 1032. How long are the periods fixed under which these settlements are arrived at ?—I think it is six months. 1033. Is there nothing definitely fixed with regard to the Board sitting?— That has not arisen yet. I understand they can reopen the case within six months, but it is a matter entirely in the discretion of the Chairman. 1034. Do you not think it is a weakness that they are not able to fix a period ?—Yes, I do. 1035. The different Boards comprise persons who have experience in the particular line of business or dispute that comes before them ?—Yes. 1036. Mr. Beauchamp.] Most of the lines that you manufacture are subject to high protective duties in New Zealand. —Yes. 1037. With inter-State free-trade you could expand your business greatly ?—I do not know. Your manufacturers would fight for the business. Our business with New Zealand is very small. People thought they could take our goods, but when they found what the duties were they discontinued taking them. 1038. Could you compete against our flour ?—No. I have a lot of experience in the grain business. Your New Zealand wheat would come over here. There are qualities in it which we like : it gives colour to the flour. 1039. It is not as strong as the Australian flour?—No, it is noc thought to be. 1040. I think Australian flour is more profitable to the baker?— Yes. 1041. Prior to a certain date large quantities of Australian flour were imported into New Zealand ?—Yes; when gristing was allowed in bond we used to grind New Zealand wheat here. 1042. What is the present value of flour in Melbourne ?—£6 per ton. 1043. That is much cheaper than New Zealand flour ? —Yes. 1044. Mr. Boberts.] Is New Zealand wheat worth more than Australian wheat?— No. It was generally a little less, because in the old times we used to import largely. It is not quite so profitable to import. 1045. What do you describe as the " living-wage " ?—I would say nothing under £1 10s. per week. Take our own employes :we have men who have been" with us over thirty years, and they have earned £2 or £2 ss. per week, and have managed to secure property. 1046. What are your opinions on the deadlock that has happened in the woollen trades Board? —That is an outrage on the intentions of Parliament. Mr. Peacock, in 1895, said that the Board would be composed of two manufacturers and two employes. He did not say representatives of employes. He induced Parliament to pass that by saying that there would be two manufacturers and two employes. That seemed to be a fair thing —namely, that the masters should meet the men and try and come to terms. 1047. Sir George Turner told me to-day that it was no violation of the spirit of the Act?—ln October, 1895, Mr. Peacock made a speech about it in Parliament. 1048. Do you think legislation will be sought to define the position ?—lt ought to be done. I understand that one man is the paid secretary of the union. It is his bread-and-butter to make mischief. 1049. Hon. the Chairman.] We understand that the quantity of New Zealand oats imported into Victoria in 1899 was £42,712 in value : can you tell me what proportion of those oats were reshipped ?—I cannot tell you without looking up the returns. I should think you would do a trade here in oats if we had open markets. 1050. Do you consider that in that year any portion was reshipped ?—There were large transhipments to South Africa in 1900. We did not commence to ship oats until after the opening of the war. 1051. Hon. Major Steivard.] The value of the exports of the previous year from New Zealand to Victoria was only about £10,000, and it rose in the following year to £42,000 : was that owing to a shortage of the crop of oats here ?—No. We have had fair crops of oats here for some time. 1052. If there was not a shortage it would point to the probability of a large portion of that being re-exported ?—Yes. Mr. Van der Velde examined. (No. 228.) 1053. Hon. the Chairman.] You understand that our Commission has reference more particularly, and indeed solely, to the question of New Zealand federating or not federating with Australia, and the question of federatiop with New Zealand and the employment of coloured labour has a bearing upon the subject. Our inquiry is only so far as the policy of a "white" Australia is concerned. If there is anything you can tell us in regard to those points we shall be very glad to hear it ?■—l am a civil engineer from the University of Ghent in Belgium. I have not followed that profession, but entered upon the beet-root industry in Europe. I was sent out here by large engineering firms to try to create a market for their manufactures in Queensland and Fiji. During my travels in those countries I came into contact with the coloured labourers, and have gained some experience of their work. Some years ago the question arose in Victoria as to the introduction of the beet-root industry. I published a pamphlet discouraging the erection of factories in Victoria. I said it would be a failure, and the principal cause of it would be the nonsupply of sugar-beet. Unfortunately, my predictions have turned out correct. A large factory was put up at Maffra, which was a failure. Sir George Turner asked me to go to Maffra to report on the causes of failure. I studied the matter, and recommended that an expert should be sent to Maffra to see the conditions under which sugar-beet could be grown and to study a scheme for reconstructing the factory. In the meantime, the federation of the colonies took place, and it was
A.—4
616
thought by many that when the trade-boundary between the States disappeared Queensland sugar would come in freely, and the beet-sugar grown here would disappear altogether, because it could not compete with the cane-sugar. As lam acquainted with the aspirations of Australia I have always said that the alien-labour question would be the very thing which would cause the introduction of the beet-sugar industry into this country. Fiji is, perhaps of all the tropical countries in the world, the one where cane-sugar can be produced cheapest, owing to its exceptional climate, the extraordinary richness of its soil, and the number of cheap and suitable labourers. The beet-sugar industry is going to be established here now, and it would be absurd to have Fiji as a partner in the Commonwealth or with New Zealand, as it would create great difficulty. 1054. Supposing Fiji federates with New Zealand and then New Zealand federates with Australia, what do you anticipate would be the result ?—lt would affect the beet-sugar industry, which is about to be established. We cannot compete against black labour. We can compete against cane, but white men cannot compete with black fellows. 1055. Are you against coloured labour being employed in the sugar-fields in Queensland ?—I am of opinion that the black labourers in Queensland should be replaced by whites wherever possible in the semi-tropical part of Queensland, as far north as Bundaberg. 1056. Supposing the cane-sugar industry is to be persevered in, do you think it could be profitably worked by white labour ?—As far north as Bundaberg. Beyond Bundaberg it is an impossibility : they must have the black labour there or the industry must perish. 1057. If that is so, what is to become of the northern portion of Queensland ?—I do not know. 1058. Can it be successfully developed by white labour at all ?—Not the cane-fields. 1059. Or any fields ?—ln the mines white men do the work, because the climate in the interior is different from what it is on the coast. The coastal districts can only be developed with the assistance of black labour. This black labour is most objectionable from a moral and humanitarian point of view. It is not because the white man cannot do the work of the blacks, but he will not do it. 1060. Can you tell the Commission of any advantages which would accrue to New Zealand by federation with Australia ?—My specialty is the sugar industry, and New Zealand is the one State which I believe is most adapted for the cultivation of sugar-beet. I believe an immense industry could be created in New Zealand, on the scale of what it is on the Continent of Europe. 1061. Our mission is not to decide on the question of beet-sugar versus cane-sugar, but to inquire into the advantages for or against federation ?—That is one of the arguments I would advance in favour of New Zealand growing beet-root sugar for the Commonwealth, because Australia will never produce enough for her own consumption. 1062. I thought you said this large industry was about to be established here ? —I do not anticipate that sufficient sugar will ever be found for the population. 1063. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Will you tell us what is the average cost of producing a ton of beet-sugar ?—lt depends on the question of labour. 1064. Under the most favourable conditions?— About £8. 1065. And cane-sugar under the most favourable circumstances ?—A little less than that — say, £7. That is owing to the difference in the cost of employment of the lowest-paid white labour. The beet-sugar industry is far superior to that of the cane-sugar. 1066. Could the beet-sugar industry succeed without bounties ?—No, for the same reason that we could not here without protection. The bounty is the difference in cost between black and white labour assuming it amounts to £1 15s. per ton on the quantity they export. 1067. Have you a knowledge of Fiji?— Yes. 1068. Would it be possible for the cultivation of any crop by European labour to be continued there ?—I do not think so. 1069. If they cease to employ black labour the Island must go out of cultivation ? —Yes. 1070. Would that same argument apply to the coastal districts of tropical Australia?— Yes. 1071. Do you think it possible that tropical Australia could be occupied permanently by a European race ?—I believe they can occupy the whole continent with the exception of the coastal districts. 1072. None of the tropical products can be grown by European labour ? —They can be, but the white man will not work there. The white man is superior to the black man, and he could work better, but you cannot get him to do it. 1073. You think the European could work in the tropics under the disadvantageous circumstances attending life on the coast ? —Yes. 1074. Can you give any illustration from history where such has been the case ?—ln no country in the world is the cane-sugar industry carried on by white labour in the tropics. But in countries which have a climate like Bundaberg—in the semi-tropical parts of South America—it is. 1075. South Carolina and Georgia are outside the tropics? — They are semi-tropical, like Bundaberg. In these southern States the industry is carried on by white labour, while formerly it was carried on by blacks. Since the abolition of slavery there are about sixty thousand Sicilians employed there. 1076. We may take it that it is impossible to create a sugar-cane industry by other than coloured labour ?—ln the tropics. 1077. Mr. Boberts.] How many tons of beet are required to a ton of sugar under ordinary circumstances ?—About 10 tons. That is what they get in Germany. 1078. What do you consider is an average crop per acre ?—l3 tons. 1079. It takes about 10 tons to make a ton of sugar? —Yes ; 13 tons is the average in Europe. 1080. Mr. Beaucham'p."] Would the exclusion of cane-sugar and the adoption of beet make the price higher ? —No. What regulates the price of sugar is the London market. The duty in Victoria
617
A.—4
is £6 per ton at the present time. Once the industry is established that would be quite sufficient to keep it going and to protect it against the black-labour sugar of Java. 1081. Supposing there was absolute free-trade in sugar between Fiji and the various ports of the Commonwealth, could sugar produced by Fiji be sold at cheaper prices than the beet-sugar produced in any part of the world?— Yes. 1082. The consumer would benefit by getting cheaper sugar ?—Yes ; but he would have to pay more for meat. Meat has risen to a price we have never known before. If Victoria made sugar from beet-root she would produce all the sugar required, and she would also fatten a hundred thousand head of cattle, and the price of meat would not be where it is now. The beetroot industry is a meat-producing industry. 1083. Do you think they would derive a greater benefit through having cheaper meat ?—Yes; it gives employment to thousands of people. 1084. Mr. Beid.] Is it not a fact that the sugar industry in the West Indies was destroyed by the bounty-fed sugars of Europe ?—Yes ; cane-sugar cannot compete with beet-sugar on level terms. The cane-sugar industry all over the world has suffered by the payment of the bounties, and the bounties at the present rate are equal to the difference in the price of wages of black and white labour. The cane industry cannot live where the beet industry can live. 1085. Are you acquainted with Samoa? Is that adapted to beet industry? —If you could get the labour, but the natives will not work. We would have nothing to do here with Samoa, as it is a German country. 1086. You have the trouble in Queensland with black labour?— That is only temporary, since Queensland herself sends delegates to the Houses of Parliament from districts in which the great majority of people are opposed to the employment of black labour. The members of Parliament mean business, and the black labour must go. 1087. Mr. Leys.'] What is the average rate of wages paid to the agricultural labourer in Belgium ?—That is a difficult question to answer. When I was a manager there we paid something like 2s. or 3s. a day to the men working in the factories. 1088. Notwithstanding those low wages, it takes £1 15s. per ton bounty in Belgium to sustain the beet-sugar industry ?—ln Java the labourers receive only 3d. per day. 1089. If in Belgium, with wages at 3s. per day, the beet-sugar industry requires a bounty of £1 15s. per ton, how can we hope with our high wages to cultivate successfully ?—lf we have a duty of not less than £6 per ton protecting us against the sugar of Java, and the sugar of Europe, we can doit. 1090. You had that duty of £6 per ton while the beet-sugar factory was in operation here, still the factory had to close down?— Because there was no beet. 1091. If it had paid to cultivate beet, would it not have paid the farmers to supply the factory ? —The farmers knew nothing about beet-cultivation. They simply scratched the soil and put in the seed, and let the whole thing go. They made 6,000 tons, instead of 40,000, as they ought to have done. 1092. They did not continue that cultivation ?—No, because they found it did not pay. The difficulty is that in Australia the methods of agriculture are what we call extensive cultivation of large areas, while beet-sugar requires intensive cultivation —that is to say, the careful cultivation of small areas. It does not require more work on the part of the farmer. 1093. What price did the factory give for beet while in operation ? —According to the quantity of sugar. Some farmers got as much as £1 Is. per ton when they harvested their beet in time. They had very little experience of the climate. When the autumn rains, set in in March heavy rain fell on the beet, which was ripe and heavy in sugar. The beet worth £1 Is. was a fortnight later worth only Bs. 1094. A good sample of beet delivered at the factory was worth —how much?—lßs. per ton, if harvested in time. 1095. Do you know what it would cost to cultivate chat ton of beet, on the average?—lt would cost the price of the seed and the rent of the land; all the rest must be done by the farmer. 109.6. What crop would you get ?—An experienced farmer, on an average, can get 13 tons every year in Europe ; but here the average is greater. In Europe the sky is sometimes covered with clouds for a long period. Here the sun always shines, and that is the great producer. 1097. Is meat cheap in beet-producing countries? —If you produce meat on grass, it costs the rent of the land. If you feed your cattle on the pulp which is the product of the beet, it is cheaper than feeding cattle on grass. 1098. Is meat cheap in beet-producing countries ?—No, because there is such a tremendous population to be supplied. In the space of ten years in Germany the number of cattle has increased by two million. 1099. In both Belgium and Germany meat is very high in price?— Yes. 1100. Notwithstanding this beet ?—Yes; if it were not for the beet-factories people could not eat meat. 1101. Hon. Major Steward.) You recommend that New Zealand should produce her own sugar by practically excluding cane-sugar by duties?—-Certainly. 1102. You think we ought to go into the production of beet with the view of keeping out canesugar ?—Yes. 1103. A duty of fd. in the pound would meet the case ?—Yes. 1104. Supposing Fiji did not federate, we would still have the competition with Queensland for some time?— Yes ; but I would advocate the imposition of a black-labour tax. 1105. It would increase the cost of the production of cane-sugar ?—Yes, and equalise the production of beet-sugar. 78—A. 4.
A.—4
618
ADELAIDE. Tuesday, 9th April, 1901. Hon. Fbedebick William Holder, M.L.A., Premier of South Australia, examined. (No. 229.) 1. Hon. the. Chairman.] You are the present Premier of the State of South Australia? —Yes. 2. And a member of the Federal House of Eepresentatives ?—I was recently elected a member of that House. 3. And you were a member of the Federal Convention? —Yes. I was elected in 1897 to the Convention which sat that year in Adelaide and Sydney, and the next year in Melbourne. 4. I believe you took an active part in the federation question?— Yes. 5. Had you anything to do with the drafting of the Constitution ?—I was a member of the Finance Committee which sat in the three capitals mentioned, and I also took a share in the discussing and framing of the other parts of the Constitution in common with the other members of the Convention. 6. I presume you approve of the present Constitution as it now exists ? —Yes. 7. I believe you are also the Minister of Labour in the State Parliament?—l am Minister of Industry. 8. Have you considered how the financial provisions of the Commonwealth Bill will affect the smaller States under federation?— That question had necessarily to be considered in framing the Constitution. 9. Perhaps I might ask you to be kind enough to give us your views upon that point : as to how you think the States will be affected, advantageously or disadvantageously ?—The only way in which the finances of the colonies will be immediately affected is by the Federal authority assuming the whole power to levy excise and Customs duties. For a period of years a bookkeeping system is to be maintained between the various States and the Federal Government, and under that the receipts and expenditure within each State must be kept separate from the receipts and expenditure of the other States, and the whole of the balance not absorbed by the expenditure of the Federal Government on outlays in connection with the transferred departments is to be returned to the State within which it was raised, so that, provided the Federal authority raises about the same amount in Customs duties as has been raised in the past, the finances of the States will not be interfered with either for better or for worse. 10. What about the expenses of the Federal Government ?—The policy all along proposed has been that the Customs and excise collections should be increased by such an amount as would make up £400,000 in the total to meet this extra expense. 11. But do you think that £400,000 would be sufficient to meet the financial requirements of the Federal Government ? —I have no doubt of it. 13. You are aware that under the Commonwealth Act the return of the 75 per cent, of the Customs duties of the States is limited for ten years, unless the Federal Parliament authorises ? —Yes. 14. Do you anticipate that the Federal Government will continue to return the 75 per cent, or more to the States? —I think they will from the first return very much more than 75 per cent., and probably for the future also. 15. Seeing that the States have to give up to the Federal Government the power of levying duties of Customs and excise, do you think it would be possible for them to raise loans for the carrying-on of public works ?—I know of no reason why they should not be able to do so. 16.' What security would they have to offer?—ln the first place, a very large security in the shape of public estate. We have powers of taxation quite apart from Customs and excise. The Customs and excise of these provinces form but a small proportion of their total revenue. 17. What is the percentage ? —Less than 25 per cent, in this colony. 18. What is the amount raised by Customs and excise in South Australia ?—I think the figures last year were £614,000. 19. What do you anticipate will be the annual loss, if any, say, to the State of Australia by reason of its contribution to the Federal Government ?—I imagine that our share in the Federal expense will be about £40,000 a year, or a little less; but Ido not anticipate that there will be any loss to the State, owing to the assumption of those powers by the Federal Government. I cannot conceive that the Federal Government will so arrange its finance as to dislocate that of any State ; but it seems to me that the financial success, and the stability of the States, will be as dear to the Federal authority as will be the financial stability of the Federal Government itself. 20. What was your total revenue last year from direct and indirect taxation ?—Roughly, about £800,000. 21. Will there be any difficulty in your meeting that £40,000 you refer to ?—I do not think we shall have to meet it. The Federal Government are proposing to levy Customs and excise duties on a sufficiently large scale to provide not only all the revenue they want and all the Customs and excise we have been raising in the past in the separate States, but also this £400,000. 22. Of course, it is impossible to say what the Federal tariff will be, but I understand that in South Australia you have a highly protective tariff?—No, not high, but a moderately protective tariff. 23. What is the average rate of the ad valorem duties ?—About 17 per cent. 24. Do you anticipate that the Federal tariff will be higher or lower than that ?— A lower tariff on such goods as will produce a higher revenue. 25. Do you think it will be lower?—l only judge from the utterances of Ministers, and I take it they will provide a tariff that will produce from eight millions and a half to nine millions sterling. The Customs and excise duties raised in the six States last year was £7,600,000, but the Federal authority proposes to raise considerably more.
619
A.—4
26. There is a provision in the Commonwealth Bill authorising the Federal Government to grant financial assistance to the States: what was the reason for that provision ?—Some rather timorous folk feared that the result of federation might lead to considerable financial trouble in some States, and that clause was inserted to quieten them. Personally, I attach not the slightest importance to it. 27. But in what way do you consider the Federal Government may grant that assistance ? — I take it that if the accounts of any of the federated States are so arranged as to dislocate the finances of either the States, then the Federal authority will grant some assistance to that particular State, but I cannot conceive of the thing corning about. 28. Would the assistance be by way of gratuity or by way of loan ? —That would depend on the determination of the Federal Parliament when the assistance was given. 29. Do you think that in time to come the States will be absorbed by the Federal Government ?—I hope we shall continue to have that measure of home rule which is left to us under the Commonwealth Act—that is to say, home rule in all questions of a local character, leaving national matters to the Federal Government. 30. As to the "white " Australia question, what are your views on that? —I am strongly in favour of keeping out alien races. 31. Do you think it can be successfully done?—So far as this State i 3 concerned, I am not afraid of it. 32. And you go how far north?—To the northern coast. 33. Hon. Captain Russell.] Have you a large population on the north coast ? —A very small population. 34. What are they employed in ?—Chiefly pastoral pursuits and mining. In neither of those industries do they require coloured labour. 35. What is the Northern Territory specially suited for ?—I think for just those two industries —pastoral, including the raising of horses and cattle, and so on, and mining for copper, gold, and other minerals. 36. Sugar ?—I think not. 37. You do not anticipate that there will be any other tropical industries carried on there, only those you have mentioned?— Not to any very large extent. 38. Take the question of Queensland : what is to become of the sugar industry there without coloured labour ?- I visited Northern Queensland some few years ago, and I then looked into this matter, and the conclusion I came to was that gradually the large plantations were being broken up into small blocks. In view of that fact, and the fact that in such cases the members of the family will be working those small blocks, the labour difficulty will be gradually overcome, and render the employment of kanakas unnecessary. 39. Do you know of any district where white labour has existed and has reproduced its species for several generations m the tropics ?—No, I do not. But at the same time I also know that whereas the output of sugar in Queensland has doubled during the last six years the number of coloured labourers employed has not increased, but that white labour is performing the task. 40. But was that white labour Queensland-born, or has it been imported white labour?—l think Queensland-born for the most part. 41. Then, you are not afraid that in the course of several generations the Anglo-Saxon race in tropical countries will deteriorate ?—I should not fear the deterioration of the race, but if they were brought into close contact with a large coloured population my opinion would be otherwise. 42. But do you believe it is possible that the white man can labour continuously from generation to generation in the tropical zone ?—My visit was paid to that portion of Queensland not extending north of Mackay. I therefore speak of that portion of the State from Mackay downwards, and in regard to that territory I do express those opinions I have already set forth. 43. But you cannot give me an illustration where it is done in any part of the world ?—I cannot. 44. Would it not be in accordance with every analogy to say that there are difficulties in the way ?—There may be, but from that point of view the presence of an alien race is a far greater danger than the risk of the white race deteriorating. 45. Therefore, when we have wakened up Japan and stirred up China, do you imagine that those people will be quiescent and allow us to have our own way right up to the extreme north without themselves making an effort to spread out ?—As to that, I am not prepared to forecast what the future may be. As to Japan, Ido know that the Japanese Government are discouraging the immigration of Japanese to Australia. 46. But if a Jap. can earn 10s. a day in Northern Queensland, is he going to rest content with 10 yen a day in Japan ? —lt may be desirable even to make more stringent laws in regard to excluding these alien races. 47. Which, then, do you think will gain the day—the law of Mr. Barton or the law of destiny?—l think in this case Mr. Barton is going in the direction of the law of destiny. 48. Mr. Millar.'] What portion of your revenue comes now from the duties levied on interState goods ?—That is not easily ascertained, because goods come to us the origin of which we cannot positively state. Sometimes goods are manufactured or partly manufactured in one State, while the raw material is obtained from another. 49. What amount do you estimate you derive from that source ? —Probably £100,000. 50. Of course, that all goes, under free-trade ? —lt goes from the duties levied on goods which come in from the other States. 51. What do you anticipate will be your tariff as against the outside world as compared with the tariff already existing in Australia ? —Should they raise the amount the Government propose— viz., £8,500,000 or £9,000,000 —they will increase the revenue which this State derives from that source.
A.—4
620
52. May I take it that this loss of revenue which you anticipate from the Customs —because it must be generally admitted that the tariff will be lower than the present one-—will have to be made up by the amount which New South Wales contributes ? —I do not imagine that at all. 53. Do you anticipate that the duties levied on various goods will exceed by £100,000 that which you are at present raising '? —Yes. 54. Owing to the increased consumption ?—No ; owing to the extra tariff placed on all goods on which there are no duties now. 55. Do you anticipate that the incidence of taxation will be very much altered?—lt must be very considerably altered. 56. Do you anticipate that the excise duties will be increased on such products as wines and spirits ?—No. I imagine that some of the duties on intoxicants and narcotics will be raised ; and if the same amount is raised in future from them, and if £500,000 is raised from an excise duty on sugar, the rest of the duties, amounting to £3,500,000, can be raised by a 15-per-cent. tariff, and in each case this is lower than our present duty. 57. Then, is there an excise duty on sugar now?—No; but Customs duty is paid in all the States excepting Queensland. 58. Then, the proposed excise on sugar, if that excise is fixed at |d. per pound, will still equal the amount, to the consumer, of the duty levied now ?—lf it were so. 59. Then, there is no saving to the people of the colony by this proposed alteration of |d. per pound import duty to -|d. per pound export duty ?—But the £500,000 derived from excise on sugar would mean a very much lower duty than that. 60. New Zealand gets £168,000 from her sugar duty of £d. per pound now, and we anticipate that we shall lose that duty entirely in the event of our federating. But under the Commonwealth is not the excise to be credited to the State in which the goods are consumed?— Yes. 61. Is that likely to remain a permanent provision ?—Until Parliament otherwise approves —for five years after the new tariff comes in, and after that till Parliament provides differently. 62. I think you anticipate that the whole expense of the Federal Government will be £400,000, but if you include the expenditure on the Defence Department it will come to £500,000 more, will it not?—l do not accept those figures; but, without accepting or refusing them, I think, with regard to the defence expenditure, that if that expenditure is necessary under federation it is still more necessary without federation, and therefore it cannot be said to be a part of the cost of the Federal Government. 63. But, if the £500,000 is expended, that amount will have to be drawn in proportion from the different States, according to the amount they contribute?— Yes. 64. Do the expenses you have mentioned include the expenses of the Volunteer movement ? — Certainly. The expenses, no doubt, include the Volunteer movement, the laying-down of mines, the erection of forts, &c. 65. Our total expenditure in New Zealand provides for £250,000 for defence alone?— When I said that £400,000 was the cost of the Federal Government I meant that that was the cost over and above the cost that we were previously meeting. 66. New expenditure? —Yes. The cost of the whole of the departments taken over was £1,250,000. 67. Does your Postal Department leave a debit each year?— No. We have a profit in this colony on that department of about £20,000 a year. 68. Is that after including the interest on the capital cost?—No doubt that has not been so carefully shown in the estimates as it might have been, but if the whole of the interest-charges were brought into the account the profit to a large extent would disappear. 69. According to Mr. Coghlan there is a deficiency for the five colonies in postal revenue of £320,000 ?—That shows how difficult it is for any one to make an estimate of the amount the Federal Government require. In this State the Government departments pay postage on their postal matter, and also on their telegraphic matter, but in some of the other States the other departments are allowed to frank, and therefore the Postal Department is not credited with the amount it really earns. If the other Postal Departments were managed as ours is, and the earnings of the department shown by debiting the other departments with the work it does for them, the Postal Department of the whole Commonwealth would show a profit. 70. In the event of the Commonwealth going in for the penny-postage, would not that add to their deficiency ?—Yes ; but they are not likely to go in for that unless it can be clearly shown that they can afford it. 71. In regard to labour conditions, I think your legislation is pretty well on a par with that of ours with the exception of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, is it not?—We have kept as near as possible up to your lines. 72. So that there is not much difference in the hours of labour and the wages paid in New Zealand to what they are in South Australia?— Not very much, and we have a Conciliation Act which is very similar to your own, Mr. Kingston being the author of the scheme, and yours being based on his. 73. So that, in the event of our federating, South Australia and New Zealand would meet on equal terms so far as the conditions of labour are concerned: there would not be very much advantage on the one side or the other?—l think not. 74. Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you anticipate any disarrangement of your Customs revenue by the importation into this State of a considerable quantity of beers and tobaccoes on which the excise duty has been paid, say, in Victoria or New South Wales?— Under the Commonwealth Act the Customs and excise duties are to be credited to the State where the consumption takes place. 75. But will it not mean a considerable difference in the revenue from the excise and duties you are now levying against the outside world ? —That depends on what the tariff will be.
A.—4
621
76. What is your duty on tobacco ?—We have a very wide margin of duty on manufactured and unmanufactured tobacco, and we have no excise duty. On manufactured tobacco I do not remember what it is. 77. On what basis would the 75 per cent, of the Customs revenue be returned to the various States ?—A debit and credit account is kept for each- State, and the return is in accordance with the demands of that account. 78. Do you apprehend that the powers of the Commonwealth Government will be increased as time goes on, and the powers of the State Government proportionately reduced? —I think the tendency will be for the Federal authority to grow stronger and for the State authority to grow weaker, but it must be resisted. 79. As to the South Sea Islands, in some quarters we have heard that some friction is likely to arise in the event of New Zealand acquiring possession of certain of those islands : do you think there is any likelihood of that if New Zealand does not federate ? —Naturally, as we have expected New Zealand to look favourably on our efforts to federate here, so we shall look favourably on any effort made by New Zealand to get into closer union with the islands of the Pacific. 80. Can you tell us from your own standpoint any benefits that we are likely to derive from federation ? —lt is difficult for me, without viewing it from the New Zealand standpoint, to express an opinion as to what is best for you to do. 81. Taking our own country, is not the question of federation prejudiced by the fact of our distance from the continent ?—I have always felt that there was considerable force in Sir John Hall's remark at the Convention of 1891, that twelve hundred miles of separation by sea were twelve hundred reasons against your joining any Australian union. 82. Mr. Luke.] You mentioned just now that the increase in the sugar-production was being marked by decreased employment of black labour: might not that be rather due to the increased use of improved machinery than to the fact that it shows that the industry can be carried on without black labour?— The fact that the output has been doubled while the number of coloured labourers employed has been stationary seems to me convincing chat the one can grow without the other. 83. Does it not prove that there is a larger amount of white labour being employed in the industry ?—When in Queensland I put several questions to a farmer in reference to the sugar industry. He told me they were gradually breaking up the plantations into smaller holdings, and that he himself and his family were upon a small block which once formed part of a large plantation. He employed on this block his sons and two kanakas. I asked him why he employed the kanakas, and if he and his sons could not do the work the kanakas did. He said, "No ; my sons work with the kanakas and do everything they do." I asked him if the kanakas were cheaper, and he said they were not, taking into account the fact that three kanakas did the work of two white men only; but the reason he employed them was that if white men were employed to do the work and a gold rush took place at the moment when the crop was ready for cutting, or any dispute arose, the white man would leave you without notice, and your crop would be worthless; whereas with kanakas employed all the year round there was no fear of being left in a fix. 84. Then, it is not entirely due to climatic conditions that black labour is employed in the industry?— Not the whole of the time. There is one portion of the work called "trashing," which consists of stripping the leaves off the cane when it is nearly grown, and in connection with that work I was told that of late years it has been found that the cane does pretty well without trashing. They are dispensing with trashing, and in doing so they are dispensing with the work which almost alone requires the employment of coloured labour. 85. Have you a Contractors' Lien Act in this colony?—We have a Workmen's Lien Act. 86. Have you a large free-list under your Customs duties ?—Yes. 87. Do you think that under the new tariff the duties will be gathered from over a larger area than in the past, and that the amount of duty on a few articles will be increased or decreased ?— Our free-list will be increased by the addition to it of all goods of inter-State origin, and Customs duties will be levied on some articles that are now free. 88. Do you think that we will be at a disadvantage under federation on account of our distance from the continent ? —Particularly in the matter of defence. 89. Do you think that under federation there would not be a more cumbersome administration of such departments as Post, Telegraph, and Railways ? —I think there will be less advantage from a centralisation of departmental work in the case of a colony like New Zealand than there would be in the case of States which are adjoining. 90. Supposing we did enter the Federation, would it be reasonable to suppose that a larger measure of local self-government would remain to us in New Zealand because of our distance?—l can conceive that if New Zealand came into the Federation she could be governed ''as the other States would be who were under the Federal authority. 91. Do you think she would want larger powers of local government asjregards post and telegraph matters ? —I do not know that larger powers would be required—under the Constitution they might be given to any administrator, and if you went into it there ought to be greater local freedom. 92. Mr. Leys.] Do you anticipate that the Commonwealth will take over the railways at an early date ?—I think so. In five years' time the Commonwealth will, I hope, have taken over the railway system of the whole continent. 93. In that case the future construction would be done by the Commonwealth ? —Yes. 94. And the borrowing ? —For railway purposes that also would be done through the Commonwealth. 95. Cannot you conceive that New Zealand would be at a great disadvantage under such a system as that ?—Of course, there is no derogation of the powers of the States to borrow for their own railways.
A.—4
622
96. But, in the event of the Commonwealth undertaking such a railway as the trans-continental railway, would there not be a considerable loss on that line for some years in which New Zealand would have to share? —In the case of the construction of such a line I think it would be perfectly fair to arrange that New Zealand should not have to bear any portion of the loss. 97. Do you think that will be the feeling in the Federal Parliament ?—I think the feeling would be to do what was fair, and it would be very unfair to saddle New Zealand with any portion of the cost of such a line. 98. With regard to the future borrowing of the States, I suppose you assume the Commonwealth would take over the national debt as well as the railways ?—We purposely left that matter open in the Constitution. Some suggested that the Commonwealth should from the beginning take over the debts of the colonies, and that the colonies ought to give the Commonwealth security in exchange for the security now given to the bondholders, but I prevailed upon the Convention so to frame the Constitution that the Commonwealth might take over the debts, leaving the matter in abeyance for the present so that the bondholders might make some return to Australia for the larger security which would be offered to them. 99. Do you anticipate that the railways might be taken over before the public debts are consolidated? —I think most probably when the railways are taken over at least that portion of the debts they represent will be taken over at the same time, on terms securing the utmost advantage to the State as well as to the present bondholders. An accountant could settle the matter in a very short time. 100. Do you think the bondholders would be willing to surrender their highly paid bonds at once ?—They would not, unless they get a quid pro quo, which the Federation would have to give them in the shape of a better security. Take one State whose 3-per-cents are worth about 90: well, the holders of that stock are not likely to be content to hold that stock at 90 if Federal stock were offered them worth par, or perhaps 101. They certainly would jump at it at once if the gain were apportioned between the bondholders and the State. 102. With regard to the possible loss through the surrendering of the Customs and excise duties, I understand that your Customs-duties yield in South Australia has been very low?-— About the average for the whole Commonwealth, or a little below. 103. Mr. Coghlan says your imports and excise duties only amount to £1 13s. 3d. per head, whereas in New Zealand they amount to £2 18s. Id. per head ; in Tasmania the average is £2 9s. 10d., and as a consequence the Tasmanian people are in great difficulty at present ? —A tariff of £9,000,000 will mean a Customs yield of £2 6s. or £2 7s. per head for the Commonwealth, and I do not see where Tasmania is going to come to grief with a tariff like that. 104. Looking at those figures, does it not suggest itself to you that we may anticipate a considerable loss when these duties are handed over to the Commonwealth ?—A loss to the States of Australia, which would mean a profit to the people in the shape of lower taxation. 105. Supposing we came out of it with a balance against us, or on equal terms, how are we to raise the money for railways and for other State functions ?—I should think you would borrow on your land revenue. 106. Do you think that our future State borrowing will have to be done on the security of direct taxation ? —No ; on the security of the general prosperity of the colony. The bondholders do not look at the Customs revenue, but at the general state of the colony and its preparedness to meet its own engagements. » 107. Assuming that we undertake our public works, as we do, out of borrowed money and they are not reproductive, how is the interest to be provided on the loan ?—I should imagine that in every such case you would provide some source of revenue out of which to pay the interest. 108. And that source must be ? —Something other than Customs. 109. Do you think it probable that the Federal Government will take over the tropical portions of Australia and administer them ?—The whole, including the tropical portion, is now under the Federal authority, and I have every reason to expect that the Northern Territory of this colony, and possibly the northern portion of Western Australia also, will be taken over as part of the Federal territory, as it can be so much better worked by the Federal Government than by a Government so far distant from the north coast as ours is. 110. In the first instance, would not the development of any northern Federal territory result in a considerable loss to the Government ? —lt is conceivable that there might be some in the shape of money invested with a view to getting larger returns in the future. But it is also conceivable that it will bring in a revenue in time to come. 111. Do you find the administration of your Northern Territory a source of profit?—ln the case of our Northern Territory we have built a railway-line from Pine Creek to Port Darwin 150 miles long. The central portion of that line pays its way with the exception of the interest on the railway loan, which, I think, is paid for by the Northern Territory; but the whole line has been a loss to us of some £70,000 to £80,000 a year, reckoning the interest on the cost of construction of the line. 112. Is it not reasonable to suppose that similar loss might arise to the Federal Government in administering these tropical territories?—lt depends on the nature of the work done and the administration. 113. Would not that loss have to be provided for out of the Federal Customs revenue, to which New Zealand would have to contribute ?—That would depend entirely on the terms New Zealand came in on. It would be quite possible for New Zealand to come in on such terms as would protect her from any such loss. 114. But would not the loans be raised on the security of the whole Commonwealth, including New Zealand ? —Yes. 115. Assuming that New Zealand does not come in, what is the chance of a reciprocal treaty being obtained between her and the Commonwealth ? —lt is very difficult to forecast the policy
623
A.—4
respecting such a matter as that, but I should be inclined, if I had to prophesy, to say that Australia would be unwilling to enter into a reciprocal treaty with New Zealand alone. But if New Zealand formed part of a Pacific Commonwealth that might tend in the future to make it worth while for the two Federations to enter into a reciprocal arrangement. 116. You have given a good deal of attention" to reciprocal treaties, have you not ?—Some years since we made an endeavour to arrange a reciprocal treaty between this colony and yourselves. 117. What was the cause of the failure of that ? —I think the Parliaments of the two colonies were a little bit shy, and nothing was done. 118. Has there been any attempt *to obtain recriprocal treaties between South Australia and other colonies ?—I tried in 1890 to arrange a reciprocal treaty between this colony and Queensland, but without success. Our experience has been that reciprocal treaties are most difficult to arrange, and, if arranged, most difficult to maintain, and they form the strongest advocacy in favour of federation, under which we have the reciprocity without the uncertainty. 119. I suppose, from your previous answers, that you do recognise that there is a community of interest between the Australian States that does not exist between the Australian Continent and New Zealand ?—Yes, a community of interest; but 1 say, at the same time, that a community of interest, sentiment, and sympathy exists between us and New Zealand as keenly as between either of the proposed federating States. 120. Is it not possible, if New Zealand came in, that she might be rather a disturbing element than a source of strength to the Commonwealth ?—From our point of view we should be very glad to see New Zealand become a State of an important Commonwealth ; but if I"could put myself in a position of responsibility in New Zealand possibly I should hesitate a good deal before I joined the Commonwealth. 121. Is your Conciliation Act on the basis of our Act, or is it on the basis of the Victorian Wages Act ?—Mr. Kingston drew up the Conciliation Bill, which was, I think, largely copied by the New Zealand Parliament shortly before it was finally passed here. The two are very similar in essence. 122. Has it been put into operation ? —There have been a few minor decisions, but in no great difficulty, so far, has it been brought into play. 123. If the two Acts are similar, how is it that whilst there are cases being continually brought under the New Zealand Act all over the colony there has not been a similar resort to your Act ?—1 am not quite sure, unless it is the different conditions prevailing in the two countries. We have been suffering from a very serious depression the last five or six years, and in such circumstances serious strikes are much less likely than they are when a country is very prosperous. 124. Hon. Major Steivard.] What is the average yield of wheat per acre in South Australia under normal conditions?—lt fluctuates very much ; it has been down to 3 bushels per acre, but this year probably it is about 7 or 8 bushels. 125. What is the cost of harvesting and cultivation?—A large farmer in one of our drier districts told me that he estimated the cost of putting in and taking off the crop, including seed, machinery, and all labour, at 10s. an acre. 126. Then, the evidence we got the other day that it could be done for 16s. can be relied on ? —-Where the soil is light, and the conditions in cultivation are as they are in some of our northern districts, and an abundance of pastoral land is available for the farm stock, it can be done for 10s. 127. What is the value of that wheat-growing land we are speaking of that produces an average crop ?—The average crop of that farmer I spoke of during a series of years was 4 bushels, and he realised for it on his farm 3s. per bushel. Prices have been lower since, and he then received 2s. an acre profit for each acre in crop. 128. Does that allow for interest on the cost of the land ?—His land was held from the Government at a nominal rental. We have a large area of Crown lands in this colony that are let for town grazing and agriculture, and are disposed of at to 3d. and 4d. an acre. 129. Do you grow maize to any extent here ? —'Very little indeed—almost none. 130. Do you grow more wheat than you require for your own consumption ?—Yes, very much more ; and we export largely. 131. Under federation do you expect to increase your market for wheat ? —Federation cannot help our wheat-growing. 132. Supposing the New Zealand public decided that it would be inexpedient for them to come into this Federation, do you think, as a public man, that our special circumstances would be recognised by your public men, so that we would be admitted on terms of equality as an original State?— You would be in the strong position that if you did not like the terms offered you would not come in. 133. Do you think there would be a friendly spirit, and that desire to meet the difficulties of the case ?—I am sure there would. 134. Are you likely to get penny-postage in this State ?—Had we remained as we were some years since we should have, I think, obtained it, but now it must wait until better times come on. 135. Do you think the Federal Parliament will establish a system of penny-postage ?—I think the disposition of members of Parliament will be only to vote for it if they see it can be afforded. 136. Mr. Roberts.] Does your Department of Industry issue a regular report setting forth the state of the industries in the colony?—We have a monthly circular similar to the one you have in New Zealand, and I will send you a copy of it. 137. Hon. the Chairman.] Is fruit-growing in South Australia increasing ?—Yes, steadily. We have a large export of apples and other fruits, and we are trying the dried system and a new method of packing.
A.—4
624
138. Is there any hope of your exporting butter to England ?—Yes ; we export to India arid England. 139. South Australia, I take it, can not only supply her own fruit requirements, but also export a very large quantity ?—I know of no fruit we need import excepting bananas and pineapples. 140. Do you know whether good grapes could be successfully exported to New Zealand if there were no restrictions ? —I have no doubt they would be. 141. Would they carry ?—Yes. 142. What is the price of fruit here?—ln the shops Id. per pound, and you can also get grapes for £3 a ton for wine-making. 143. How about dairy produce.: do you export it ?—Yes ; we export a good deal of butter, but nothing much in cheese. We are importing a good deal of cheese, hams, and bacon. 144. Supposing there were intercolonial free-trade, is there any chance of a market here for New Zealand farm produce ? —You would probably send us, as you have been sending us of late, some hams, bacon, butter, cheese, oatmeal, and oats, notwithstanding the duties. 145. Did you include Northern Queensland in northern Australia when you said it would be taken over by the Federal Government ?—Northern Queensland would remain attached to Queensland as part of that State. 146. What, then, is to become of northern Western Australia and northern South Australia? —They should be Federal territories, managed by the Federal Government, until strong enough to become a State or States. 147. But how is that country to be populated and developed?—As South Australia and Western Australia have been developed in the past. 148. But the population is small, is it not, in those northern territories ?—lt is small, but every now and again there is a slight increase. 149. What is the chief purpose to which northern Australia is devoted?— Stock-raising and gold-mining, excluding Queensland. 150. Supposing irrigation-works were undertaken there, is there any land available for cultivation ? —Yes, very large areas highly suitable, by means of irrigation, for tropical agriculture ; but, as that is an expensive process, I have very little hope of seeing it adopted at a very early date. 151. Mr. Luke.] Have you an Early Closing Act in this colony?— Yes; I will give you a copy. 152. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you believe that the northern part of Australia ever can be developed without coloured labour ?—I only speak of what I know, and I have spoken very positively concerning the northern portions of South Australia and Western Australia, but of that portion of Northern Queensland north of Mackay I am not able to speak of from personal knowledge or investigation, and concerning that I cannot express an opinion.
Gawlbe, Wednesday, 10th Apeil, 1901. Alpbed May examined. (No. 230.) 153. Hon. the Chairman.'] What are you, Mr. May ?—An engineer, and proprietor of the Gawler Foundry and Engineering Works. 154. How many hands do you employ ? —ln full working, 250. We make agricultural implements and mining machinery especially. The large machine you see here is a winding-machine, and I think it is the largest winding-engine that has been made in South Australia. 155. What is your average rate of wages ?—For fitters Is. 3d. an hour, and they work eight hours a day. 156. Have you any apprentices ?—We do not indenture apprentices. Young fellows, after they have been with us four or five years, and are in any way qualified, get about £1 10s. a week. We start them at about 6s. I have here in the foundry youths getting from 6s. to £1 10s. They number 33 per cent, of the hands employed. 157. Do you have any labour troubles with your men?—-We have never had any labour troubles. 158. Can you tell us what would be the cost of harvesting with the stripper-machine we see here?—l could not tell you. 159. Mr. Luke.] Do the lads pay a premimum when they enter the shops ? —We have no premiums in South Australia ; but the lads start on wages at once. There is no binding agreement at all. All that is necessary when they leave is to give them a notice saying that they were employed at such-and-such work, and they never have any difficulty in getting employment when they leave our premises. 160. Mr. Leys.] How many acres would the stripper you make harvest in a day ?—About 12 acres; but I have records showing where they have done a lot more with three horses under ordinary conditions, but a lot depends on the soil. 161. Do you think that strippers of this construction would be of any use for wheat-harvest-ing in New Zealand ?—I do not know anything about your conditions. 162. Does the straw have to be very dry in order to make the machines work well?— Not necessarily, as long as the beaters can cut it off. 163. What is about the average height of your wheat here?— Four feet, and some crops go up to 5 ft. 164. Mr. Beauchamp.] I suppose your "stripper "is universally used among the farmers here ?— Absolutely so. Ido not know of any place about this colony where they are not used. The
625
A.—4
" is a machine which, if the wheat has been allowed to mature too much in the stooks, strips the heads off the straw, but the straw does not go through the stripper at all. We turn out about two hundrei and fifty of these strippers a year, and the sale-price is about £58 f.o.b. 165. How long have these machines been in work? —Sixteen years. We also make broadcast seed-sowers and ploughers. 166. Mr. Luke.] Do you export largely to the other States?— This State is our principal market; but, unfortunately, South Australia has been subject to drought, and the market has not been as extensive on that account as we would have wished. Other places have been our principal market for some time.
Thursday, 11th April, 1901. Frederick Samuel Wallis examined. (No. 231.) 167. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the secretary to the United Trades and Labour Council of South Australia ? —Yes. 168. How many bodies does that represent ?—Twenty-three, with a membership of over two thousand. 169. Has that council been long in existence ? —Seventeen years. 170. Is there any Arbitration and Conciliation Act in force in South Australia ?—Yes ; it is Mr. Kingston's Act. 171. Is that a voluntary matter, or are they compelled in any way by law ?—lt is not compulsory ; that is the weakness of it. 172. Can either side decline to attend if cited by the President of the Court ?—There have only been one or two occasions when there has been an attempt to make use of the Act, and then the absence of a provision for compelling the two sides to come together was found to be the weakness. There was a dispute a little while ago in connection with the tobacco-twisters' trade. In that case the Chairman of the Conciliation Board, Mr. Commissioner Eussell, invited the two parties to lay the matter before him, and they agreed to do so and to abide by his decision; but had one side refused nothing would have come of it. 173. Is there no machinery, then, for enforcing the award of the Court?— No. 174. Are industrial disputes rare here ?—Of recent years there have been none of any consequence, with the exception of the bootmakers' strike four years ago. 175. Is there any standard rate of wages in the trades here?—ln some trades they have a standard. You can get a fairly accurate statement of the average rates from the statistical register published here—a Government document. In the Federated Plasterers' Union, the secretary recently informed me, the recognised rate of wages is 9s. a day. For journeyman butchers there is no ruling rate, but they are expecting to get one fixed under the Factories Act. They do not come under it at present; hence they cannot yet obtain the advantages of a Wages Board. By resolution of Parliament they can come under the Act, and, in fact, any trade outside the four trades named in the Act —the baking, furniture, clothing, and bootmaking—can be brought under its provisions by resolution of Parliament. For carpenters the rate is from 9s. to 10s. a day of eight hours. It is eight hours in most cases. For builders' labourers, 7s. (with Is. an hour for overtime) for eight hours. Bricklayers and masons, 10s. per day of eight hours. For tailors I cannot get any definite information, because the trade is so disorganized. That is one of the trades named in the Act, and in connection with which they hope to have a Board appointed very soon. 176. You spoke of a Wages Board : is there such a Board established ? —The Factories Act recently passed provides for the appointment of a Wages Board in connection with each of the four trades named in the Act. 177. Is that similar to the Wages Board in vogue in Victoria?— Yes. The Premier has told me that the regulations will be issued in this week's Gazette. 178. Is the eight-hour system generally observed in South Australia ?—lt is, in connection with trades. 179. Have you a Shop Hours Act here ? —No; we have an Early Closing Act, which deals with the closing-times, but does not limit the hours. Under the Act the shopkeepers are supposed to close at 6 o'clock on four nights in the week, and at 1 o'clock on one afternoon, and they can keep open until 9 o'clock on Friday or Saturday night, as the case may be. It depends upon whether they close on Wednesday night or Saturday as to which night they keep open until 9 o'clock. 180. Are there several trades which do not come under the Act ?—Yes. I am informed by the chaff-mill employes that they work from ten to twelve hours a day. 181. What wages do they get ? —I do not know, but they are not high. 182. Do you know anything about the hours and wages in the foundries ? —I believe the boilermakers get 10s. a day on the eight-hours system, and the engineers about the same. 183. Hon. Captain Russell.] Do you know if the eight-hours system is strictly observed here, or is it really a longer day? —In all trades where there is a union the eight-hours system is observed faithfully, but where there is no organisation I cannot speak definitely. 184. Do you really believe that the men in the chaff-mills work twelve hours a day?—l believe the "men told me what is true. The men have to go early in the morning to see to the horses, and have to stay late at night for the same purpose, and the consequence is that from starting-time to finishing-time they average about twelve hours. 185. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] But the men who look after the horses are paid extra, are they not ? —I am given to understand, no. 186. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Are these works in the country or town ?—Bound about, in the city and suburbs. 79—A. 4.
A.—4
626
187. But I suppose you recognise that it is not possible to work twelve hours during the winter, because there is no light ? —I give you the information exactly as I got it, and it is only recently that I learned anything in connection with the chaff-mill employes. The union]was only formed a little while ago mainly because of the long hours worked. 188. You think it is a bond fide statement, and not merely a figure of speech ?—I think so, and that it may be taken as reliable. 189. Then, we may take it that the answer is that you do not know what the average work is, but that on certain occasions they work for twelve hours ?—I understand that, generally speaking, they average twelve hours a day. 190. You say the plasterers receive 9s. a day?— Yes. 191. Do the more skilled tradesmen get nothing better than 9s.'?—lt has been up to 10s./but it is back again to 95., which is the ruling rate at present for plasterers. 192. Does a first-class hand get the same wages as a second-class hand ?—I cannot give you any information on that point. 193. Do you know what wages the agricultural labourer gets ? —I do not know anything about that, beyond what is in the statistical register. 194. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Are there many strikes here ? —No, we are pretty free from labour disputes. 195. Do you attribute that to the passing of the Arbitration Act ?—No. 196. You think the people are generally contented here ?—They accept their disadvantages without making a great public to-do. My experience in connection with the Trades and Labour Council is that there is very little in the way of differences between employers and employes at present. 197. Then, there is no agitation in favour of legislation ?—There has been agitation in favour of a Factories Act. 198. But not for the Conciliation and Arbitration Act ?—No; but we would like to get our present Arbitration and Conciliation Act brought more into harmony with the New Zealand Act, so that it would be.more useful to us. As things stand now, it is almost a dead-letter. 199. Mr. Roberts.'] Have your country workers amongst the agriculturists and pastoralists formed any union ?—Not among the agriculturists. 200. Is there a shearers' union here ?—There is an Australian Workers' Union, which includes shearers. 201. Is that affiliated to the Trades Council?— Yes. 202. I understand there is some difficulty likely to arise amongst the shearers this year?—l have not heard of it. 203. You have not heard of any circulars having gone out from headquarters, indicating that new terms are to be demanded?—l believe there has been something going on, but I cannot say that there is likely to be trouble. Nothing has come before the council. 204. Mr. Millar.] Is your Factories Act on the same basis as the Victorian and New South Wales Act?—lt is based on the Victorian Act. 205. How do you find it operate : is it only partial in its application?—lt has not come into operation yet. It has been restricted to the metropolitan area only, but we would have preferred it to have applied to the whole colony. As things stand now, the Act may be extended to any other district by a vote of Parliament. Both Houses have to approve of the extension of the Act to another tra,de, but either House can approve of the extension of the Act to another district. 206. But in Victoria I understand that a member of either House can move the motion to bring any trade, under the Act, and that if carried it takes effect, and that trade comes under the Act ?—We wished to get the same thing here, but we were not successful. 207. So that your Factories Act is really behind the Victorian one ?—Yes. 208. What is your basis for a factory ?—One hand constitutes a factory here—one employe besides the employer. 209. How do you propose to regulate this class of labour which cannot possibly come under the Factories Act —all the unskilled labour ? —There is no way, excepting by organization and following the lines hitherto adopted in forming unions. 210. That is to say, forming unions and then striking ?—Not striking, but agitating. 211. Assuming that they agitated for some considerable time and got no redress, do you think that they can hold together a large body of men who cannot get satisfaction if those men believe they are labouring under heavy disadvantages ?—With an Act such as we have it is capable of improvement, and every effort would be made to get any body of men engaged in any trade or calling brought under the Act. 212. How do the labour people here view the question of compulsory arbitration?— They are favourable to it. 213. Then, I may reasonably assume that it will be the endeavour of the Labour party in South Australia to get the Federal Parliament as soon as possible to make the Compulsory Arbitration Act apply to the whole of Australia ?—I can safely say that they are favourable to it—in fact, that they are expecting to have similar legislation introduced in the Commonwealth Parliament to that existing in New Zealand. 214. How do you arrange the number of boys or girls to be employed in any one trade : have you any restrictions in that respect ? —Only such as the rules of the trades-unions may adopt. 215. Could you enforce them ?—Just to the extent that the union is strong enough. 216. What legislation have you in South Australia for the protection of labour outside the Factories Act ? —The Workmen's Compensation Act recently passed, which includes the seamen. I do not think the English Act does that.
627
A.—4
217. Do you know whether it is on the same lines as the English Act ?—I cannot say. There is also a Workmen's Lien Act, but it wants improving, and that is the case with most of our industrial legislation. 218. Do you anticipate, under the Federation you have now gone into, that South Australia from the labour point of view is likely to make any great advance P —The majority of us confess that we do not know exactly how federation will affect some trades. It remains to be seen what its effect will be, but no doubt some trades will suffer on account of the concentration of industries in one or other of the capitals. 219. I presume you are of opinion that there will be a great deal of drawing-off, as it were, to Sydney and Victoria of several manufactures from here ? —Yes. 220. That means that people will have to follow the work ?—Yes. 221. What industry do you think that will apply to?—I cannot speak definitely on that point. 222. Do you think the people in your State Parliament will be able to go in for any advanced legislation unless the other colonies go ii> for the same thing at the same time ?—That is a matter the Labour party in the various colonies intends to keep in view, so as to bring the colonies into line as much as possible in all labour movements. 223. Do you see much prospect of that being done, seeing that the same men who are running the Federal Parliament have been for the last ten years your representatives in the State Parliament, and have not been able to accomplish much in that direction ?—The candidates for the Federal Parliament in this State practically adopted the Labour party's platform. 224. Have you got that in Mack and white from them ? —lt is in their public utterances and published opinions, and they have gone in on those opinions. 225. We know, as far as Queensland is concerned, that that is pretty well correct too; but, assuming that the smaller States were consolidated in connection with the matter, do you think that you then would be able to do anything as against the opposition of the larger States ? In New South Wales you would have a block vote against labour and industrial legislation. You would have the two largest States combined entirely against the smaller States ? —I do not think you will find that there will be any one State unanimous on any one point against the other States. 226. Mr. Luke.] Have you a general knowledge of the conditions applying to labour in New Zealand ?—No ; I have seen the journal of the Labour Department there. In January, 1900, a communication was sent to the Trades Council here from New Zealand asking for an expression of opinion as to how federation was likely to affect New Zealand industries. It came from the Wellington Trades Council, and this is the reply that was sent by our council : — [Extraot from letter, P. S. Wallis, honorary secretary United Trades and Labour Council of South Australia, to Wellington Trades Council, dated 29th January, 1900, and printed in New Zealand Times for 16th February, said letter having been approved by the council of South Australia before being sent.] " (1.) In 1891 those of the workers who gave the matter any thought were mainly inclined to look with suspicion on the movement for intercolonial federation, holding that it was supported principally by a class who hoped thereby to curb the growing-power of the labour unions, and to make more difficult the enacting of legislation directly in the interests of labour. Now, however, federation is practically an accomplished fact, and under the Commonwealth Bill it is possible for the people of each colony to secure labour representation in both Houses of the Federal Parliament. Hence, if the workers will only exercise their power, the Federal Parliament may be so constituted as to insure a proper regard being paid to their interests in legislation of a Federal character. Speaking of labour as a whole throughout the colonies in the Federation, it may be said that the probable effect of federation, as far as legislation is concerned, will be beneficent or otherwise, according to the extent to which the labour interest is directly represented in the Federal Parliament. " (2.) The abolition of Customs duties between the colonies will naturally have an effect on certain manufacturing industries, but to what extent will only be known by experience. In some trades in this colony it is expected that as a result of federation Melbourne or Sydney will become the centre of operations, and that large establishments in one or both of those cities will take the place of many of the factories in Adelaide and elsewhere. Men in some trades, therefore, here have rather pessimistic ideas regarding federation from a personal point of view. Men in Sydney or Melbourne, however, in the same trades, also taking a personal view of the matter, may see reason to anticipate a better state of things than at present exists for them. The aim of nearly all manufacturers appears to be to get as nearly a3 they can a monopoly of the public patronage, and there are some who under federation will hardly be satisfied with less than the whole of Australia as their customers. ' Live and let live' is not their motto so far as their own line of business is concerned. This concentration of industrial energy will mean a larger output at a proportionately diminished cost of production —in other words, the employment of fewer hands in the aggregate than at present. The net result will be in some trades an increase in the number of unemployed; but intercolonial free-trade —whatever its effect upon certain trades in one particular colony as against another —is inevitable, and, as happens in the case of introduction of machinery, matters will in course of time adjust themselves by the surplus men seeking other occupations. " (3.) So far as this colony is concerned, there may be ways in which losses will be counterbalanced by gains. For instance, it is believed that a great impetus will be given to our wine industry by the removal of Customs duties between the colonies, and that in other directions our natural products will be in much greater demand than at present. " (4.) It is thought by some that the Federal capital will draw the majority of the wealthy people to it —that it will be a sort of seat of Australian aristocracy—and will thus be detrimental to all the colonies (the capitals particularly) except the particular colony within whose borders it is to be situated. But the building of a new city will necessarily attract population of every description, and if the erection of a Federal capital should result in a more liberal expenditure of their incomes
A.—4
628
by the moneyed classes it will not be altogether a disadvantage to the handicraftsmen of Australia as a whole. " (5.) In conclusion, I may say that we are not quite clear that what I am forwarding as some of our opinions will be of much assistance to. you in determining how far the Commonwealth Bill is suited to the circumstances and geographical position of New Zealand." 227. Mr. Millar.] You say there that, now federation is an accomplished fact, you believe the working-classes have sufficient power to return labour members to the Federal Parliament who will look after the interests of labour? —Yes, if the working-classes exercised the voting-power they have got; but only 40 per cent, of the people here voted for the Federal elections. Had a larger percentage voted we would have had two more labour members in the Federal Parliament. 228. Supposing you had all labour members in that Parliament, what power have they got to legislate on social questions at all, seeing that you have tied them down by your thirty-nine articles? They have no power excepting to pass an Arbitration Act? —The old-age pensions comes under the labour platform, and it is one matter the Federal Parliament can legislate for. They can also legislate for the settlement of industrial disputes that extend beyond the borders of another State. That is a very large matter, and I look to the Federal Parliament to prevent a recurrence of inter-State labour troubles, 229. But, having legislated on that, what is there left for them to do? —If they deal with that one question satisfactorily—l refer to disputes extending beyond the border of one colony—they will do a good thing, and confer a lasting benefit on the workers. 230. Do you anticipate that your local Parliaments will be able to pass progressive legislation unless that legislation is passed about the same time by all the States —that is, reducing the hours of labour in one State to forty-eight hours ?—Of course, the hours of labour have not been brought down in a wholesale manner to forty-eight. Thgy have only come down in one trade at a time, and I cannot see how any reduction in the hours of labour would come about in a wholesale fashion as applied to all trades. 231. Are there none of your trades now that work forty-four hours only in a week? —I have an impression that there are one or two who do not work the full forty-eight. The Factories Act of 1894 is confined to limiting the hours of women and young.persons only, and provides for not more than one hundred hours' overtime being worked throughout the year. 232. Mr. Beauchamp.] To what do you attribute the fact that only 40 per cent, of the people voted at the last elections ?—1 do not know what to attribute it to; but I think that people who would not vote for the Federal Parliament (having adult suffrage) do not deserve to have a vote for any purpose. 233. What is the condition of labour here at present ?—ln some trades it is all right, but among the unskilled men there are always some out of work. 234. Are there many unemployed here ?t—l cannot say there is at present, generally speaking. 235. Has your experience of the working-classes been confined to South Australia? —Yes. 236. How does the Labour Bureau work here?— Generally speaking, I think it accomplishes the object it was intended for—namely, to provide a medium between the employer and those who want work. 237. Do people find the heat here oppressive, and calculated to reduce the quantity of work they can turn out ?—We feel the heat on our very hot days, but we get through our work just the same. 238. Mr. Luke.] Is the furniture trade largely developed here ?—With regard to that trade Chinese are troublesome to us. 239. Are there many Chinese in that trade in Adelaide ? —ln Adelaide, I am informed by a member of the trade, their competition has been very keenly felt, and they have already brought down the quality of the work, and also the price of it in consequence, as British workmen cannot do it at the same price. 240. Is there a large boot industry here ?—There are several factories. 241. Do they export largely?—l cannot say. 242. Are there any large engineering-works in the City of Adelaide?— There are several in the city, but I can give you no information about them. 243. Mr. Leys.] Was the adoption of the Victorian Wages Act in your factories here urged by the Trades and Labour Council ? —Yes. We wished to have the Act as nearly as possible on the lines of the latest Victorian legislation. 244. Why was it that you went in for the system of Wages Boards in preference to amending your Conciliation and Arbitration Act so as to make it compulsory ?—The operation of the Victorian Act was so much better known to us than the operation of your Act in New Zealand, Victoria being so close to us ; and the different trades were able to follow the benefits resulting from the Victorian legislation, as they were brought more prominently under our notice, than the effects of your legislation. 245. Is the feeling amongst the workers here that the Victorian Act is a very effective Act ? —Yes. 246. You do not want both the Conciliation and Arbitration Act and the Wages Act, do you? —The Factories Act covers much the same ground, certainly, as the Wages Act does. 247. Is it not just another way of doing the same thing?—lt is to a great extent. 248. Under the Victorian Act there are now about twenty-six trades which appear to have been legislated for: how is it that you could only get four trades brought under your Act in South Australia?— That is the result of the majority in our Parliament being of a Conservative tendency. We had great trouble to get an Act at all, and the Bill, as introduced last session, was much more comprehensive than the one that was passed. The Conservatives were totally against the Bill, and it was limited to four trades so as to get something, with the restriction that no other trade
629
A.—4.
could come under the Act without a vote of Parliament, and that no other district beyond the metropolitan area could come under the Act excepting by a vote of either House. 249. Do you think that there will be great difficulty in getting other trades brought under the Act ?—No, not if the Act is proved to be beneficial. .1 think that would be a strong argument that would overcome the opposition to getting other trades included. 250. Do I understand you to mean that the unskilled trades could be brought under the operations of that Act ?—I should think they could if they were organized. 251. Notwithstanding the fact that they are not working in factories?— The definition of a factory is pretty wide. 252. Hon. Major Steward.] You said your Factories Act was considerably amended in its progress through Parliament: do you mean in the sense of being improved ? —No ; mutilated. 253. It was restricted largely in its operation, was it not ?—Yes ; some would put it that way. 254. Does the Wages Board deal with any other conditions of labour than the mere question of pay ? Does it take into account the number of apprentices?— Yes; but not the hours. This was one of the directions in which it was mutilated. The Wages Board has no power to deal with the hours, and it stands to reason that you cannot fix the wages satisfactorily without reference to the hours. 255. What is your proportion of boy-labour in various trades to journeymen?— The trades that have unions generally provide for the number of apprentices to journeymen. 256. Does the Act recognise the regulations made by trade-unions ?—I cannot say that it does ; but we shall see when it comes into operation how far these regulations will be recognised. I think the Victorian Act has taken them as a basis, generally speaking. 257. As regards your boy-labour, do you insist upon indentures ? —Some trades do under their trade-union rules, but we have no law insisting on the indenturing of apprentices. 258. Mr. Millar.] Under this Factories Act do you think it is advisable, from the labour point of view, that the political element should be allowed to be so largely mixed up with it ? Do you think it is advisable, in the interests of the workers of this colony, that a Factories Act should be on the statute-book which practically places the whole power in the hands of members of Parliament ?—No. I would have preferred that the Act should have been much wider in its application, and that its provisions could be taken advantage of without having to obtain permission of Parliament. 259. You would keep the political element out of it altogether ?—Yes ; I would have preferred that. To have made the Act apply all round in the first instance, so that no further political interference was required, would have been better, in my opinion. James Duncan examined. (No. 232.) 260. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the firm of Duncan and Fraser, coachbuilders ? —Yes. We have been in business here thirty-five years, and we pay about £105 a week in wages. The average wage for an adult is from Bs. to 10s. ; 9s. is the average coachbuilder's, and the hours of labour are eight a day. For the last three months we have been working up till 9 o'clock at night, and overtime is paid for. 261. Have you experienced any difficulty in the matter of trade disputes with those in your employ?—We never have anything of that sort. 262. Are there many in your line of business in South Australia?— There are a large number of carriage-builders here. 263. Do you think federation will prove of any benefit to the manufacturers of South Australia?—l think it will be an advantage to us. 264. In what way ?—Because our colony borders on every other colony. We send goods up north, to Queensland, and to Broken Hill, which is a New South Wales city. Then, if we had federation and free ports we could do a large amount of business on the Victorian side. So far as business is concerned, the first eighty miles of Victoria would, I think, belong to us; and, of course, we do a considerable business with Western Australia. 265. Have you any fear of the trade being drawn from here to the larger centres ?—Some classes of trade might go, but I think we shall get other classes in return. In Victoria there is a demand for high-class carriages, because they live much more stylishly than we do, and it does not pay us to make a carriage that is only required perhaps once in two or three years. There are not more than two or three landaus made in this colony in ten years, and that trade would probably go to Victoria, where they are making them every day. 266. Do you export any of your vehicles to New Zealand?—No; and even with intercolonial free-trade 1 do not think we would. I visited New Zealand a few years ago and looked through their shops, and, while there were no very large factories there, the people seemed to be well up in their business, and the freight would preclude us from any chance of doing business there. 267. Mr. Beid.] Is your trade protected ? —Yes. It is a fixed duty, according to the value of the vehicle, but it is sufficiently protected to stop the importation of vehicles into South Australia. I believe the development that has gone on in this trade has been largely due to the protective duties. 268. Do you assume that when the Federal tariff is made you will get a less duty than you have now, or a high one ? —We could do with a less duty without being injured. 269. Mr. Luke.] Do you manufacture the tram-cars we see plying here ?—Yes. We have made all the tram-cars required here for the last fifteen years. The wheels come from Home, but we make the axles and other fittings. I also made the tram-cars used in Ballarat, and in that case I competed successfully with the Victorian manufacturers, and against their high duty. 270. Do you grow timber here for making the felloes and spokes?— Practically nothing but the felloes. We import the hubs and spokes, and a number of the felloes. There is a very large demand for buggies and carriages, but very little demand for landaus.
A.—4
630
271. Are there any skilled men getting higher than 9s. ?—Yes ; I have two men getting 12s.— one is a blacksmith and the other is a trimmer. For 10s. you could get a good body-maker. We pay every man according to his work. 272. Do not the trade organizations regulate yo.ur rate of wages?— Hitherto they have not, but we expect to have a Bill brought into operation for the minimum wage which will affect them. 273. Do you apprentice the lads ? —We do not have any apprentices. 274. What wages do you pay them ? —About 6s. or 7s. a week, according to their work. We gave up apprentices when we went in for new machinery, as we thought we would not be doing justice to the boys in bringing them up in a purely machine-shop, as they could not get a living elsewhere. A boy gets £1 a week as soon as he can earn it, and he gets a yearly rise of 35., 45., or ss. 275. Does not that breed dissatisfaction amongst the boys?—lt creates emulation. 276. But does not the opposite happen sometimes ?—lf there is any dissatisfaction they have to get a job somewhere else. 277. About what proportion of boys do you employ to men ?—We have about three men to one boy. 278. I suppose in the coaehbuilding business a good deal of machinery is employed ?—No; I think we are the only people who use machinery here. 279. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you an extensive free-list under the Customs tariff?—No; everything we use is taxed about 25 per cent. 280. Have you any serious competition from American carriages and buggies?— Practically none. I have only known of one being imported for years past. There is a fixed duty of £10 a buggy, and if it has a hood it is £15, which is practically prohibitive. 281. Mr. Millar.] According to your evidence, there is no such thing as an eight-hours day in your industry ? —Yes, those are the regular hours. 282. But you do not pay any overtime ?—No. 283. Have you not been working overtime considerably lately ?—For the last three months we have had a great scarcity of men. 284. That means that the men have been working nine hours a day for the same rate of wages, and that the eight hours dotes not apply ? —They do not get any extra rate, but they get paid for the number of hours they work. In some trades people have had to pay " time and a quarter " or " time and a half," but it has not been the custom in our trade. 285. You do not anticipate any danger through federation to your trade here ? —No; I am quite prepared to compete with, and I have been able to compete with, Victoria, and they are the most formidable competitor we are likely Co have. 286. In your tour round New Zealand, how did you find the carriage-building industries there : were the establishments well equipped with machinery?—l do not think there is one which has as much machinery as we have, but still I cannot be certain of that. In Auckland there are one or two good-sized establishments —Atkins's and Cousin Brothers', but none are very extensive. 287. You feel pretty sure that the freight would prevent you going into the New Zealand trade, even if there were free-trade ?—Yes, I am quite satisfied about that. 288. Mr. Roberts.] Do you think a man here can do as good a day's work as he can in New Zealand, in the milder climate we have there?—l think the advantage would certainly be in favour of the milder climate, but we have the most delightful climate in the world here in the winter-time. 289. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Do you find any difference in your output in the cooler winter months as compared with the output in the summer months ?—No; we are exceedingly busy in summer, and we.find the men are very willing in helping to get the work through. 290. Can they do as much work in a day when the thermometer is at 100° as they can in the winter, when it is not over 70° ? : —I believe they do quite as much, because we are generally very busy in summer. 291. During the summer-time, when you have great pressure of work, are the men paid the same wages as they are in the winter-time, when you have an easy time ?—Yes, the men are all supposed to be paid a fair day's wage all the time. 292. You say you have not had the eight-hours day : supposing a man works ten hours, what does he get ? —He gets paid in the same proportion extra as for the previous eight hours, but he does not get a special rate for overtime. We pay so-much an hour in Australia. 293. Then, if a man only works seven hours, does he only get paid in proportion ?—He gets paid for seven hours, and if he works twelve hours he gets paid for twelve hours. 294. Mr. Leys.] Are there any New Zealand woods used in carriage-building?— Yes, kauri especially ; and there are a number of other woods in New Zealand we should be glad to get, but they do not come here; but unless there is a big trade I think you cannot export them profitably. 295. What wood was that?—Mangia. It is used in shafts; but we generally get them ready made in England and sent out. 296. Is not the kauri used more for the body-work ? —Yes ; it is the best wood we can get for the purpose for buggies, although cedar is perhaps better than even kauri for front carriages. Kauri is a splendid timber to bend. There is some soft-wood kauri very largely in demand, but it is rather difficult to get. We have had some timber coming from Queensland lately which may compete with kauri. H. J. Holden examined. (No. 233.) 297. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?— Leather-goods manufacturers and saddlers principally. We employ about a hundred hands, and the average rate of wages paid to them is about £2 ss. a week of forty-eight hours. The best men run to £2 Bs., and the medium to £2 2s. 298. What do you pay for overtime ? —Time and a quarter.
631
A.—4
299. Have you any apprentices in your business ?—They are not bound, but we have boys. We have no bound apprentices, because it is not the custom in South Australia. 300. Is the leather used by your firm of colonial manufacture ?—Both English and colonial. The best class is English; the medium and rough .classes of goods are made of colonial leather. We import basils largely from New Zealand. 301. What about the iron- and brass-work in connection with your trade : where does that come from ?—Mostly from England; but we also get a small amount from America. 302. Have you had much trouble or any trade disputes with your men? —None at all for over twenty years. 303. How do you think federation will affect your trade particularly ?—Most favourably, through the opening of larger markets by means of intercolonial free-trade. South Australia in particular will benefit, because we shall to a large extent control the intercolonial border trade, which hitherto has not been of much use to us. It used to belong to South Australia some years ago, but since the heavy protectionist policy was set up by Victoria and Queensland this trade has been lost. 304. Have you any fear of the larger concerns in other States interfering prejudicially with your establishment ?—Not in the slightest; we'are quite able to hold our own. 305. Hon. Captain Russell.'] Broken Hill is not in this State ?—No. 306. Then, you have to pay duty on goods going from here to Broken Hill?—No, not to Broken Hill, because it is in New South Wales territory, which is practically free-trade. We have the Broken Hill market. - 307. Where do you expect to get any markets under federation ? —ln the principal points I have mentioned—that is, the Queensland western border trade—because South Australia holds a geographical position in the centre of all the States. We touch the Queensland border on the north-east, and also lower down touch the New South Wales border, and still further south we touch the Victorian border. But it is principally the Queensland border in the north-east which will give us a very large trade, and which, on account of the intercolonial jealousies due to border duties, is now closed to us. 308. How do the rates of wages in South Australia compare with the rates of wages paid in Victoria?—lf anything, I think they are higher here. 309. Do you find the quality of colonial leather good ?—The principal fault in colonial leather is that they do not give it time enough to mature. The quality of the leather produced here is satisfactory, and the tannage is satisfactory, but there is not sufficient time given it to mature, and therefore the grain is open, and that affects the leather prejudicially. Of course, in England, where the tannage mostly used is oak-bark, it is allowed some two years to mature. 310. Are the Australian tanning materials as good as the oak-bark ?—Yes, and no. Yes from the point that they tan equally as well, and no from the point that the Australian tannage is more stringent and affects the leather very much more rapidly. 311. What is the Australion tanning material?— The wattle. 312. Supposing you were offered a price to produce the best piece of leather, would you tan it with colonial material or English material ?—lf I were asked what is the best piece of leather I would say the English leather produced with the oak-tannage. 313. Then, do I understand that we shall always be at a disadvantage in regard to the production of leather?—Of that particular class, yes. But, of course, that leather is very much more expensive—l refer to the oak-tanned leather—and, of course, there is a limit to its production and also to its use. 314. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Is there any other material used here for tanning except the wattle? —Wattle is the principal material for rough and quick leathers; but the tanners used to import " valonia " and " myrabolams," and other tanning material, which came very largely from Italy. There is no other indigenous tanning material besides the wattle. 315. And if the wattle were given time, would it tan as well as the oak-bark?—l think so, if the leather were given time to mature; but where it is manufactured cheaply the raw materials are used hot and very stringent, in order to strike into the leather more quickly, and the result is that the materials produce inferior leather. We are large exporters of wattle from South Australia, and we can get as much bark as we want for local use. 316. Mr. Roberts.] I understand that the principal reason against the producing of good leather in the colonies is the want of capital: is that so ?—Yes, that would be one point; I do not know but that there are plenty of people who have the capital and could provide it, but they do not do it. 317. You mentioned that you used New Zealand pelts?— Yes, and basils. There are a great many used here. We buy them mostly from Melbourne and Sydney, as we have no direct communication with New Zealand. Of course, we have to pay the duties, and this limits the consumption ; for if they were duty-free I suppose New Zealand basils would hold their own against any other manufacturers. 318. Is there any import duty against salted pelts?—No ; they come in free. 319. Do your tanners import them ?—Yes, in large quantities; but they are not sold as New Zealand basils, but simply as colonial basils. They are thicker and heavier and more suitable for our trade than any other kind. 320. Mr. Millar.] I presume you must be one of the largest manufacturers in your trade in the colonies ?—Yes. 321. Then, I suppose you would not be at all afraid of competition?—l think that South Australia would be able to hold its own against every one, and the whole of our trade is of the same opinion as myself. 322. Will the smaller men be able to hold their own under federation ?—The trade here is
A.—4
632
different from what it is in other places. The smaller saddlers mostly buy the goods ready made from the large manufacturers, who are more distributing saddlers. It is only three or four large saddlers who do the export trade. 323. Have you direct communication with the borders of Queensland and New South Wales ? —Through Broken Hill to New South Wales, and I believe the closest point to Queensland is the Hergott Springs and Oodnadatta line. 324. Has there not been some unfair competition amongst the different railways of the States to get the trade of Broken Hill ?—As far as Broken Hill is concerned, only the South Australian railways run there. New South Wales has been talking about building a railway across the Darling and down the Murray, but Ido not think it will ever be carried out. The competition is principally between Victoria and New South Wales, and it concerns no one else. 325. Will the removal of the duties affect the existing competition?— Yes, as regards the border trade. If the railway-rates remain as they are now in Victoria I think the South Australian trade will gain. 326. Do you export saddlery to New Zealand?— No. 327. Mr. Beauchamp.] Under intercolonial free-trade you will find a fairly good market for your manufactures in Australia?—We should .try to, more particularly with regard to Western Australia and the Queensland border. 328. Is it the high duty in New Zealand that has shut you out from that market?—No; principally the distance. 329. How does the quality of New Zealand leather compare with the leather manufactured in other parts of Australia ? —My experience has only been in regard to basils, and your basils are better than they are here. 330. What is the duty here ?—ls per cent. 331. If we failed to federate would we lose that trade in basils? —We should only be able to pay the duty on the quantity that we must take —that is, the best quality. With intercolonial free-trade, however, you would find a large market for basils throughout the colonies, because they are largely used in Sydney, and we buy from Sydney principally. 332. Mr. Luke.] How do the wages paid in this State compare with those paid in Victoria and New South Wales?—As far as I know, our wages are equal to if not higher than they are in New South Wales ; and, on the whole, I think they are higher than the Victorian wages also. We have the better class of men, and pay better wages to them. 333. Then, the wages paid in your trade to any skilled man are rather less than what is paid in the other trades? —Taking the term "skilled labour" as the test, £2 Bs. is about the average wage paid to the best men here. 334. How do you account for that difference—one man says 10s. a day is the average wage paid ? —lf that report is given as an average rate for indoor-work I am inclined to think a mistake has been made ; 9s. a day would be nearer the mark. 335. Do you think that the trade of the Commonwealth will be possible to you under the changed conditions ? Do you think trade can be effected with the interior when the interior railways are put down ?—Not to any great extent. We are quite satisfied that we will be able to do an increased trade, even within our own geographical limits, and we shall also try to trade with the different States. 336. Mr. Leys.} Is wattle cultivated in South Australia?— Yes. 337. Is the natural supply pretty well exhausted?— There is a considerable natural supply in our hills, and companies have been formed for cultivating the wattle. I believe it is a paying business too. ■ 338. Is it exported? —Yes ; largely to London. And it is also used in France and Germany. 339. Then, a quantity of the English leathers that you import may really be tanned with the wattle-bark ?—No doubt a very large quantity is tanned with the colonial bark, but we do not import them. We only want from England the very best leather we can get. Eor certain classes of work colonial leathers answer our purposes equally well. We export sole-leather from South Australia to London. 340. Hon. Major Steward.'] Is the wattle indigenous to any other parts besides South Australia ?—Victoria has a great deal of it, and I fancy there is also some in Western Australia. 341. Without cultivation would the natural supply run out ?—I do not think so. There is a large demand for it in London, and the price is being kept up by the demand for it in Germany and in France. 342. Is the leather tanned here used by the bootmakers of this colony?— Nearly wholly. 343. Wattle-tanned leather ?—Yes. 344. Mr. Roberts.] Can you tell us if New Zealand hides are imported into South Australia?— Yes ; the South Australian hides are very light on account of the finely bred cattle we have here; therefore we cannot get any Australian hides of the same strength and thickness as those that come from the colder climates, and consequently we are bound to import our heavy hides, and we shall continue to do so. 345. Do you think South Australia will have to continue to import its heavy hides?— Yes; we are bound to. 346. I suppose the climate affects the qualities of the hides considerably ?—Yes. John Felix Maetin examined. (No. 234.) 347. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the firm of Martin and Co., Gawler ?—I am the chairman of directors of James Martin and Co. (Limited), in business as ironfounders and engineers at Gawler, South Australia, twenty-five miles from Adelaide, and twenty miles from the port. 348. How many hands do you employ ? —About six hundred and fifty now. We have had more, and when we were building the locomotives we employed about nine hundred.
633
A.—4
349. What are the principal descriptions of machinery that you manufacture?— All kinds of mining machinery and agricultural machinery, and also locomotives which we have built for our Government, for Western Australia, and Tasmania. 350. Will you kindly tell us what the average rate of wages paid in your factory is ? —To engineers about 10s. —from 7s. 6d. to 13s. —-but a full "mechanic gets from 9s. 6d. to 10s. a day. Ten shillings is the average, but special hands get as high as 13s. In the turning-shop they run from 9s. 6d. to 10s., and we pay 12s. to special men. The foremen are paid more than that, and the blacksmiths earn from Bs. to 10s., special hands more. The agricultural hands make from Bs. to 10s. ; boilerrnakers, from 10s. to 13s. ; labourers, from ss. 6d. to 7s. 6d. ; and pattern-makers average from 10s. to 125., because they are all first-class men. Moulders earn from Bs. 6d. to 12s. 351. What is the day's work in your factory?— Bight hours. 352. What is paid for overtime ?—Nothing extra, simply the ordinary day-rates ; but when we are busy we work three shifts. We are at the present time working twenty-four hours, in three shifts of eight hours each. In the foundry we keep the men on the night-shifts cleaning up and getting ready for the day-shift, so that there is no overtime, and we find that it pays better than paying overtime. 353. But supposing you are not so busy, what do you do then ?—We come down to one shift of eight hours, but we have not done that for the last four or five years with the tools. 354. Is there any other larger factory than yours in Australia?—l could not say; it is rather a difficult question for me to answer. 355. How do you think that federation in Australia will affect your business?—lt is a good thing for us to have intercolonial free-trade. 356. Have you done any work for New Zealand ?—We have only sent a few strippers there in days gone by. 357. Do you make this machinery for South Australia?— Yes, and for New South Wales and Western Australia. They used to have them in Victoria also, but they put on a 35-per-cent. duty against us, and so keep us out. 358. Supposing New Zealand came into the Federation, would you export to that colony then?—-We might in special lines. 359. Have you made any dredging machinery ?—No ; we "have been asked to build it, but it was rather out of our line, and we were a considerable distance away from the places where it was wanted. 360. Mr. Leys.] Do you not find it a disadvantage to work so far away from your supply of coal ? —Of course, it is a little disadvantage, but we have other things to help us. We get wood fuel much cheaper at Gawler than we would anywhere else. We have to pay the freight on the coal, and that makes it a little more expensive to use. 361. Is there any advantage in your labour being employed so far away from the centre ?—Yes, we find it an advantage being here, as we are not interfered with in labour matters. We have trained up our own men, and we have kept them, and we are not interfered with by any one. 362. But would you not come under the operations of the Factories Act? —Oh, yes ; but that depends on the amount of work you turn out. We have this advantage : that we are not watched or troubled by agitators, which makes a lot of difference to an employer. 363. And, on the whole, you find that your men are very contented?— Yes. 364. Has there been any agitation for special legislation in your district?—No; but we do not come under Corporation control. The rents and taxes are very much less in a place like Gawler than they would be in Adelaide. 365. In regard to strippers, what area would a stripper cover in a day ? —From 8 to 15 acres, but ie depends on the part of the colony where you are working. With a fair average yield they could go through 15 acres in a day. 366. What do you call a day ?—From daylight to dark. With a damp-weather stripper you can easily do 15 acres a day in the north. 367. Would the heaviness of the crop affect the amount you would strip ?—Not in the least. 368. You say you sent some of these strippers to New Zealand : have you heard how they answered ?—I believe they did very well in one part of the colony, but very few were sent, and they went to some people who shifted from here to New Zealand, who knew the quality of the machines and ordered them. 369. Do you know whether they are still in use in New Zealand ?—I believe they are, but I could not say for certain. 370. Do you think New Zealand straw is dry enough for the stripper to work in advantageously ? —-I only know that they work the stripper there. I have not been in New Zealand when they were being worked. 371. Does the high straw affect the stripper? —No, because the machine can be lowered up or down to take in a crop from several feet to 6 in. high. 372. Mr. Luke.] Do you apprentice your lads?— No. 373. What wages do they get when they begin their business?— That depends on their capacity. Some are worth very little, but others are worth more ; we take apprentices, but we do not bind them. If they behave themselves we keep them, and when they have served six years we give them a certificate to say they have learned the business. 374. Do you employ boys at the blacksmithing ?—Yes. 375. More particularly in the machine-shops ?—Yes. 376. What does pig-iron cost you landed at Gawler ? —lt depends on the brand. 377. Say, Middlesborough pig-iron ?—We never use that, because it is too inferior. 378. What brand do you use ?—lt depends on the work we are doing. 80—A. 4.
A.—4
634
379. Well, generally ?—lt depends whether it is for mining machinery, agricultural machinery, or locomotives. 380. Do you use Clyde iron?— Sometimes. 381. What does that cost to land at Gawler?—About £5 10s. per ton; it depends on the freight. 382. What coal do you use ?—Newcastle. 383. You have none nearer ?—No. 384. What coke do you use ?—English coke mostly, Hood's principally; and that and the German cokes we find the best. 385. What is the heaviest casting you have turned out ?—We made a wheel the other day for the Lake View Mine which weighed 28 tons. 386. What would be your capacity ?—We could have doubled that by having all the furnaces at work at once. We have an arrangement so that we can run them together. 387. Do you work up your own scrap-iron?— Yes. 388. What would be the largest shaft you make, flanged or hammered metal? —We have flanged some about 12 in. and 14 in., but we do not go in for marine work. 389. Have you machinery for flanging plates ?—Yes. 390. Have you any system of piecework in your establishment?— Not in the engineering, but we have in the agricultural department, where the whole work is done on piecework. 391. Mr. Beauchamp.] With regard to the wages you pay, how do they compare with those ruling in other parts of Australia?— They are pretty much the same, excepting to our special men, to whom we give a special wage. In the case of rock-drills, for instance, we get a good man, and it pays us to give him a couple of shillings more, because he is to be depended on. 392. Under federation do you anticipate being able to extend your volume of trade with the other States of the Commonwealth ?—We export now 90 per cent, of our manufactures. 393. To what portion of Australia do they go?— New South Wales, Western Australia, and Tasmania. 394. What about Victoria?— They shut us out by the duties. 395. Under federation do you anticipate doing any business in Victoria ?—We have a special concentrating-table for which our price is £85, but the Victorians say that this table could not be manufactured for this amount and they put it down at £90, and then they put another £10 on it—■ it amounts to about 40 per cent. ; it stops us from sending there at' all. When we have to obtain special appliances and to compete in the face of that duty, which is prohibitive, it is impossible. 396. With regard to locomotives, were those you made of such a satisfactory character as to induce the Government to give you further orders? —We have made all that have been made for our Government, and we have supplied the other States as they wanted them. It does not pay to keep that kind of material in stock on the chance of being called upon to make engines, because its value is so very great and it is not used for ordinary work ; it is a special material which you cannot afford to use in ordinary lines. 397. Are most of the locomotives now used by the respective Governments made in Australia? —Western Australia is importing them. They offered us a big contract if we would shift there, but we did not think it was good enough to put up a plant in Western Australia. They promised us that if we would go to the west they would give us their orders, because the Labour party in that State would not allow the Government to give the work outside the colony unless the firm who received the contract started a branch in the colony. 398. And will not those conditions prevail even under federation?— Not so much. If the Federal Government will only take over the railways, I think that is all we want. 399. Mr. Millar.] Were you ever asked to quote for any engines in New Zealand ?—No. 400. What price would you manufacture engines at for a 3 ft. 6 in. gauge which now cost us £3,000 on the English market? —You would have to reckon about 10 to 15 per cent, more than what you can buy them for in London. Our contract prices are about 10 per cent, on Beyer, Peacock, and Co.'s prices. 401. Are you aware that New Zealand has been importing engines lately?—No; I thought they would have been able to make them there. But you cannot start making engines unless you have a special plant, and unless you have a contract for a hundred or a hundred and fifty it would not pay to lay down the necessary plant, costing you £50,000. 402. Would your firm undertake to turn out a dozen locomotives in the event of getting a contract? —When we were busy here we did one a week, but if you called for tenders now no one in the colonies would give you the locomotives under twelve months—that is to say, it would be twelve months before you got the first one. 403. I understand that with three shifts you only pay the one rate of wage right through ?— Yes. 404. In the event of your working one shift a day of eight hours and keeping the men on for an extra two hours, what would you pay them ?—We would simply pay them an extra two hours at the same rate as their ordinary wage. 405. Mr. Boberts.] How many years has your business been established ? —For about fifty-four or fifty-five years. 406. Has it been a limited company all that time ?—lt has only been a limited company for a few years, and, although it is now a limited company, we do not take any one in besides ourselves. No shares are on the market, and the shares cannot be sold to any outsider. We keep the business between ourselves. 407. What is the paid-up capital ?—About £120,000. 408. Do you declare any dividends?—We have paid lately about 5 per cent. If we make any more we put it to the reserve fund. We never pay less than 5 per cent., and sometimes more,
635
A.—4
409. Hon the Chairman.'] What did you say you paid for the coke ?—1 was offered Hood's coke to-day at Port Adelaide for £3 10s., but if you can fill up with pig-iron you get it at £2 10s. a ton. 410. Is not the tariff a highly protective one- in your trade in South Australia ?—ln some respects, but not in all. 411. And in Victoria ?—lt is highly protective. 412. Supposing the tariff of the Federal Government is considerably lower than your tariff, would your trade be affected, or is it likely to be affected under the new conditions, by the competition of America ?—That would not affect us at all, because we are competing now with America in New South Wales and Western Australia, where we have the same duty to pay as the Americans. We are not frightened of them ; but we think it would be a great mistake if the tariff were made more than 10 per cent, or 15 per cent. Portable engines are admitted duty-free here, and if you import the parts to manufacture here you have to pay the duty on them, and that is where the anomaly of the tariff comes in, and the Government are afraid to alter it. 413. Mr. Luke.] Have you any branch establishments throughout the Commonwealth ?—No, not manufacturing branches ; but we have a place in Perth, just a store and office. We have no manufacturing establishments besides the Gawler Works. William Bubfobd examined. (No. 235.) 414. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a Justice of the Peace and president of the Chamber of Manufactures in Adelaide ?■—Yes. 415. What does that body represent ?—The manufacturing and producing interests of South Australia. 416. Is it a large body ? —I think there are about 140 subscribers, representing seven or eight different manufactures. 417. What is the object of your chamber?—To foster the industries and productions of the colony; to gain all the possible information we can from other parts of the world, to tabulate it, and then to give it out to those persons who are interested in our productions. 418. Has your chamber favoured a policy of free-trade or protection?—lt is a non-political chamber, but most of the members favour a protectionist policy, 419. How do they view the federation of Australia? —Very favourably, and we have done our best to bring it about. 420. What advantage do you expect to derive from federation ?—A larger market for our manufactures through intercolonial free-trade. Being a small community, and having our factories provided with the necessary machinery, it will be greatly to our interest to have a larger population to work upon. 421. Are you concerned with the labour laws in South Australia ? —As an employer I am, but as a chamber we are not. The only part we have taken in that connection is to obtain copies of the various Bills which have been put before Parliament, and to bring them before the chamber for perusal and suggestions. 422. Have there been any strikes in South Australia ?—On two occasions we have had strikes in the boot trade, but I do not know anything about the boot industry to enable me to express an opinion upon it. 423. Hon. Captain Russell.] Have you considered how the Federation will affect the State finances ?—No, we. have not gone into the matter. Our idea is to increase our manufactures and increase our population. 424. But supposing there should be a less protective tariff under the Commonwealth than you have now in South Australia, will not that diminish your State revenue considerably ? —I think so. 425. Have you any idea how best to make up such a deficiency ? —Do you wish me to answer that personally, or to give the opinion of the chamber ? 426. As you choose? —We have not gone into the political aspects as a chamber, but my private opinion is that the most legitimate way of raising the revenue is through the income-tax; and a protective tariff would benefit the colonists generally by encouraging our manufacturers and producers. 427. Have you any income-tax at the present time ?—Yes. 428. Then, supposing that there is a policy more or less free-trade, do you think you would have to increase the income-tax?— Yes, I do not see any other way. 429. What amount do you imagine you will have to levy to balance the account ?—I would scarcely like to say, not having gone into the matter. 430. Mr. Roberts.] Did the chamber approve of the labour legislation passed here during the past few years?—ln part. 431. Did you find that the operation of those Acts in any way hampered trade ?—They have not materially affected us; but they were not passed as they were first intended. If they had been they would have been oppressive, but we do not find them oppressive now. 432. Mr. Beauchamp.] The financial effect under federation was not very seriously considered by the various colonies before they federated, was it?— No. 433. Do you think that three things practically urged the different colonies to federate— namely, the desire for intercolonial free-trade, the abolition of the friction that had arisen in respect to the control of the rivers, and the desire to abolish the differential rates on the railways? —Those would be the three primary causes. 434. In addition to that, was there not also a certain amount of sentiment ?—That was a strong reason, but the tariff question was the greatest reason of all. 435. Mr. Leys.] I suppose you consider a great portion of New South Wales belongs to South Australia naturally ?—Yes, as far as the mining interests are concerned.
A.—4
636
436. I mean as to the territory generally, which is more in touch with Adelaide ?—Broken Hill is looked on as our territory, because the business-people here have really done the major part of the business of this place. 437. I suppose what you have said in favour, of federation is because you are a South Australian, but would you also be in favour of it if you were a New-Zealander ?—There is no doubt that New Zealand is peculiarly situated, inasmuch as it has no other country on its border ; it is separated from the continent by sea, and it is very far away. 438. Do you anticipate any advantage in government from the Federal system ? Do you anticipate that there will be any improvement ?—No. I have not considered that there there will be any improvement in the government at all in our case ; but I believe we shall find .hat the administration will be very much more expensive under federation than it was before. 439. Then, it is really a commercial advantage that you lay stress upon ?—Yes ; and in the body I represent that was the aspect that was considered. 440. Are you not a little bit afraid of the competition of the larger industries of Victoria and New South Wales?— Not at all. I am a manufacturer myself, and naturally look to the advantages that would accrue from having a larger population to make soap, candles, glycerine, and oils for. 441. Do you not think that the Victorian manufacturers can compete with you successfully when the duties are removed?—l think we shall have the advantage of them. 442. How do you expect that? —In the first place, I have taken orders from them on their own ground. The quality of our goods is already bringing us into their trade. Our goods are very well known as against the very best articles that come into the colony. I have secured orders at higher prices than the Sydney Soap and Candle Company. 443. Then, you already have a considerable market in New South Wales?— Yes, especially in Broken Hill. 444. With regard to the labour laws, does the Wages Act affect you ?—That is the most depressing part of the work ; but I do not think it will be found to have any particular force. They talk about making 7s. the minimum wage, but I do not think it will pass. 445. What is your average wage ?—For unskilled labour from 6s. to 7s. a day. Drivers get more money—from ss. to 10s. a week more. 446. Are there many boys employed in your industry ? ; boys from fourteen years of age upwards, the age at which we are allowed, to employ them. They begin' at 12s. 6d. a week, and at eighteen and nineteen they may get £1 to £1 10s. a week. 447. What is the proportion of boys to adults in your particular branch of industry ? —Ten boys to forty or fifty men. 448. Do you know how your rate of wages compares with the rate in Victoria and New South Wales ?—We are rather above those in Victoria in the same trade. 449. But is not your industry under the Wages Board in Victoria ?—That I could not say. We are not affected by it here. 450. Do you find the local supply of tallow sufficient for you ?—For the last two or three years we have been importers rather than exporters, but as a rule we are exporters. There has not been sufficient tallow in the colony to meet its requirements, and we find a better market for the Queensland tallow here for those who have it to sell. 451. Have you ever tried the New Zealand market for your soap and candles? Do you think you could do any business in New Zealand in those articles if the duties were removed ?—I am not acquainted with the manufactories in New Zealand, and could not say. 454. Hon. Major Steward.] What is the present rate of your income-tax ? —I cannot tell you exactly. 455. Does it apply to all incomes or is there an exception ? —There is a reserve up to £200. 456. Is it an even rate or a progressive rate ?—I could not say. I think the income-tax is a fair one, but that there ought to be no exemptions. 457. Have you also a land-tax here ? —Yes ; a graduated one. 458. Do you know what that brings in ? —No. 459. Hon. the Chairman.} Now that federation has become an accomplished fact, do you think there is any probability of these Parliament Buildings here in Adelaide being finished according to the original design ?—I was wondering that myself this morning when I entered them, and when I saw the plan as exhibited on the wall. I could, only hope in my own mind that they will be finished for some other purpose, because I believe they will not be required for parliamentary purposes. They might be used for a museum, but Ido not think there is any probability of their being finished in my time. 460. Does not that point to the fact of the probability of the States being absorbed by the Commonwealth ?—No. I do not think the completion of the buildings has anything to do with that. 461. But will there be any financial power in the State to do the work ?—Yes. There would be no trouble to get the money if we made up our minds to complete the building. 462. Mr. Beauchamp.} What price do you pay for good paraffine-wax used in your manufactures ?—From £1 Is. to £1 6s. per hundredweight. 463. Do you use considerable'quantities of paraffine-wax in the manufacture of candles?—ln winter-time we use some. 464. Do you import that from the United States ?—For the last few years we have been getting it from our agents in Melbourne. 465. Is there any duty on paraffine-wax, or is it admitted free ?—The duty is Id. 466. Is there any duty on candles here ?—2d. a pound. 467. Does that duty enable many English candles to be sold in this market ?—There are not many English candles sold here ; they are principally Continental candles.
637
A. -4
468. I suppose it is necessary to have that high protection of 2d. to enable you to compete with the Continental candles'?—We do not use the duty and never have used it, but we want it as a protection for the manufacturers here. 469. Is there any duty on soap ?—There was a large duty on soap, but we never used it. The toilet-soaps were under duty, and there is a duty on ordinary yellow soap of £9 a ton, but we have never used it. 470. If that was reduced by 50 per cent, would it make any difference to your industry ? —lt would on toilet-soap and candles. It would break it up altogether, because we only want that duty to insure our being able to manufacture the soap here in the colony. Professor William Lowkib examined. (No. 236.) 471. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the head of the Agricultural Department in South Australia?— Yes. 472. How long have you held that office?— Thirteen years. 473. Can you tell us whether agriculture is progressing in South Australia?— Yes, and has been progressing rapidly for the last five years. 474. How many additional acres have been brought under cultivation within that period?—l do not think the area has appreciably extended within that period, but the progress is due to the improved methods of working and taking advantage of the lar.d to its full capacity. 475. Is there a large additional area available for cultivation within the rainfall district ?— Taking the agricultural industry as a whole, I should say there is not much room for further extension. 476. Can you tell us the average yield of wheat throughout the colony ?—From 5 to 7 bushels. 477. Have you any knowledge of what the cost of cultivation and of harvesting the wheat is? —There are areas of wheat where it does not cost more than from 7s. 6d. to 10s. per acre for cultivation ; there are other areas where it would cost from £1 to £1 55., and other portions again where it would cost from £2 to £2 10s. 478. What would the yield be on those high-priced areas ?—From 25 bushels up to 45 bushels per acre. 479. What has been the average price during the last five years of wheat ?—About 3s. per bushel approximately, I think. 480. Would that price pay the agriculturist ? —3s. will pay. 481. I suppose the other cereals are grown here as well as wheat?— Yes, such as barley and oats; but the areas devoted to them are relatively small. 482. Are there many root-crops grown? —No. In the County of Grey, in the south-east, there are a few farmers growing rape and kale and mustard. 483. Is rape grown for fattening stock ? —lt is grown more for the sheep on unhealthy country, and it is to help the " two-tooths " through on country subject to worms, and also for fattening. 484. The next important industry here is viticulture ? —Yes; but our wool industry is our greatest o«e. 485. Is the vine extensively cultivated ? —Yes. 486. Is the industry increasing?— Slightly, within the last year or two. Eight or ten years ago it went along with a great jump, and then it steadied down a little, because, apparently, they had enough for the market. But when phylloxera came into Victoria and New South Wales the industry here became scared somewhat. It has not progressed of late as much as it did between 1890 and 1894. . 487. Is there plenty of country available for the extension of that industry ?—I believe it will be our first industry yet within the agricultural area proper. 488. Is farming carried on in a scientific manner here ?—I should say, from my experience here, that the character of the farming as a skilled business is very rapidly improving. 489. Apart from the grape industry, is the cultivation of fruit carried on extensively in South Australia ? —Eelatively, no. 490. Are there facilities for it ?—Yes ; the soil and the climate are suitable. 491. Then, to what do you attribute the fact of the industry not being carried on?— The market will not absorb the fruit in a good year like we have just had. We have been sending apples to London. Once the industry is developed it will be most valuable to the colony, provided we can cope with the codlin-moth. 492. Are you much troubled with that here?— Yes, in some districts. 493. Besides apples and plums, are there many other fruits grown here ?—We grow chiefly apricots, peaches, pears, and apples. The plum is not grown so extensively. 494. Are those fruits grown in sufficient quantities to justify their export?— Yes. With facilities for drying I fancy we can do a trade in them. 495. Do you grow the small fruits, such as raspberries, gooseberries, and strawberries?—No; it is too hot for them. They are only grown on the hilly areas. 496. Mr. Leys.] Do you grow maize here ?—Yes, for summer feed for the dairy cattle—not for corn, because our climate is too dry, and it would not fill. 497. If there were no duty on oats in South Australia, do you think New Zealand could ship oats here ?—Our consumption of oats is small. 498. What horse-feed do you use mostly ?—Bran and wheaten chaff. 499. Then, in that case we could not look for a large market for oats in South Australia ?— Not for a large market, I should say, using the term " large " as between countries. If we could get the oats cheaper I do not know but that they would be better, but the duty makes them dear to us.
A.—4
638
500. If you required oats could you get them easier from Victoria than from New Zealand ? —I think the New Zealand output simply would control the market, and that New Zealand could make the price in Victoria. 501. With regard to dairy produce, do you supply yourselves with that?—We are not doing it at the present time. 502. Where are you importing dairy produce from chiefly?— Prom Victoria. The cream is coming in, and is being made into butter here. 503. Supposing the duty were removed, would there be any market here for New Zealand dairy produce ?—I should say in my official position, I hope not. I hope that our dairying industry will extend, and that we will be able to supply ourselves without having to import at all. 504. Do you anticipate that South Australia will be able to supply herself with all classes of dairy produce, excepting in very dry seasons ?—That question is far-reaching. If we could not make sure of getting more than 10d. a pound for our butter it would pay us better to grow wheat and fatten lambs, and let the dairying-work alone. 505. Do you think there would be a permanent market here for our dairying produce?— No. 506. We have had some estimates given us with regard to the cost of cultivating the mallee land : are there large areas of that land in the State ?—Yes. 507. What does it cost to put mallee land under cultivation, at per acre? —From 7s. 6d. to 10s., without seed and manure. That price is when the land is cleared, and, of course, it is a very rough kind of cultivation where a man can plough 7 acres a day. One man can do all the work and harvest 300 acres himself of the mallee country. 508. What crop would he expect ?—Lately they have taken to the use of soluble manures, and when a sprinkling of that is put on—say, a hundredweight to an acre—the farmer can get from 10 to 12 bushels an acre, and the manure would cost from ss. to ss. 6d. The phosphates are simply working a revolution on the poor land. 509. How long can the farmer go on cropping that land ?—All I can say i 3 that I have been doing it on the College Farm, which is mallee land, for thirteen years, and in some fields I have used phosphates and nothing else, and in a favourable year I have reaped from 27 to 30 bushels an acre. 510. After working it for thirteen years ? —No, working it in wheat one year, leaving it fallow the next year, and cropping the third year. None of our farmers can crop successfully for three successive years. 511. What do they do with such land when they do not crop it with wheat ? —They put stock on it, but practically they let it alone to grow adventitious herbage. 512. Is there any legislation against the codlin-moth here ? —Yes. Inspectors are appointed, and growers are not allowed to offer fruit for sale that is affected in any way. 513. Is there compulsory treatment in the orchards ?—There is washing and syringing, and the Inspectors have to be satisfied that the man is doing his best to keep his orchard clean, otherwise they can make him destroy the trees. 514. Mr. Beid.] What do you make your hay-crop from ?—Wheat. 515. After the ear has been stripped off?— No. We cut it when it is about a week past bloom, just as it is beginning to fill. 516. During the winter months do you feed your dairy cattle on that hay ?—ln the winter months they are mostly on pasturage all over the plain country, this being assisted by hay or by bran and chaff. 517. Is the pasturage more than sufficient in a season like this?— Yes. The early winter rains produce sufficient pasturage. 518. Is there any attempt at irrigation, either public or private, in South Australia ?—Yes. There is Eenmark Settlement (private), on the Murray, and also village settlements on the same river. 519. How are they provided for? Are they regulated by the State, or are they under private control ?—They are Government settlements, and were really started as a means of relieving the congested state of the labour-market. 520. How are those settlements worked ? —They were started on the community-of-goods idea. I do not think it is being developed. I think they give the settlers so much irrigated country in common with individual blocks of 10 acres. 521. What is this land used for—agricultural or pastoral purposes ?—For fruit chiefly ■—apricots, peaches, and raisin-growing. 522. Does it come within your department ?—No. 523. Mr. Beauchamp.] When I was in Germany, about three years ago, I was told by a friend, a large merchant, that he found a large market in South Australia for chemical manures—Thomas's phosphates, &c. ? —I do not think there has been so big a market for Thomas's phosphates, or that South Australia will ever be so big a market for it as for superphosphates. 524. Do you import your phosphate for the farm, or do you make it here ?—lt is chiefly imported from London or Belgium. Some is made here. 525. Are the Government freezing-works under your control ?—No. 526. I suppose you do a considerable business in drying and canning fruits in this colony ? —We have tried shipping them to London, and we turned out a high quality—equal to the Californian ; but we do not do very much in that direction. 527. Do the Government have Inspectors who give instruction in respect to the cultivation and grading of fruit ? —Yes; there is a Government expert in this department who goes round lecturing and instructing the settlers. We have a fruit expert, and a dairy expert, besides the Government viticulturist. 528. Is it a fact that butter is sold here at 10d. a pound?— Yes, at times.
639
A.—4
529. Is that due to the development of the factory system ?—This system makes the price less fluctuating. 530. Does that pay the dairymen under the factory system ?—ln the favoured areas where pastures last longer it seems to pay, but is less profitable than wheat and sheep on the drier country. 531. In the case of butter sent to the Old Country, would not the charges have to be deducted ? Would it net you 10d. ?—A little less than that. 532. You would think 10d. in London very satisfactory?—No ; but it is a means of relieving a glut. 533. How much milk does it take to make 1 lb. of butter ? —From 2 to 2J or even 3 gallons. 534. Mr. Roberts.] You mentioned that you did not think that there would be any increased area under cultivation for agricultural purposes ?—No ; I think it will decrease. 535. Do you think the production of wheat will continue on the present scale ?—I think we shall grow half as much again as we grow now, by reason of the better system of cultivation that is being engaged in. 536. I see you export raisins to some extent to New Zealand : is that trade carried on extensively ?—No. 537. Can you explain why the bread is so very dark here?—l am not inclined to admit that it is dark. 538. It is distinctly darker here than in New Zealand, and we were told in Melbourne by a large miller that he imported wheat from New Zealand for the purpose of improving the colour of the flour ? —I think you cannot beat the South Australian colour, and, in fact, I do not think there is any place in the world where they can beat it, except, perhaps, California. 539. At the same time, it might not make a good-coloured bread. You mentioned that the cost of manure was about 5s. —for phosphates —per acre ? —Yes, from os. to Bs. 6d. 540. And that the cost of cultivation was 10s. per acre : so that it costs you something like 15s. per acre, and you produce how many bushels per acre? —8 to 12. But 15s. is the very minimum. 541. So that the cost of production for wheat is, assuming your lowest figures to be correct, about Is. 6d. a bushel ?—That is pretty near it for the very lowest cases, but 2s. to 2s. 6d. generally. 542. Have the Government here any State farm ?—They have an Agricultural College Farm of 1,400 acres. 543. So that they can teach their young men who wish to learn the art of farming ? —Yes. 544. Hon. Captain Russell.] I notice in Mr. Coghlan's book that the average yield of wheat in South Australia is stated at 469 bushels : is that based on correct information, or is it a mere estimate on his part ? —lt is from Government statistics and the statistics that were gathered by one of the newspapers for a number of years when the Government were not compiling the statistics. Now that the Government are doing it the newspaper's figures would not be taken. 545. He states that the average last year was 464 bushels : do you assume that to be based on the Government returns ?—Yes. 546. Do you imagine that those 4-64 bushels produced a profit, or was there an actual loss to the State in producing them ?—There was not a loss to the State; but that low average caused great distress in the northern districts, where the settlers were reduced to getting the seed-wheat from the Government. It was the total failure of the rainfall over this large northern district that brought down the average in the wheat-crop for the whole colony. 547. Assuming those figures to be even approximately true, do you think the State gains or loses by wheat-cultivation in the case of South Australia ?"—lt gains by it. I do not think great stress should be laid on those figures, because a lot of this country that is said to be ploughed and sown is simply harrowed, and when the rain comes the wheat is simply thrown over it; and if the farmers get 3 or 4 bushels to the acre it pays them. 548. What is the first cost of cultivating a piece of the mallee country ?—On land within fifty miles of Adelaide, and near a railway, you could get it cleared right out for the timber—that is, it costs you nothing to clear the land. If you are away from the railway, and where you cannot sell the timber, and want it grubbed right out ready for the plough, it would cost you £3 an acre. Other places it is rolled down, burned, and worked with stump-jump implements for £1 to £1 10s. 549. What does the land stand the ordinary farmer in ?—£2 to £3 ss. an acre to purchase cleared. 550. And the ploughing : what does he pay for that ?—You would get it ploughed for 2s. 6d. or 3s. Ido not know of any work having been done by contract. There are a few men who have large areas and who are getting their crop put in under the share system—that is to say, they supply the seed and the land and get half the returns. 551. When a man has taken his first crop of wheat off, what does he proceed to do with the land? —He will leave the stubble standing in the field, and when the rain comes a lot of herbage springs up in the shape of wild oats, wheat that has been dropped in the stripping, geranium, and Cape-weed. Over this he runs his ewes, or ewes and lambs, right through till the next year, when he wants to fallow it—-until next June, a year or fourteen months altogether. 552. Take 1,000 acres of wheat land : how many sheep would he run over that for the fourteen months?— From a thousand to twelve hundred for the whole of the time —that is, provided he has been using phosphate manures. If he does not use phosphates Ido not think he would run more than five hundred sheep. If you take in the mallee land the number will be lower, because then he has not good stock-carrying land, though the use of artificial manures has brought about a large increase in the stock-carrying capacity of that land,
A.—4
640
553. Does not the stock do the land a considerable quantity of good, besides the phosphates ? Y es 554. How long can he go on doing this ?—For evermore, as far as my experience indicates. I might tell you that when I started to work on the College Farm we could only raise 12 bushels to the acre, whereas this year the average was 26 bushels. 555. What was in that land the year before? —It was bare fallow. 556. What do you do to it when you plough it ?—We plough it up and scarify it, and in September, or as soon as we can get on to the land to work it properly, we may put in a little sorghum ; but most of the land will be left bare. That will last until the summer, when we work it with the harrows, and scarify if necessary. With li cwt. to 2 cwt. of phosphates to the acre, it costs from Bs. to 9s. per acre for manure. 557. Do you make any use of the straw at all?—In my own work I do, and I find I can deliver it and sell it in Adelaide at £1 ss. a ton pressed ; but farmers have not adopted this plan. 558. Can you tell us how the settlement at Renmark is getting on ?—As this matter is now one of practical politics I prefer not to answer. 559. Hon. the Chairman.} Is there any matter in connection with your department that would be of advantage for us to know and which we have not questioned you on? —As a general principle, I think that a country with the moisture New Zealand has might do something here with barley and oats. Henry Davis examined. (No. 237.) 560. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Davis?—Manager for G. E. Wills and Co.'s boot-factory. 561. What number of hands do you employ?— About two hundred and fifty. 562. How long has that factory been established here?— About thirty years. 563. Are your operations increasing?— Yes. 564. What is the average rate of wages paid to the adult males ?—£2 2s. for forty-eight hours per week. 565. Are there many boys employed?-—Not many; about 20 per cent, of the number of the men. 566. How do you pay for overtime ?—The usual standard time. They get the usual rates. 567. Is there much machine-work in your establishment ?—Yes. 568. Do you find that the boot-market is affected by the American importations ?—Yes, but not so much as it was. 569. What do you attribute that to ?—The competition of the American goods spurred us on to greatpr efforts all round. 570. What leather is mostly used by you ?—We use all kinds. We get the American, German, and the New Zealand ; but the most of it is made in the colony. 571. With intercolonial free-trade do you think your trade with the other States will be affected ? —I have no doubt that we shall get competition from the other large establishments of the other States, and I am afraid they will affect us adversely. We do not export to New Zealand, and I know of no other manufacturers here who do. We have had a great deal of trouble with our men, and we had a very big strike four or five years ago, when the union was destroyed. Since then we have got on all right. 572. Speaking generally, is the boot industry increasing or decreasing?—lt is increasing. 573. Mr. Roberts.] Do I understand you to say that since the strike the union has discontinued operations ?—Yes. 573 a. And have they not reorganized again ? —Recently. 574. Mr. Millar. ,] Do you work on the piecework log or weekly ?—On the weekly system. 574 a. What is the minimum wage paid ? —lt depends on whether you are able to get the value of each particular man. We pay the men according to their value. We have no minimum or maximum wage. lam paying from £1 ss. to very poor hands, whom, of course, we will get rid of immediately the Minimum Wages Act comes into operation. lam paying £2 ss. down to £1 10s., butj then, again, to men of better capabilities from £2 10s. to £3, and four or five leading hands £3 ss. a week. 575. Then, the wages you pay must be on an average higher than those paid in Victoria ?—I do not know, but the manufacturers I meet from there say that their minimum is £2 2s. a week, so that it would be a difficult thing for me to answer the question without having a practical knowledge of the Victorian rates. 576. You do anticipate competition under intercolonial free-trade ?—I do, because if you take the four other colonies of Australia apart from New South Wales and Victoria you will see that they are not sufficiently extensive to enable more expensive plants than we have now to be laid down, because a larger output is necessary to do that, and when you have the machinery it must be kept going. What I fear will happen is that the larger concerns will send their surplus goods over here and sell them a little below actual cost in order to keep their machinery going. Their fair competition we do not fear, but we do fear the competition of the larger colonies in the way mentioned. We know this is done in England constantly, where the factories are kept in full work, and where they send up to twenty thousand pairs of boots out to be sold at almost any price in order that they may keep their factories going. I anticipate that the same thing will happen in connection with the bigger establishments of the other States. 577. Mr. Leys.] Do you specialise in your bootmaking?—We cannot, because we have such a small population that we have to turn out anything. With a very large population the factories can specialise and make one class of boots only, but here we are making men's, women's, and children's boots in tremendous variety, and this, of course, makes it awkward for us. With a
641
A.—4
large factory running only two lines, as they do in America, they can turn out enormous quantities at a comparatively small cost, and that is where the advantage of specialising comes in, and where our difficulty lies. 578. And you think the same thing will arise in Sydney and Melbourne?—l can hardly say it will arise, because I do not think the population is-large enough, or will be as large as it is in America. All our large factories might specialise, however, in regard to men's, women's, and children's boots. 579. How do employers here view the Factories Act?— Employers are against the Act, because there is a provision which says that any employe who may have a grudge or any ill-feeling against his employer can hatch any charge, and the Act puts the onus of rebutting that charge on the employer. The employe has not to prove his charge. That is the worst feature of the Act. 580. But is there no advantage in fixing a uniform wage which would apply to every factory ? —That would be an advantage, but the difficulty lies in fixing the minimum. 581. What do you think the tariff is likely to be under the Commonwealth?—l understand that there is to be one duty under the Federal tariff. I think it is 15 per cent., and that will apply to manufactured goods as well as grindery and leathers in our trade. If we had a 15-per-eent. duty on our grindery and leathers and on everything we have to obtain in connection with our trade we certainly would have no advantage at all. We have to manufacture goods against the European workers, and we have to pay 50 per cent, more wages; so that with only 15 per cent, on made-up goods we cannot compete against it. 582. Hon. the Chairman.] Assuming that there is a 15-per-cent. tariff, do you think that America will be able to compete against you?—l do, on the lines I have been explaining. 583. If that is so, what is the result going to be to the colonial factories?—We shall be reduced to making the most common lines. It will pay our people to import the better lines under a tariff of 15 per cent. —that is to say, that the prices will come down, and they will be able to buy below the price at which we would be able to manufacture it. 584. Mr. Roberts.'] What class of New Zealand leather do you use ?—Mostly glace chrome sheepskins. We tried the skins in the raw condition for manufacturing into the glace , leather, which is so much sought after, but they did not go off freely. It is a leather we could use a great deal more of if we could get it. Hon. Eobeet Galdwell, M.P., examined. (No. 238.) 585. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the Lower House of the State Legislature?— Yes. I have been a member of the House of Assembly for seventeen consecutive years. 586. Do you live in Adelaide?—No; I am a country member, living in the Onkaparinga Valley. 587. Are you acquainted with the agricultural and pastoral interests of South Australia? — Yes. 588. Is the agricultural industry increasing here ?—lt has been during the last year or two ; but it was hard hit by a succession of bad seasons. Since the seasons have slightly improved our farmers have resorted to the use of artificial manures, and a better system of agriculture, and a little improvement in regard to the industry has taken place. 589. What grain do you refer to ?—Principally wheat; but all grains are similarly affected. Wheat is the only grain that we attach much value to the cultivation of in South Australia. 590. Another principal industry is vine-growing ?—Yes, it is an important one ; but we have still a lot to learn in connection with it?. 591. Is there much dairy production ?—Yes, there is a reasonable amount, and much attention has been given to it during the last eight or ten years. 592. Do you export dairy produce?—We have exported during the present season a little over 100 tons. As chairman of the Dairy Board, it has been my business to take an interest in everything relating to this industry. 593. Is that butter or cheese ?—I was referring to the butter exported. 594. Do you export any cheese ?—No. I am the chairman of a factory that probably produces a larger quantity of cheese than any other factory in South Australia. And when I say we have not exported cheese I mean that we have not directly done so, though I have been informed small parcels have found their way to outside markets. 595. What effect do you think federation will have on the public finances of this State ?—My opinion is that it will have a detrimental effect on this State for a few years—that we have little to gain for perhaps five years. I may say that I have never been an ardent Federationist. 596. Do you think this State will be able to bear parting with its Customs revenue ?—I think there will be a direct loss for a few years —of perhaps £60,000 a year. 597. How is that to be made up?—l hope the increased prosperity that we have all been expecting will enable us to balance the account. The Customs revenue has been below the average for a few years ou account of bad seasons. But with the return of better seasons I think we shall be able to make up the shortage that is likely to result from federation. 598. Supposing you do not realise that anticipation, what is to happen ?—lt will mean an increase of direct taxation, either on the land or from income-tax. 599. Are there many public works that require to be taken in hand here, or are they all finished? —I cannot say we have finished all our public works, because we have in hand at the present time two water schemes —one the " Barossa," and another known as the "Bundileer"— the completion of which will take two or three years yet. 600. But those are works which will be reproductive, are they not ?—I do not expect them to be reproductive for many years. 601. Do you not think that the State will have a difficulty in borrowing money when they require it, seeing that a part of the Customs revenue will be handed over to the Commonwealth, 81—A. 4.
A.—4
642
and that that is the principal security ?—That is my apprehension. But hitherto we have had no trouble in borrowing money. 602. Hon. Major Steward.'] You said that in the event of there being a shortage in the revenue the deficiency would have to be made up by an increase in the income-tax or the landtax ?—Yes. 603. On what amount of income does the tax fall at present ? —On incomes exceeding £200 a year. 604. What is the total return from it ?—As far as my memory goes, about £80,000 or £100,000 ; actually £93,820 for 1900. 605. Is the landed tax a progressive one?— Yes; fd. in the pound on aggregate values not exceeding £4,000, and steadily increasing on the higher values. The greatest amount realised by it, I think, was about £120,000. 606. So that an increase of something like 20 per cent, would overtake the shortage, supposing there is a shortage in your revenue ?—Yes. 607. Mr. Leys.] Is this a good producing country?— Not as a rule. The northern districts can never be expected to produce the best quality of oats in any quantity, but the southern districts are fairly reliable. The district of Onkaparinga, where I live, will compare favourably with the average producing districts in New Zealand. 608. Do you think that ultimately South Australia will become self-supporting in dairy products?—l see no reason why she should not. 609. Do you think that if the duty were abolished New Zealand would have any chance of finding a permanent market here for dairy produce ? —I think New Zealand would always have a chance for a market, because a large number of our people favour foreign importations, and in the case of butter and cheese the preference would certainly be given to the New Zealand article. 610. But as a matter of capacity you think that South Australia ought to be self-supporting ? —I see no reason why it should not be. 611. Would there be a large market here for New Zealand oats under intercolonial free-trade ?—■ I cannot say a large market, because the colony has not been progressing during the last few years as we could have wished. Had there been the progress we had expected, there would have been a large demand for New Zealand oats, because our climate is not favourable for the cultivation of oats. 612. Could we land oats in Adelaide to supersede the horse-food at present in use?—l think that if the duty had been removed a larger quantity of New Zealand oats would have been imported during the last few years. The duty is about 9d. a bushel. 613. Can you give us any idea as to the extent of the market we might expect ?—I have not considered the question from that point of view. 614. Can you tell us what average yield of wheat per acre would pay ?—That all depends on the price of grain. Our farmers could make 6 bushels to the acre pay very well provided the price was 4s. a bushel. 615. We will say 3s. a bushel?— Some of the farmers here could live fairly well on 6 bushels at 3s. a bushel. 616. You say you have not been an ardent Pederationist ? Can you suggest any advantages that New Zealand would gain by coming into the Commonwealth ?—My impression all along has been that New Zaaland would gain more than any of the Australian Colonies, because you have a climate favourable to the cultivation of different varieties of products; and I think you are going to be a large manufacturing people in time to come, because you have such wonderfully valuable natural resources in the shape of water-power, and in the command of cheap coal. I was struck with the advantages that New Zealand had over the other colonies when I was there about two years ago. I then expressed surprise that steps had not been taken by the people of New Zealand to go into the Federation, which has since resulted. 617. Do you not think, as far as our farming products go, that they are very much on the same lines that Australia produces ? —I do not think there would be very much to be gained through interchange of products. Of course, it all depends on the seasons here, and on the droughts. I have known times when we have not had a surplus of wheat, and when we had to import it from wherever we could get it, and, of course, when those times come round, facilities for interchange are valuable for both parties. 618. But on the average ?—On the average we are able to supply our own wants as far as the principal commodities are concerned. But I cannot say we are always able to do this so far as dairy produce is concerned. 619. From your knowledge of the other colonies, and their producing-capacity, do you not think that would be the case with all of them ?—With most of them it may be ; and I will not say that ultimately the best growing districts in New South Wales and in Queensland, from what I have seen and read, will be insignificant in their operations. With the development that will take place in these colonies, apart altogether from the Commonwealth, I should say that Queensland particularly will be able to supply herself with the principal necessities of life. 620. Has it not suggested itself to you that our distance is rather a serious handicap to us in that respect? —Oh, no. Your distance is not greater, taking Melbourne as the centre, than either Queensland or Western Australia; in fact, you have the advantage of those colonies by several hundred miles. 621. But lam referring to the central markets, where the population is ?—I think you are in a splendid position to throw off your surplus products. Your shipping facilities are improving every year, you have a splendid line of steamers, and are now able to send your goods into Australia very quickly. You have not long distances to traverse with your produce over lines of railway, as in the case in Australia, where damage often results to the goods.
643
A.—4
622. With regard to the legislative advantages, can you see any such advantages to New Zealand from federation ? —I can see no legislative advantage that will accrue to this State from federation. Xhe only thing is we shall be in a similar position. It may be from want of comprehension that I have not been able to see very great advantages in favour of federation. But, looking at the question all round, I still think that New Zealand would benefit by federation quite as extensively if not more so than any of the Australian Colonies. But legislatively I see no particular advantage in federation. 623. Mr. Reid.] You mentioned something about water schemes ?—Yes. 624. What are they?—We have dry districts in this colony, and in order to keep the people on the land we have to supply them with water, for the conservation of which we are constructing extensive weirs and reservoirs, which are required for the catchment of the water that may chance to fall during favourable winters. 625. Is that to be managed under Government control?— Absolutely under Government control. 626. Do you charge the people for the water-supply ?—Yes ; at so-much per thousand gallons. The Government construct the reservoir, lay the mains, and supply the water to the farmers. But it is optional, and they can decline to take the water if they choose. Of course, the service district is rated. 627. Do you take in the streams, or depend simply on the catchment areas?— The permanent streams that would come in would not give us anything like an adequate supply. It would only be during exceptional seasons that we could get the required quantity. 628. Then, when you do take any land you take a large area?— Yes. 629. How do they constitute a water district ? Is it on the option of the inhabitants ? —Yes ; generally on petition. It requires a certain area in order to guarantee that there will be a reasonable return for the interest on the money expended over a given number of years. 630. I suppose there are regulations to provide that one man shall not get more than his share ?—Yes. 631. Mr. Roberts.] You mentioned that agriculture was not increasing in South Australia?— Yes. 632. I suppose that is owing to the very serious seasons you have had ?—Without question. 633. To the enormous loss in sheep and cattle ?—Yes. 634. I notice that the average wheat yield has been something under 4J bushels : is it possible for the industry to continue under such conditions ? —No, it is not possible. My surprise is that the farmers have been able to exist, and I say this with a full knowledge of their circumstances. 635. I suppose the lot of the farmers in this country is not a good one ?—lt has not been lately. Alfred Allen Simpson examined. (No. 239.) 636. Hon. the Chairman.) What are you, sir?— Manager of the firm of A. Simpson and Son, tinsmiths and general ironwork manufacturers. We employ between three and four hundred hands, and have no branch anywhere else. 637. How do you think federation will affect your industry?—l think it will lead to a general cutting of prices.. We export a good deal to New South Wales at the present time, more especially to Broken Hill. The duty keeps us out of Victoria, but we do a little business with Western Australia. We do not export to New Zealand. 638. What-is the average daily wage in your business?— That depends on the nature of the work. We are under several trades as regards wages. The average tinsmith would earn about £2 ss. a week for fifty hours. A great deal of the tinware is made by unskilled labour with machinery. We pay overtime the same rates as ordinary time. In the other branches a tradesman would get £2 Bs. a week on the average. A blacksmith would get £2 10s. a week; but we pay more than they do outside, because if our blacksmiths were to leave us to-day we could fill their places to-morrow for £2 a week. We employ a good many boys for making jam-tins and similar work. I suppose for day-work the average would be Bs. a week. I have known a boy knock out £1 a week at piecework. 639. Mr. Roberts.] But is not forty-eight hours a week the custom in your trade?— Fifty. 640. Does that extend to most industries ?—They vary very much. 641. Is fifty the maximum?— There is no fixed maximum, but I think it would probably be the average. 642. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you had any industrial disputes with your men?— Not within my recollection. 643. Have you abundance of men available for your class of business?— Yes, generally. The supply is quite equal to the demand here. 644. Do you think that with intercolonial free-trade your business would be prejudicially affected ?—I think it would be increased very much, but we should have to cut the prices. 645. Mr. Leys.] In what direction do you expect your business to increase?—We shall do business in the other colonies. 646. If you cut the prices do you think that will have the effect of cutting wages as well ?— It will not if we can help it. 647. But you know it is the custom in all manufacturing countries to have lower export prices than the local prices?— That is the custom in England. 648. Do you chink you would export your lines at a lower figure than you would supply them at locally?— Yes.
A.-4
644
649. Do you think that if New Zealand federated you would clear similar lines in New Zealand?— Yes. 650. By increasing your output in that way you can, of course, lower the average cost pro raid ? —Yes. 651. What are the average wages here paid to labourers by the Government? — Outside the Government the average labourer's wage is about ss. 6d. a day, but in the Government the minimum is 6s. 652. Do you know how the wages in your trade compare with the wages in the same trade in Victoria?— Two years ago, when I made comparisons, I think they were about the same. I compared our wages then with Messrs. Harvey, Shaw, and Co., the biggest tinsmiths in that colony. 653. Do you look with any disfavour on the new Wages Act in South Australia ?—lt does not affect us at present. 654. But are you not contemplating that it may affect you hereafter?— The consumer would have to pay for it in the long-run. We have always got on very well with our men. John Makshall Eeid examined. (No. 240.) 655. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the firm of John Eeid and Sons, tanners, leather-grindery and bark merchants. How many hands do you employ in your business ?—We have about 110 at the tannery. 656. What is the average rate of wages paid to them ? —About £2 Bs. a week for forty-eight hours. About twelve boys amongst that number of men receive 15s. a week, which is the minimum wage. We pay for overtime the ordinary wage. 657. What leathers do you manufacture? —All classes of boot, shoe, and harness leathers. 658. Are there many tanners in South Australia besides yourselves ? —-There are about five so-called large tanners here. 659. Do you export much leather from South Australia?— Yes; I suppose 40 or 50 per cent. of our output goes out of the colony. 660. Does that apply to the other tanners too?— Hardly. I think they are more connected with the boot-factories than the export trade. 661. Where do you export to? —To the English market—principally to London. 662. Then, you will not be affected one way or the other by federation ?—Not a great deal. I think there will be a levelling-down. There may be some lines that may come in from the other colonies against us, but, generally speaking, I think conditions will be equal. 663. Do you export to New Zealand? —No; we import from New Zealand for the factories here that we supply with leathers. We import principally fancy leathers in sheepskins. 664. Mr. Roberts.] Do you import salted pelts from New Zealand for tanning purposes ?—No. The New Zealand people have perfected them so well that we prefer to import the finished article. 665. I see that a considerable quantity of hides are imported into this colony : are they imported for the purpose of being worked up for further manufacture ?—We have to import New Zealand hides for certain purposes, because they are better grown than our hides. 666. We have heard frequent complaints about the want of solidity in the intercolonial leathers : I suppose the tanning is done more quickly than it is at Home ? —Yes; there is no time to keep the leather in the pits, simply because we cannot wait for the returns. 667. Mr. Beauchamp.] Can you produce as good leather with the wattle-tannage as with the oak-tannage ?—Speaking generally, no. 668. So unless we go in for oak-tannage we shall be bound to have to import considerable quantities of finished leathers from the Home countries ?—No. I think at the present time the New Zealand people are sending finished leathers to London. 669. What is the duty on our finished articles ?—Some are free and some are dutiable, but the bulk of the lines coming from New Zealand are free. 670. Then, duty or no duty, you would continue to import New Zealand leathers for certain manufactures? —I am afraid that the dividing-line is very close ;if New Zealand does not federate with us, and she is shut out by the tariff, it will be a question whether England or America will not suit us best, because they can supply just as good glace kinds. 671. Mr. Leys.] But you do not anticipate that there will be a differential tariff against New Zealand ? Should we not be on the same terms as the English manufacturers ?—Yes ; but at the present time many of your goods are coming in from New Zealand free. 672. And are not English goods taxed?— Yes; but the matter will be equalised, in which case it will be cheaper to get the goods from America than from New Zealand. 673. Would not our goods be allowed to come in free ?—Our tariff was framed in the interests of the manufacturers here, and I do not think it is likely to be repealed. 674. Do you think that the boot-manufacturers in the other colonies will protest against a duty being put upon New Zealand leathers ?—lt is simply a matter of price to them ; but, of course, Bailey and Co., of Dunedin, and Bowron, of Christchurch, have made great strides in the leather industry. 675. What are the wages of labourers here ?—6s. is the recognised wage for a day of eight hours. 676. Is that the wage earned in unskilled work?— There is no uniform standard here, but 6s. is the so-called regular workman's wage. 677. It has been stated that labourers' rates are fixed at ss. 6d. : are there many engaged at work at that price ?—No, not many, because there is so very little surplus labour in this colony.
645
A.—4
Feiday, 12th Apull, 1901. Eobbet William Skebvington examined. (No. 241.) 678. Hon. the Chairman.'] What is your official position, sir ? —Manager of the Produce Export Department of the South Australian Government. 679. Of what do the works of that department consist ?—We have a plant consisting of one Linde refrigerating-inachine, equal to 100 tons of refrigeration, and two Hall's machines, equal to 60 tons, and the works are at Port Adelaide, situated on what is known as the Ocean Steamers' Wharf. They are a Government concern. 680. How are they conducted ? —I have brought with me copies of our circulars and last year's report, which I beg to put in before the Commission. They will give you all the information respecting the charges and conditions under which the works are conducted. [See end of evidence.] 681. Mr. Roberts.} What is the capacity of the freezing-works equal to ?—l6O tons refrigeration. With the Linde machine we can treat 2,500 carcases per day of mutton, and we can store 80,000. With the two Hall machines, which were in use prior to our receiving the new Linde machine, we did 1,500 per day, and stored about 35,000. If the whole storage-accommodation were occupied we would be able to store over 113,000 carcases. Our principal exports are wine, butter, lambs, mutton, rabbits, poultry, and fruit. 682. Hon. the Chairman.] Do the goods you freeze belong to private individuals ?—The goods in every instance belong to the producer or the speculator. They do not belong to the Government. The Government do not buy, but make an advance of Is. a gallon in the case of wine approved of by the Professor of Viticulture, to whom samples are sent before the wine is forwarded to our depots. If he, after analysis, approves of those samples the Government advances Is. in the gallon on it, and they charge the producer interest at the rate of 5 per cent. For lambs we advance ljd. a pound. 683. How do you arrange about the insurance ? —lf we do the whole business for the producer we insure for him. Then all the charges are deducted when the account-sales arrive at this end. 684. What charge is made for the work you do in connection with the matter ?—One of the circulars I have put in [see end of evidence] gives full particulars in that respect. 685. How long have these works been established?— About five years. 686. Has it been found to answer well the purpose for which it was intended ? Does it pay the Government? —We have paid working-expenses. I have been manager for over four years next December, and in the first year I was afraid of making a loss, but since that time we have been practically paying working-expenses. 687. Are the works largely used by your producers? —Yes. For lambs our season commences in August and will finish about January, according to the season. If it were a good season it would last six months, and if it were a bad season it would last three. The season this year lasted about four months, and we put through 94,447 carcases of lambs and 7,122 carcases of mutton. Of fruit, we have shipped up to the present time from the Ist July 13,638 cases, but only one-third of that was fruit going direct from the depot —that is to say, the depot receives it from the producer, the balance belongs to private speculators, and. we receive the fruit, cool it, and put it on board ship. 688. Why were these works established ? —To find markets for the surplus products. 689. But are there no private freezing-works in South Australia ?—There were none here previously, though there are now. Private enterprise was asked to go into this matter, but they did not do it, and that is why the Government took it up. 690. Is it likely to be continued ?—lt is sure to be. 691. My. Roberts.] You mentioned that the Government made an advance of Is. a gallon on wine : does not the enterprise of a merchant cover that business ?—All wine sent through the Produce Import Department goes to the London depot, other shippers send to private firms. There is any amount of wine shipped from here by private firms, which we have nothing at all to do with. It does not go through ourselves. We have a depot in London. 692. Then, as to your advance on lambs and mutton, it is only 1-Jd. a pound: is that the net advance to the producer ? —We also return him the whole of the fat and the skins. 693. Is your freight permanently -fd. ? —No ; sometimes less. It is fd. this year. Of course, if a speculator were to send down 2,000 lambs we would do all the work of slaughtering and freezing for him for o'3sd. a pound, and we have to take care of his skins and weigh his fat. He gets almost everything. The department gets the tongues, sweetbread, and offal, and we return all of the remainder to him. 694. Are your charges for lambs and mutton about the same as they are in New South Wales? —-About that. In fact, I think New South Wales has a bit of a pull over us, as they have machinery there for making up the by-products, which I have induced our Government to start at once. 695. What do you do with your by-products ?—I have to sell them. We do not manipulate them ourselves. 696. Mr. Beaiochamp.] With regard to freights, are those net rates, or are they subject to primage? —Those are our net rates. We have no primage. 697. And you say the whole capacity is 80,000 carcases, or can you squeeze in 100,000 ?— What I wanted to convey by my first answer was that if we were to occupy the whole of our freezing-chambers as well as the store-rooms we could store over 113,000 carcases. Last year we were working up to the highest capacity, and we had not enough storage-accommodation, and we had to fill up our freezing-chambers as we went along, owing to the scarcity of fruit. 698. Are you exporting much poultry?— No. It is not likely to be an important industry here. The people here do not take enough care about their poultry to make the industry successful.
A.—4.
646
699. Mr. Leys.] Do you have charge of the butter exported from here ?—I only take charge of it in regard to receiving, chilling, and shipping. We have a Dairy Inspector and Instructor, who does the grading, and gives instructor], to the farmers, and so on. 700. What is your charge for butter ? —So-much a box ; it amounts to ojd. per box. 701. Is the quantity of butter exported increasing,? —We have had such a continuation of dry seasons, and, of course, it has reduced the herds, our exports are nothing like what they are in Victoria. We have not got the country ; but there is room for great development, and I dare say the export will increase. We only exported about 312 tons last season. 702. Do you think that South Australia will be able to supply itself in dairy produce in the future, or do you think that New Zealand can find a market for dairy produce here ?—I do not think there would be much of a market here for New Zealand butter, unless we strike a few bad seasons. 703. Then, except in times of drought, New Zealand cannot expect a permanent market in South Australia for dairy produce ?—I think not, although I should not like to give a definite opinion ; but that is my impression. 704. Do you include in your working-expenses the interest on your buildings and the cost of the London depot ? —The London depot accounts are kept separate from our balance-sheet; but I might add that the Produce Export Department spends a large sum of money in advertising, and it would not be fair to debit this department with that. On the whole, we return about 5 per cent, interest on the outlay, including the cost of buildings and everything. The London depot has to contend with strong competition from private people, who do not see eye-to-eye with our Government in this matter, and therefore the manager in London has to spend a considerable amount in advertising in order to get business. The London depot is being worked at a loss at the present time. 705. Hon. Major Steward.) Do the Government put the Government brand on the carcases, or is it left to the owner to put a brand on?— Every shipper has his own mark on the carcases. There is no Government brand. 706. Hon. the Chairman.} Can you tell us the value of the fruit exported last year? —£1,836. I have not the exact figures with me; but we have exported 13,638 cases of fruit, the majority of which would be apples. 706 a. What is the freight on butter?—fd. per pound, or £4 ss. per ton measurement. EXTEACT FBOM THE REPORT ON THE EXPORT OP WINE AND PkODUCE (SEASON 1899-1900}. —PBODUCE EXPORT Department. Through the marked increase in most of the exports during the past season the department is again in a position to report a balanoe on the right side, after having paid outstanding accounts to the amount of £1,004 19s. 3d., which have been in dispute since 1895-96. The breaking-out of hostilities in South Africa took from the Australian trade many steamers as transports which otherwise would have been available for the carriage of frozen produce. This scarcity of freights for frozen produce not only put the exporters and the department to considerable inconvenience, but also curtailed the supplies, which would have come forward had there been no hindrance in this direction. It is safe to estimate that over 100,000 lambs would have been treated had freights been available as required. Every provision is now being made to meet the coming season's requirements. The department having made arrangements with the Adelaide Steam-tug Company for the carriage of frozen produce from the depot outside to the anchorage in an insulated lighter, whioh will be supplied with a refrigerant, enables the exporters to take advantage of the mail-steamers and other large oceangoing vessels which do not come up the river, and also in the oase of the White Star liners, the opportunity of opening up a direot market with Liverpool and the north of England. With the advent of increased exports and the promise of good seasons, and the rapid growth in the lamb, butter, and rabbit trade, the department has found it compulsory to still further increase the refrigerating and storage capaoity of the depot. It has also been necessary to remove the slaughtering-house from the vicinity of the freezingworks, so that the butter oan be handled under the best conditions. With the new arrangements butter for examination will be received in a store directly under the cold-storage chambers, which will be found not only specially clean, but having the advantage of a suitable cool temperature. A site has been chosen at Dry Greek giving ample room for the erection of a large slaughterhouse and good yarding and paddocking accommodation, besides being an ideal situation for the erection of a plant for the treatment of by-products, without which no freezing-works is complete, as it is the economical treatment of every part of an animal that makes the business a profitable one. Every year the department is making strenuous and successful efforts to oope with the increasing volume of trade, and during the coming season the department will be in a position to treat 2,500 lambs per day, and store upwards of 80,000 carcases, besides dealing with large quantities of butter. Wine. The vignerons and wine-makers have experienced during the last few years very poor vintages, mainly due to the drought, hailstorms, and frost. This has had the effect of considerably decreasing the export to the London depot during the past year, and shortage of stocks has had a tendency to increased prioes, and growers are naturally holding stocks in anticipation of a rise. Aβ in the past, the wines shipped through the depot during the year have been analysed by the Government Viticulturist, and certified pure and sound before exportation; 51,152 gallons have gone forward during the last twelve months, aa against 141,652 gallons for the previous year. Babbits. Year by year this trade expands, and the exports for the past twelve months have been 520,662 rabbits, against 396,370 for the previous like period.
Lamb, Mutton, and Pork. The anticipations of a marked increase in the output of lambs during the past season were more than realised, and it will be seen by the following figures the progress the trade has made since its inauguration in this colony:—
Season. Lambs. Lambs. Mutton. Pork. Value. L895-96 L896-97 L897-98 1898-99 :899-1900 ) Carcases. 1,751 10,606 3,534 38,620 • 89,980 Carcases. 1,028 675 463 2,052 1,334 j Carcases. 132 10 30 ! £ s. d. 2,362 8 7 5,122 16 9 1,691 17 6 22,393 3 6 49,683 17 3
647
A.—4
On the whole, the quality was not up to the standard of the previous season, although several parcels of approved weights and nice shape and quality were received. With greater experience in the lamb-export trade it is hoped that intended shippers will recognise that nothing but first-class quality should be forwarded. One of the greatest drawbacks South Australian shippers have to contend with is the landing of our frozen lambs on the London market at the tail end of the season, instead of during the spring of the year. It is, nevertheless, an undoubted fact that for nice spring lamb off the milk.South Australian should be an easy first. The possibilities of this trade are great; and extra storage-accommodation, assistance from the exporters in forwarding first-class quality, the determination of the department to do its level best for one and all and stick to quality, " Adelaide lambs " should be sought after by buyers in the Home markets. Owing to the high prices ruling in the local market for mutton and pork, and the shortage in flocks of sheep, the department has done very little in these lines. The London lamb-market at times during the season has been very disappointing, and it was found necessary to store large quantities, awaiting an improvement in prices. The department sold through the London depot 4,637 lambs, with an average selling weight of 33-24 lb. per carcase. The price realised for the season has worked out to 3'B6d. per pouud, or 10s. 7d. per carcase, which, after deducting all charges, leaves a net average of 6s. 4d. per carcase at Port Adelaide. To this, of course, must be added the value of skins and fat, whioh would probably average 2s. per carcase, making a return of about Bs. 4d. per lamb. Butter. The increase in the past season's export again stands out prominently against that of the previous season's, proving conclusively that, given fair seasons, the colony will take that position in the trade which was anticipated when the Government started the industry by giving a bonus on butter exported which came up to a standard for quality, and it is expected that the coming season's quantity will more than equal that of any other season's output. The following list gives the exports made during the various seasons through the department:— Quantity. Quantity. Season. Tons cwt. qr. Season. Tons cwt. qr. 1893-94 .. .. .. 224 15 0)Bonus 1897-98 .. .. .. .. 8 5 0 1894-95 .. .. .. 598 12 Of years. 1898-99 .. .. .. .. 166 13 0 1895-96 .. .. .. 349 15 0 1899-1900 .. .. .. .. 390 13 2 1896-97 .. .. .. 70 1 0 Fruit. Oranges and Lemons. —During the past season growers were again induoed to try the London market with oranges, and the prices realised have plainly shown that there is a payable market for citrus fruits in London ; and with the last season's experience before us, and the fact that inquiries for space for larger quantities during the coming season are being made, it may be fairly said that the trade is now passing from the experimental stages to an established business. The department's shipments of two hundred cases realised a gross average of 14s. 2d. a case, prices ranging from 11s. to £1 per case. The average charges amount to 4s. Bd. a case", making a net return of about 9s. 6d. per case. Apples, Pears, and Grapes. —Of these, apples have been the principal export, growers only just sending test oases of pears and grapes, with varying success. Some have turned out all right, while others are partly or wholly wasted. The number of cases exported through the depot this season compares unfavourably with past seasons; but the colony's total output is the highest on record. This is accounted for by the fact that there are now other exporters who are pushing their business and are willing to speculate in freight, without which there is no likelihood of getting regular shipments, as Tasmanian growers are only too willing to engage all available space months ahead. The department is not able to engage spaoe at least four months ahead for growers who are not in a position to give an assurance of filling such ppaoe, and are therefore at a disadvantage oompared with exporters who buy fruit outright; and it was often the case that consignments were offered the department, but no suitable space could be Been red. The prices realised for consignments, the sales of which are to hand, have been very satisfactory, reaching the high level of last year's sales. R. W. Skevington, To the Hon. Minister of Agrioulture. Manager of Produce Export Department. 21st August, 1900.
Exports of Produce generally from Ist July, 1899, to 30th June, 1900. £ s. d. i Poultry—B crates =74 fowls .. ) £s. d. Meat—B9,9Bo carcases lamb = 3,113,674 ib.t .„,.,,„ 7Q ! „' 8 „ =96 ducks .. [ 40 0 0 1,334 „ mutton = 64,783 lb.} 4J ' DtKi 'a. „ 9 „ =61 turkeys .. J 30 „ pork = 2,642 Ib. .. 30 9 6 : By-produots—l3,l26 dozen kidneys ) _„. „ „ Rabbits—2l,o6s crates = 520,662 rabbits'.. 13,016 11 0j , 3,130 lb. sweetbreads Wine—sl,ls2gallons .. .. .. 7,246 10 8 | Sundry—4s kangaroo-tails, 48 haunches.. 710 0 Butter—ls,627 boxes = 875,11216. .. 43,755 12 0 „ 28 cases apricot-pulp, and 120 Fruit—2,l2o cases apples .. } oases preserved meat .. 185 0 0 321 „ oranges .. I 1 836 0 0 " 1,472 lamb plucks .. .. 60 0 „ 1 „ lemons .. ' ■ 4 „ pears .. j £116,132 3 5 „ 2 „ grapes .. .. .. — Of the above, the following particulars refer to consignments forwarded for sale through the London depot:— , £ s. d. Poultry—7 crates =59 fowls .. ) £ s. d. Meat—4,sB9 carcases lamb = 150,556 lb. ) „ .„,. 1P . „ 8 „ =96duoks .. 30 0 0 48 , mutton = 4,930 lb. f ° . 4 , =26 turkeys J 30 „ pork = 3,642 lb. .. 30 9 6 By-products—l3,l26 dozen kidneys | Wine-51,152 gallons .. .. .. 7,246 10 8 , 3,130 lb. sweetbreads \ Butter—2,s73 boxes = 144,0881b... .. 7,204 8 0 Sundries—4s kangaroo-tails, 48 haunches 710 0 Fruit—2,l2o oases apples .. \ „ 28 oases apricot-pulp = 28cwt. 35 0 0 „ 321 „ oranges .. „ 120 „ preserved meat .. 150 0 0 1 „ lemons .. \ 1,836 0 0 ■ 4 . pears.. .. £19,310 17 0 » 2 „ grapes .. J "
Department of Agriculture.—Produce Export Branch.—Regulations for Rabbit Export, Season 1900. Adelaide, 20th March, 1900. Rabbits. 1. Rabbits to be forwarded to the depot must be trapped or snared (not shot), killed, bled, and gutted ; kidneys being left in the carcase. The carcases must be perfectly clean and in good condition. They should be packed in crates specially provided with two stioks, running the length of the crate, on which the rabbits are hung in pairs. Sample-crates can be seen at the depot.
A.-4
648
2. It is advisable when forwarding rabbits in the summer months that oare should be exercised in not overcrowding the crates. The average crate holds about from twenty-four to twenty-seven pairs ; the larger quantity in oold weather, the smaller in hot. The department must be notified when a consignment is being forwarded to the depot, giving full particulars of the number of packages, brands, contents, &c, otherwise the consignment will not be received. Consignments should be forwarded so as to reach the depot not later than Friday of each week when practicable. 3. All consignments shall be sent direct to the Government depot, Ocean Steamere' Wharf, Port Adelaide, and delivered there, carriage-paid. 4. Shippers should make arrangements to have their rabbits carted from the Port Adelaide Station, immediately on arrival, to the depot ; this is absolutely necessary for the preservation of the rabbits. The cost of receiving and storing rabbits arriving on Saturday evening for cool-storage to be paid for by exporter. No tainted rabbits will be allowed in the chambers, and will have to be thrown out by the exporter. Orates must have a label attaohed to them, legibly branded, so as to avoid mistakes. 5. The department's grading regulations—First furs to weigh 4§ lb. to 51b. and over per pair; second furs to weigh not less than 4 lb. 6. These grades will bear the Government " Approved for Export" brand. Each exporter must adopt a shipping-brand to be put on his crates before they go into the freezing-chamber. The department reserves to itself the right of accepting or rejeoting consignments, and nothing will be accepted for export unless of the most approved quality. 7. The exporter will be allowed to grade his own rabbits, the department paying the exporter for such work at the rate of 10s. per hundred transit crates. Transit crates to contain not less than twenty-four pairs of rabbits. 8. Rabbits graded by the exporter will not bear the Government " Approved for Export" brand. 9. The cost of any additional branding to be paid for by the exporter. 10. All rejected rabbits shall be dealt with promptly by the shipper or his agent, and cleared away before noon each day. This order must be strictly complied with by the shipper or his agent. Persons having their produce rejected will have no claim on that account against the department. All rabbits packed for export will be placed direct into a freezing chamber, the temperature of whioh will be kept as near as possible at 10° Fahr. 11. The charges are as follows: For receiving, grading, packing, orates, and freezing, 2d. per pair; wharfage, Is. 6d. per ton measurement. A crate of furs oontains twenty-four rabbits, and a skinner-crate from thirty to sixty rabbits. 12. In the case of persons so desiring, the department will undertake all services connected with the shipping, insurance, and sale of rabbits or any produce consigned through the export depot, and as soon as the account-sales are received, oopy thereof, together with a remittance for the net result, will at once be forwarded to the owner of the goods. 13. Rabbits held over from shipments at the option of the department may be stored over the month at the rate of ljd. per crate per week. 14. The department reserves to itself the right of engaging freight by any steamer for any exporter should the necessity arise, in order to prevent a block in the storage-chambers. 15. Directly rabbits are graded as skinners the exporter must have a man to attend to the skinning, and the department will only take delivery of skinners coming up to the standard. All rabbits received in quantities insufficient to fill a crate will be placed in a cool-storage at consignor's ritsk, and await further consignments to make up full crate. 16. Receipts will only be given for full crates. Hares. 17. Hares should be trapped or snared (not shot), killed, but not gutted. Care should be taken to keep the fur clean, as blood or any other disfigurement of the skin militates against their satisfactory sale. The carcases, immediately on being killed, must be forwarded to the depot by quick train. 18. The charges for receiving, grading, packing, crates, and freezing has been fixed at 2d. each.
Produce Export Department. Adelaide, Ist August, IQOO. Butter. 1. The depot will be open Mondays to Fridays, inclusive, from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m., and on Saturdays 7 a.m. to 12 noon. 2. The ohargas will be as follows : Butter, 5Jd. per 56 lb. box. This includes reoeiving, chilling, and delivering to lighters at the depot. 3. An additional charge of Is. 6c3. a ton measurement will be charged for wharfage. 4. Eleven days' storage will be allowed for butter for export beyond the Australasian Colonies, and six days when for intercolonial or inland trade. 5. An additional SJI. per box per week or any portion thereof will be charged when the butter remains in the depot longer than the above-stated time. 6. A new contract, commencing from October, 1899, has been made between the shippers and the P. and 0. and Orient Steam Navigation Companies, by which the freight to London is |d. per pound (net weight) from the wharf, Port Adelaide, for butter in rectangular boxes containing 56 lb. each. 7. Shippers desirous of availing themselves of the facilities offered are requested to sign a copy of the agreement (if they have cot already done so) in triplicate. Contract forms can be had either direct from the shipping companies or through this department. 8. In the case of persons so desiring, the department will undertake to make freight engagements on their behalf; but, aa the department will be held responsible for all the freight on any space applied for, no application from intending shippers will be entertained unless made on the application form marked " A," supplied by the department. This renders persons applying for space liable for freight due on that which may be allotted to them, or any portion thereof. 9. The department will also undertake the chilling of butter for shippers who wish to make their applications for epace direct to the shipping companies, in accordance with the charges and conditions stated hereon. 10. Notioe of space required must be given to the mail companies by the department not later than 4 o'olook p.m. on the fourteenth day prior to date of sailing of the vessels from Port Adelaide, and only such spaoe will be secured as the department may receive applications for by noon on the fourteenth day prior to the date of sailing—viz. Tiiursday of each weekly mail steamer ; but in the event of the shipper or agent being unable to fill the space, allotted to him, he shall be allowed to substitute other butter, or to transfer the balanoe of spaoe to other shippers under the same conditions. 11. In the event of the total space applied for exceeding that available, a pro ratd distribution will be made amongst the various applicants. 12. Butter for shipment must be sent for examination to the refrigerating-chambers, Produce Export Depot, Ocean Steamers' Wharf, Port Adelaide, and, in order to give ample time for examining and chilling before being tendered for shipment on the following Wednesday, the butter must arrive thereat at least six clear days before the day of sailing of the vessel by whioh ie is intended to be shipped. The sailings are every Thursday, and all butter should be at the depot on the previous Friday at latest.
649
A.—4
13. Every person sending butter for shipment through this department shall forward to the manager an advice note on the form marked " B." The department will then undertake the chilling and shipment. 14. With a view of economizing space in transit, it is specially desirable that packages of a uniform size should be used. Sample-cases most in favour with buyers can be seeji at this department. The inside measurements are — Butter-caaes, 12 in. by 12 in. and 12 in. deep, weighing from 111b. to 121b. ; oheese-eases, length in., diameter 13 in., weighing 19 lb. to 201b., ends 1 in. thick, centre Jin. thick, sides J in. thick. 15. It is specially desirable that only will-seascmei timber be used for butter-boxes, as mildew rapidly develops and affects the butter where improperly seasoned timber has been used in the manufacture of the boxes. Badly nailed, indistinotly branded, second-hand, or soiled boxes will not be shipped. The timber recommended for buttercaaes is New Zealand white-pine or kauri, and for cheese-cases, Oregon. 16. The butter-boxes must be lined with the best waterproof butter-paper, and put in the box in two pieces only, so that the solid square of butter may be shaken out with the paper adhering to it. Eaoh box should contain 57 lb. of butter, whioh would allow lib. for shrinkage during the voyage. Cheese-cases should contain two cheeses of not less than 56 lb. each. 17. Boxes containing butter must be legibly branded on the top and one side with the name of the factory a» whioh the butter is manufactured ; the letters should not be less than 1 in. in length. Eaoh box should also be numbered consecutively as picked throughout the season, and the net weight of butter branded thereon. The figures should not be less than lin. in length. Case 3 containing ohee<e should be branded in a similar manner to butter. In the case of mixed or blended butters shippers will only be permitted to brand their boxes with letters or figures. 18. Butter should be properly pressed, as it comes from the worker, into one solid block in the box; it should be free from creases, and have an even and smooth surface. 19. The most favourable time for selling Australian butter in the English markets is from the end of September until the end of March, and makers will do well to bear this in mind, as any shipment that might arrive either before or afier these months would probably result in disappointment to the exporter. 20. As the voyage takes from five to six weeks under the present conditions, butter oannot be placed on the English market within seven or eight weeks after leaving the factory ; therefore all butter should be forwarded for export as soon aa possible after being manufactured, and landed in England and sold in the freshest possible condition. 21. In the case of persons having no agents in England, the department will undertake the sale of consignments, and as soon as the acoount-sales are received a copy thereof, together with a remittance for the net result, will be forwarded to the owners of the produce. 22. Tho Inspeotor of butter (Mr. G. S. Thompson) will furnish shippers with any other information on application.
Pboduce Export Department. Adelaide, 1st August, 1900. The rapid increase in the export of frozen lamb, rabbitB, and butter through the produce export depot has warranted the erection of increased refrigerating-power, and the extension of freezing- and storage-accommodation. These alterations will be completed during September, and when finished the department will be able to treat 2,500 carcases per day and store upwards of 80,000. The removal of the slaughterhouse to Dry Creek will give the department ample acoommodation for handling and grading large quantities of stock ; it will also remove from the depot all traces of smell oomplained of in connection with the treatment of butter. The advantage to the department in removing the slaughtering to Dry Creek should be apparent to all those interested in this export trade, as greater facilities will be given for the treatment of all by-products. It is the eoonomical use of every part of the animal which reduces the working charges to the lowest limit. Exporters, when forwarding stock by rail, should consign it to the Government Produce Department's Slaughtering-yards, Dry Creek, and drovers, carters, &c, should be instructed to deliver it there. Directions as to route will be furnished on application at the Adelaide office. Stock will be reoeived at Dry Creek between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. week-days, and until noon on Saturdays; but, by special arrangement, delivery will be taken at other times, provided sufficient notice is given at the Head Office, G.P.O., Adelaide. The port depot will be opened—From Mondays to Fridays, inolusive, from 7 a.m to 4 p.m., and on Saturdays to noon. Attention is drawn to the following oharges : — Frozen Produce. 1. Lamb and mutton, ljd. per pound. This includes slaughtering, dressing, weighing, bagging, freezing, putting on board vessels at the depot, freight, insurance (oovering all usual risks), and London charges. This is based on a fd. freight, and any rise in the freight will increase this rate accordingly. This does not inolude wharfage and storage. Pork, lgd. per pound, including the same items as those stated for lamb and mutton. 2. The oharge for slaughtering, grading, weighing, bagging, and freezing only will be 0'35d. per pound for lamb or mutton, with a minimum charge of Is. per carcase. 3. An additional charge of Is. 6d. a ton measurement will be made for putting on board vessels at the depot, including wharfage. 4. Lamb or mutton held over from shipments at the option of the department may be stored over four weeks at the rate of §d. per oarcase per week. 5. Persons desirous of doing their own slaughtering may deliver carcases, properly dressed, at the port depot, but no allowance will be made for killing and dressing, and in eaoh case they will be subject to inspection and approval. 6. Advances will be made on produce at the discretion of the Minister, interest being charged on same at the rate of 5 per centum per annum. 7. When the slaughtering is undertaken by the department the fat and skins will be returned to the owner and the remaining by-produots become the property of the department.* 8. The department will not bo responsible for damages to carcases, but every care will be exercised in slaughtering and dressing. The department will not be responsible for the correct delivery of skins and fat, and it will therefore be necessary for exporters to have some one to attend to these on their behalf. 9. The department will, however, plaoe with reliable agents for sale the skins, fat, and rejeots from the lambs which shippers forward for sale through the London depot. 10. Owing to the difficulties experienced with rejects in past seasons, the department intends storing for seven days after slaughtering, and if the owners have not then removed them from the stores storage will be charged at the rate of Id. per carcase per day or any part thoreof. 11. The department only undertakes storage of rejects when there is ample space in the chambers, and at all times approved produoe will have preference. 12. The depattment reserves the right of varying the number of sheep or lambs agreed to be taken during each day. If any alteration is necessary, notice will be given as early as possible to the consignor.
* That is to say, if the butcher has bought lambs in the market here he may not perhaps like to kill them himself, and he would then be allowed to keep some of the by-products, which in our business we keep.
82—A. 4.
650
A.—4
ly. Exporters making their own freight engagements must have a tally-clerk at the depot to attend to their shipments, as the department will only obtain receipts from the ship for the produce for which they have engaged freight. In the absence of such tally-clerks the department will not be responsible for the correct delivery of exporter's produce from the depot. 14. Persons intending to place the whole business in the hands of the department should give early notice, so that arrangements can be made for receiving consignments and securing freight. 15. The department reserves to itself the right of accepting or rejecting consignments, and any lambs or sheep not considered by the department up to the standard in condition, quality, and weight will be rejected while alive. These rejects will be placed in a paddock at owner's expense until he is communicated with as to their disposal. 16. Persons having their produce rejected will have no claim on that account against the department. 17. The department will set apart Wednesday afternoon and Thursday for dealing with lambs purchased in the Adelaide market, and no other bookings will be made for these days. Poultry. Must be young. Fowls from three to five months old, well fed, and not under 3J lb. each, live-weight. Older birds, or those in poor condition, will be rejeoted by the grader. Ducklings should be from ten weeks to five months old, weighing not under 4 lb. each, live-weight. The younger birds give the better prices. White ducklings are most admired in the English market. Old birds will be rejected. Goslings should not be over six months old, and should weigh not under 10 lb., live-weight. Turkeys.—Goblers must not be over ten months old, and should weigh not less than 13 lb.; hens not under 9 lb., live-weight. If young, the heavier the bird is the better price can be got in proportion. Ducks and fowls, Is. Id. each. Turkeys and goslings, 2s. each. This includes receiving, killing, dressing, grading, packing, cost of wraps and crate, freezing, delivering to vessels at the depot, wharfage, freight, insurance, but not London charges or selling commission, as the latter varies according to the prices realised. Poultry will be received alive in crates or other packages, which must not contain less than a dozen birds, although it is speoially desirable, with a view to lessening the freight, that larger numbers be forwarded, and that the numbers be made up in dozens. Empty crates and packages will be returned to the consignors. Poultry-orates must have a leather or wooden label attached to them, legibly branded, so as to avoid mistakes.
Pboducb Bxpobt Department. Adelaide, 6th February, 1901. This department is now prepared to receive rabbits at the depot, Port Adelaide, for freezing aud shipment at a charge of Jd. per rabbit, or Id. per pair, and wharfage Is. 6d. per ton measurement. Babbit 3 must be prepared, graded, properly paoked, and branded for export when delivery will be taken at the chamber-doors of the depot. Exporters must supply their own crates. The necessary accommodation for treating, grading, and packing will be provided at the depot without extra expense to the exporters. Free storage will be allowed for four weeks, after which a charge of ljd. will be made per orate per week. Eev. Joseph Berby examined. (No. 242.) 707. Hon. the Chairman.'] You are the Eev. Joseph Berry, minister of the Methodist Church? —Yes. 708. How long have you resided in South Australia ? —Eight years. Before that I lived in New Zealand for twenty-five years. I have resided in no other part of Australia. 709. I understand you have paid some attention to the question of the federation of Australia, and have written upon the subject, I believe ? —Not much. 710. I would like to ask you whether you are satisfied with the Constitution as it at present exists under the Commonwealth ?—Yes, as far as Australia is concerned. 711. Do you consider that the States as they exist at present are likely to continue to so exist, or do you think that they will be ultimately absorbed by the Federal Government ?— I think they will continue to exist, but ultimately something might happen like what happened in New Zealand when the provinces were merged into the General Government. I have not thought much about that matter, though. 712. Have you studied the financial aspect of the question so far as the States are concerned—as to how their public revenues will be affected by reason of the Customs duties being handed over to the Federal Government ? —No. I do not consider myself an expert on questions of that kind. 713. Do you consider it expedient for New Zealand to join the Commonwealth ?—No, sir ; at present I do not. 714. Are there any advantages which suggest themselves to you that New Zealand would enjoy by joining the Commonwealth ? —I think not, at present. 715. Do you think that the distance of New Zealand from Australia would be prejudicial in any way to her Government administration through it being carried on from the Federal capital ? —Well, there are two sets of opinion about that. Some regard the distance as a serious matter and some regard it as a mere nothing. I think, whichever way you take it, the best thing for New Zealand to do is to remain as she is, whether the distance is little or much. Then, I think you will feel the magnetism of the larger body, as Canada does that of the United States, and you would be wakened up by federation. If the distance is not serious, then I think that is a good reason for staying as you are. In travelling through Canada I was very much struck with the loss that Canada invariably has to meet through her closeness to the United States. Her young blood is drawn across the border; and if you are as near as some people imagine, then I think you would do better to keep your fences up. 716. You think that there will be a tendency for the young population of New Zealand to be attracted to Australia ? —I think there might be if you were brought into too close touch. 717. Do you think the manufactures of New Zealand would be affected by the larger concerns in Australia ?—That is a question on which my opinion would not be worth much.
651
A.—4
718. Have you studied the statistics with regard to the trade between Australia and New Zealand ?—I have to some extent, and I can see that New Zealand ought to buy some things from here, and that we must buy some things from you; but I thmk that could be arranged by treaty without federation. lam speaking now as in heart a New-Zealander. lam not an Australian, although I live here. And if I were yonder I would-not favour federation at present. 719. So far as we understand the matter at present, leaving out the gold duty, apparently there is a balance of trade in favour of New Zealand of some £500,000 a year: do you think that is sufficient inducement for New Zealand to give up her political independence?—l think not. We shall have to buy your oats, because we cannot grow them here. 720. But cannot they grow sufficient oats in Victoria to supply local requirements ? —I sometimes think that we in South Australia shall have to buy your frozen meat. 721. But we have just been taking evidence to the effect that you export frozen meat from South Australia?—We have been living on Queensland beef for a good while here. 722. Then, you think that South Australia may be a customer for New Zealand frozen meat ? —I am not very serious in the remark I have just made ; I have been accustomed to say so playfully. 723. Hon. Major Steward.} The Chairman spoke of the balance of the trade as being about £500,000 in favour of New Zealand. If you look at the financial cost to New Zealand of entering federation you would find that she would have to contribute £500,000 from her Customs revenue to the Federal Government. Supposing we had to do that, do you think we should receive any advantage as compensation for it?—l do not think you would, even if you had only to pay a third of the money. Supposing a liberal concession was made to you, Ido not see what you would have to gain to put against the outlay. 724. You know our Maori population are treated exactly as ourselves, and you know they do not count for the purpose of election under the Constitution : should we not require to get some consideration in regard to that also ? —You would get it, no doubt, because the Australian aboriginal is not to be compared with the Maori, as we all know. 725. Do you know anything about the problem of coloured labour in Queensland? —Yes; I have been there lately, and have thought about the matter. 726. Do you think it possible to carry out the promises of Mr. Barton's Government of a "white" Australia? —I think that the policy Mr. Barton has initiated has most seriously discounted the value of federation. 1 think it is utterly absurd te attempt to govern all Australia, both tropical and temperate, on the same lines. 727. Then, I presume from your answer that you think it is not possible to turn tropical Australia to the best account without the employment of coloured labour?—As far as I can see, it is impossible to turn it to any account without coloured labour. 728. Then, if that is so, and politicians insist on refusing to employ coloured labour, are we to infer that the land must go out of cultivation ? —I think that Northern Queensland will very largely go out of cultivation if they stop kanaka labour. 729. Do you think, supposing that were to happen, that it could be a permanent condition of things to allow millions of acres of land to lie idle ? —That depends upon how long the people can keep the battle up of trying to fight God Almighty. He has made tropical lands, and men suitable for cultivating them. Ido not know how long men can keep the battle up. 730. That is to say, that natural laws must be superior to human laws?— Certainly. I think the policy of a " white " Australia is ridiculous. 731. Mr. Leys.] Do you think, from your observation of people, that the development of national life is likely to be different in Australia from what it is in New Zealand?— Not of national life, but there is a distinct type in New Zealand. 732. Do you think that that type is likely to differentiate more as time goes on from the continental type ?—I look at New Zealand, and I find the bulk of the people there living on the seacoast accustomed to the sea as much as to the land. I find them yeomen cultivators, having small holdings that yield them a good income, and I find in New Zealand a climate singularly conducive to health. I find there the condition of things in which the advantages of life are more equal than over here. I think New Zealand will develop that type. 733. You do not see any advantage for New Zealand in federation : what are the disadvantages you see ? —ln the first place, look at your country and note that you have always been apart, yet in the matter of trade we have had, in every sense, a union between Australia and New Zealand. I look at your wonderful growth, and I think that you are going ahead now more than any other State in Australia except, perhaps, Queensland. I look at your population-carrying capacity, and I think that fifty years hence New Zealand will double the population of any State in Australia. I think it may have as large a population as Australia itself. Your carrying-capacity per acre is immeasurably beyond that of Australia. Why should your Governor be subservient to the Gover-nor-General here, or your Parliament be subservient to the Federal Parliament here ? 734. Mr. Luke.] You have given some attention to the social question too, have you not, Mr. Berry?—l have. 735. What is your opinion as to the social conditions here as compared with those in New Zealand? —New Zealand has altered a great deal since I left eight years ago. There has been a good deal of social development since that time. 736. Is there nothing here, in your opinion, in the matter of legislation that compares with the progressive legislation passed in New Zealand since that time ?—I would not say that. 737. Is the condition of the working-classes here as good as it is in New Zealand?—l think not, partly because house-rents are higher here —that is due to your wooden houses. Food is dearer here. We pay Is. for New Zealand bacon and Is. for New Zealand cheese. We cannot produce much cheese or bacon of our own. I think a working-man can get on his feet sooner in New Zealand, because the land is more productive, as 5 acres there will grow as much as 50 acres here. Much of our land here is comparatively worthless.
A—4
652
738. Is there much general discontent among the working-classes in Australia ?—There would be if they saw New Zealand. 739. You think our legislative independence is superior to any advantages we are likely to gather from federating with Australia ?—I think so. As an illustration, I might say that our Methodist Church is federated throughout the Australasian Colonies, just in the same way as it is proposed to federate with the States now. We have a general conference, which governs the whole church, including New Zealand. Fourteen years ago the New Zealand conference wanted to do something, but the general conference outvoted it, and the result of that has been disastrous to our church in New Zealand, and I fear something of the same kind might happen in politics. The positions are nearly analogous. 740. And you think our administration would suffer materially, and that many little things would crop up that would be burdensome to the community if we were governed from Australia ? —I think the administration might suffer. 741. Mr. Beauchamp.] You look on New Zealand as the junior partner, who would be dominated by the senior partner?—l think so. 742. From your intimate knowledge of Australia, would you say that there is nothing like a real community of interest between the two countries?—No; New Zealand people do not read Australian literature, and they do not take much interest in Australia. Their interests are all towards England, from which land they came. 743. Do you think that there is less interest exhibited by Australian people in New Zealand than there is in Australia by New-Zealanders ? —Only because New Zealand is smaller. 744. In the event of New Zealand not federating with Australia, do you think that trouble will sooner or later arise between the two countries in respect to the control of the South Pacific islands?—l do not know. I think New Zealand is the natural centre of the South Pacific, and possibly she is entitled to form a Federation with the islands. 745. With regard to the powers of the Federal Government, do you think that they are likely to be enlarged as time rolls on and the powers of the States curtailed ?— In the parallel I have suggested, if it can be termed a parallel, that is just what has happened in New Zealand. If the powers of the States were relatively reduced, then New Zealand would be relatively a smaller place than she is now. 746. With regard to the reciprocity treaty: from the feelings that exist in the minds of Australians towards New Zealand, is there any chance of that being accomplished ? —I do not know, but I should think so. 747. As far as the Australian Federation is concerned, do you fall in with the idea that, practically, three things assisted the desire for federation —namely, the desire for intercolonial freetrade, the desire to have control of the rivers, and the desire to abolish the differential rates on the railways?—lt was the differential rates that were felt most acutely. Any one who has travelled often between here and Sydney and has had to submit to an examination of their luggage by Customs officers and that kind of thing, and other petty annoyances caused by intercolonial jealousy and competition between the States, must have felt their existence to be a disgraceful thing.
MELBOUENE. Satueday, 13th April, 1901. Sir John Forrest, P. 0., G.C.M.G., Federal Minister of State for Defence, examined. (No. 243.) 1. Hon. the Chairman.] You are the Minister of State for Defence in the Commonwealth Government, Sir John ? —I am the Minister of State for Defence of the Commonwealth, and I have been a member of all the Federal Conventions since 1891. I have also been the Premier of the State of West Australia for the last ten years. 2. Did not that State for a long time decline to join the Federation?— Well, it never declined to join, but there were circumstances which delayed its joining. First of all, before we had had an opportunity of consulting the people the Colony of New South Wales had decided against the Bill, and as by our Enabling Act it was made obligatory that New South Wales should be one of the federating colonies there was no need for us then to consult the people; and afterwards, when the Premiers' Conference had altered the Constitution, we delayed the referendum in order, if possible, to obtain better terms. When we found that no better terms could be obtained, and that all the other colonies had decided to enter the Federation, we summoned Parliament and referred the matter to the people, who decided in favour of federation under the Commonwealth Bill by a large majority. 3. You mentioned the fact of West Australia wishing to get better terms —those were special terms with reference to Customs duties. Were there any other terms asked for ?—Our main request was with regard to the Customs—viz., that from the date of the establishment of uniform duties, and for five years therefrom, we should be allowed practically to have our own tariff, if we liked, with a sliding scale of reduction every year. 4. Was the construction of a railway from Western Australia to South Australia any part of the bargain ?—No. 5. As regards the financial aspect of the question, what do you think will be the result of the operation of the 87th clause of the Constitution upon the finances of the different States ?—I think that clause will be a protection to the States. It is not so good for the Commonwealth, probably, as we may have to raise more than we want.
653
A.—4
6. Why should they raise more than they want ?—Because if they want, say, two millions from the Customs they must raise eight millions ; and if they want another quarter of a million they must raise ten millions. 7. Have you any reason to suppose that the Commonwealth will not require the whole of that 25 per cent. ?—I am inclined to think that the 25 per cent, will be ample for their needs. 8. But will they want the 25 per cent. ?—I do not think they will immediately, but I think they will eventually. 9. What do you think will be the effect upon the finances of the States through their having parted with the right to levy duties of Customs?—l think it is a very serious matter. If the power that the Commonwealth has under this Constitution were used mainly for its own purposes without reference to the States it might soon place all the States in a position of great imperilment, but I do not anticipate that they would do so. 10. Do you not think that the smaller States will be placed in some financial embarrassment through the right to levy Customs duties having been handed over to the Federal Parliament ?—I am inclined to think they will. Of course, there is the power in the 96th section for the Commonwealth to grant financial assistance to the States. 11. What do you understand by that clause ?—lt gives the Parliament a free hand. 12. How do you think that assistance will be given ? —I have had several interpretations of that clause. 13. Do you think it will be by way of gratuitous money-grants, or by way of loan, or advance ? —I do not think it will be granted unconditionally for a moment. If that assistance were granted it would be on terms, probably, by which certain conditions would be enforced, or required, with regard to further borrowing and the construction of public works, and with regard to a quid pro quo. 14. You do not think it would be financial assistance in the same way that Western Australia has had special terms granted to it ?—lt could not possibly be that, because the fundamental principle of the Constitution is intercolonial free-trade. Therefore the Commonwealth has not the power to give any consideration of that sort. 15. I should like to ask you whether you think New Zealand would derive any advantages through joining the Commonwealth ?—The only advantages that occur to me are, first of all, the right to send her goods into the Commonwealth —her own produce—free ; secondly, that unity is strength, and that for the purposes of defence, and in order to obtain recognition in the world as part of a great southern Commonwealth, it would probably be better for New Zealand to come in than to stand alone. 16. Is Western Australia a fruit-producing State ? —lt produces all the extra-tropical fruits that the other colonies produce. 17. Do you export fruit? —No, as we have not been producing sufficient for ourselves, the reason being that the population is small, and there are so many avenues for the employment of the people which are more remunerative. 18. As regards agricultural produce, what do you grow in Western Australia? —We grow everything they grow in South Australia and Victoria. 19. Do you grow sufficient to supply all your own wants ?—No, we have not enough yet; but we can grow enough, the only reason being that so many people are engaged in mining and other pursuits, which are more lucrative. There is plenty of land available to supply the wants of millions of people. 20. Mr. Leys.] The special terms obtained in the case of Western Australia were granted, I understand, because she depended so largely on the Customs duties for her revenue —more so than the Federal tariff was likely to give her?—We have no taxation in Western Australia excepting through the Customs. We have no land- and income-tax, only the municipal and roads taxes, and therefore our revenue is principally obtained from the Customs, and from the renting and sale of land. Of course, we have the railways and the posts and telegraphs, but they do no more than pay their way —in fact, the Postal Department does not pay its way. 21. New Zealand is also depending largely on its Customs revenue. It raises the high percentage of £2 18s. through its Customs, and, in the event of our federating, is it not probable that we shall have to suffer a considerable loss under the Federal tariff? —It all depends upon how much you import from these States, and upon how much the intercolonial duties amount to. They come to £300,000 a year with us, and that will be diminished gradually, and by that time we shall be able to look around and put our house in order. 22. Do you think you will be able to square the finances in five years ?—I do not know ; but the policy of Mr. Barton is not to impose a land- and income-tax for Federal purposes, and that will leave us free to impose that form of taxation in the State of Western Australia should it eventually become necessary, which I hope will not be the case. 23. How do you propose to carry out your State works under federation ?—I expect that we shall have to do less than we are doing now. We have been doing a great deal of work out of revenue. Nearly all our public buildings are constructed out of revenue, and we have more revenue than South Australia has, while our population is only half of hers. I think that under federation we shall have to reduce our departments and State works. 24. There was a report of an interview with you published in the South Australian Register lately : was the report of your remarks at that interview with reference to the question of a transcontinental railway fairly accurate ? —I did not see the report, but I have no doubt it was accurate, because I was interviewed by a shorthand-writer. 25. That interview, I think, stated that you would regard federation as a failure, as far as Western Australia was concerned, unless the Federal Government undertook the construction of a trans-continental railway : was that correctly reported ? —I said unless that railway was constructed
A.—4
654
I would consider federation a failure, because Western Australia was isolated in the matter of defence and means of communication, and that such a railway would, in my opinion, assist federation. Western Australia might just as well be an island in the ocean if we have no means of communication. In times of trouble no troops could be sent to our assistance. It is very difficult indeed from a financial standpoint to show the advantages that are going to accrue by federation to a colony like Western Australia, isolated as it is, seeing that it takes four days across the ocean to get to Fremantle. Further, we are not at present exporters of produce, with the exception of timber, and therefore the balance of the export trade is all one-sided. 26. Is not that very much the position of New Zealand?— You are large exporters of produce, and therefore it is an advantage to you to have ports close at hand where you can send your stuff to; but at present we export few things except timber and gold, nearly everything else we are importers of, and in my opinion the advantages of federation from our point of view are difficult to show ; but, of course, there are the advantages of having one Government for all national matters over the whole Australian Continent. 27. That is from the sentimental point of view ? —Yes ; but we are on the mainland, and there are many things which affect us—for instance, the mail-services and telegraphs and railways ; and if we were kept isolated and cut off from the eastern part of the continent we would have no influence in obtaining those advantages. In fact, the rest of the continent might rather be against us. 28. Free-trade is the main advantage in the case of New Zealand, is it not ? —Yes; and I presume that that is the reason why the Commission has been appointed. I surmise that it would not have been appointed if it were not for the question of sending your produce here free. Ido not suppose that New Zealand would care about anything else. She has had a market here of some sort, and naturally does not want it interfered with, and there is always more of an advantage in being a part of a big nation than being a small one on your own account. 29. Assuming that the Federal Government build this trans-continental railway, how is it to be paid for?—l do not know. That is a financial concern; but we are getting information as to what it will cost, whether it will pay, and to what extent. You can hardly judge as yet whether the line will pay by looking at the question from a distance, but there is now a considerable trade on the line already constructed and to and fro in that part of the country, and also between the other colonies and West Australia. Boughly, about forty thousand people travel by sea per year between West Australia and these colonies, and we might get some of them by railway. 30. Have you taken out a rough estimate of the cost of such a line ?—We know that it will cost between three and four millions. It is easy country all the way, and it could be built from three points —from Kalgoorlie, Eucla, and Port Augusta. 31. If you got that line I suppose Queensland would want the northern railway constructed by the Federal Government as well ?—I do not think so. Ido not think Queensland is under the same necessity. For instance, Queensland does not go to Port Darwin. Queensland has to develop its own territory more first. Unless it was decided to make the terminus somewhere at Port Darwin there would not be the same necessity to build such a line ; and I do not think the terminus would be at Port Darwin, because it would mean a tropical voyage all the way from Suez. 32. Do you think the other colonies would be inclined to pay the loss on the working of that railway? —I do not know. Ido not think they would be. My opinion is that they would not be inclined to pay very much of the loss, but perhaps the loss would not be so great. 33. Do you think the Federal Government would be inclined to take over the tropical territories, and administer them ?—I am inclined to think that they will not be very eager to do it. 34. Do you think there will be an effort made to induce them to do it?—l do not think it would be very much of an advantage if they could do it. The tropical parts of Australia are not very productive when worked by white people only. 35. South Australia has already constructed a railway on which she is losing £70,000 a year: I suppose you are aware of that, Sir John ?—Yes; it runs through part of a country where there are no people. 36. They seem to be desirous of getting the Federal Government to take over the tropical territory :do you think that there will not be the same feeling on the part of other States ?—I do not think so. Ido not think there will be any desire on the part of Western Australia to part with her Northern Territory. 37. Do you think that the northern territories can be worked without black labour?—l should be sorry to say that they could not be ; but it is not the place people are going to for preference. They like to remain in other parts of the colony. White men work there at gold-mining. If you ask them to go and work on plantations I do not think they will be eager to do so. 38. Do you think that the whites can do the work on the plantations ?—I believe they could do it, but they do not like it. White men work at navvying in the tropics, and also at all sorts of farming, fencing, house-building, and similar forms of labour, but it is a very hot, trying climate. 39. At cane-cutting ? —The north-western side of Australia is not fit for cane-growing although in the tropics. The climate is not tropical there, and there is scarcely any tropical land that will grow sugar in that part. It is all grown on the eastern side, where the climate is moist. 40. Do you anticipate that the Federal Government will take over the railways, as they are empowered to do with the consent of the States ?—I believe the Federal Government would be only too glad to take over the railways if the States would let them, but I question very much whether the States would let them. The railways in Australia are not a burden on the States. The West Australian railways pay working-expenses and interest on the debt, and 1 per cent, sinking fund as well, and in other States those railways that are not paying could be made to do so.
655
A.—4,
41. Do you not think that that will be the final result?—lt might be. It would make the Federation very much more powerful than it is if they had the railways ; but if they took over the railways they would have to take the debts with them, because that is how the debts have been created. Ido not think the debts will be consolidated until such time as the loans fall due. If you wished to consolidate your loans now the owners would not take less than the market price, but when the loans fall in then will be the time to consolidate. In regard to the Western Australian loans—about eight millions of our debt —although not redeemable for forty years, we have the right to pay off at any time after twenty years by giving twelve months' notice. 42. You can see no saving in conversion until the loans mature ?—My own opinion is that people will want the current price for them, and there is no advantage in consolidating until they mature. 43. Do you think there is any likelihood of our being able to obtain a reciprocity treaty in the event of our not joining the Federation ? —I should say you would not. 44. Why do you think so? —Because it would be of no advantage. Most people are selfish, and the producers here would say, "We can produce all we want, and more; why should we allow another person to come in here to compete with us when we are producing more than we want already ? " 45. But at the present time Australia is sending about a quarter of a million more to us than we are sending to Australia. The balance of trade is against us, excluding gold. Would not she be likely to enter into a reciprocal treaty rather than lose that trade ?—I believe if you could show that a reciprocal treaty was to the advantage of Australia they would have one, but not without. I do not think the question of brotherly feeling would come in very much. 46. Mr. Beauchamp.] Having regard to the different conditions prevailing in the case of an island like New Zealand, do you think she would be granted special conditions if she desired to come into the Commonwealth ?—My idea is that she would have to come in on the basis of the Constitution. There is no power to give her any special conditions —in regard to the tariff, for instance. Take the 121 st clause, which says, " The Parliament may admit to the Commonwealth or establish new States, and may upon such admission or establishment make or impose such terms and conditions, including the extent of representation in either House of the Parliament, as it thinks fit." My reading of that clause is that the Parliament can make such conditions as it likes. They may say to you, "We shall give you £100,000 a year for ten years, or we shall give you something else " ; but, whatever terms are granted, there could be no concession with regard to intercolonial free-trade, as it is the fundamental principle of the Constitution. 47. In discussing this matter with Mr. Barton, he said that a special concession to suit the exigencies of New Zealand should be granted ; and we also drew his attention to the question of a trans-continental railway, and other works in connection with tropical Australia, to which it would be scarcely fair to ask New Zealand to contribute without giving her some concession in return ?— What are your views on that point, Sir John ?—I think you might say, for instance, that one condition should be that there should be, say, a railway constructed from Auckland, straight as a die, into Wellington. That should be a special condition in regard to anything connected with the construction of public works ; but the tariff concession you could not get, as there is no power to give it to you. 48. As regards the tariff, do you think that such a sum will be raised as will enable the Federal Government to return to each State an amount equal to the sum at present raised by the States through the Customs ?—We are aiming at that. The Federal Government want to give to the States the same revenue as at present, because the ■ obligations of the States are based on that proposition. 49. Do you think the thirty-nine articles on which the Federal Government has the power to legislate will be sufficient to engage the consideration of that Government for a considerable time ? Or do you think that the powers of legislation of the Federal Parliament will, by means of the referendum, be enlarged? —I do not think they will be. I have never heard it suggested that the powers generally granted under this Constitution are not extensive enough. 50. There is no provision in the Act for dealing with labour laws, with a view to making them uniform throughout the Commonwealth : would the Federal Parliament be likely to ask for power to deal with that matter ?—lt is hard to look into the future, but I have no reason to think that in the immediate future this Constitution is to be materially altered. 50a. In New Zealand there is hard-and-fast legislation with regard to the employment of boylabour and woman-labour, and as to the hours of work and rates of wages. We have also a Master and Apprentices Act, which limits the number of boys employed. Do you think the tendency will be to level these matters up or to level them down, in the event of the Commonwealth getting the power to legislate on such matters ?—I have no doubt the tendency will be to try and get everything you have got in New Zealand if they can. 51. As regards State loans, do you think they will be raised as favourably under the Commonwealth as they were prior to federation ?—I am inclined to think they will not. They probably will be able to borrow through the Commonwealth; but I do not think the borrowing of the States will be so extensive as it has been, as time goes on. 52. Do you think there will be as much difference in the case of future Commonwealth and State borrowing as between the loans of, say, third-class municipalities and the Government ? —I think it will be better than that. My own opinion is that the change will not improve the borrow-ing-powers of the State unless the Commonwealth guarantees the loans. Then it will. 53. You have told us that Western Australia is in an isolated position through having no railway communication with the other States of the continent : do you not think that New Zealand is in even a worse position, seeing that she is separated from Australia by twelve hundred miles of sea ? —I think that she is at present in just the same position that we are. We are a thousand miles away from here, but we have the hope of being connected by railway, which New Zealand • has not.
A.—4
656
54. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you regard the twelve hundred miles of water between New Zealand and Australia as a drawback to New Zealand entering the Commonwealth ?—I should say that it was. 55. Do you not think that there would be very serious difficulties of administration in the case of New Zealand, the Federal centre being so far away?—l do not know that there would be any greater difficulty than in the case of Western Australia ; in her case it has to be done by telegraph. 56. Do you think that there is any probability of new States being carved out of Queensland and New South Wales ?—I do not think so. 57. As you are aware, we have a penny-postage in New Zealand. Supposing New Zealand federated, would it be possible to retain that system in the colony if the Federal Government did not go in for a general reduction of postage?—lt would be a matter absolutely for the Federal Government and Parliament to decide, but I do not think it would be possible or even legal for the Federal Government to have a different postal system in one part of the Commonwealth to what it had in another. The postal system throughout is sure to be uniform. 58. Mr. Leys.] Do you think that even if we do not federate any difficulties are likely to arise between the Commonwealth and New Zealand over the South Sea Islands ?—I should not think so; but my idea is that the Commonwealth will take all the control they can get. It will absorb everything it can. 59. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think it will absorb the States ?—They cannot under the Constitution, but I believe they will in time exercise all the powers that are given them. 60. You do not see any danger of conflict between New Zealand and the Commonwealth over the South Sea Islands? —I do not think so, so long as the Commonwealth has the chief say. 61. They must make that " say" through the Imperial Government, must they not? —They must; but you may depend upon it that they will be listened to the most. That is what I felt all along with regard to Western Australia—that in any questions arising in which the interests of that colony were concerned it would be of no use our trying to stand againet the Commonwealth; it would be too powerful for us, and therefore we should have to go to the wall. We would have had the whole of Australia —four millions of people —against, say, two hundred thousand, and how could we have succeeded; and even if the Imperial Government had wished to help the State of Western Australia, they could not easily do so if the Commonwealth otherwise insisted; and your case, though to a lesser extent, is similar. 62. Do you think that, in the event of New Zealand deciding to join the Federation, the Federal Parliament would favourably consider an alteration to the provisions with regard to the inclusion of the Maoris in the races qualified to vote at the Federal elections ? —I should say that any legislation in Australia with regard to the Maori race would not be adverse to that race. Ido not think that the 127 th section was ever intended to apply to the Maoris. lam sure that in framing that clause the Convention never had in their minds the Maori race.
SYDNEY. Tuesday, 16th Ai'eil, 1901. Richard Teece examined. (No. 244.) 1. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Teece? —General manager and actuary of the Australian Mutual Provident Society. I have lived in Australia for forty-five years, and have held that office for about ten years, but I am a native of New Zealand. 2. Have you taken any part in the Commonwealth question ? —Just to the extent that I consider it the duty of every citizen to inform himself on what is going on, and to form an intelligent opinion as to the propriety of the proceedings, or otherwise. -3. Have you perused the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act ?—Yes. 4. Are you satisfied with the provisions of that Act so far as it relates to Australia?—No; I am not satisfied with the financial clauses. The first objection which I take is to the clause known as the " Braddon blot," which provides in a haphazard sort of way for the return to the States of a certain proportion of the Customs collections without any regard to the requirements of the States. The result of that is that in a State like New South Wales, which obtains, and always has obtained, a large revenue from the alienation of public lands, the amount returned will be a good deal more than is necessary for the legitimate requirements of the State. That will tend, of course, to the growth of extravagance in administration, and to, possibly, corruption in political life, and to that extent I think it is extremely prejudicial, and it is in the highest degree unscientific. 5. But in that case will not New South Wales be able to do without the other taxes which she raises at present ?—No. 6. What is the alternative which you suggest to the "Braddon blot"? —To enact such provisions as would return as little as possible to any of the States —that is, to absorb in the Commonwealth as many liabilities as would to the utmost degree absorb the revenue which would come into its possession. 7. You mean that you would take over the railways and public debts ? —I do not say the railways; I think that is impracticable, but I think they ought to take over the public debts. 8. But why do you think that they should not take aver the railways ?—For the reason that the railways of these colonies have been constructed largely not in the nature of commercial undertakings, but for the purpose of developing the country, and consequently a great many lines
657
A.—4
of an unreproductive character have been built. But they have served another purpose—they have opened up the country and developed the lands, and therefore their indirect benefit cannot altogether be measured in money-value. And then, if the Commonwealth take over the railways, the construction of any future lines of railway would necessarily have to be its duty, and the Commonwealth would not be justified in building railways for the development of the resources of any States : it would only be justified in building them for its own purposes. 9. You are aware, I think, that in some of the States the bulk of their revenue, or a very large portion of it, is derived from Customs duties, and that in some States the interest on their public debt is paid from the Customs revenue ? —Of course, in Western Australia the railway returns are sufficient to pay the whole of the interest on the public debt, but in most States the railways do not return sufficient to pay interest on the railway debt. 10. If the Commonwealth were, as you say, to take over the whole of the Customs duties for Federal purposes, what funds would the States have to pay the interest upon the railway debts out of ? —They would not have it to pay. The Commonwealth would have in some instances sufficient from the Customs and excise duties to pay that, and in others it would not, and in those instances the States would have to make up the deficiency. 11. How could they do that?—By direct taxation. 12. Do you think that could be possible in the smaller States, such as Tasmania ?—I do not think Tasmania ought to be regarded as a factor in it at all, because I think the conditions of Tasmania ought not to determine the policy of the Commonwealth; it is so small a colony, and any trouble which might arise there could be easily met by the aid of other States ; but I do not think it ought to be a factor in it at all. 13. What do you think will be the effect upon the States, especially the smaller ones, through the Customs revenue being handed over to the Federal Government ? —I think that the Federal Government would have to provide a sufficiently large Customs and exercise revenue to make the 75- ' per-cent. collection sufficient for the requirements of the States. That is the one fault of the Constitution—the Federal Government has to raise four times as much as it requires for its own purposes in order to comply with the provisions of the Commonwealth Act. 14. What other objections have you to the Act ?—I object to the book-keeping system as a whole, because it is impracticable. It will not be complied with, and it is merely perpetuating the provincial spirit which it was the design of the Commonwealth to abolish. A case in point is that of the Eiverina, which is of course New South Wales territory, but much of the trade of which is done with Victoria. The alleged reason for the book-keeping system was that the State of Victoria should not be allowed to profit by the trade of the Eiverina settlers as far as the collection of the Customs duties was concerned on trade belonging to New South Wales; but surely it would appear that the object, both of the State and Federal Governments, is not to consider the interests of a particular State by obstructing all the settlers of that State, and that if it is found somewhat profitable for the Eiverina settlers, who are citizens of New South Wales, to transact their business in Victoria, the Federal Government should have allowed them to do so. It is an advantage to the colony if its own citizens are afforded facilities for the carrying-on business, and what must be an advantage to the citizens must be an advantage to the State in its corporate capacity. 15. Are you in favour of union rather than of federation? —Yes, I should be in favour of unification. 16. Do you think there is any probability of that coming about?— Not the slightest. 17. Can you suggest any advantages that would accrue to New Zealand from joining the Commonwealth? —That will depend on whether you are proceeding in this matter from a spirit of altruism, or from the point of view of what is best for yourselves. If you are not proceeding in an altruistic spirit "I might possibly advance the argument that I think federation would not be advantageous to New Zealand. 18. Why not ?—Your circumstances and environment are entirely different from those of these colonies. You have got no great centralised population, which has been a distinct evil in the Australian Colonies. You have your four great centres, with others of minor importance scattered round the coast within easy reach of communication, and you have got a colony which, so far as advantages of rainfall, climate, and soil are concerned, is not adversely affected, as Australia is, by droughts and floods. Your population is a different one from that of Australia; yours is largely an agricultural population, living on the soil and on the natural products. You have not got a large body of mechanical workers; you are not, and never will be, a large manufacturing country, as you have not a population sufficiently large to maintain large manufactures. The only difficulty you would be likely to experience by remaining outside the Australian Confederation would be that your products would be to some extent shut out of the Australian markets, supposing the Commonwealth would not allow them to come in without a duty, as it might do, judging from the temper of the majority of the Parliament. That seems to me the most important question for you to consider —whether you can find markets elsewhere to absorb your products, so that you need not be dependent to any great extent on the Australian markets. If you can do that, Ido not see where the advantage is to accrue to you by joining the Australian Federation. 19. Are you well acquainted with the products of Australia as a whole ?—Yes. 20. Do you think that Australia is capable of producing sufficient for her own requirements ?— Yes ; she already does it. 21. Do you think there would be much chance of a very large trade in New Zealand products between New Zealand and Australia in the future ?—I do not think there will be unless facilities are offered to you to send in certain products that you can grow cheaper and better than we can by reason of the reliability of your seasons. In good seasons we have a very large surplus, and when we have a surplus in such products as, wheat the price does not depend on the price ruling here, but on the price in the London market. 83—A. 4.
A.—4
658
22. Might I take it that you are of opinion that New Zealand ought not to join ? —-I do not know chat I ought to say that. I confess if I were a New-Zealandcr I should hesitate about it. Of course, I assume that you have no fear as to your position in the event of foreign complications. You do not suppose that it is likely that the British Government would allow any foreign Power to obtain a footing in New Zealand. 23. Hon. Mr. Botven.] You say that the Commonwealth ought not to take over the railways ; but is not one of the great advantages held out as to the taking-over of the railways by the Commonwealth that the States would get rid of these rival tariffs ?—No, sir ; that is otherwise provided for—by an Inter-State Commission, which has to prevent any unfair rivalry of that character, on the lines of the Inter-State Commission of the United States. 24. Mr. Millar.] I think you said that, in looking at the financial aspect of federation, Tasmania ought not to be taken into'account. What is your opinion with regard to the other States, such as Western Australia ? —I do not think there will be any difficulty in the case of Western Australia, which has immense resources. She has the richest goldfield in the world, and sufficient good land to enable her to produce more than sufficient for her local demands. 25. Do you anticipate that a direct tax on the land and mines will bring them in a revenue equal to that which they would lose in Customs duty at the end of the five years ? —I think it would be quite sufficient, with the gold and the timber. 26. What about Queensland ?—Queensland is the richest of all the States. 27. But is it not now, on account of droughts, in a very bad state? —It is; but still her mineral resources have been very much developed, and that colony is becoming a great wheatproducer. 28. As an expert in finance, do you anticipate any great advantage under federation by the conversion of the whole of the loans ?—■Nβ, there can be no immediate advantage in conversion. There would be an advantage in raising a new loan ; but no man who knows anything about finance is going to give up a profitable security for a less profitable one, unless he gets some compensation for it. 29. Therefore, as far as that argument is concerned, it can have no weight?— None whatever, excepting that of sentiment. 30. I think you said that you did not think New Zealand would ever develop into a great manufacturing centre ? —I said that. 31. Do you not think that, with her great available water-power for developing electricity, she will in course of time become a great manufacturing country ?—I do not think so. She will not develop unless she has a market permanently, and where can she get it. 32. With the increase of population will not there be sufficient people to develop these industries ? —The increase cannot be sufficiently rapid to warrant the profitable extension of the industries. 33. Have you any idea of the value of our exports to Australia now ? —No. 34. It is only equal to 4 per cent, of the total exports of the colony which could be affected by a prohibitive tariff?—l had no idea that it was so small as that. 35. Mr. Beauchamp.] What do you think were the chief causes that hastened the formation of the Commonwealth? —That is rather a delicate question. 36. May I suggest that the chief reason was the desire to break down the fiscal barriers that existed between the different colonies?—l do not think it was. 37. Do you think it was the desire for inter-State free-trade?—To a degree; some of the colonies thought there was a bad time coming if they could not extend their markets. 38. Do you not think that some of the colonies felt the differentiation of the railway-rates ? — They did. 39. And with regard to the control of the rivers?— Yes. 40. Do you think there was a strong sentimental feeling behind all this ?—There was a strong desire for unity. 41. And that this cause would not prompt the New-Zealanders to join the Federation?—l should say, from my knowledge, that the New-Zealanders are not a very sentimental people. 42. Do you think that the financial aspect of the question was considered by the bulk of the people of the Commonwealth ?—On the contrary, I am quite certain that they did not consider it at all. 43. As to black labour, I think you know Queensland pretty well: do you think that the sugar industry can be maintained by white labour ?—I am certain that it cannot. Black labour is absolutely necessary for the development of Northern Queensland. 44. Do you think that State loans will be raised in the future as favourably as the colonial Governments have been able to borrow money in the past ?—That will depend on circumstances entirely. It depends on the condition of the London money-market whether you get a loan sometimes at 3 per cent, and sometimes at 4 per cent., and a month after at 3J per cent. 45. Supposing a State loan and a Commonwealth loan were on the market at the one time, do you think it would be an advantage to the vendors ?—I think the Commonwealth Government would get it at least £ per cent, less than the State Government. 46. With respect to the present powers of the Federal Government, do you think they will be enlarged as time goes on, or do you think the Federal Government will have plenty to do to legislate on these thirty-nine articles ?—I think that for many years to come they will find their hands full, and that there will be no strong efforts made to increase the powers of the Federal Government or to diminish the powers of the State Government. I think the tendency will be the other way, because particular powers have been retained to the States. The Commonwealth Act provides that anything which is not specifically assigned to the Federal Parliament is within the jurisdiction of the States. That is the democratic principle of the American Constitution,
659
A.—4
47. Mr. Luke.] Which do you think will be the great manufacturing centre in the Commonwealth ?—New South Wales, because it has got a supply of coal, splendid shipping facilities, and it is the distributing centre. 48. You do not think that New Zealand, having water-power, will have any special advantage as compared with New South Wales or even Victoria ?—I do not think so ; it might be possible if it had access to the Australian markets. 49. But, I am suggesting, presuming we entered the Commonwealth ?—lf you entered the Commonwealth I think the probability is that there would be facilities for the development to a limited extent of your manufactures. 50. Do you think that New Zealand, having coal-measures similar to those in New South Wales, together with the water-power, would not have a special advantage as compared with the latter colony ?—Not to any appreciable extent. 51. But we also have immense deposits of iron, and limestone in the immediate vicinity of the iron, only waiting for development: should we not have an advantage in that respect over some of these States ?—They exist in all the colonies. There are enormous deposits of iron and limestone in this colony. 52. Mr. Reid.] When you said that if you were a New-Zealander you would hesitate about federating, and gave reasons why you would not federate, did you recognise that a State must regard such a matter not from an altruistic point of view, but rather from the point of view of an intelligent selfishness ?—I think so. 53. That is to say, she must look to the balance of advantages that she is likely to obtain, and that only ?—I imagine so. 54. Then, I think you said you would not federate at present; but I suppose you would advise us to keep in view the alternative of coming in in the future ?—That would always be open to you. 55. Do you think there would be any difficulty in the way of keeping that " lex potentialitie " open ?—I do not think so. I think the feeling in the States will always be friendly to you, and their Parliaments too. There is nothing but the very warmest of feeling throughout all the colonies towards New Zealand, and that feeling must grow as means of communication increase between the colonies. 56. Mr. Leys.] Do you think it probable that the Commonwealth Government will take over all the loans?—l think it is quite within the range of possibility. 57. In that case, do you think the Federal Government would still allow the States to borrow on their own account ?—They could not interfere with them ; that is an inherent right in the States. 58. If the Federal Government take over the whole of the loans, and absorb the Customs and excise revenue, upon what security would the States proceed with their borrowing? —That would be for the lender to say—whether he was satisfied or not with the security of the State named. 59. Do you think it is likely that the lender would be satisfied with the security of any State which had handed ever a large amount of its indirect taxation to the Federal Government ?—I think so, for all the purposes of their requirements. 60. Do you think that under these circumstances a State could go on borrowing for the construction of roads, and non-productive works ?—Of course, the theory is that we do not borrow for the construction of roads. Ido not mean to say that the borrower is misleading in regard to the nature of the work he is borrowing for, but that is the theory. 61. Do you assume that there would be a considerable restriction of borrowing in the future by the States? —I do not think so. 62. Do you think that a State like New Zealand could rely upon getting money, and on meeting the interest by additional direct taxation for such works as it is now engaged in ?■—A State like New Zealand could. 63. Do you know the amount of direct taxation New Zealand has now? —I do. 64. Do you think that that amount of direct taxation could be doubled without injuring the agricultural industry ?—No, it could not. 65. Do you think it could be materially increased?—Of course, any considerable increase of taxation might tend to injure a community already too heavily burdened, but they could carry it. 66. Do you not regard the transfer of the Customs and excise as practically putting the whole of the fiscal policy of the States at the mercy of the Federal Government ? —I do. That is why I said they should assume the liability for the debts. 67. Do you not think that the loss of that fiscal control would be a very serious matter to a State like New Zealand, which depends very largely on its Customs duties ?—I do not think so. New Zealand does not depend more largely on her Customs duties than Victoria. 68. Yes, it is 19s. higher per head than Victoria ?—Yes, but I do not think that the per capita basis is altogether one that can b6 relied on. New Zealand consists of a colony of workers—they are all producers —but in Victoria, while there are a great many people who are producers, there are many who are producing very little wealth. 69. You mean that the average wealth per head might be higher in New Zealand than in Victoria? —I should say that the average man in New Zealand adds more to the national wealth than the average man in Victoria does. 70. Hon. the Chairman.] Assuming that intercolonial free-trade existed between New Zealand and Australia, do you think that the manufacturers in New Zealand could compete successfully with the manufacturers in Australia ?—I have grave doubts about it. 71. Do you think that if there were intercolonial free-trade there would be a market for New Zealand agricultural produce in Australia?— Yes, there would be for some of it. For oats, for example, there would be a good market, because you grow them cheaper—and they are a more certain crop—than we can do here, and I think it is probably a better article, and, therefore, no
A.—4
660
matter what product we have, if you can produce the best thing it must come out on top in the end. It is not a question of quantity or price, it is the high quality of the article produced that is going to rule the markets of the world. On the other hand, your wheat, which is more plentiful to the acre than ours, is not nearly as good as ours,_ and so could not compete with ours. You cannot grow the same class of wool we can ; but you beat us in frozem mutton. 72. What about malt and barley ?—I do not "know anything about them. 73. Do you think that Victoria could compete with us in the matter of oats ? —I do not think so. 74. Under the Act it is provided that the Federal Government may grant assistance to a State upon such terms as the Parliament thinks fit: will you kindly tell us how you think that assistance is to be granted ? —I understand that it would be in any way that the Federal Parliament might determine. If it were found that Tasmania could not pay its way without a subsidy of £100,000 a year, the Federal Parliament would give it to her —a straight-out grant in aid, as a gift. That is the way I view it, and that is the way I should do if I were the Federal Premier. 75. Mr. Millar.] Did you read that letter of Mr. Fehon's, about taking over the railways ? —Yes, and I should say that that was quite impracticable. 76. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you consider still that the sentimental question of belonging to a larger nation, such as would be the case with New Zealand if she joined the Federation, sufficient justification for her abandoning her local autonomy and political independence ?—I should not think so. lam afraid that there is not much of the sentimental in me ; lam accustomed to dealing with hard facts. 77. Hon. Captain Russell.] Why do you think that New Zealand people could not compete with Australian manufacturers ?—I think the facilities for manufacturing here are more than equal to those in New Zealand, and then you have the difficulty of transit and the additional cost of freight; and though I have no doubt that you would get a fair share of the trade, you would not monopolize it, you would meet with very strong competition from here. 78. Do you look forward to the time when Australia will be able to compete for the outside markets ?—Not for many years to come. All these colonies will have to depend on their own natural markets. They will manufacture whatever pays them best, if they are sensible people. 79. Do you think that the Australian is able to do more work, or better work, than the New-Zealander ? —I do not think so; on the whole I think it is the other way about, because I think the New-Zealander is descended from a better class of colonist. He is better educated, he has better environments than the Australian, and from the start his development has been under more favourable circumstances. Your healthier environment has produced a better type of people. 80. In the process of generations, do you think that that will affect the character of the people ?—I am afraid that is a subject to which I have not given much attention. I think the change might become apparent in a generation, and in two or three generations it will probably be very marked. 81. I suppose the physical conditions of New Zealand are not antagonistic to manufactures? —I should say, certainly not. 82. And the people themselves are fully the equals of the Australians for work?— Undoubtedly. 83. And the Australians cannot look for a market out of their own country? —Not to any great extent, because we are not up to the manufacturers of older countries, where they have had centuries of education and experience to work on. We have to learn everything here. Hon. John Heney "Want, K.C., examined. (No. 245.) 84. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a K.C., and have lived in New South Wales all your life ?— Yes, fifty-four years. 85. Do you know New Zealand at all ? —Only from visiting it on flying trips. lam not well acquainted with its commercial life, although I have taken a good deal of interest in watching its legislative progress. 86. Did you take an active part in the formation of the Australian Commonwealth ?—I took an active part in trying to stop it. 87. What are your objections to the Federation as it at present stands?—ln the first place, I do not think that it will accomplish the objects they are working for, and I cannot help thinking that, instead of consolidating the States, and making one people, the Constitution as framed will have the effect of maintaining the differences between the States. The feeling of one member being looked on as the member for Melbourne, and another member as the member for Adelaide, will be perpetuated and intensified, and there will always remain the feeling that each man must stick by his own State. 88. Are you in favour of union, instead of federation ?—I certainly am, and I think it could be brought about, although everybody who was of that opinion said, " Of course, it will be very much better if you could get a union, but you will not get members of Parliament to vote to destroy themselves." 89. Do you consider that the expenses of government generally will be increased under the present system? —I am certain that they will be outrageous, as compared with what they might have been under a union, and I am sure that we shall realise that we shall have to pay dearly for what we have got. 90. Do you think the people realise that, and that the union will ultimately be brought about ? —I think it could be very easily brought about if you could get some men to tackle it. 91. What do you think will be the effect upon the finances of the States through the right to levy Customs and excise duties being handed over to the Commonwealth?— What I fear is that we shall still have an enormous expenditure in our own States in connection with what I might
661
A.—4
call " the fiscal question," and at the same time we shall have added to it the expenses of those that are in charge of the Federal matters. We shall have to keep up our staff, although the Parliament has gone away from us. There is a big staff under the Commonwealth also to be maintained, and there must be the proportionate expenses of two Governors, two Parliaments, and two sets of Ministers. Instead of reducing expenditure we are adding to it, and that is one of my chief objections to the present arrangement. 92. Do you think the States, especially the small ones, will have any difficulty in raising loans for necessary public works ?—I do not think so ; all these colonies are too strong to experience any difficulty in that respect. 93. Can you imagine what is likely to arise after the expiration of the ten years—under the clause "? —That is a puzzle. lam not able to grasp or understand that clause. My impression is that the Federal Government will get such a hold of the finance that they will not give up the three-fourths. The moneys they get from the States will be used, and even if they return anything to the States the local State Treasurers will not allow it to go back to the pockets of the people again. 94. Are there any other objections you have to the Commonwealth Act as it stands?— Another thing I object to is that the Commonwealth only takes upon itself certain large departments of the State, which is the reverse of the Canadian system, where they take everything over practically, and allow the State to retain but a few little things. 95. Do you not anticipate that the Constitution will be amended from time to time, with a view to giving the Federal Government greater powers ? —I do not think that they will ever amend the Constitution under the present Act, on account of the difficulty of so doing, and on account of the queer way in which any alteration is required to be made. 96. How do you think the question of New Zealand's distance from the continent would affect her if she decided to join?—' Different people take a different view of that question; but it seems to me that, with my knowledge of the workings of political life, it would be an absolute farce for New Zealand to attempt such a thing. You are too remote altogether. 97. It has been suggested to us, in view of a possible Imperial Federation, that that matter would be helped by New Zealand joining the Commonwealth: what is your opinion on that point ?—I have no doubt that it would assist it, provided that you are looking at the matter in that light only. Canada is further off than New Zealand, and Ido not suppose that any attempt would be made to form an Imperial Federation without including all the colonies, Canada, and South Africa. 98. But do you not think that New Zealand could aid the cause of Imperial federation just as well by remaining a separate colony as by joining the Australian Commonwealth?—No doubt, but not to initiate it. 99. Would our joining this Commonwealth hasten on Imperial federation?—l think it would not. 100. Hon. Captain Russell.] Then, you do not think that two separate Powers in the South Pacific would be more likely to bring about Imperial federation than one Power in the South Pacific ?—I should think that if you got the Pacific islands joined to New Zealand, that, together ■with this Commonwealth, would help the cause of Imperial federation. 101. Do you anticipate the possibility of any friction between the Commonwealth and New Zealand over the Pacific islands?— None whatever. I think there will always be the old rivalry, but nothing else, although, speaking from a Conservative point of view, we look upon some of your legislation as rather peculiar sometimes. 102. " Advanced" ?—Yes ; and, if I might say so, it is rather amusing to us sometimes; but I know that there is the very best possible feeling between the two countries, and the proof of that is that we have just sent over a Commission to make inquiries as to the working of your Industrial Conciliation Act, so that I do not think the fact of your standing out of the Commonwealth will make the slightest difference. 103. Is there any possibility of a reciprocal treaty between the two countries?— Yes, I think there is; and I think such a treaty would have been possible between this colony and Tasmania had it not been for Victoria throwing difficulties in the road. 104. You think the policy of the Victorian farmer is not likely to cause trouble ?—I do not think they will be strong enough. 105. You are a Free-trader ?—Yes ; a staunch one. 106. I understand you think that the Act as it stands at present will not tend to the making of an Australian nation? —No, I do not think so. 107. But will not time obliterate the distinction between Queensland and New South Wales? —I do not think so. I think the way this Commonwealth will be worked will rather augment the feeling, and that has been one of my strongest objections to the Act. 108. Am I not right in supposing that a good deal of trade from certain portions of New South Wales goes by sea to Adelaide?— Yes; and a lot of it goes to Melbourne. 109. And that people who own property in one State not infrequently live in the cities of the other? —Very much so ; in Victoria especially. There are many rich men there who own large stations in this colony. There will be a good deal of trouble over the question of the control of our inland rivers, as all the rivers flowing through Victoria have their sources here, and they run through different territories, and in interfering with them you are interfering with the rights of the Commonwealth. 110. Do you think that the different climates and the different environments will cause no distinction between the various States of Australia ?—-No; the differences of environment will cause a difference in trade. We are in this State cut off from our best land by a big mountainrange, and we do not get a single thing for our railways to carry until we reach the rich country at Goulburn, from whence to Melbourne you can carry goods far cheaper that you can bring them to
A.—4
662
Sydney. The consequence is that it will be a great blow to us to lose that trade, as we shall under federation, as our railways will not have the stuff to carry. It is the same with regard to Broken Hill and Adelaide, Melbourne and the Biverina. As the Commonwealth gets charge of some of these railways, as it eventually will, and diverts all the tradfe to its proper channel, it will cause a great deal of trouble between the States. 111. Do you anticipate that the Commonwealth will take possession of the railways? —I think they must. 112 Then, the construction of the future railways will be under Commonwealth guidance and management ? —Yes. 113. Where would New Zealand come in if there were an Australian system of railways?—l think you are too far away to talk of that. 114. But, under this Bill, should we not be liable for our share of the expenses ?—Of course, you would have to pay the piper and look pleasant. 115. I think you said you doubted whether the borrowing-powers of the States would be affected by the fact that they now belonged to a Commonwealth ?—I said I did not think they would. 116. Seeing that the Commonwealth practically controls the Customs revenue, supposing Adelaide wants to make a breakwater at Largs Bay, where is she going to get the necessary money?— She will have to borrow it; she has no large revenue to draw on, as against this colony which has a very large one ; but I do think there will be a difficulty in their getting their own people to launch out in such works as that when their borrowing-power is limited. 117. Do you imagine that the Commonwealth loans will be quoted at a very much lower price than the State loans are at present ?—I do not think so. 118. You do not think New Zealand would gain very much by federation in that respect ?—I do not think so. 119. You said amongst other things that you were strongly in favour of unification : are there many more like you ? —I suppose there are nine out of ten who take the same view ; but the question is, how are you going to bring it about, because you will not get members of Parliament to vote to destroy themselves. 120. You think some man with magnetic influence might precipitate that question ?—I do not say it wants magnetism : a strong man with strong feeling behind him could do it. 121. Do you think it probable that it will be a political war-cry before long?—I do, because people will be so disgusted with this Commonwealth that the people will be glad of a change. 122. Under a unified Australia would our position be as good as under a federated Australia if we were to join in the future ?—I think it would be better ; but I cannot see the advantage of New Zealand even joining a unified Australia. The only benefit I would say would be with regard to Imperial federation. To talk about New Zealand joining this Federation is like a man living in England managing his affairs in this colony. 123. We have heard that there will be some difficulty, with regard to the weaker States: is that your opinion ?—Half of them will be insolvent. 124. In what shape do you think assistance will have to be given to those colonies ?—That has been a puzzle to me right through, and several of the older States now see the evil effects that will arise from the financial clauses of the Constitution. 125. Then, I suppose there is a possibility of the stronger States having to come to the rescue of the weaker ones, and will not all this tend to unification ? —lt will help to bring about unification, because the stronger States will have such a taste of it that they will want something better than the Commonwealth. 126. But there is nothing in the Act to allow of a judicial separation ?—No, the connection is for all time and for ever. 127. Do you think it will be possible to so alter the Constitution as to provide for unification ? —You will have to wipe out the Constitution, and start again. 128. Do you think all that is within the bounds of possibility ?—I do. 129. Do you think that it is probable ?—Yes, I believe, if tackled in a proper way, unification could be brought about just as easily as we got this present Federation. 130. Do you think we, as New-Zealanders, might consider that it is probable that there will be a unified, rather than a federated, Australia within measurable distance ?—Within the next ten years. There is one very strong man in this colony who takes the same view as I do, and we fought the question together —that is Sir George Dibbs. We both suggested that unification should be the direction in which the change should be made. Sir George Dibbs addressed a letter to the other Premiers at the time, pointing out how he thought it could be done. I was in the Ministry with him at the time, and his letter expresses my views just as well as I could express them myself. 131. Hon. Mr. Boioen.] I presume that when you speak of the unification of Australia you mean something more like the Canadian system ?—I mean something stronger than that. 132. You mean to obliterate ihe States more completely ?—I would do so absolutely. I would very much have preferred the Canadian Constitution to what we have got; but I would have gone further than the Canadian Constitution even. 133. Do you think that the States and the Commonwealth dipping out of the one purse is a fatal blot ?—-I do, and I have always deemed it the great stumbling-block, and they adopted this marvellous "Braddon blot" in order, as they thought, to overcome the difficulty; but I cannot understand how it is going to work, nor does any one else. 134. You said you thought that the credit of the States if they belonged to the Commonwealth would be sufficient to enable them to borrow, as their credit would have to be supported by the Commonwealth ?—Yes.
663
A.—4
135. I dare say you recollect that in the caee of the United States the repudiation of Pennsylvania brought discredit on the States generally ?—I do not think that the Commonwealth would ever allow a State to repudiate. 136. Therefore the loan would have to be met by the Commonwealth?—No doubt; and therefore the people in lending money would feel that the security of the whole Commonwealth would be behind the loans of the States. 137. You are not afraid that the Commonwealth would take the view the United States did in tbe case of Pennsylvania ?—No ; I think it would be too " un-English." 138. Mr. 'Beauchamp.] With regard to the States, I suppose you would assess their powers as compared with the powers of the Commonwealth at about the same scale as the powers of the London County Council as compared with the English Parliament ?—Very much the same. 139. What do you think of the proposed book-keeping system to administer the accounts between the States?—lt will lead to the utmost confusion. Supposing you take a sealskin in this colony and send it across the border to Melbourne, and it is made into a jacket there, and then sent into Adelaide to be sold as a sealskin jacket, just look at the book-keeping it will have to go through before it is sold as a sealskin jacket. 140. I gather from your remarks that New South Wales is to be called upon to make the greatest sacrifices under this Commonwealth ? —No doubt, for the present; and Queensland will come next. 141. Do you think that New South Wales will be likely to extend her various manufactures under intercolonial free-trade? —I think she will, and that is one of the good points she will get from federation. 142. I suppose that has been one of the strongest arguments in favour of federation ?—No doubt, and that is one of the things which could have been met by a simple Act of Parliament. 143. Holding these views, do you think it would be just as easy for New Zealand to establish free-trade with the Commonwealth ?—Just as easy. We used to have a Border Duties Act between this colony and Victoria. 144. As to the railways, you hold the opinion that they ought to be taken over by the Commonwealth ? —lt must come to that, on account of the trouble in adjusting the rates. 145. But will not there be a difficulty in inducing some of the States to give their consent ? — There will be a lot of trouble, and that is one I have seen all along. 146. To keep faith with the Westralians, do you think that a trans-continental railway will be constructed within a reasonable time ? —I do not think so, and it is a wicked shame to propose such a line. That question will be tied up for the next fifty years. 147. Have you given any consideration to the question of coloured labour?—l do not think it is possible to have a " white " Australia. If we are going to utilise the northern territories, it can only be done by employing black labour. I am very much averse to the employment of coloured labour, and I have assisted to exclude the Chinese and all coloured peoples from this colony ; but, although you might exclude them from some parts of Queensland, I do not see how you can utilise the northern part of that country without employing coloured labour. Some of the public works and gold-mines at Port Darwin were doing very well with Chinese labour, but as soon as this labour was excluded the whole place was shut up. You cannot maintain some industries in some parts of Australia without black labour, and if you wish certain industries to be maintained black labour must come in. 148. Mr. Luke.] Under the new conditions is there not already a disposition to economize as far as the State administration is concerned? —No, not the slightest sign of it. 149. Are not steps already being taken to reduce the number of members?—We are trying to do it now, but the House is very much averse to it. It will take some trouble to do it. 150. Do you not think that public opinion will be sufficiently strong to compel the House to do it ? —I hope so, and I think it will; but it will not be done on account of the establishment of the Commonwealth, although they are using the Commonwealth as a lever to bring it about. For the last ten years we have had twice as many members as we ought to have had. We have here one member of Parliament to every ten thousand inhabitants, while in the United Kingdom they have one to every sixty thousand. 151. Then, you do not think that this expression on the part of the State members is sincere? —No, it is sincere only because they are made to appear sincere by public pressure. 152. You do not think that economies could be effected to cover the cost of the Federal administration?—l do not. 153. You do not think there is any possibility of the Federal power absorbing the powers of the States?—l do not think so, under this Constitution. 154. Supposing unification did not come about in ten years, do you think it would be advisable for New Zealand to enter the Federation as it now exists ?—I do not think so, if you mean to enter now. 155. Not even if we had faster steam communication?—l think you are too far away. You would not like to have a big store here, and to be managing it from Auckland. 156. But are there not some branches here of large concerns in other parts of the world?—■ You want to be on the spot to manage a large business successfully. There are very few people in this colony, excepting the educated people, who know what sort of a country New Zealand is, and therefore no interest is taken in it. 157. Does that explain the reason why you see so little information in the daily papers here about New Zealand?—l found it was the.same in England—that the people there did not know anything about Australia. 158. Mr. Beid.] You have been Attorney-GeDeral, Mr. Want ?—Yes, in several Ministries. 159. With regard to the means and power of amending the Constitution, are you familiar with that matter?—l am.
A.—4
664
160. Do you consider it effective ?—I think it is unworkable, or nearly so. 161. That being so, there will be no alteration or amendment of the Act by the Imperial Parliament?— That is so; all we can do is to wipe it out and start afresh. 162. That being an unworkable clause, you think you would have to get the Constitution amended by an Imperial Act ? —I think so. 163. Are you familiar with the judicial provisions?— Yes. 164. What do you think about the constitution of the High Court ?—I think the clause is of very great importance, as far as altering the present appeal to the Privy Council is concerned ; but I take exception to that alteration which has been made, as to controlling the power of the people in this country to go direct to the Privy Council. 165. You think there should be a right of appeal with leave? —Yes; I wanted to leave exactly as it is now the appeal to the Privy Council, a tribunal which is without bias or prejudice. And we also have it without any expense. In these days also the appeal to the Privy Council is just as rapid as an appeal to your own Courts. I have known appeal cases go to England and back, and be settled before a case was settled in the Appeal Court in these colonies. 166. Do you think that the 73rd section of the Act makes the right of appeal exclusive to the High Court ? —That is the clause which gives you the right to go to one or the other, and in that connection I think you will find a case mentioned in Bryce on the " American Constitution," where there were cross appeals. The plaintiff appealed to the Privy Council, and the defendant appealed to the High Court, and they both got a decision in their favour. They never got out of the tangle. 167. Then, you think the 74th clause is exclusive?— Yes. The 73rd clause allows one to go to one Court and one to the other. 168. Where do you think the High Court will sit ? —lt must sit within the Federal territory. 169. Mr, Leys.] You said that, from your knowledge of the workings of political life, you thought New Zealand would be at a disadvantage : I suppose you have had a pretty long experience of political life o —Yes;- I have been in four Ministries. 170. It has been suggested to us that, although New Zealand would be very much in a minority in the Federal Parliament, the " lofty ideals" of political life would secure New Zealand receiving justice if she joined the Federation : what is your opinion ? — My experience is that " lofty idoals " in political life have been right through a minus quantity. 171. You seem to anticipate a struggle between the States and the Commonwealth : do you think it very likely that New Zealand would go to the wall in such a struggle ?—I do net think it would go as far as that. 172. But New Zealand's interests would be likely to suffer?—l do think so, undoubtedly, if you joined now.
Wednesday, 17th Apeil, 1901. E. H. Lascelles. (No. 246.) Mr. Lascelles, of Melbourne, was unable to appear for examination, but sent the following reply to a series of questions put to him, by letter, by the Commissioners : — Deak Me. Lascelles, — Adelaide, 11th April, 1901. The Hon. Colonel Pitt, our Chairman, has asked me to write to you acknowledging the letter of 3rd instant received from your firm, and explaining that, although we shall not have an opportunity of taking your evidence personally, it would be esteemed a favour if you would furnish us with certain information in writing. In anticipation of your agreeing to our wishes in this respect, I submit the following heads I have drawn up, which will show you the sort of information we desire to obtain. (1.) What is the extent of the mallee country which is suitable for wheat-growing ? (2.) What is the extent suitable for fruit-growing? (3) What is the acreage already under cultivation of— (a) Wheat and other grains; (i>) fruit ? (4.) What acreage is being brought in yearly ? (5.) What is the mode used of breaking in the country and making it fit for cultivation ? (6.) The cost of the same. (7.) What is the nature of the tenure, and rent or purchase-money payable? (8.) What is the cost of putting in and taking off the crops and delivering grain at the nearest railway-siding ? (9.) What is the average yield of grain per acre ? (10.) What are the average wages paid for labour? (11.) What 13 the average rainfall ? (12.) Is any assistance given to settlers in the mallee by Government ? If you are unable to give an exact answer to any of the questions will you kindly give the best reply you can. I shall be much obliged if you address your reply to the Chairman at the Metropole, Sydney. Thanking you in anticipation, I am, &c, E. H. Lascelles, Esq., Geelong. Jno. Eobeets. Deae Sib,— Geelong, 17th April, 190.1. I am sorry that absence up country prevented me from giving evidence to your Commission when in Victoria, but Mr. Roberts's questions submitted to me in his letter of 11th instant are so full that they will quite exhaust the subject. My replies are as follows :— (1.) About 7,000,000 acres.
665
A.—4.
(2.) The total area of Victorian mallee is about 12,000,000 acres, the 5,000,000 not agricultural being hummocky sandy country, growing chiefly heaths. In generations to come, a large portion of this seemingly useless land may be utilised for fruit-growing. From my own experiments, I believe it is adapted for that purpose. Outside of_this, and exclusive of the Mildura Settlement, all pine ridges throughout the mallee are good for fruit-growing, even the white-sand ridges are found very suitable; it is pure guesswork to estimate the area —I should say half a million acres. It will be a feature of mallee settlement that most of the settlers will have good gardens on their Murray pine ridges. (3.) (a.) About 800,000 acres, practically all wheat, (b.) Excepting Mildura, probably not 200 acres. (4.) Owing to past bad seasons, from 1895 to now (last season being a medium one), comparatively little new country is being cleared. I should say it would not average more than 30,000 acres per annum for the last five years. (5.) Chiefly use of mallee-roller, which rolls scrub, say, 10 to 12 acres per day for each team. The rolled scrub lies on the ground for three or four months, and is fired in February. Heavy mallee has to be cut with the axe, and is similarly burnt. (6.) 3s. 6d. to ss. per acre for rolling; 6d. to 3s. per acre for picking up and snagging, according to character of burn. Cutting down with the axe costs ss. to 7s. 6d. per acre; picking up, same as above. (7.) The existing leases were for twenty years, and expire on the Ist December, 1903. Eent varied from 10s. to £2 per square mile, according to character of land ; but lessees can select from 640 acres to 1,920 acres, at from£l for former to ss. for latter, payable without interest in forty annual instalments, when Crown grants are issued. They can also take similar areas under perpetual lease, paying 1J per cent, per annum on unimproved values, subject to adjustment every ten years. (8.) Ploughing, sowing, and harrowing, 55.; seed, 30 lb. to acre—average price, Is. 3d.; stripping, according to crop, say, 4s. ; winnowing, Is. ; bags, Is. ; average cartage, Is. The above is for a two-bag crop. If ploughed one year it is considered a fair thing to disc it the next; so discing, harrowing, and sowing would only cost 2s. 6d. per acre over the two years. The average cost of putting in and taking off a crop, including cartage, would be 12s. per acre. The prices quoted are contract prices I pay. A farmer with his land free, and a working family, would probably say that at a gross return of 10s. per acre he could pay his way, but it would be a hard life, and only bare necessaries to figure in the menib. (9.) Mallee settlement on an extensive scale commenced in 1889, when there were six good seasons (1889 to 1894 inclusive), the rainfall averaging at Hopetoun 18-i-in. From 1895 to 1900 the average has been 11 in. For the former period I estimate the average yield at 12 bushels (where not affected by rabbits) ; for latter period the average has been about 4-J- bushels—starvation years. The average on 80,000 acres of my Hopetoun Settlement last season was 7£ bushels ; and the average price at railway-station was 2s. 3|d. (10.) £1 ss. per week for ordinary farm-hands, and £1 7s. 6d. for horse-drivers, men finding themselves; but during harvest-time men not in constant employ get about £1 15s. to £2 per week and find themselves. (11.) This is answered in No. 9. (12.) The mallee has been settled by farmers taking land directly from the State, or by purchase from me and others of the unexpired terms of lease. The Government have assisted many settlers with seed-wheat, and loans for erection of netting fencing, but practically no Government help has been given to those who may be termed my settlers. The Shire Council has received loans, on which interest has to be paid, for the construction of water-channels. One great trouble with mallee-settlers, and which has caused crops only to be scratched in, has been the want of water; but a reservoir is to be constructed in the Grampians, and the fall being to the north, with no engineering difficulties, water can be cheaply conveyed right through the mallee. Trusting the information given is all you require, Yours truly, The Chairman, New Zealand Federal Eoyal Commission, E. H. Lascelles. Sydney, New South Wales.
BEISBANE. Monday, 22nd Apkil, 1901. Joseph Hughes examined. (No. 247.) In reply to the Chairman, Mr. Hughes said he was the Begistrar-General of Queensland, and had been a little over two years in office. The area of land under crop for sugar, including the area for crushed and plant cane, and stand-over cane, in 1900 was 108,535 acres. The area crushed for sugar was 72,651 acres. The yield of sugar was 92,554 tons for the season of 1900. The area under cultivation for sugar was 2,122 acres less than it was in the previous year. The decrease was attributable to the severe drought throughout the sugar districts as far north as Mackay. Further north than that the season had been a fairly good one. 2. Hon. the Chairman.] What labour is employed in the area spoken of ? —I cannot tell until I get the result of the census. 3. What is the kind of labour? —Speaking from my own knowledge and not statistically, there are all kinds of labour employed on the sugar-plantations —South Sea Islanders or kanakas, Japanese, Javanese, Chinese, and whites. I cannot give you the figures about the whites, and I am not prepared to say what the proportion is, because I decline to do any guesswork in the matter. 84—A. 4.
A.—4
666
4. Can you tell us under what conditions the Japanese are employed on the sugar-planta-tions ?—When I lived in the north I was aware that these men were brought down under special agreement between the planters and themselves, and men were sent down with them to look after their interests. 5. Had those agreements anything to do with the Governments of the two countries ?—1 am not prepared to say. 6. Have you lived much in the sugar country?— Yes; in Townsville. 7. What is your opinion as to the possibility of the sugar industry being carried on by white labour? —There is always a very great difficulty in obtaining white labour to work in the sugarcane fields. 8. Is there a disinclination on the part of the white labour to work in the fields ?—Yes, a very great disinclination excepting in connection with ploughing and such work. 9. Do you think the planters could rely on obtaining the services of white labourers for trimming or cutting the cane?—l think they could not for "trashing," which means working in the standing cane, or cutting. Even if they get white labour to undertake that work, they have a great difficulty in inducing them to stick to it. 10. Do you think the climatic conditions are against the white man labouring there ?—ln work involving working in the standing cane, yes. 11. In southern Queensland are the climatic conditions favourable to white men working in the sugar-fields ?—When I lived in Bundaberg, which is a sugar district, none but kanakas were employed in the field-work; but that was twenty-five years ago. 12. Do the climatic conditions of Bundaberg prevent white labour being employed there?— That is a question lam not prepared to answer. lam not a sugar expert. 13. Can you tell me what are the agricultural products of Queensland ?—Wheat, oats, barley (both malting and other), maize, rye, a small quantity of rice, potatoes, pumpkins, sugar, arrowroot, tobacco, coffey, hay (and green fodder), bananas, pineapples, and oranges. Only a few apples and pears are grown. 14. Are these products grown in sufficient quantity to supply the wants of Queensland? —Not in wheat or oats. Barley is imported, and maize depends on the crop here as compared with the crop in New South Wales. It is a fluctuating quantity; two years ago we exported maize largely, but last year we imported a good deal. 15. How long is it since malting-barley has been grown in Queensland? —Two years ago the amount was very small, but there has been an increase, and last year the acreage of malting-barley was 6,011 acres, with a yield of 100,027 bushels. 16. Is that likely to be an increasing industry here ? —lt is increasing, and the yield for the year before was only 26,000 bushels. It is principally grown in the district west of Toowoomba. 17. Is the production of oats increasing?— The total average for 1899 was 714 acres, which is more than double the previous year ; but it is insignificant, and the yield is not very great. The yield for 1899 was 10,712 bushels, the acreage being 714 acres. In 1899 the acreage under wheat was 52,527 acres, and the total yield was 614,414 bushels, or an average yield per acre of 11 - 36 bushels free from rust, the average for the whole colony being 11-70. 18. Is the dairy produce increasing?— Yes ; the butter exported in 1899 was 1,159,2551b., of the value of £49,517 ; and the cheese exported that year was 11,358 lb., of the value of £250. 19. Do you export condensed milk ?—No. 20. Did you import butter and cheese during that time?—ln 1899 we imported 26,4801b. of butter, of the value of £1,166; and cheese to the amount of 69,3321b., valued at £1,833. 21. Hon. Captain Russell.] Did you occupy an official position when you were at Townsville ? —I was in charge of the Customs there. 22. Could you tell us from memory or documentary evidence what are the vital statistics up there ?—The number of deaths in Townsville in 1899 was 257. 23. Have you any idea what the death-rate is in Northern Queensland? —I am not prepared to say that it varies in any conspicuous degree from the rest of the colony. 24. Is there anything to show that the white people are less productive there, or that the death-rate of children is greater there than elsewhere ? —The figures are not localised. Speaking without the statistics, I know that it is a very healthy place for children. 25. Do the children pine during the hot weather ?—Not very much. 26. Are there many native-born Europeans in the north of Queensland? —Yes, a good many. 27. What is the condition of their health?—A great deal depends on the locality in which they are brought up. Townsville is a healthier place than some people think. It is an extremely dry place, with sugar-plantations to the north and south of it, but no agricultural land near the town. 28. What occupations do the white men follow who are employed in the sugar districts ? — Ploughing, engineering, and they also are employed as mill-hands. 29. Are those occupations of a superior or ordinary kind ?—The ploughman is superior to a man who only uses a hoe. 30. You said that the disinclination of the whites to labour in the sugar-fields was the cause of their not taking up that work ?—I imagine that they do not like the work. 31. Is it because they consider it infra dig., or because of the temperature?— The work is extremely physically trying. Ido not think there is any question of dignity in the matter. » 32. The question of the " niSan white " has not cropped up there ? —I do not think so, 33. It is simply because they feel it too enervating?—lt is too exhausting. 34. Do you imagine that that feeling will extend as the generations go by?— That is entirely a matter of conjecture. 35. Are there any manufactures in that Northern Territory other than sugar? —Not many. 36. Is that due to the sparse population or to the climate ?—The cost of labour is greater there, because there is not the same competition that there is down south, and the employers think that the men do not do so much work.
A.—4
667
37. Why not—are they a bad class of labour?—Oh, no; it is the climate. 38. You think the men are willing to work, but are unable to do so?— There are some small manufacturers there, but they cannot compete with the south. 39. What wages do the ploughmen get there ?—I had rather you asked a more recent authority, as I have been away from the north for two years. 40. Mr. Millar.'] When you were at Townsville were you the officer appointed by the Government to look after the cane-fields ?—No. 41. What department is that under?— There is an Inspector for the Pacific-islanders, who ooks after their interests. 42. Who looks after and recommends the payment of the Government subsidy to the sugar industry ?—I am not aware that there is any subsidy paid. 43. Has not there always been a subsidy paid on the setting-up of mills ?—I think it scarcely comes under that heading. You mean the advances for the construction of central mills ? 44. Yes; and the condition under which it was originally granted was that there should be no black labour employed ?—Yes ; that there should be no black labour in connection with the mills, and that is still the law. 45. Who looks after that matter? —It is under the Agricultural Department, but the Department of Pacific-islanders would be able to supply you with all the information connected with the kanakas, their employment, housing, sanitation, clothing, and wages. 46. Could they give us definite information as to the death-rate amongst the kanakas working on the plantations ?—I think I should be able to obtain for you a comparison of the mortality of the islanders as compared with the whites. > -;48. Mr. Beaucharnp.] Compared with the other industries here how does the sugar industry rank?— Our exports for 1899 were as follows: Wool, £3,400,000; gold, £2,915,000; sugar, £1,163,000; frozen beef, £796,468; frozen mutton, £37,265; frozen tongues, £1,398; extract of beef, £215,209; salt beef, £10,037; dessicated beef, £1,917: cattle (overland), £707,000; sheep (overland), £180,000 ; hides, £482,125 ; tallow, £468,829; green fruit, £93,291; skins, £218,000; pearl-shell, £137,000; manure, £24,000 ; tin, ore and smelted, £81,000 ; wolfram-ore, £26,000. Total exports for 1899, £11,942,858 ; and total imports, £6,764,097. 49. With regard to the employment of whites in these northern districts, do you think if the employers were to offer a sufficiently high wage they would induce white men to take work in the cane-fields ?—That is what the great controversy is about. My opinion is that they would not take the work even if they were offered an extremely high wage, because it is too severe. They might work at it for some time when they were hard-up, but they would not take that kind of employment if they could get other, and you must remember that white men are scarce up there. 50. Are the unemployed here men who do not want any work?— There is a section of them who will not go outside the towns to work, and in the country at present there is a great depression following on the drought. This has congested the labour-market in the towns. 51. How long has the drought lasted ?—When I was in Cunnamulla some months ago they said they had not had a good season for four years. We generally have a succession of bad. seasons and then of good ones. 52. Are the kanakas permitted to bring their wives with them, or are a certain number of women allowed to accompany the men ?—Some women come with every ship-load, but only a very small number. 53. Do they breed at all ? —Yes. 54. If they return do the children return with the parents ?—A man takes his wife and children home. 55. What is the period for which these men are employed?— Three years. 56. Is there a poll-tax on the Japanese and Javanese ? —No; there is a restriction on Chinese, but no absolute tax. The Chinese are restricted to one Chinaman to each 500 tons burden of a ship's register. 57. Mr. Luke.] What is the population of Queensland? —500,000 approximately. 58. Where do you send the tin-ore to? —The ore to New South Wales, and the smelted tin probably to London. 59. Are there any works for treating tin-ore in Queensland ?—They are erecting smelters at Chillagoe, to the west of Cairns. 60. Where do these large mining concerns get their machinery from ? —A good deal is made in Queensland, but they also import it from New South Wales. Machinery valued ai £15,267 was imported in 1899, of which half came from New South Wales. 61. What are the hours of labour in these mining districts?— Bight hours. 62. What is about the wage paid ?—The ordinary wage in Charters Towers is about £2 10s. to £3 a week. 63. Mr. Leys.] Have you given any attention to the finances of the Commonwealth as they affect Queensland ? —No ; my attention is mainly directed to recording existing facts. 64. In many tropical places it is considered the rule to send the women away periodically : is that the rule in Northern Queensland? —The North-Queenslanders always try to get away if they can —the women as well as the men. The well-to-do people always send the ladies of their family away in the hot months, and also their children. 65. Is that because they find their health suffering ?—Certainly the northern climate is very much more trying than it is in the south. I speak from experience. 66. That seems to indicate that the white race does not permanently thrive there ? —There has not been a sufficient lapse of time to see. The climate affects the women more than it does the men. 67. Do you think, from your observation, there is likely to be any large market in Queensland for New Zealand agricultural produce ?—There is a good deal imported in the way of oats.
A.—4
668
There were 186,905 bushels imported in 1899, valued at £22,835, of which New Zealand supplied 73,519 bushels, valued at £9,216. 68. Do you know any other New Zealand product that comes in to any extent ? —Potatoes ; but it is not very great —660 tons out of 15,128 tons, unless some of those imported from New South Wales came from New Zealand. 69. Do you import New Zealand timbers ? —We used to some years ago, but not of late years. We imported in 1899 New Zealand hardwood timber to the value of £780, and pine to the value of £5,603. 70. Is that kauri-pine ?—That is pine timber under 96 in.—that is, under 12 in. by 8 in. 71. Do you import Californian timbers ?—Only to the value of £513 in 1899. 72. Hon. Major Steiuard.] What was the value of the wheat you imported last year? — £102.920. 73. How much from New Zealand ?—£5,668. 74. And barley?—£lo,9ss, of which £5,833 came from New Zealand. 75. Do you import onions ?—Yes; £20,281 in 1899, of which only a small amount, amounting to £474, came from New Zealand. 75a. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] When you speak of the climate affecting the Europeans you do not mean the high lands of the north ?—No ; the coast-line where the sugar is grown. Townsville is immediately on the sea. 76. You are not speaking of the pastoral high lands inland?—l did not make any mention of them. Alexander Chabdes Grant examined. (No. 248.) 77. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Grant ?—Managing director of Morehead's (Limited), stock and station agents, stock salesmen, produce dealers, and general merchants in Brisbane. We deal with every part of Queensland. 78. Have you any knowledge of the sugar industry ? —No. 79. Are you connected with agriculture ? —With wheat only. 80. Mr. Leys.] What is the average price of cattle here for export?— From £1 3s. to £1 4s. a hundred pounds in the yards. 81. Hon..Captain Bussell.] How long has that been the price?— For the last six months. Before that, for a time, it was probably about £1 a hundred pounds. We have had a very bad season, which has placed an additional value upon fat cattle. 82. Has there been a great loss of stock? —The loss of stock in Queensland has probably been over 60 per cent, in sheep, and in cattle certainly from 50 to 60 per cent. 83. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You mean over the whole drought ?—I should say this estimate covers the loss in sheep during the last twelve months. The estimate of decrease in cattle you may say extends over the last two years and a half. The sheep owe their decrease to the drought; and the cattle in part to the drought, but in a great measure to the tick pest, and also to the fact that a great many cows have been speyed for certain reasons. A great many cattle have been exported. 84. Mr. Leys.] Was beef very much cheaper two years ago ?—Yes.' 85. Do you think there is any large likely market in Queensland for New Zealand produce ?— Ido not think so. We have had New Zealand hides sent over for sale, and the returns have been very satisfactory; but we have never received many consignments, although I believe the returns were satisfactory to consignees. I think there is'no market for your butter here, as we are increasing our dairying operations very much indeed. In one district quite close to our border, where a few years ago there were only a few milking-cows, there are now over fifty thousand being milked, and the same extension is taking place all round here. 86. Do you think that Queensland will become self-supporting in respect to wheat ?—That is a very difficult question, and puzzles wiser heads than mine. The wheat-cultivation at present is of a spasmodic character, and the area under wheat is confined to the Darling Downs. Now, the Darling Downs is a district which commences about sixty miles from here. It is a large district, and one of the best we have got. The Darling Downs is generally supposed to be the garden of Queensland ; but the whole of the Darling Downs is not of equally good quality. A portion of it is wonderfully fine, rich agricultural country, but the other portion is purely pastoral country. 88. Mr. Leys.] You were saying that it was uncertain whether there would be any great future for the extension of grain-growing here?— With proper methods, systematic cultivation, and with the erection of light tramways we may be able to grow wheat for export. The Darling Downs district is divided into country which has got a very good rainfall and country which has got a scanty rainfall, and therefore the good agricultural country on the downs may be measured by that portion which is of a first-class character and which has got a good rainfall. 89. What would be the value of the land per acre which is suitable for wheat-growing ?—My company has got in its hands for sale the pick of the Darling Downs—that is, the late Mr. Tyson's station —and the price of that is from £3 to £3 ss. per acre. 90. Is that improved land ? —Only for pastoral purposes—fenced for keeping sheep in paddocks. It comprises a considerable quantity of first-class lucerne land, on the banks of a good creek. 91. Do you think there is any probability of New Zealand potatoes finding a big market here ?—I am not able to give any information about them. 92. Mr. Luke.] Were the hides you mentioned as having come from New Zealand for manufacture in this colony or for re-export? —They were sent to us for sale, and were bought by our tanners. Prices were better here than could be obtained in New Zealand for that class of hide. 93. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is the export of frozen beef and mutton falling off on account of the losses in sheep and cattle?—lt has not decreased very much. Large numbers of female cattle
669
A 4
have been speyed, and thus became available for sale as beef cattle to export companies. The tenure of leasehold country is so uncertain that many pastoralists considered it better to spey their female cattle, so that they could readily turn them into cash, instead of having them on their hands when the leases of runs expired. Owing to the working of our Land Act, which does not provide for the renewal of the leases, many owners considered it better to deal with their cattle in this way ; consequently there has been a large number of fat cows available for consumption. 94. How long is it since cattle suitable for export were selling here at £3 10s. and £4 per head ? —They were never selling as low as that in my time and neighbourhood. We have, however, had a large surplus of cattle, and in 1890 we sent over 495,000 head of store cattle into New South Wales and Victoria. 95. And do you still continue to do a very large trade in that direction?—No, a small trade now. We have meat-works of our own, and our surplus cattle are sold for export. 96. Have you factories for preserving milk? —Several. 97. Are they producing for export as well as for local consumption?—l do not know whether the industry has reached that stage yet, but there is no reason why it should not succeed. I have not seen any New Zealand preserved milk sold in this market. 98. Hon. Captain Bussell.] What description is that land on the Darling Downs which is being offered for sale at £3 ?—That would be beautiful rolling downs, in a great measure without timber —there might be an occasional tree —then a belt of timber, and then more rolling downs on the other side. Well watered for pastoral purposes ; but I wish it to be understood that Ido not consider that is the market price. 99. Is it capable of growing wheat ?—Yes, very well, indeed, 100. What stock would that land carry ?—There is a great difference of opinion on that point. Many people say that it will carry more than one sheep to the acre ; but I believe, if it is to be kept in a marketable condition, it will not do to carry more than one sheep to 1-J- acres. 101. Does wheat-growing not pay there? —The general opinion is that it does not pay ; but I think there are reasons why it does not pay. 102. What is the system of cultivation ? —They use " discs," and have the latest machinery in use. I believe that ploughing and harrowing can be done as low as ss. an acre. 103. Is that virgin land ? —Land which has been already in crop. 104. Do they strip or reap ? —I think they strip. 105. After they have taken a crop of wheat off, what do they do with the land ?—They generally put it under lucerne for fattening sheep. The lucerne, under favourable circumstances, will stand for about seven years. The land on the creeks is much more suitable for lucerne than the rolling downs back from the creeks, only a portion of which would be suitable for growing lucerne. 106. What was the average price of beef per hundredweight, say, five years ago ?—About 13s. to 14s. for fat cattle. 107. Did cattle-running pay at those prices? —No. I think cattle never paid very well until exportation of beef took place. A few years ago those who owned cattle owned an insolvent estate you might say. The meat-freezing has been our salvation; but the ticks have destroyed a great many cattle. 108. Is there any possibility of sending fat cattle from New Zealand to here and making the trade pay ?—None whatever, because we can produce beasts cheaper than you can land them here. 109. Hon. the Chairman.] Can beef be exported at a profit at the present prices?— Our companies supply orders from Home c.i.f. ; but if the demand from South Africa falls off these companies would have to shut up. 110. Mr. Beauchamp.] Will these companies give the grower the option of selling or freezing on his own account ? —They do; but it is becoming more the practice with the companies to purchase. 111. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you think there is any chance of Queensland in the near future being able to supply her own requirements in oats? —That I could not tell. 112. Hon. Major Steward.] Can you give us, approximately by miles, the area of the Darling Downs? —The exact area is 6,067 square miles of settled districts, and 18,995 square miles of unsettled districts, or a total of 25,062 square miles. 113. Then, take the district you spoke of being so close to your border and as practically belonging to Brisbane : what would be the area of that district ?—Three hundred or four hundred square miles on the Richmond River. 114. Hon. Captain Russell.] Is the outlet for that part of New South Wales through Brisbane ? —We are building a railway to connect with their railway, which will bring that trade into Brisbane ; it does not come here at present, but, owing to the peculiar lay of the country, and the fact of the railways approaching each other so closely, it will not be long before it comes here. William James Scott examined. (No. 249.) 115. Hon. the Chairman.] What is your official position, Mr. Scott?—Under-Secretary for Public Lands. 116. What is the principal land-tenure in this colony?— The largest proportion of the land in the colony is held under pastoral lease for twenty-one and twenty-eight years without the right of purchase. 117. Is there a freehold tenure as well?— There is a provision for a freehold tenure, and there has been a considerable area alienated under that tenure. 118. Has the land been readily taken up under the leasehold provisions of your Land Acts ?— The leasehold tenure has always been going on in one form or another. It was che first fornVof tenure provided in the colony, but there have been changes in the method of tenure, and almost all
A.—4.
670
the available land which is not under other tenures is now under pastoral lease. There is another form of tenure —the agricultural farm—which can be made into the freehold tenure. The new operations under the pastoral tenures are not many, and are only in connection with lands which have been forfeited. 119. Does that apply to Northern Queensland are a great many forfeited runs in the Burke and Cook districts, but the operations are not many now. 120. What is the land principally held for?— Pasture. 121. Is there very much of the land which is held under the leasehold tenure available for agricultural purposes?—ln one sense a very large proportion is agricultural soil, but it is not suitable for agricultural purposes for climatic reasons—the want of rain. 122. Are none of these lands naturally watered by rivers ? —Some are in a sense, but many of our rivers in the interior are dry part of the year. 123. Are the lands upon which cereals are grown held also under the leasehold tenure ?—No ; they may be under the leasehold tenure, but they are convertible to freehold on certain terms. 124. Are there many forfeitures ? —They were very extensive in certain parts of the colony, but last year an Act was passed by which a number of these runs will be taken up again by the same persons who held them before. In the extreme west, from the Gulf down to the South Australian border, a large area was held under a twenty-one-years lease in three periods—for the first period, ss. a square mile; for the second, 10s. a mile; and for the third period, 15s. a mile— and when it came to the third period the forfeitures were very extensive. 125. Do I understand that the agricultural produce of this colony is not likely to be increased very largely ?—I would not say that, because it is likely to increase very largely, but it will be in the coastal districts. 126. How far back from the sea-line do you consider the coastal lands extend ?—From the coast back to the coast range. 127. How far is this coastal range back from the sea?— From about thirty miles to about a hundred miles. 128. Hon. Major Steward.] Do the leases under which the grazing-lands are held contain any conditions as to rotation of crops ? —No. 129. Is it not the fact that amongst the land which is so held there is a good deal of land which could be devoted to agriculture ?—lt would be largely devoted to that but for the climatic conditions. The soil is fit for anything. 130. And you do not think it necessary to impose any conditions regarding rotation of crops in these leases ? —No; there is no condition in any of our tenures regarding cultivation. 131. I ask the question because I was told last night that a great portion of your estate is likely to be absolutely ruined through everything being taken out of the ground, and that when the leases expire the land's are thrown upon the hands of the Government: is there anything in that? —I do not understand what your informant was referring to. We impose no conditions as to working the selections for agricultural purposes. Selectors are required to improve their holdings up to a certain value, but they can put their improvements in whatever form they choose. 132. With regard to the country known as the Darling Downs, is that under lease, or is it freehold or partially freehold ?—The Darling Downs is a very large district. That portion you travelled over when you came here is practically all freehold property. 133. Have you much land left in the hands of the State which is suitable for agriculture?— Not a great deal. 134. Then, do you anticipate this large increase in the agricultural products through the improved methods of cultivation—irrigation, and so on—or because you expect a larger area to be put under cultivation ?—On the coast, where we have repurchased a large quantity of land, there will be a larger production. 135. Mr. Leys.] Are you buying improved estates for closer settlement purposes?—We are buying freehold estates, but they are not very much improved. They have been used for grazing in the past. 136. Is there any large demand for agricultural land ?—Yes. 137. Who does that demand come from ? Is it from new-comers or from settlers who are already here ? —From both. We are limited to £100,000 a year for the purchase of land, but we can find candidates from our own people for all we can buy. We also get some people from the southern colonies. 138. At what price do you resell these areas ?—At as high as £6 an acre. 139. Do you sell them straight out? —We buy at a price, add a percentage to cover expenses, and we give selectors twenty years to pay it back, with 5 per cent, interest. 140. What area can a man take up under that system ? —He might take up as much as 1,280 acres ; but in administering these lands the areas are restricted in all instances, and in some down to 80 acres. About 160 acres is about the area taken up on the average by the small men. 141. With regard to that large strip inside the coastal range, is there any agricultural land in that ?—Yes. 142. How is that held?—lt has been taken up under various tenures. 143. Is it mostly held under lease ? —lt is very largely freehold, and large areas are now under the selection tenure of the Act of 1884. 144. Do you look to Queensland becoming self-containing in respect to all agricultural products ? Is there a market here now for New Zealand produce ?—I understand so. 145. Is it likely to increase ?—The dairy industry has made great strides here, and they are exporting. 146. Do you think grain-growing will ultimately make similar strides through closer cultivation ?—Yes ; but it is not a matter I have gone into ; it is rather connected with the Agricultural Department. The demand is very keen for agricultural land, and we cannot meet it.
671
A.—4
147. Mr. Beauchamp.] Does that strip of land we came through by train suffer severely from drought ?—lt does not suffer from drought as other parts suffer. 148. What is the average rainfall in that district?— For Toowoomba it is 41-44 in., and for Warwick 28-77 in. 149. In connection with the payment of the lands you sell, does that 5 per cent, over a period of twenty years extinguish the interest and principal?— Yes. . 150. Are you still leasing considerable areas of land under fresh tenures?— Yes; grazingfarms, with tenures of fourteen, twenty-one, and twenty-eight years. 151. How is that rent based ?—On the carrying-capacity of the land, the minimum rent being id. per acre. 20,000 acres is the maximum that can be taken up. 152. Which is the most popular tenure ? —The leasehold for grazing purposes. 153. What would be a fair value for the Darling Downs land for agricultural and pastoral purposes, separately ?—We have paid as low as £1 12s. and as high as £3 13s. Bd. when we have bought it back. It has been used for pastoral purposes in the past, but it will be used for agricultural purposes in the future. It is rather expensive land for dairy purposes, and if they can get it under grain they prefer to do so. 154. Have you any idea what that land would carry in sheep or cattle ?—I would not venture an opinion. 155. Mr. Millar.] What is the object of granting the freehold in agricultural land when you decline to grant it in respect to pastoral land? —Our tenants'do not want the freehold of pastoral land ; they prefer to pay a rental. 156. You give no option in pastoral lands?— No. 157. But you do in agricultural lands?— The latter is simply a purchase on deferred payment. 158. Have you much land available for sugar-cultivation ?—Not much in our own hands. There are areas in the north, but they are inaccessible at present. 159. Can you tell me whether any definite proposals have been made by the Government for an irrigation scheme for the interior of Queensland ? —I do not know of any. 160. Does your department in cutting up land add anything for roading? —Yes; we road the blocks, and add it to the rent; but nearly all these estates are largely roaded when we buy them. 161. Does your department grant any assistance to men going on the land? —No. We have an arrangement with the Railway Department whereby we put them on their land free, with their household effects, farm implements, and their families. 162. Does your Government grant relief to settlers in the event of bad seasons?—We give them time to pay their rents, but we have no power to remit rents. Patrick Robinson Gordon examined. (No. 250.) 163. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Gordon? —Chief Inspector of Stock, Brisbane. I have held that position since 1868. 164. 1 understand that a large portion of the stock in Queensland have died from the drought: is that so ?—ln the western districts there has been a very severe drought for nearly five years. 165. Are these droughts of frequent occurrence ?—Yes. During my tenure of office there have been four pretty severe droughts, but not so long continued as the present one. 166. How are the runs restocked after a drought?— They recuperate very rapidly as regards the grass, but the difficulty now is to restock, because we cannot buy breeding-stock and ewes on this side, or in New South Wales. 167. Is the production of wool in Queensland increasing? —Yes, it did until the present drought. 168. Do you export as much live-stock from Queensland by sea as you do by land ?—We export a large quantity of meat, but not many head of live-stock by sea. We send a large number by land; in fact, we supply the southern States with store cattle. We have more cattle than all the other States put together, but not sheep. 169. Do you think that this colony will be able to supply all its requirements in agricultural produce and stock ? —I think so. We have virtually no winter here, and in ordinary seasons the cattle graze all the year round. 170. Hon. Captain Russell.] What price are two- and four-tooth ewes at now?— Between 16s. and 17s. In normal seasons the usual price would be about 4s. or ss. 171. When do you imagine the country will be stocked up again?—lt can only be stocked up again by the natural increase, and it will take at least five years. They can afford to take two crops of lambs in eighteen months, and sometimes two crops in twelve months. 172. What is the price of wethers now?— About Bs. and 9s. ; for fat wethers up to 125., and crossbreds up to 15s. 173. Is Queensland exporting frozen mutton now? —Very little; mostly beef, which is largely sent to South Africa, and this year there has been more profit out of the tinned meats than out of frozen meat. 174. Do you know the Darling Downs ?—Well. 175. What is their carrying-capacity?— About 4 acres per bullock, but it has been overstocked for so many years that the natural grasses are not worth very much now. 176. Then, the stocking of the country has deteriorated it ?—Very much. 177. How many sheep can they carry to the acre on lucerne here?—We have had as many as fourteen and fifteen sheep to the acre. On lucerne you would be carrying forty sheep to the acre in a year—you would fatten that number. 178. What is the value of such land as that ?—The Government are buying it up for about £2 10s. and selling it at between £3 and £4, with twenty years to pay for it.
A.— 4
672
179. How long does the lucerne last ? —ln deep soil it will last many years, but if it be a light soil it will not last very long. It does not bear close feeding, because when the sheep eat down to the crown of the plant it dies out. 180. Supposing you laid down a favourable piece of land this year with lucerne, and you got a good crop, and you have four years of drought, is the lucerne lost altogether ? —I should say so. 181. How often does a drought take place between Warwick and Toowoomba ?—There have been four droughts during my tenure of office, but never such a severe one as this. 182. Does the Toowoomba district suffer by the drought ?—To some extent; the eastern districts have not suffered so much as the western. I do not think the grasses have died out in the Darling Downs. 183. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] I suppose the small settlers cut their lucerne ?—Yes; to supply the town here and other places with hay. 184. Does it succeed well that way ?—I think they get about four and five crops in a year. 185. With regard to the grasses, you say that in the western country they have failed a bit lately?— They have disappeared for a while, but they will come again. The Mitchell grass never dies. In the drought of 1883 I know that the wild carrot disappeared from the downs for nearly eleven years, but it reappeared. 186. Then, they never sow the artificial grasses in the back country ? — No. An attempt was made in the far interior by one squatter to make ensilage of the native grasses. 187. Mr. Beauchamp .] To what extent would you consider that the flocks of sheep have been reduced by the recent drought ?—I should say over all by 51 per cent. I had a return last week from one run where there were 104,500 sheep on the Ist January, 1900, and the number this year was 5,000 —that is a loss of 95 per cent.; but a fair average would be 51 per cent., because the loss has not been so severe in the eastern districts. 188. What has been the loss of cattle by tick and drought ?—A good number has been lost since 1896, but that has been because we did not understand the disease; we were under the impression that all the deaths were from fever, but now we find out that only about 20 per cent, of the losses were from Texas fever, and the majority were from tick-worry, which we can now prevent by dipping. 189. You dip the cattle ?—Yes. 190. What do you dip with ?—Arsenic dissolved with soda, eoap, and Stockholm tar. 191. Is there much land available for pastoral and agricultural purposes?— Yes. We have any quantity of land available for dairying, but agriculture will not pay unless the land is in close proximity to railway-carriage. 192. Have many cattle-stations been converted into sheep-stations?— Yes, a number before this drought. 193. Are they getting better returns from sheep than from cattle ? —Yes. 194. What are store cattle worth? —£1 10s. per head on the station before the drought, but now they are worth £4 per head on account of the drought. We are getting £8 per head for fat cattle for the local butchers. We also boil down a lot of cattle for tallow, and we have rendered into extract a tremendous lot of fat cattle for the Liebig Meat-extract Company. 195. Mr. Luke.} Where are your freezing establishments situated? —We have two here, one at Gladstone, a large one at Bockhampton, one at Bowen, and one at Townsville. 196. Are they all kept going since the falling-off in the stock ?—No ; several are hung up, and only three are working, but all are starting this month. There is enough stock for freezing. 197. Mr. Leys.} Is the increase of stock sufficient to keep up the present export of beef? — Oh, yes ; but it will not keep up the boiling-down works, which will have to be shut. It is not profitable to boil down for the tallow. 198. Supposing the meat-market declined, would it pay to boil cattle down?— Yes. If our cattle increase to seven millions we can reckon on 10 per cent, of them being turned off as fat cattle, and the balance we can utilise in some other profitable way. 199. Hon. Major Steward.] Do you breed horses to any great extent ?—We have about 480,000 horses. 200. I was referring to the type of horse now in great demand for cavalry purposes ? —We have a great number of weeds, but they have turned out to be just the thing for South Africa—of a light, rough, and hardy class. We have a large export of horses to South Africa and to India. 201. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Will they take that sort of horse for India? —No; but they buy here for India. 202. Hon. Major Steward.] Does the Government do anything towards improving the breed of horses ?—Nothing whatever. 203. About this tick : have you been prevented from exporting these cattle to the other States in consequence of the tick ?—We are not allowed to export any into Victoria or New South Wales from the tick-infested portion of the colony; but it is a coast disease, and no cattle are exported into New South Wales from there. They go from the portion west of the coast range. 204. Is the disease increasing?— The cattle have become immune in the northern part where it first appeared, and they do not have any trouble with the ticks now. 205. Have you any industry for the manufacture of bacon and hams ?—Yes ; we have the largest factory in the Australian Colonies here. 206. Is that export growing ?—Yes. 207. So that you do not require to import New Zealand bacon and hams?—No; we export to New South Wales. 208. Or butter or cheese ?—No. 209. Do you think in the near future Queensland will be able to supply her own requirements in the matter of oats? —-Maize is taking the place of oats as feed. Ido not think oats are much grown here at all. We get some from New Zealand.
673
A.—4
210. As regards wheat, you will have a considerable export by-and-by?—l do not know ;we have to fight the rust here, and it depends on the season whether we have to import or not. We are not up to the exporting-point yet in wheat. If it is a muggy season we are sure to have the rust.
Tuesday, 23rd April, 1901. Captain Albert William Pearse examined. (No. 251.) 211. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Captain Pearse?—l am one of the proprietors of the Pastoralists' Beview. I am not a resident of Queensland, but I have been travelling in this State and in Australia for ten years. 212. What particular matter do you wish to bring before the Commission?—l want to show the Commission that under the present competition with certain countries it is impossible for us in Australia to grow wheat or anything else at a profit, and that it is absolutely necessary for us to have an Imperial zollverein. 213. Are you favourable to the present Australian Federation ?—Decidedly. 214. Do you think it will come up to the expectations claimed for it?—l think it will lead to greater economy and less expenditure. 215. I understand you are in favour rather of an Imperial Federation?— Decidedly I am, because I consider it is impossible for us in this colony to grow wheat against the Argentine Eepublic without an Imperial Federation. The Argentine has very cheap labour, and can put wheat into London at Is. 6d. and Is. 7£d. per bushel. 216. Are not they subject to greater pests than drought in the shape of locusts ?—They have not had a pest of locusts for three years. They have overcome that difficulty by sprinkling the land with acids. 217. Do you think the Argentine will be able to compete with these colonies in wheat ?—lt is doing so now. They are exporting this year 60,000,000 bushels of wheat, and it is a bad year. 218. How do you think this Imperial Federation should be formed?—-There should be some scheme by which colonial goods should be allowed into Great Britain with a priority over the goods produced by cheap labour in a foreign country. Twenty-two thousand cheap European labourers are going down to the Argentine this year to take agricultural work, and their wages will be £2 ss. a month. 219. Hon. Major Steward.] Is the Argentine likely to be a serious rival to New Zealand in the matter of dairy produce ?—A very serious rival. 220. Are they going in for dairying on a large scale in the Argentine ?—Yes. One Danish company has rented 42,000 acres of land at £3,000 a year, and the manager has gone Home to get the best stud stock money can buy. This company has the very latest methods for producing the best butter and cheese. When I was in the Argentine they were turning out, in three big factories, 20 tons a day. But the possibilities for dairying are wonderful. The land at £7 an acre is equal to your land at £23 an acre, and there is any quantity of it. 221. Mr. Leys.] Is the system of agriculture as carried on in Australia generally anything like what it is in New Zealand ?—Only in western Victoria, and possibly on the Hunter Eiver. 222. Do you think there is likely to be closer settlement and better tillage in Australia ?—Only in the coastal districts. 223. Do you think there will be a large increase in agricultural products in consequence of better tillage ?—lt is to be hoped so; but I do not think that New Zealand is likely to find any market here for its surplus produce. 224. Can you see any advantage that New Zealand would get from federation ?—None whatever ; it would be the other way. I think your laws are so far ahead of the Australian laws that it would place you at a great disadvantage to join. But I certainly think that you should join an Imperial Federation, to save your own people. 225. Is it possible to arrange such a Federation ?—Mr. Chamberlain's scheme is the one I am speaking about. 226. Do you think Mr. Chamberlain could induce the people of England to submit to extra taxation for the purpose of benefiting the colonies ? —The colonies are so much in favour in England at the present time that if deputations went Home from the Chambers of Commerce I think it would be arranged. 227. Is it your idea that foreign products should be subjected to a certain tax as against our colonial products? —As against the cheap labour of foreign countries. It is the only thing to do to save your own people. The competition of the Argentine will reduce the price of butter by 2d. a pound, as it has reduced the price of mutton already. 228. Mr. Luke.] Do you not think it will take many generations to reverse the present order of things in Great Britain in order to bring about Imperial federation ?—Events move so quickly nowadays that you may see it sooner than you expect. 229". Mr. Beauchamp.] Do you know what would be a fair value for land for agricultural and dairy purposes in this State ? —From 16s. to £1 an acre for dairying, and possibly £7 near the river for agricultural purposes. 230. One witness told us that land on the Tyson Estate was being offered at from £3 to £3 ss. per acre : I suppose that could not be described as dairying or agricultural land ?—No ; that is river land. 231. Have you discussed this Imperial zollverein question with many prominent people in Australia? —I have. 232. Is their opinion on the subject in favour of the zollverein ?—They say, with me, that it is the only chance of keeping up the white man's wage. 85—A. 4.
A.—4
674
233. Have you discussed the matter with Australian statesmen?—l have, with Mr. Bruce Smith ; but the one who took the most interest in the matter is Sir William McMillan, and he is favourable to it, although at heart a thorough Free-trader. 234. Are there very large areas of land available .in Australia for agricultural purposes that are not occupied ? —Yes, but I do not think it will pay to grow wheat on them. 235. But it would pay to grow it for domestic consumption, would it not? —It would pay to grow for export, if Great Britain would put a small duty on wheat. 236. Mr. Millar.] You have been in England lately, Captain Pearse ? —Yes. 237. What is the feeling there in regard to this question of an Imperial Federation ? —I think the English people are so fond of Australia at the present time that they would do anything for us. 238. Knowing the growing feeling in England with regard to this matter, and seeing that you occupy a position in connection with the producing interest in Australia, do you not think it would be well for you to take the initiative in trying to make it a live question ?—So far as the Beview is concerned, we are doing that every month, and strongly too. 239. What about the stock in the Argentine: can they beat these colonies in that respect ? —Their herds are increasing enormously. To-day they have one hundred and ten millions of sheep, and in ten years they they will have two hundred millions. They have twenty-eight million cattle to-day, and they are"increasing rapidly. They have from 700,000,000 to 800,000,000 acres of land, 60 per cent, of which is agricultural, and unless some preferential treatment is accorded to the colonies I can see no prospect of a market for our produce in Great Britain. Then, the currency is largely in favour of the Argentine. They sell for gold, and pay everything with paper. 240. Have you any idea of the freights from the Eiver Plate to London? —I will put them in when I return the evidence. [Not received.] The grain export from the Argentine this year is valued at £20,000,000 ; 60,000,000 bushels of wheat; 500,000 tons of linseed ; and 1,800,000 tons of maize. I have been on one block of land, of 200,000 acres of wheat, with five thousand Eussians farming it on the " halves " system. 241. Hon. the Chairman.'] Besides India, would not Australia and New Zealand have a large competitor in Canada in wheat ?—Yes, but that is a white man's country. 242. Is there not a large amount of British capital invested in the Argentine? —Yes. 243. Which would prevent the British people from taxing produce from the Argentine ? —That is true ; it is nearly all British capital. 244. Then, what prospect would there be of the products of the Argentine being shut out from Britain ? —To shut those goods out would help to bring about the democratic idea of keeping up the white man's wages ; it is not so much the capitalist who is involved. 245. If it is found that other portions of the world can produce much more cheaply than we can in these colonies, does not that point to the fact that we shall have to direct our energies into some other channels?—We must thresh this matter out in the Legislatures of the different colonies, and find some scheme. There is a very big field in the Argentine for New Zealand goods in the shape of wool-presses, agricultural machinery, saddlery, and harness, and I wish to bring that phase of the matter before this Commission. It is only twenty-one days' voyage from New Zealand to the Eiver Plate, and you could send them a lot of things in the way of agricultural machinery. v Peteb McLean examined. (No. 252.) 246. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. McLean?—Agricultural Adviser to the Department of Agriculture, Queensland. I have lived in this State about thirty-six years, and am acquainted with its resources generally. 247. What do you regard as the principal productions of Queensland? —Sugar, wheat, maize, barley, potatoes, hay, and nearly all kinds of fruit. The agricultural industry is increasing. Oats are grown principally for hay, and maize for horse-feed. 248. In your opinion, will the State of Queensland be able to produce sufficient produce for its own requirements?— Very shortly, and to export. We have been exporting a good deal of butter, but during the past dry season the export has ceased. 249. Do you think the export of butter is likely to increase ? —Yes ; but one difficulty we have is the want of facilities for getting it to the London market. 250. Do you think that cheese will be an item of export ? —I have no reason to suppose that it will not, because we have heard very favourable reports on our cheese from London. 251. Do you think the manufacture of condensed milk will become an item of export?—l see no reason why it should not. 252. Have you any knowledge of the sugar industry ? —A general knowledge. I was engaged in sugar-growing for a short time, but my land was not suitable for it. 253. Have you a knowledge of the sugar-fields in Northern Queensland ?—Yes. 254. Is there any white labour employed there ?—A good deal, principally in mill-work, ploughing, and a good deal of the field-work. 255. Do you think the sugar industry could be successfully carried on by white labour?—l am very doubtful about it. Some years ago the Parliament voted £50,000 to be advanced to growers to see whether it would not be possible to produce cane and sugar by European labour. Two co-operative mills were started under that provision at Mackay, and shortly after I was deputed by the Government to hold an inquiry into the state of those mills. I found that a very large proportion of the cane that had been crushed at the mills was produced by coloured labour, and, in fact, the day I left Mackay to report to the Government, one of the directors of one of these mills asked me if I would use my influence with the Government after I returned to Brisbane to get them a supply of kanakas. I turned round and said, "You take my breath away. You have got this money advanced by the Government after being voted by Parliament as an experiment to show
675
A.—4
whether sugar can be grown by European labour, and you have entered into an agreement to do so, and now you ask me to use my influence with the Government to get you a supply of kanakas. I will do nothing of the kind." 256. You infer from that that sugar cannot be profitably produced by white labour?— Not in Northern Queensland. It is not so much a question that it cannot be produced; but we have not got the labour, and we cannot get it at the time it is necessery to take the crop off the ground. 257. Is there not a supply of white labour in southern Queensland available for the sugar industry ?—There is very little sugar grown in southern Queensland. 258. Can you depend on the white labour?—l should say that you cannot. 259. In southern Queensland it is not a question that white men " cannot do the work," but that they " will not do it " ?—Exactly. 260. What is the ordinary rate of pay for agricultural labourers in this State ?—About £1 a week and found. 261. Hon. Captain Russell.] You say it is rather a question that the white man will not do the work than that he cannot do the work ?—ln southern Queensland. 262. Why will they not do the work ?—My impression is that they have an idea that the production of sugar has been all along associated with coloured labour, and they object to certain kinds of labour which is a necessity in its production, and which they think should be done by black rather than by white men. 263. Then, you think there is the question of the " mean white " growing up, as in America—■ that it is incompatible for a white man to work where a black man is working ?—There is a feeling of that kind. 264. What work is done in the fields by the blacks ? —Trashing, stripping the dead leaves off the cane. 265. Is that mostly done by white men or black ?—By coloured labour. Some white men work in the fields. 266. What proportion of white men is employed at that kind of work ?—I could not say exactly. Some people in the southern part of the colony do not trash the cane, they burn it just before the crushing. They burn the trash, and cut down the cane immediately after. 267. Are these men who are employed in the trashing ordinary labourers or gangers ?—Ordinary labourers. 268. What wages do they get?— About the same—£l and found. 269. Have you had much experience in the sugar-fields?—l have been all over them many times. 270. Does the health of the men last ? —Oh, yes. 271. The cane-fields are not injurious?— Not in any respect. 272. How is the health of the women who live in those parts affected ?—The women do not stand the climate anything like as well as the men. They are confined to the house, and they have not the same amount of exercise that the men have. 273. How would a woman who has lived ten years in tropical Queensland compare with a woman who has lived ten years in southern Queensland? —-A good deal depends on the woman. There are plenty of women who live in northern Queensland who are just as healthy as those in southern Queensland. 274. Are the women as healthy in northern Queensland as in Brisbane ?—I think so. 275. And the children ?—The children are healthy, and as strong and robust as those in the south. 276. Then, you would not be afraid that in the process of years the longevity of the women would be affected by living up there ?—Not as a rule. 277. What proportion of the children grow up—as many as in the more temperate parts of Australia? —I could not answer that. 278. But from living there ?—I never heard. 279. Mr. Millar.] I think you said that there was a difficulty in getting white labour to do this work ?—Yes. 280. Do you think the wage question has anything to do with it ? —I do not. 281. Do you think that a man would as soon go into the cane-fields and work for £1 a week as go to ordinary work at that price ?—ln southern Queensland he would, but in the north you cannot get them to do the work. 282. Have you in your experience ever found that the labour could not be got if you gave the money for it ? —The quantity of labour is not there, and it could not be got there, because it is only for a limited period that the labour is required. 283. Is not the shearing only for a limited period in the west ?—But the men follow it from one shed to another. 284. Is there any scarcity of labour amongst the shearers?— Sometimes there is, I understand. 285. Does not the fact that the wool is always got off point to the fact that where the monetary inducement is sufficient there you will find sufficient labour?— Shearing is very heavy work, but it is not the oppressive work that working in the cane-fields is. 286. How long does trashing take ?—That all depends on how long you have to keep your cane. The mill is not always ready to take the cane. 287. During that period if the mill were not ready would you knock the men off?— Yes. 288. But supposing the mill were ready to take all your cane, how long would it take to do the trashing of 150 acres ? —I could not say, but with several men in the field it would not take long. 289. That and the topping is about the only part of the work that is done by kanaka labour, is it not?— The trashing, cutting, topping, and hoeing. The white man does the ploughing, and the whole of the milling.
676
A.—4
290. Do you produce enough maize for your home consumption ?—Yes. I do not think we export much. Our average yield of maize is about 16 bushels to the acre. 291. Do you ever get two crops in one year? —Yes, a common thing ; and we have any quantity of land to increase the output of maize should the market offer. 292. Is that average for a good year, or for a series of years? —That was the average for 1899. 293. Mr. Beauchamp.] What quality of oats can you produce?— Not first class ; they do not seem to fill here as well as they do in New Zealand. 294. Are they Algerian oats that you grow ?—We grow all kinds. 295. I suppose for feeding purposes oats would be rather too heating here ?—I do not believe in that theory, that oats are heating. They are just as good for horse-feed as maize, and they are often mixed with maize—half oats and half maize. 296. Do you think you could grow all the oats for your own requirements ? —We have not done so yet. 297. What could a man of average ability as a shearer earn as compared with a man working in the cane-fields?—l do not think there would be any comparison ; the shearer can make much higher wages. 298. Mr. Leys.] Is trashing and cane-cutting very exhaustive work? —It is in northern Queensland. 299. Do you know of any other work so exhausting?— No. 300. Do you think the physique of the white man could stand the work continuously ?—I do not think they could in northern Queensland. 301. Is it not a matter of experience that the white men have tried it and thrown it up?— It is reported so—that gangs of white men have taken contracts, and have worked at it for a certain time, and then have given it up. I have every reason to believe that that is a fact, but I do not know it from personal experience. 302. With regard to these kanakas, do you think from your observation that they are well treated ?—I believe so. 303. Is there proper Government supervision over their housing ?—Yes. They prefer to build their own houses, and form a sort of village. 304. Do you think that it is healthy for them to allow that ?—I could not say. 305. There are reports that typhoid is rife amongst them lis that the case ?—I have never heard of it. Dysentery is prevalent shortly after they come here, but, of course, white men are attacked as well as kanakas by that disease. 306. Do you think the mortality is greater amongst the kanakas than amongst the white people labouring there?—l believe it is. 307. What do you attribute that to? —To the change of conditions, which are entirely different from those prevailing in their own islands. 308. You do not think it is attributable to any systematic neglect?—l am sure that they are not neglected. 309. Is it very cheap labour ?—lt is not looked on as cheap labour, but only as reliable labour. I would not look upon it as cheap labour. 310. Do you think if white men could be got at £1 a week and found it would be as cheap as kanaka labour ?—lf they would do the work. 311. Hon. Major Steivard.] Supposing a white man were employed, could he do as much work in a day as a kanaka could ?—I think he could. 312. What is the pay of the kanakas?—£6 a year and found, and certain clothing and medical attendance. 313. How does this compare with the £1 a week and found which is paid to a white man ? — The kanakas are a good deal of their time in their houses, and not in the field at work. I should say that the planter loses a very large portion of the kanakas' time, as they have their sicknesses, and a desire not to work. The first year of their engagement is practically lost. 314. Then, you think that the cost of white labour to the planter at the end of a year would not be greater than the cost of the kanaka labour ?—I do not think it would be much greater; but you must understand that the planter would not be employing white labour all the year round, while he does employ the kanaka the whole year. He would only be employing the white labour a very short time. 315. Does the £6 a year cover the cost of introduction to the colony ?—No ; I believe it costs about £30 a head to indent a kanaka. 316. For how many years is he engaged ?—Three years. 317. Is there any likelihood of the present Customs tariff being departed from, and oats being imported from New Zealand ?—I do not think it. Hon. Alfred Sandlings Cowlby, M.L.A., examined. (No. 253.) 318. Hon. the Chairman.] You have been the Speaker of the Queensland Parliament, Mr. Gowley ?—Yes, for six years. I am an ex-Minister for Lands, and have been a member of the Legislature since 1888. 319. Are you well acquainted with the districts in which the cultivation of sugar is carried on ? —Yes ; with every sugar district in the colony, but especially the north. 320. We are interested to know whether sugar-cultivation can be successfully carried on in Queensland by white labour: what is your opinion on that matter?—My experience extends Ifom 1872 to the present time, and during the whole of that time, although several experiments have been tried, we have never yet been successful in cultivating sugar by white labour entirely. 321. What are the difficulties in respect to the employment of white labour?— The country north of Eockhampton is extremely hot and wet in the summer months, the average rainfall on the Herbert, Cairns, and Johnson Rivers being about 120 in. That heavy rainfall, combined with the
677
A.—4
intense heat, makes it almost impossible for white men to work in the sugar-fields and to keep their health. Never yet have white men succeeded in doing the work, even though some have honestly tried to do it. One experiment was tried by the Government in 1885, when they determined to put a stop to the introduction of kanaka labour. In order to show that they believed the work could be done without employing kanakas, £60,000 was voted for the purpose of purchasing and erecting the necessary machinery for the manufacture of sugar. This money was lent to farmers—who were going to work on the co-operative principle—interest and redemption to be paid in half-yearly instalments extending over a period of twenty or twenty-five years. The conditions were that they were to grow the cane entirely with white labour, and white labour only was to be used in the mill. They tried the scheme for several years, but during the whole of that time they never paid to the Government a solitary farthing in the way of interest and redemption. They were unable to grow sufficient cane to keep the mill going; and eventually, through a flaw in the agreement, they evaded its provisions by leasing the land to others who employed coloured labour. The Government then, seeing what was going on, allowed them to employ kanakas, since when the mills have been a success. 322. We were told that in southern Queensland it is not so much a matter that the white labour cannot do the work, but that the white man will not do the work ?—Yes, that is so; in fact, they are not to be obtained, as they can get work which pays them better and is more suitable. That applies with greater force to northern Queensland, because in the south white labour is more plentiful than in the north. 323. From your experience, what do you say will be the result if the employment of coloured labour in the sugar-fields of Queensland were prohibited? —I do not think there will be any cane grown north of Bundaberg, which is comparatively close to Brisbane. If coloured labour is entirely prohibited, then the sugar industry must die. I see nothing else for it, as it would be impossible to obtain the necessary white labour, even if the white men were willing to do the work. In 1883-84 I endeavoured to obtain ploughmen from Gloucestershire, England, to come out to Queensland, and I offered to pay their passages and the whole of their expenses from the time they left their native villages until they reached, here, and to give them £50 a year, rations, and house. My agents told me that the terms were so good that they could get me as many as I wanted, and I told them to send twelve. Ultimately they sent only two, and said they could not get good ploughmen, as they would not leave their native county, even for a place where they would be so much better off. These two men came out, but, after working some time, they went off to the mines, and both made money. 324. Supposing the sugar industry were killed in Queensland, what effect would that have on the commerce of the State ? —lt would be felt in every industry in Queensland, because in the sugar industry we employ very large numbers of men, who have to be fed and also their families. It takes from 8 to 10 tons of cane to make a ton of sugar, and that has to be carried long distances. On some of our sugar estates we have from twenty to thirty miles of light railways, 2 ft. gauge, to convey the sugar-cane to the mills. Sugar itself is a bulky product. About 160,000 tons were made in 1898, for every ton of which we used at least a ton of firewood, as we do not use coal. All this employs large quantities of labour. Our supplies of horse-feed and stores for the men are drawn from the southern farmers and merchants. The northern boats are always full-up of farm produce of all kinds going from the south. Then, the foundries and engineering-works receive a great deal of their work from the sugar-plantations, because the plant must be kept up to date, and overhauled and repaired after every season. 325. I suppose this labour question was a burning one at the late Federal elections ? —Yes ; it was made so by Mr. Barton's manifesto. 326. Is it not a fact that members who favoured Mr. Barton's policy of a " white " Australia were returned for the sugar districts ?—Yes. 327. How do you account for that?—lt is a mystery to me, as the other side were so sure of winning. There is one Federal electorate which embraces six State electorates, and for these six electorates there are eight members, seven of whom are returned to the State Legislature all in favour of the employment of coloured labour, and one opposed to it; yet, while there are seven to one, and three of them Ministers of the Crown in favour of coloured labour, that electorate has returned to the Federal Parliament an anti-kanaka member. I put it down to the apathy of the other side, and to the prevalence of heavy rains in the north which prevented many men getting to the poll. 328. Do you think the result of the elections does not represent the true minds of the electors? —I am certain of it in this instance, and if the election was fought over again next week, it would result in a big majority the other way. 329. Mr. Leys.] What is the total value of the sugar output in Queensland? —In 1898 the total area under crop in this colony was 363,256 acres. Of this, there were 111,012 acres of sugarcane ; therefore the sugar-crop is nearly a third of the total area under cultivation. The area crushed for 1898 was 82,391 acres, and the yield was 163,734 tons, which, valued at £9 a ton, gave a return of £1,473,606, but that was our best year. 330. Are there any refineries in Queensland ?—Two ; but the bulk of the sugar is sent to Melbourne, Sydney, and South Australia to be refined. 331. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] And to Auckland ?—I do not think so; you get it from Fiji, but it is the same company. 332. Mr. Leys.] What proportion of that amount wouldbe distributed in wages amongst white labour and the farmers ?—The bulk of it. 333. What is the average wage paid to the kanaka?— About £9 per annum. The number of kanakas employed in 1898 was 8,589, the total number of coloured atourers in connection with the whole of the industry not exceeding 11,000. We take other coloured men when we cannot get the kanakas.
A 4
678
334. Then, the proportion of wealth derived from sugar which goes to the coloured labourers is not very large ?—No ; and the kanaka never takes anything out of the colony, as his money goes to the storekeeper. 335. What rate of pay do the Chinese, Japanese, and Javanese get?— Double the kanaka's wage; but they are not paid unless they work, whereas the kanaka is paid the whole time. 336. Including the cost of introduction, wages, and every other charge, what will a kanaka cost a planter in a year ?. —We have to get them under Government supervision, and the cost of passage is from £22 to £22 10s. We also pay the Government £4 a head, as the person who employs the kanaka must bear the whole of the cost of introduction, his maintenance while in the colony, and the cost of his return to his native land—the latter costs £s—making a total of £31. If you divide that by three, the cost is £10 6s. Bd. per annum. The wages average £9, the lowest being £6; but sometimes we pay £15 for old returned boys. The rations cost about £13 a year, and we have to house them, clothe them, supply them with tobacco and pipes, and medical attendance, which brings the total cost up to about £37 6s. Bd. per annum. Then, there is the loss by deaths, so that they are dear labour as far as money goes. 337. Do you think that white men at £1 a week and found would be as cheap, if they could do the work? —I would rather have them at £1 and board, if they could do the work and if you could rely on them, but you cannot. The sugar-cane must be transported to the mills as soon as possible after it is cut, so that we must have a standing and reliable supply of labour. Sugarbeet can be dug up and taken to the mill for about 4d. a ton, because they will keep. It takes the same quantity of it to make a ton of sugar as it does of cane, but it costs 3s. a ton to reap a cane crop, put it on the trucks and convey it to the mill, so that it is absolutely essential that whatever labour we employ shall be reliable. 338. Is there any restriction on the introduction of Japanese here ?—Yes, they can only be brought in with the Government's consent. 339. Does that restriction apply to all coloured labour ?—There is no treaty with Java. 340. Mr. Millar.] Do you think the smallness of the wages paid does not largely account for white labour not being available ?—No, because I have never employed a ploughman in the north under £1 a week and his rations, and yet we cannot get them. The bulk of them get £1 ss. a week; and I have offered them 2s. 6d. extra if they would stay the season through. A man would not take trashing at £2 a week, if he can get ploughing at "£l. 341. Do you think the European cau do the work properly?— Not for any length of time. 342. How long would a man be engaged in trashing?— About three months in the year. 343. Is that continuous work ? —Yes ; during the season when the cane is ripening we trash it twice before it is cut. 344. Are there any plantations where they do not trash, but simply put the fire through before cutting?— Not in Queensland. 345. In your experience of Queensland, have you not found that labour follows the work if remunerative wages are offered ?—No. 346. What about shearers : there is never any dearth of them ? —That is a different class of labour, but I have had no experience of shearing or what is paid for it. 347. Would not £5 a week attract men to the sugar-fields?— Nobody could pay it. In 1883 1 had 120 kanakas taken away from the plantation I was managing. They were supposed to have been kidnapped, and the Government, after inquiry, thinking they were brought over under false pretences, took them away and returned them to the islands. It was just when I wanted to commence crushing, and, rather than lose the cane, I offered double the price for the reaping of the crop, trusting that the Government would compensate me for the difference; but I could not get it done. I had a 3,000-ton crop, and I made 1,280 tons, leaving 1,200 in the field. I could not get the labour, although I was prepared to pay ss. or 6s. a ton for what I would have done with my kanakas for from 2s. to 2s. 6d. I failed to get the balance of the crop in, and I afterwards received £12,000 from the Government as compensation. 348. Assuming there waa a regular sugar harvest season, and it was known that work was available there at fairly remunerative rates, do you not think that white labour would be attracted to the industry ?—The result of our experience has been that the whites will not do the work. We have offered Is. a ton more than we could afford for cane-cutting, but we have failed to obtain white men to do it. In several instances they have tried, but in no case that I know of have they kept at the work for more than two weeks consecutively. With a larger population, and a better class of men, it would be hard to say what could be done, because many of these men at times make such good wages that after making a cheque they go on the spree, and that is the difficulty we have. 349. Is there any connection between the Colonial Sugar Company and any of these mills here ?—Yes ; they own several of them. 350. Is this £9 a ton for unrefined sugar ?—Yes. In 1882, I sold the whole of my crop of unrefined sugar to the Colonial Sugar Company, and I got £22 for it. The lowest that has been paid of late years was £8. 351. It seems to me that there ought to be a larger price paid to the producer than what is given ?—lt may be so; but when you take into account the fact that they find the bags, pay cash, bear the loss in the refining, and that they convey it all the way down the coast to the refineries, it is not a big margin. 352. 150 per cent, is a big margin?— They do not get that. We buy white sugars here as low as £14. They pay big dividends, and no doubt it pays them better to buy the raw sugar than to grow it. Nine-tenths of their cane is purchased from the small farmers, but they grow some. 353. You think that the climate is not suitable for Europeans, even if the profits will permit of them being paid a higher wage ?—My opinion is that white men can do anything which negroes can do, and under any conditions ; but they will not do it, and their health, in fact, will not stand it.
679
A.—4
354. Are the sanitary conditions sufficiently good to prevent typhoid among the kanakas ?— Very great attention is paid to that matter now. We have established hospitals, and employ a doctor to visit the plantations once a week, and if a man is ill he is taken at once to the local hospital, where, if it is found to be a bad case, he is .attended to by the medical men. 355. Have you heard anything about certain things that are said to exist at the present time? —Only from what I see in the paper. 356. Then, you have not heard that a doctor was sent down to a certain place, and refused to have anything to do with the patient ?—No. 357. Looking at it from the effective point of view, how is this country generally going to be affected if any amount of coloured labour is allowed in one portion ? And how would New Zealand be affected if she joined the Federation ? —I suppose you would get your sugar at a cheaper rate than you otherwise would. 358. What is to prevent these coloured people spreading into every part of the Commonwealth ?—The kanakas cannot. 359. But the Japanese and Javanese—if you find them necessary for the purpose of cultivating Northern Queensland, what is to hinder these people spreading over the whole of Queensland and the other parts of the Commonwealth ? —I do not know that there is anything to prevent them coming here if they can find employment, unless the Federal Parliament passes prohibitive legislation. They are fully able to do that. 360. You would not desire to see an influx of that labour, would you ?—I am not an advocate of coloured alien labour excepting the kanaka labour, which in no way competes with our white labour, but is entirely confined to work that our whites are not accustomed to, and in regard to which every penny spent in feeding and clothing the kanakas, and also for their wages, is returned to the whites again. 361. Looking at it from a Federal point of view, do you not think it would be advisable, if the Government were satisfied that this industry can only be carried on by coloured labour, that they should limit it to a certain area of latitude, and hold those who are responsible for importing that alien labour liable if it gets beyond that area? —I do not know that that would be fair. Ido not think that those who import the labour for the good of the Commonwealth should also bear the expense of the police as well. 362. But are they doing it for the good of the Commonwealth? Are they not doing it for the good of the individual?— How can you separate the two? 363. Assuming the 23rd parallel of latitude were fixed as the boundary over which the coloured labour should not go, would it not be fair, if any got away beyond that latitude, that the expense of sending them back should be borne by the employer?—l do not think so. 364. You do it now with the kanakas?— No. After the kanaka works his three years he is free to go to any part of Queensland or New South Wales ; but so long as he remains in Queensland he cannot engage in any work except tropical agriculture, and his last employer is responsible for his return passage. Directly he goes into New South Wales we have no control over him. If he wishes to go home we are compelled to send him, but we cannot send him against his will. 365. Is there any large proportion who ultimately settle in the colony?— None of them settle now. Twelve years ago a few settled, and then, when the Act was amended, it was taken into consideration that these men had come in under different conditions from those then existing, and they were exempt from the law relating to kanakas; but since that time no kanaka has been allowed to embark in any occupation excepting tropical agriculture. If he declines to work he can live with his friends until he sees fit to work. After the expiry of their three years' engagement some of them wait perhaps three months and then re-engage at a higher rate, but the agreement must be deposited with the Government so that they can be always traced. 366. I think you said that the result of the last election did not represent public opinion ?— Not in the sugar districts. 367. Do you have the same franchise for the Federal Parliament that you have for the State Parliament?— Slightly different. 368. Would not that account for it ?—No. The difference is explained by the fact that the one party polled all they knew and the other only one-half. 369. It was not because it was the first election under the one-man-one-vote ? —lt could not make that difference. It is very rough travelling in the month of March in the northern districts, and great difficulties were experienced from the flooded creeks. Unless people are really interested they will not run the risk of being seized by an alligator for the sake of recording their votes. There was no excitement about the Federal election, as people did not understand much about it, and were quiescent. In the draft Commonwealth Bill of 1891 provision was made that all Asiatics and coloured aliens, with the exception of the Maoris, should be dealt with exclusively by the Federal Legislature; but when the present Act was passed in 1898 that was altered, and the exclusive right was taken away from the Federal Parliament, and was vested in the State Parliaments until such time as the Federal Parliament saw fit to deal with it. When that alteration was made we believed it was enacted with the special object of allowing the State of Queensland to deal with the kanaka question, and the whole of the sugar-planters and those interested in sugar voted for federation on that understanding. It is only reasonable to suppose that when the power was taken from the Federal Parliament we should have believed that it would be left to us, and we voted for federation on that understanding. The North Queensland vote carried the day for federation in Queensland ; but now we find that we have been bitterly deceived, and that the very men who drafted that clause and made the alteration are now the first ones, practically, to give effect to the original Bill and to take into the hands of the Federal Government the power which should have been left in the hands of the State Parliament. 370. How is federation going to affect New Zealand ? —That is a big- order. lam a Federalist. I think ultimately it will work for good.
A.—4
680
371. Do you anticipate the reduction of the State Parliaments and the increase of the powers of the Federal Government ?—lt is hard to say, after Mr. Barton's manifesto regarding a "white " Australia, what will happen. I thought the Federal Government would be formed of honest, capable, and conscientious men; but look at their action in dealing with that question. I thought they would have allowed the matter to rest, at any rate, until the State most deeply concerned had requested them to deal with it. 372. Do you not think the people of the several States, after the Federal Parliament has legislated on the different questions set forth in the Constitution Act, will clamour for a reduction of the powers of the State Parliaments ? —No. I think the benefits to be derived from the federation of the States will more than repay them for any disabilties in that respect. 373. You do not anticipate that the State Parliaments will be eventually wiped out ?—No. 374. What will the Federal Parliament do after it has legislated on these thirty-nine articles ? —They will have to administer the laws ; and look at the benefit we get from intercolonial freetrade 1 375. Do you think that will repay the sacrifices made by the States ?—I think so, and I certainly think the defence of the colonies can be better carried on by a Federal Government than by each State acting on its own account. 376. You think New Zealand would be similarly benefited ?—New Zealand is further away, and is under different conditions to us. 377. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] You said you would rather have kanaka labour than any other : do you mean that they work better ?—I said I would rather have kanaka labour than any other coloured labour. They work better and are better behaved. 378. Has coolie labour been tried on the plantations?— No. 379. Are you aware that it is being used in the Mauritius by an arrangement with the Indian Government ?—Yes. I used them for several years in South Africa. 380. Were they satisfactory ? —Yes; but the Natal Government made a mistake when they introduced them. They were engaged for five years straight away with one employer. They received 10s. a month the first year, and an increase of Is. per month for each succeeding year. At the end of five years they had a free pass, and could either return to India, at their own expense, or, if they worked for other employers in the country for another five years, they could obtain a free passage back to their island or a grant of land. That was the mistake. The grant of land induced them to stay, and they became rather a nuisance to ordinary labour. 381- If the kanakas failed, could not the coolies be introduced to advantage?— Yes, on the condition that before the expiry of five years they should be returned to their homes. If they were put on board a ship and returned before the expiration of that term no ill-effects could arise, and they would constitute a very suitable class of labour for us. 382. It was mentioned that some farmers put a fire through the cane instead of trashing : is not that a very injurious process ?—lt is not only injurious, but very dangerous, and it is rarely resorted to unless it is an enormously heavy crop. On some of the rich virgin lands in the north in a fair season we get as high as 110 tons of cane per acre. That is a heavy yield, and you cannot trash that. In some instances, when we have a heavy crop we burn the trash so as to facilitate the cutting, but it is a very dangerous work, because on a hot day you might burn 100 acres. It does not spoil the cane if it is crushed at once, but fermentation sets in after a certain time and a percentage is lost, and the manufacturers will not give as much for the burnt cane as they will for the cut cane. 383. Practically, your opinion is that the sugar industry is impossible without the employment of coloured labour in this colony?— Yes, north of Bundaberg. South of that town it might be possible, but the industry would not be a great success. 384. And the only alternative for the employment of coloured labour would be to leave the country unoccupied ?—The land already cultivated could be turned into dairying country. 385. Hon. Captain Russell.] When did the sugar industry first become of any importance in Queensland ?—About the year 1870. 386. Is there much land not at present in sugar which is suitable for sugar-cultivation ?—As much as under crop. In the electorate I represent we have about two thousand square miles of scrub land of dense jungle. It is very suitable for sugar. 387. But further west, is there much land fit for sugar? —We cannot grow sugar in the west. No sugar is grown twenty miles from the sea. 388. I mean along the sea-coast ?— I know a couple of rivers where there are 50,000 acres suitable for sugar-growing, but there is not a single mill there. 369. Would it be rash to assume that the amount of land suitable for sugar-growing is two, three, or four times as much as there is in the north ? —Twice as much, at least. 390. Then, would Queensland look forward to the possibility of supplying the whole Commonwealth with sugar?—We can do it now in a good season. In 1898 we exported to Canada because we grew more than Australia could consume. 391. Then, you assume that for years to come, if the industry were conducted on even lines, Queensland could supply the whole of the Commonwealth with sugar?— Yes, if we can get the necessary labour. 392. Is the industry increasing or standing still?— 1898 was our biggest yield, but since then we have had very bad seasons. The approaching season will not be good. 393. I mean the area under cane ?—The area under cane is not a criterion, because it is the yield per acre you must reckon by. Unless the mills increase in number it is not easy to increase the area. The present milling-power is quite sufficient to cope with 180,000 to 200,000 tons. In good seasons the lands under crop would yield nearly 200,000 tons. 394. What is the .average gross value of an acre of sugar? —In 1898 we had 1-99 tons—say, 2 tons per acre —that at £9 per ton gives £18. Our yield of maize during that year would mean £2 15s. per acre, and of wheat £1 19s. The average yield of maize that year was 20 bushels.
681
A.—4
395. Might we assume that £15 to £20 would be a fair average gross yield for an acre of sugar ? —Yes ; that is, where the manufacturing is combined with the growing. A large amount of cane is grown by the small farmer, who can do the work with a few kanakas, and he can get double the work out of the same number of men that a large plantation can. The average yield throughout Queensland in 1898 would be about 18 tons of cane per acre, and that is worth to the farmer, as it stands in the field, 10s, a ton. 396. But we want to get the value of it to the State : what is that ?—The value to the State is about £18 when it is manufactured, but the cost to the mill-owner is about 13s. a ton, which the farmer will get for the cane cut and delivered on the tramway. 397. What is the relative cost of producing a ton of equal quality sugar from cane and from beet-root?—I cannot give you that exactly, not having taken any interest in the beet-sugar question. 398. Have you any idea at all?—I think the beet can be grown on an average at about £2 to £3 a ton less than the cane. 399. What area is subject to that extremely heavy rainfall ?—Prom Port Douglas down south to the Herbert, on a coast-line of about two hundred to three hundred miles. It does not extend more than about fifteen miles back to the main range. 400. What are the conditions of life there to the European family ?—lt is habitable to the Englishman, but we all like to get away. 401. But take the case of a labouring-man who cannot get away?— The labouring-man, as a rule, does go away, and even the married man too. 402. His family too ?—They take it turn about. 403. But supposing the time comes when a man cannot afford to go to the hills ?—lt is not a bad climate. I lived there from 1875 to 1878 and was only twice away. 404. Why will not the white man work?—He only works at this industry till he can get work that suits him better. 405. You think it is not a matter to be considered that the European will not be able to permanently occupy the country?—l think, myself, that they will. 406. Can you give us any illustration in the world where a Europeon is living under these conditions ?—I do not know of any where there have been the labouring-class. 407. You say the sugar industry is only thirty years in existence?— Practically. 408. Is it not likely that the climate will affect succeeding generations ?—I think it will. 409. And you think they will not be as strong as the present generation ?—I do not think they will. I have always sent my children away south, for the reason that they do not seem to have as much stamina as the southern children. 410. Why did the ploughmen you offered the extra 2s. 6d. to refuse it ?—They said it was too hot. These men are working in the hot sun, and the heat is too much for them. The bonus applies more particularly to the men who are engaged for the season, and not to the permanent hands. 411. Are there any other tropical industries in that part of the colony?— Yes ; coffee. 412. Does that depend on coloured labour?— Yes. We have grown tea, but not spices. The nutmeg grows wild. The country is suitable for those things, but we have not the labour. 413. 1 suppose we might take it that the country is suitable for tropical industries ? —Yes. 414. And you believe that no tropical industry can be carried on without coloured labour?— Yes ; not to pay, at any rate. 415. Supposing the Commonwealth decides that you are not to have coloured labour in any of those industries, will the country remain unutilised and those industries lapse?— That is my opinion, and I have no hesitation in saying so. 416. Supposing you were to offer 25 per cent, higher wages, could you get the white man to work under those circumstances ?—No ; and unless we had very great protection we could not afford it. 417. Do you think it will be possible for the State to regulate in the future the influx of coloured labour into Australia ? Or will not the law of nature be stronger than the law of Mr. Barton ? —I think it will. 418. Do you look forward to northern Australia being occupied by coloured labour ?—Purely with agriculturists. Ido not think the country can be possibly developed without the assistance of coloured people. 419. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you formed any idea as to the amount of capital invested in the sugar industry ?—ln 1899 I was on a Eoyal Commission to inquire into the sugar question, and the result of our investigations showed that it was about £5,000,000, and since then you might fairly estimate that there has been another £2,000,000 invested in it, making it £7,000,000 at the present time. The money advanced by Parliament for co-operative mills is £600,000. 420. Is there anything in the idea that white labour considers it infra dig. to work in the sugar-fields ?—No; our white men work alongside the kanakas, but they do a different class of work, and they live on the very best of terms together. 421. Is there a dearth of white labour in the country districts generally ?—Yes. 422. Can you conceive of any advantages that New Zealand would derive by joining the Commonwealth? —I do not know enough about New Zealand to answer. I have never visited your colony. 423. What is the temperature of this country?—lt ranges as high as 119° in the shade in the summer, while in the sun it is burning. 424. Can you explain why the output of sugar has increased whilst the number of kanakas employed has diminished? —One great reason is that the scrub lands, which were formerly cultivated by hand-labour, are cultivated now by ploughs and implements of other kinds. Another reason is that, while previously the bulk of he sugar-cane was grown on large plantations by kanakas 86—A. 4.
A.—4
682
working in gangs of from three to four hundred, now north of Bundaberg fully 90 per cent, of the cane is grown by small farmers, who use about seven or eight kanakas, and they get far more work out of them working alongside of them than the original planter could by employing them in large gangs. 425. What work does the farmer do himself ?—He works with the implement, and the kanaka follows with the hoe. 426. What is the production ?—For the seven years ending 1892, when there were doubts as to the further introduction of kanakas, because the Act was passed in 1885 prohibiting their introduction after 1890, the average output was 54,000 tons of sugaj ; and for the seven years ending 1899, after the kanakas were reintroduced (in 1892), the average output was 105,718 tons, and that, was brought about with less numbers of coloured labourers than previously. 427. Hon. the Chairman.'] Do you think there is any probability of the difficulties you have mentioned in connection with labour being overcome by the introduction of proper machinery ?— We have been trying for many years to get a machine that will cut cane, and large rewards have been offered in the United States, where the men are very keen after these things, for a machine which would do the work of cutting, but it has never yet been invented. One of our inventors has solved the difficulty, he thinks, and he is taking his patent to the States to try and perfect it. Our Government have assisted him, and the planters h&ve also helped him, and if he proves successful it will certainly enable us to do the cutting with whites instead of blacks. But the same weapon will be put into the hands of our foreign competitors in other parts of the world, where cane is grown with black labour. 428. But will it reduce the probability of your wanting black labour?— Yes. lam of opinion that if the invention is what we hope it will be it will to a great extent overcome the difficulty—at any rate, so far as harvesting the crop is concerned. 429. Could that machine do the trashing? —No; the cane is too much tangled up. Hon. Aethue Butledge, ty[.L.A., Acting-Premier of Queensland, examined. (No. 254.) 430. Hon. the Chairman.] How long have you been connected with politics in this State, sir ? —Nearly twenty-three years. 431. Are you satisfied with the provisions of the Commonwealth Act?—l am fairly satisfied with them. 432. Have you considered how the public finances of the smaller States will be affected under the provisions of that Act, having regard to the fact that the Customs duties are handed over to the Commonwealth? —The fact that the control of the finances arising from Customs duties has been handed over to the Federal Parliament will, no doubt, create for a time a little disturbance in the State of Queensland, but I do not foresee any permament disadvantage to the finances of this State. It may necessitate this State having to have recourse to some other form of taxation to make up the deficiency created by the handing-over of one-fourth of our Customs revenue to the Commonwealth. 433. Do you anticipate that under an £8,000,000 tariff a deficit will be created ? —A slight deficit in our finances. 434. How will that deficiency have to be met?—l am afraid, by direct taxation. 435. What provision would then be made for the prosecution of your public works? —They are usually carried on out of loan-money. 436. Do you anticipate that the States will have any difficulty in raising future loans through having parted with the control of the Customs ? —I do not. 437. Do you think that the States as they exist now will continue to exist for all time under the Commonwealth ?—For a very long time, with the exception that it is not improbable that there may be a division of what is now the State of Queensland into at least two States. 438. Do you anticipate that there will be any absorption of the States by the Federal Government, and that a Union will replace the present Federation ?—I think not. 439. What are the probable advantages which you consider will be gained by the federation of the different States ?—There are now a great many difficulties experienced through the States having different laws on certain subjects, which will be obviated. Take the question of the naturalisation of aliens, and the laws relating to copyright and patents, marriage and divorce, and quarantine. Theft, there are the advantages arising from possessing a uniform system of defence, under one common head, by which greater efficiency and economy would be secured ; also the advantage to be gained by the recognition, in all the States, of the laws of each, and the execution of legal process for the enforcement in any State of judgments pronounced in any other; also the benefits arising from the existence of one general law relating to such subjects as insolvency, quarantine, weights and measures, bills of exchange, and foreign corporations. There are also others which might easily be enumerated. To have one set of laws relating to those subjects will be of infinite advantage to the whole of Australia, rather than as at present—separate laws. 440. As regards judicial matters, are you satisfied with the constitution of the Federal Court of Appeal ?—Yes. I think the alteration which was made in clause 74 of the Commonwealth Act, chiefly at the instigation of Queensland, has done a great deal towards reconciling many of the opposite views held with regard to the right of appeal to the Privy Council from the Courts of the several States. 441. Do you understand that there is an alternative right of appeal offered to the Federal Court of Appeal or to the Privy Council excepting in certain matters ?—Yes. 442. Beyond intercolonial free-trade, can you suggest what advantages will be gained by New Zealand joining the Commonwealth ?—The chief advantage, would be that all the colonies in the southern seas would be able to speak as with one voice upon matters of international importance, particularly in regard to the condition of things existing in Polynesia. It is probable that in the
683
A.—4
future international difficulties might arise in connection with the administration of the affairs of Polynesia, and it would be to the very great advantage of the British race generally in the southern seas if New Zealand united with Australia in expressing what were the views of our race in this quarter of the globe in respect to these matters. 443. Supposing under the operation of the Commonwealth Act any of the smaller States got into financial difficulties, how do you take it that such difficulties would be dealt with by the Commonwealth ?—lt is provided in the Act that in a case of need for a certain time the Commonwealth may stand by a weak State. 444. You mean that clause which provides that financial assistance might be granted ?—Yes. 445. How do- you anticipate that relief will be given ?—That is a matter upon which I can hardly express an opinion. It will depend a great deal on the circumstances of the State involved. Persons more experienced in finance than I am could give a better opinion on that subject than 1 can, but one can readily conceive that there are several ways in which the Commonwealth could come to the rescue of the weaker State, particularly in the matter of the payment of interest on loans. 446. Would it be by way of gift or advance ?—Probably by way of advance in the first instance or by way of security. 447. Do you think the sugar industry in Queensland can be maintained without the employment of coloured labour ? —ln its present state of development I have no hesitation in saying that it cannot. 448. Is there any arrangement for the introduction of Japanese into Queensland? —There is an understanding between the Government of Queensland and the Government of Japan that a certain number of Japanese may be introduced to replace those who return to their native country. 449. Are they allowed to come in without the payment of a poll-tax ?—Yes ; and the number is limited that can come in by one ship. They must also have the authority of their own Government to come before they are allowed to land. 450. Are they allowed to settle in the country, or must they return to Japan ?—They are admitted under engagement to serve a certain number of years, at the expiration of which they are to be returned to their own country. 451. Hon. Captain Russell.] Supposing Queensland were divided into two States, what representation would it have in the Senate ?—Of course, each State would have the same representation in the Senate as the whole State now has. Each division would return six members to the Senate, and the number of the representatives in the House would depend on the population of each State. That would involve a reduction in the number of representatives Queensland now has from nine to the number to which it was found each new State was entitled on the basis of population. There was a special clause relating to the election of Senators in Queensland when the Act was first drafted, but we did not take advantage of that Act. 452. Supposing you divide Queensland into northern, southern, and central Queensland, do you imagine that you would have eighteen Senators ?—No; if there were only provincial divisions, which we thought at one time of establishing here, Queensland as a whole would not be entitled to return more than six Senators. If, however, the Commonwealth Parliament should, with the consent of the Queensland Parliament, divide Queensland into two or three States, then each of those three States would be entitled to the same representation. 453. Only, I presume, if they were admitted as original States ?—No. The Parliament is entitled to dictate terms in the case of States which do not come in as original States; but I scarcely think the Parliament of Queensland would be prepared to accept any proposed law emanating from-the Parliament of the Commonwealth with respect to the division of Queensland into two or three States that did not give each State equal rights with all the other States. 454. But would it not be to the advantage of Queensland to be divided into two or three divisions if, instead of six Senators for the whole State, you had four for the northern and four for the southern, making eight in all instead of six ?—I am not prepared to say whether the Parliament of Queensland would be satisfied with an arrangement of that kind. It is only a question of time when the central and northern parts will possess a population equal to the entire population of Queensland itself now. 455. But do you anticipate the possibility of the division of Queensland into separate States ?— I do. 456. Under those circumstances, what Senate representation do you imagine Queensland will have ? —Each of the States would demand equal representation jn the Senate with the other States. 457. Supposing Tasmania were to be absorbed by Victoria, what would become of the representation of Tasmania in the Senate ?—lf it became absorbed by and became part of the State of Victoria, then, I apprehend, the representation would be in the case of the Senate six for both States, and the representation to the House would depend upon the population of the combined State. 458. Then, in other words, the Constitution Act depends entirely upon the absorption of Tasmania and the division of Queensland ? —I cannot say, though I take it it is hardly likely that Tasmania will ever consent to be absorbed by Victoria or any other State. 459. Supposing the position to be such as required it—in Tasmania we were told that their finance would be a very difficult matter to arrange, and that they cannot carry on without assistance from the Commonwealth—will that not point rather to a unification rather than the federation of Australia ?—I am quite satisfied that a unification will never be accepted by the Commonwealth. 460. Have you considered the question of Imperial federation, as to whether it is a dream or possibility?—I am disposed to think it is a dream on the part of visionaries.
684
A.—4
461. Do you imagine that the entry of New Zealand into an Australian Commonwealth would tend to Imperial federation or to check it ? —I do not see at present that it would have much effect one way or the other. 462. Do you think that Australia being one power and New Zealand being another power, and possibly Polynesia being a third power, in these seas, it would be more likely to lead to Imperial federation than if they were all massed into an Australian Commonwealth ?—I do not think so. 463. You think that the aggrandisement of power by the Commonwealth would tend to check Imperial federation? —I think so ;it is quite likely. 464. Supposing Australia were one power, New Zealand and Fiji another, and the Pacific islands were another, do you not think it would be more likely to lead to Imperial federation than if those three domains were massed into one ?—I think it would have no effect. 465. There has been a deal of irritation, has there not, in connection with the colonisation of New Guinea ?—Yes ; a good deal of dissatisfaction has been expressed that at the time when New Guinea was annexed —illegally, it must be admitted —by the Government of Queensland that action was not indorsed by the Imperial Government. 466. What part in the future do you imagine English New Guinea will play in the Australian Commonwealth ?—I do not think it will play a very important part, except that it will serve as an outlet for the exercise of British enterprise. 467. And where will the administration of British New Guinea lie—in the Imperial authorities or in the Commonwealth authorities ?—Probably with the Commonwealth, though I do not know that the policy which is at present being pursued would be likely to be immediately altered to any material extent. 468. And that policy is ?—That policy is that New Guinea is really administered subject to the control of the Government of Queensland, in'association with the Governments of the other contributing colonies. 469. Do you imagine that the question of the colonisation of New Guinea may lead to international disputes ?—Not unless there is an attempt to colonise that part of New Guinea which is now subject to German and Dutch influence respectively. 470. But supposing that they do colonise, and we have every reason to suppose that that is their policy, what will happen then ? —lt is very likely, then, that New Guinea will be administered by the Government of the Commonwealth rather than by the Government of Queensland, and that might be very advantageous. 471. Do you think it will lead to questions of international policy, and friction between ourselves and the German and Dutch Governments ?—I think not. 472. You have no apprehension, then, that the Commonwealth might be involved in European politics through the colonisation of German and Dutch New Guinea ?—None whatever. 473. Assuming that what one gathers from the papers is correct, and that there will be a revenue, rather than a protective, tariff for the Commonwealth, how will that affect the revenue of Queensland ?—Not at all materially, for although the Queensland tariff is nominally protective, yet, in view of what is contemplated by the more southern States, it would practically mean a revenue tariff only. • 474. Then, you do not imagine that any tariff that may be imposed by the Commonwealth will materially affect the financial position of Queensland ? —I think not. 475. Have you any land-tax here ? —No, excepting that we have a tax imposed by the local authorities. The whole State is divided into either boroughs, shires, or divisions, and there is a tax imposed by the local authorities on unimproved values of land for the purpose of constructing roads and bridges., and other such local requirements. That is the only thing we have in the shape of a land-tax. There is no Government land-tax. 476. How do you imagine the people would stand a land- and income-tax?—l am quite satisfied the people of Queensland would very strongly resist any attempt to impose a land-tax in addition to the taxes which have to be met by the owners of land under the system of local government which prevails in this colony. 477. Is there any form of income-tax ?—No. 478. Then, you are a very blessed people, I should say?— Very. 479. And you think there would be the greatest dissatisfaction at any endeavour to impose a land- and income-tax ? —I am quite satisfied that any attempt to impose a land-tax would be strongly resisted, and, of course, there would be dissatisfaction at the imposition of an income-tax, as the general run of people do not like any form of direct taxation, although I am of opinion that the income-tax is preferable to a land-tax for Queensland. 480. Mr. Millar.] How do you think the present Constitution is going to affect the different States in regard to enacting progressive legislation?—l do not think it will affect them in the slightest degree, because on all subjects, excepting those that are handed over 'to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Parliament of the Commonwealth, the several States have the same right to legislate that they have now. 481. Assuming that you in Queensland desired to pass a Factories Act reducing the hours of labour to forty-five hours, do you think you could possibly do it and still conserve the interests of your manufacturers and employers whilst forty-eight hours were the hours of labour all round you ?—I think so. There is no reason in the world why legislation to that effect should not be passed by the State of Queensland. 482. You think that a State with the full knowledge of the outcome of such legislation—that it might have to pay for it—would pass such legislation ?—lt all depends on whether we thought we had the material conditions which gave us- a superior position over other States in the Commonwealth in regard to particular branches of manufacture.
685
A.—4
483. Is the tendency not likely to be that no State would dare to make that forward movement now ?—I do not think so. 484. Do you not think it would have been better, from purely an Australian point of view, if the Federal Government had had the power to legislate on such questions as those of the factories laws?—l do not think so, because the "conditions differ in each State. There are climatic and other advantages or disadvantages which operate in one State and not in another. 485. Do you not think an Act could have been passed which would have made matters pretty equal : the climatic conditions are not so vastly different as to handicap seriously any particular State ? —Excepting in tropical Queensland, where they are vastly different from the conditions of Tasmania, New Zealand, and Victoria. 486. Are you at all likely to have manufactures established in those torrid regions?—We are not likely to have manufactures established in those regions that could under any circumstances compete with the manufactures of New Zealand, Victoria, and Tasmania. 487. In regard to social legislation, do you think that as beneficial results can be obtained by the State legislating on these questions as would have been obtained by a uniform law passed by the Federal Government ? —I think so. 488. Has there been any estimate made of the cost of an old-age-pension scheme for Australia ? —I do not think there has been any real attempt to ascertain what the cost of an old-age-pension scheme for this State would be, but, judging from what has transpired as the result of inquiries made elsewhere, I think it will be found that the cost to the whole of Australia would be very great. That is one of the proposals of the Federal Government. 489. Then, there is also a feeling floating in the air that a system of penny-postage ought to be introduced throughout Australia: has there been any estimate made of the loss of revenue if penny-postage were introduced here ?—I think an estimate has been made for Australia in this connection, but I really could not give the Commission any authentic information upon the subject. lam satisfied, however, that the attempt to introduce penny-postage throughout Australia would result in very serious loss to the whole of the States. 490. Until such questions as these have been placed on some definite footing it is absolutely impossible, I presume, for any State to conclude how much revenue it will get out of the Customs duties which the Federal Government are allowed to retain ?—I think so. I think penny-postage and old-age pensions would absorb the entire 25 per cent. 491. So that any estimate given at the present time as to the cost of the Federal Government must be really problematical?—To a great extent, but I do not say wholly. 492. But, knowing that these two things are controlled by the Federal Government, you do not anticipate that there will be any return of revenue after those questions have been dealt with ? —I do not think so. But it has to be borne in mind that it does not follow that the Federal Parliament will immediately proceed to establish an old-age-pensions law or the penny-postage. These measures might be deferred until the aggregate amount represented by the one-fourth from each State would represent a much larger sum than can possibly be paid out within the next year or two. 493. But have we not the definite assurance of Mr. Barton and Mr. Lyne that the duties are to be on a 15-per-cent. basis ? Do you anticipate that a 15-per-cent. ad valorem duty all round is going to bring in a much larger sum than that which is got by the State at the present time?— Personally, I do not think a 15-per-cent. duty would be a fair revenue duty ; it is too high. 494. But would it not require that to bring in the £9,000,000 they estimate they require ?—I am not sure about it. The Treasurer might be able to speak with more certainty on that point. 495. Do you think sufficient study had been given to this question of finance before the colonies went into federation ?—I think as much study has been given to it as might be given to any subject upon which men have not had actual experience. Of course, in a matter of this kind we have to take a great deal upon trust, and to anticipate the greater development of Australia as a whole under federation than has been experienced under the separate State conditions that we have now. Ido not think we shall, all of us, be inclined to be satisfied with the present rate of increase of the population, or with the present rate of actual development of our natural resources. 496. Why do you anticipate from federation a much larger increase ?—Because I think the people from the Old World will be likely to show more confidence in the country that is a united country such as the Commonwealth would be than they would be in separate States competing with one another, and leaving them in a position of uncertainty as to what the actual condition of things was. Canada as a Dominion has attracted infinitely more population from Great Britain and Germany than she would have secured if she had never developed into a united Dominion. 497. But Canada has formed its Dominion on a totally different basis from that of the Continent of Australia ?—Undoubtedly, the basis is materially different; but there it is—a Dominion under a Central Government, and the people abroad have more confidence in a country which is ruled by a great Central Government than in one which consists of separate States having conflicting interests, and often antagonistic to one another. 498. But would that confidence be extended to a Central Government if it is known that the Central Government is securing the greater part of the power of taxation ?—I do not know whether that is the principal point to which persons proposing to embark capital devote special attention. 499. But persons proposing to invest do look to that point, do they not ? —I think in that case that there would be much more disposition on the part of investors to lend money when it was known that the Continent of Australia was administered under one Government than when it was under six separate Governments entirely independent of each other for all purposes. 500. Then, you approve of unification?—No, I do not. 501. Then, you still have six or seven Governments if you do not have unification : is that not so ?—We have the possibility which exists under the Commonwealth of the unification of the whole
A.—4
686
of the State debts, and the Commonwealth may take over the railways of the several States, and may become the one responsible party to the foreign creditor. 502. If that takes place, I presume the States will only be able to borrow through the Federal Government ?—lt would be a matter of arrangement, between the Federal Government and the State Government. They would borrow the money subject to the approval of the Commonwealth Government. 503. As a member of the Government, can you tell us if there has been any proposal on the part of the Government for a complete system of irrigation in the interior of Queensland? —No. The question of the irrigation of Queensland is a very large one, but there exist on the statute-book of Queensland laws regarding local irrigation, some of which are likely to be availed of in the very near future. 504. We have been told that one of the matters with which the Commonwealth Parliament will deal will be the irrigation of the interior of Australia, and, naturally, if that takes place, we look upon it that we will be called upon to bear a portion of the expenses of such a scheme : do you think that would be the case ?—Of course, a great deal depends on what is meant by the irrigation of Australia. Ido not think that any system of irrigation such as we stand in need of now would be at all applicable to the circumstances of the interior of Australia. My opinion is that a very considerable portion of the interior of Australia, particularly in the South Australian territory, is below the present level of the sea —that is also the opinion of well-known engineers—and that if any engineering-works were carried out with a view to admitting the waters of the ocean into those lands the gain and benefit to Australia as a whole would be enormous as affecting the character of the rainfall. In such a case as that, if the cost were not insupportable, Ido not doubt that all the Australian States would agree to bear the burden. 505. That would be a case in which New Zealand would not benefit, although Australia would. In the event of such a scheme being propounded and carried out, and New Zealand being a State of the Commonwealth and having to contribute to it, I presume we would be fairly entitled to an equal expenditure of public moneys in the direction of giving us more rapid communication with Australia by sea or some other public works of a like nature? —Undoubtedly, the Commonwealth would consider that question, and give you what you were entitled to. 506. How do you think New Zealand would be affected by the fact of this State allowing alien labour to come in without restriction ?—I do not think that any State in Australia, as far as my knowledge goes, is in favour of the unrestricted introduction of Asiatic labour into any part of Australia. The people of Queensland, while a large section of them are content with the introduction of kanaka labour at present as being indispensable to the success of the sugar industry, are equally emphatic against the unrestricted introduction of Asiatic labour. A vast difference exists between the kanaka and any other form of coloured labour. The kanaka is simply a sort of superior animal. He has no intellectual capacity, nor is he inclined to engage in those occupations in which the Europeans engage. He has no adaptability. He has none of that Asiatic cunning which characterizes the Chinese, the Japanese, or the natives of India, and he is content if he gets his food and lodging and his wage, and is sent back to his islands on the expiration of his time. On the other hand, the Chinaman, and the Japanese, and the Indian labourers are clever; they are more or less intellectual; they are imitative, inquiring, and have a knowledge of figures. They are able to adapt themselves to the ways of business, and this puts them in a position to rival the European artisan or labourer, or even the European shopkeeper. And because of that, and because they are able to work at a rate that would not be remunerative to a European, it is felt that their presence in any number in our midst is a danger to the well-being of the community. But that objection cannot exist in the case of the kanaka, who cannot under any circumstances come into competition with-the white working-man. The nature of the work which is done by the kanaka during the summer is of so trying a character that the European constitution cannot stand it. He seeks no more than his wage and maintenance; he does not want to extend his operations beyond the cane-fields, and he is sent back to the islands at the expiration of the time. 507. What restrictions have you on the Japanese and Javanese?— The Javanese we do not admit at all. 508. But are there not a large number of them in the north?— There are some there. But we have no provision for admitting any more of them. 509. Is there any provision for excluding them?— For excluding them from some occupations. There is a statutory provision for preventing them engaging in the pearl-shell fishing, but those who were most anxious to secure that legislation now very deeply regret it, as they do not know what to do for divers, and the industry is languishing for want of divers to get the shell. 510. And you think it would be possible to continue the importation of these people and still confine them to certain things ?—lf that is done they can be confined, say, to pearl-shell diving, just the same as the kanaka is, under our Polynesian labour laws, confined to tropical agriculture. A man is liable to be fined heavily if he engages a kanaka in driving his buggy, or in any other form of labour that a white man can do. 511. Are they not bound to be sent back to the islands from whence they came?— The policy of the State is to send back men at the end of their time. 512. Have you much labour legislation affecting the workers of this colony?—We have a Shops and Factories Act of the most liberal character in favour of the workers ; it was passed last year. We had one before, but this late one is of a much more comprehensive character. 513. There is no Wages Board attached to it ? —No. 514. You have no legislation regarding wages here, nor hours of labour ?—No. 515. And no Apprentice Act, or Workmen's Wages Lien Act ?—No. Bills for objects of this kind have been introduced, and I see no reason why some of them should not be passed in the near future.
687
A.—4
516. Mr. Beauchamp.] Have you a Chinese Eestriction Act? —Yes; we have an Act dealing with the introduction of Chinese, which enacts that only a certain number of Chinese can be brought to Queensland as passengers—l think it is one to every 500 tons of a ship's registered tonnage—and if there is a breach of that Act there are all sorts of penalties provided, including the seizure and sale of the ship in default of payment of penalties. 517. Have you any industries that are developed largely by a policy of protection ?—The bootmaking industry probably benefits by protection, such as we have, and the jam-making, and a few others of that kind ; but they are not of large dimensions. Sawmills and foundries have also been assisted by that policy. 518. How do you think these industries are likely to be promoted by inter-State free-trade? —I think in this State there are many industries which ought to depend on the facilities which exist for procuring the raw material, and the result of inter-State free-trade in their ease would be that, instead of having a number of little struggling industries carried on without much success with only Queensland for a market, we shall have southern capital introduced, and these industries with the whole of Australia for a market would be put on a strong foundation. Then, with our natural advantages in the possession of abundant raw material, and the application of superior intelligence, experience, and more capital, we shall have those industries in a much more vigorous condition than they are now. 519. How are you situated as regards coal? —We have enormous deposits of coal in the Ipswich district, and also near Maryborough. 520. Is there any New Zealand timber used in Queensland—kauri, for instance ?—There is a certain amount. 521. You have a timber in this State which is very similar to our pine : what name is it known by? —It is usually called " pine." 522. Have you a large supply of that? —Yes, within reasonable distance, but it is rapidly diminishing. We have also cedar and many varieties of good hardwood. 523. You are of opinion that a " white " Australia is not possible?— Not in the absolute sense in which some people understand the term. I believe in a "white" Australia with a certain reservation which would be applicable to the kanakas under the conditions we have now, because until we have discovered some means by which machinery can do the cane trashing and cutting we shall require labour that can endure the terrific heat which-is experienced in the rows of sugarcane in the summer-time in the tropical portion of Queensland. 524. It has been suggested that in the event of our not federating friction might arise sooner or later with the Commonwealth in respect to the control of the South Sea Islands : do you think that would happen ?—I do not. I would, however, rather put it this way : that friction would be much more likely to be avoided by the union of New Zealand and Australia than by New Zealand remaining a separate State. 525. Referring to the question of State loans, do you think that we would be able to raise them under the Commonwealth as cheaply as they are raised now by the various colonies ?—More cheaply. 526. Do you think there would be a difference in the price we would have to pay for a State loan and a Commonwealth loan ? —I think so. 527. What do you think the difference would be?—lt might be 1 per cent., but I think certainly it would be \ per cent. 528. Mr. Luke.] Do you supply your own wants in coal, or do you import any ?—We supply all our own needs. 529. Is there any iron-ore in your State?— There is some. 530. Has there been any attempt made to manufacture iron ?—No. 531. Is your ore in close proximity to the coal-deposits?— No. The fact is that in regard to the mineral deposits of Queensland we have only been scratching the surface in a few places. 532. Is your coal a good burning coal? Is it equal to Newcastle?—lt is not superior to Newcastle, but for practical purposes it is quite equal. It, however, tends to break up. It is a good coal, and some of it is preferred by some steamship companies to Newcastle coal. 533. Is it easily and cheaply shipped ?—lt is close to the water. 534. Have you no Employers' Liability Act other than the old Act ?—We have the English Employers' Liability Act —not the very latest. One has been before our Parliament for two sessions, and I think there is a growing feeling in favour of the bulk of its provisions being passed. 535. Have you any large engineering and iron factories F —We have engineering industries in Maryborough principally, and also in Brisbane, which are able to compete with the foundries of Ballarat and other places. 536. Do you manufacture your own locomotives ?—We do; in Brisbane and Maryborough, at Walker's (Limited). 537. Is most of the machinery for mining purposes manufactured in the State ?—A very large proportion of it. 538. Mr. Leys.] Has any estimate been made of the effect on the State finance of Queensland by the Federal Government taking over the Customs and excise duties?—l can scarcely answer that; there has not been any analysis of the financial position. 539. Do you anticipate you will have to impose some direct taxation for State purposes when the Federal tariff comes into operation ?—A difficulty has been created by the duration of this terrible drought, which has lasted four or five years, and has crippled Queensland in respect to one of its chief industries to what extent it is difficult to estimate. It will depend on the seasons in the immediate future as to whether we shall be in any way embarrassed by the deduction of one-fourth of our Customs revenue. 540. To what extent does Queensland control New Guinea?— All the Ordinances which are passed by the Government of New Guinea are submitted to the Governor of Queensland, who
A.—4
688
causes them to be submitted to the Attorney-General before they are approved. They must be approved by the Governor of Queensland before they have the force of law. 541. Have you any voice in the appointment of the Governor of New Guinea or his Executive ?—No; the Governor appoints his own Executive, and there is no actual control in respect to the appointment of an Administrator of New Guinea by the Government of Queensland. That is done by the Imperial Government itself. 542. Have you any control over the sale of Crown lands?—No, excepting with regard to the passing of laws which regulate the sales of land. There is a control in that respect. 543. Does not that system lead to friction ?—lt has not hitherto. There was a question of administration as to whether it was desirable for the Governor of New Guinea to attempt to alienate a large portion of land without reference to the contributing colonies. The contract for the sale of certain land broke down, and the company who had contracted to buy the area —some 250,000 acres —are now seeking compensation from the Australian Governments for the losses they incurred in connection with their preliminary expenditure and the failure on the part of the Government to carry out the contract. 544. Does that not look as if you had all the responsibility without the control?—lt was a question of administration as to whether it was desirable for the Government of New Guinea to attempt to alienate so large a portion of land without reference to the contributing colonies. 545. Does the Imperial Government pay anything towards the cost of governing New Guinea ? —They pay something. 546. Is it as much as the colonies pay?— No. lam not prepared to speak from memory on that point, but I think the fact is that the Imperial Government pays very little. 547. Do you think the Federal Government will not insist on having the complete control of New Guinea ?—I do not know that it is certain that they wish to do so, but it would be rather a relief to Queensland if they would. 548. Do you think the islands will not be taken over and administered by the Federal Government? —It all depends upon whether these islands are considered to belong to Australia as a whole. New Guinea is considered of great value from a strategical point of view as well as from a commercial point of view. 549. You said you thought that if New Zealand were to unite with the Commonwealth their united voice would be brought to bear more satisfactorily on the Home Government when any question of the administration of these islands was concerned. Now, supposing the interest of New Zealand in the islands differed from the interest of the Australian Colonies, would not our interests be sacrificed?—l can hardly conceive of a condition of things where the interests of the two countries would be antagonistic. 550. If that is so, is there any danger at all of friction? —I think it is reduced to a minimum, and not worth taking into account. Francis Kbnna examined. (No. 255.) 551. Hon. the Chairman.'] What is your occupation?— Journalist. lam the editor of the Worker in Brisbane. I have resided all my life —thirty-six years—in Queensland. 552. Have you studied the question of the sugar industry in Queensland ?—I have lived in various sugar districts in the North—at Ingham, north of Townsville, and in Bundaberg on one occasion for four months. 553. What is your opinion as to the possibility of the sugar industry being continued without the aid of coloured labour ?—My opinion is that the industry could be carried on all right without coloured labour. 554. Do yau include kanakas ?—I do. 555. Do you think that sufficient white labour would be available for the prosecution of the industries ?—I certainly do. At the present time there are large numbers of unemployed who would be only too glad to undertake work in the sugar-fields if they had the opportunity, and the wages paid would enable them to make a decent living out of it. 556. Are there many white people employed in the industry now as labourers ?—I am not prepared to say how many are employed, but sugar is being grown in Queensland by white labour. 557. Do you know of any other industry in which the work is so distasteful to a white man as the sugar industry ?—I do, and I have in my mind the work of a fireman on a northern coastal packet, which is a more onerous and disagreeable occupation than working in the sugar-fields. 558. Can you instance any other occupation besides that of a fireman ?—Working on the rail-way-cuttings on the Chillagoe Railway-line, west of Cairns, is a much more laborious occupation than working in the open cane-field. 559. Are those cuttings done by white labour ?—I think one of the conditions is that they can only employ white labour. 560. Do you think that the white labourers in Northern Queensland can continue for a period of years to do the work in the sugar-fields there ?—I do. My opinion is supported by that of Mr. Knox, the late managing director of the Colonial Sugar Company ; Mr. Gibson, one of the largest growers in Bundaberg, and others. 561. Do you think that machinery can be successfully used in the cultivation of sugar in Northern Queensland and do all the work that is required of the coloured labour ?—I do ; and I think the cheapness of the labour at present used has prevented the introduction of machinery. 562. Mr. Leys.] If labour-saving machinery were introduced, in what way would the unemployed population gain?—l do not use that as an argument in favour of settling the "unemployed" question as much as I do against the present institution of black labour. 563. As I understand your argument, a lot of the unemployed cannot get employment now in Queensland in ordinary avocations, but if the sugar industry were available to them they would get employment; if they introduce labour-saving machinery I suppose they would still not get employment ?—Probably not.
689
A.—4
564. Do you think cane cutting and trashing with the thermometer at 119° in the shade in a humid atmosphere is work that you can expect white men to engage in'? —I hold that whatever the black man can do the white man can do and do better. When it comes to a matter of physical endurance I believe the white man is superior to the South Sea Islander. 565. But do you mean to say that centuries of acclimatisation have given the black man no advantages in working in a tropical climate ? —I think his advantages are outweighed by centuries of hard work and by the adaptability of the white race to all climates. 566. Can you mention any instance in the world where white men are doing hard manual labour under tropical conditions ?—I can instance you mining in Croydon, where the temperature is often much higher than 110°. 567. Where is Croydon ? —lt is in the Gulf country, about the latitude of Cooktown, but inland, and it has a very dry and sultry climate. 568. But they are working underground?— And overground also. 569. Do you think that kind of work is anything like as exhausting as working in a close canebrake with a torrid sun overhead ?—lt may be different; but I think a analogy would be a man breaking stones or digging in one of the northern railway-cuttings. 570. Is it not a fact that cane-trashing is a particularly exhausting work? —I have never been able to clearly understand what the difficulty is with respect to this cane-trashing or the necessity for it. Some people claim that the work is very trying on the hands, while others claim that it is the dense heat that prevails in the cane-brake that makes it exhausting. I think that the man who goes into a dense northern scrub to fell scrub is working under more trying conditions than a man who works out in a cane-brake. 571. But even this scrub occupation is very intermittent, is it not,? Do they go on year after year felling scrub?—l think it is no more intermittent than the occupations in the cane-field or than other tropical outdoor work. 572. Is it not a fact that the Government started two sugar-mills to test this question of doing the work by white labour only and that both of those mills failed ?—lt might have been so, but I never heard of it before. 573. We had the evidence of two public officials to that effect ? —I suppose the Commission is aware of the central-mill system which has been established here,, and of which that possibly might have been a part ? 574. Yes; but these were two mills which were started conditional on white people only being employed in the production of the cane and the work in the mills: have you heard of that experiment?—lt is the first I have heard of it. The cei\tral-mill system started on the distinct promise of Sir Thomas Mcllwraith that coloured labour should be done without. The Labour party endeavoured to get a clause inserted in the Act to this effect, but, after a " stonewall," accepted Sir Thomas Mcllwraith's promise in lieu thereof. 575. But did they not take cane from plantations where they employed kanakas ?—They did. 576. Was it not one of the conditions that they should not take such cane ?—That was the original condition, if I recollect rightly. I am justified in saying that Sir Thomas Mcllwraith promised that black labour should not be employed in connection with these mills. 577. Was it not the case that they could not get a supply of cane with white labour, and had to fail back on the black labour ?—-I do not know of any authentic grounds for saying so. 578. If we had the official statement of the Inspector who investigated the matter that this was the case—that the State was asked to remove this condition because the cane could not be obtained by white labour—would you not be satisfied that the statement was correct ?—I am dubious about accepting the opinions of officials who are very largely influenced by the opinions of the party in power. 579. But these were Government officers?— Yes, I understand you. I have been a Civil servant myself, and know that a Civil servant's opinion on a political subject-matter is largely moulded on the opinions of his chief or of the party in power. 580. But this was a statement of fact; do you think a public official would come before us and deliver a statement as to a matter which had occurred within his own knowledge and place it on official records if it were false ? —I can only say that lam not aware of any central mill having been established herewith the object of testing the question as to whether sugar could be grown by white labour. 581. I understood you to say that those mills were, within your own knowledge, started with that condition ?—But the conditions were never fulfilled. 582. They got the money, and they get it still. Why was the condition never fulfilled ?— Because of a lax style of administering the law and fulfilling the promise made by the Ministry at the time. 583. We were told chat there was a flaw in the agreement ?—Even flaws are sometimes convenient. 584. Have you anything to support your opinion that sugar can be grown , by white labour?— Yes. The position of the sugar industry in Queensland, it must be remembered, can be divided into three stages —sugar-growing, the manufacture of raw sugar, and the refining. The two first are practically at the mercy of the latter- —a monopoly exercised by the Colonial Sugar-refining Company. 585. We are told that sugar cannot be grown by white labour ?—That is so. I think that the kanaka, Asiatic, and also white labour is already being employed in the growing of sugar in Queensland. There are sugar-farmers in the sugar districts who grow their cane successfully by white labour. In Cairns at the last meeting of the Mulgrave Central Mill a shareholder named Swan and another gentleman connected with the mill named Mueller strongly advocated the employment of white labour. 87—A. 4.
A.—4
690
586. But do you know of any instances where cane is being grown in the northern districts without the assistance of coloured labour ?—I cannot for the moment quote a specific instance, but there are many such instances. 587. Then, it is merely your own opinion that it may be ? —Yes, founded on facts which I cannot give impromptu. 588. Mr. Beauchamp.] If it is admitted that this labour is of so trying and exhausting a nature, would you, as a worker, compel white men to go into the cane-fields when they can get so much more employment of a more congenial character ?—-It is all a question of wages. The rate of wage paid in sugar-growing is determined by the price of black labour. The white man will not go into it, because they do not pay him a white man's wage. Give the white man decent wages and there will be no more difficulty in obtaining white labour for sugar-growing than there will for any other industry. 589. At what wages do you think white men would be prepared to undertake work in the sugarfields?—About £1 ss. or £1 10s. a week and keep. 590. Do you believe that £1 ss. or £1 10s. a week and found would induce white men to work in the cane-fields, or that there would be any difficulty in getting them?— Not at present. 591. We have been told that there is a great dearth of labour in many districts throughout this State: do you hold that view ?—I hold it to be untrue. Nearly all the western country is overrun with men seeking employment at the present time. 592. Mr. Millar.] And how much alien labour is employed in the sugar-fields?—lt has been asserted that twenty thousand white men are employed in connection with the industry. These figures I have publicly challenged, and I asked for authentic records to show that it was so; but I have never yet met any person who can give authority for saying that that number of people are employed. Ido not believe one-third of that number are employed. Last year, according to the Eegistrar-General's returns, there were 8,795 kanakas, and also that year in Queensland there were 10,076 Chinese, 3,063 Japanese, and 2,357 other aliens, showing a total of 15,496. Of these coloured aliens, about twelve thousand would be employed directly on the sugar-fields. 593. We have it in evidence that £1 ss. and found is the wage given now to ploughmen on the sugar-fields-, and they would not remain at that : is that so ?—There are two things to be considered in that connection—one is, what the food is like t I believe the white man's food is governed very largely by that of the kanaka, just as his wage is. But I never heard that there was any difficulty in getting ploughmen for the sugar-fields. 594. Have you any knowledge of the shearing-sheds away out west? —A fair knowledge. 595. Would you think that the work of shearing in the western districts is as arduous as working the trash in the cane-fields ?—Certainly. 596. Have you ever known any dearth of men for shearing ?—Never. 597. Would that be accounted for by the fact that men make fair wages at shearing ?— Possibly. 598. Do you think if a fair wage was offered for the sugar-work, and that men knew that they would be required at certain seasons of the year, by that means a sufficient quantity of white labour would be found to do the whole of the work ? —I do. 599. And do you think that white labour would go there for £1 10s. a week and found ? — I do. 600. What do the shearers get here ? —£l a hundred nearly all over the colony, excepting on the Darling Downs, where living is cheap, and they get 17s. a hundred. 601. Would he average £1 a day during the season ?—I think so. 602. Do you imagine that £1 10s. a week and found would tempt them o go to the sugarfields?—l do, under existing conditions. 603. With regard to the general labour conditions outside the sugar industry, is there any labour legislation in Queensland beneficial to the workers ?—I do not know of any. 604. Did not they pass a Factories Act last session ?—The Factories Act scarcely affects grown-up men. The Early Closing Act does, and it is the only piece of what you might term labour legislation that I know of. There is no Conciliation and Arbitration Act, no Minimum "Wage Act, and no Wages Board. Lately the day-labour system has been tried in connection with the building of a few railways, when a minimum wage was fixed. 605. Do you think there is any probability of any labour legislation being passed during the next few years ? —I think there is a possibility of the Labour party being able to get such legislation passed, provided we can obtain the "one man one vote." 606. Do you think there is any probability of obtaining " one man one vote " ?—Not if our opponents can prevent it. 607. In view of these circumstances, do you think it would be advisable for New Zealand to federate ?—I opposed federation here for two reasons : one because here in Queensland we had a distinct Labour party, which formed the Opposition, and which embraced twenty-three members in a House of seventy-two, and which was the outcome of ten years' organization and agitation. It seemed to me that it was only a matter of a short time when the Labour party would govern this colony. I believed it would have been to the interests of Queensland workers had they concentrated their attention and energies on the capture of the local Parliament, and not have bothered themselves about federation. That is why I believed we should have been much better off than embarking on an undertaking of which nobody could see the results. 608. But would it be well for New Zealand to come in ? —The circumstances of the two colonies are not unlike. 609. Do you think if New Zealand joined that she would be of material assistance in furthering the democratic movement ? —1 think the accession of New Zealand would mean a liberalising of the Legislature of the Commonwealth; but if I were a New-Zealander lam inclined to
691
A.-4
think that I should feel that it would not lead to the progress which she has been making, and which she is likely to make in the future, being continued. 610. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Our object is to get at the facts of this business about coloured labour, and we had absolute evidence that double wages have been offered to men to take the labour in tropical parts, but that they gave it up as a bad job and went away —either that evidence must be true or deliberately false, that is the. point?— Generally speaking, I do not believe that that evidence is correct. 611. Then, I ask you, do you know of any tropical country in the world where white men have been able to work in the open cane-field and do the actual manual labour of cane-cutting and trashing, and do it continuously ?—I do not; but I think that results from the fact that coloured 'labour dominates in all tropical countries and renders the competition of white men impossible. 612. Do you think it is advantageous that the white race should be asked to work at a labour that will mean deterioration to the race ?—I think there is a greater danger of the race deteriorating through mixing with a coloured alien population. 613. The negro ?—Yes. 614. Can white men without ruin to their health work in the tropics in the fields at sugarplanting?—l think lam justified in saying that they can, and I know of no reason why they cannot. The average mortality of the kanakas is far and away higher than that of the white workers. 615. We have it again in evidence that the small farmers employ in small numbers the kanaka labour that was formerly employed in large gangs by companies, and that in that way these men manage to bring their sugar into the market in a way that will pay them : is that correct ?—That may be.so, and I hold that if I to-morrow were to embark in sugar-growing I should be compelled to employ kanakas by reason of the competition around me of those small growers. 616. But the competition was as to the price of sugar?—l do not think the competition is world-wide. I think it results from the monopoly of the Colonial Sugar Company. They hold a refining monopoly and pay very large dividends, and have carried forward very large reserves for the last ten years. If you cut down the refining industries here in which large profits are made, and I hold that these profits are made at the expense of the sugar-grower, you will do the right thing, because it is the monopoly which compels the grower to resort to the cheapest labour. 617. Hon. Captain Bussell.) Can you give me any idea what profit the raw-sugar grower gets ? —I could not offhand. 618. Surely that has something to do with the rate he can pay for producing ?—I think the sugar-grower and the raw-sugar manufacturer on the average only make an ordinary profit out of it. I should say, roughly, that the raw-sugar grower would only make about sor 6 per cent, out of his industry. 619. And that is done by employing this kanaka labour ? —lt is done through squeezing the grower and causing him to employ cheap kanaka labour. 620. Supposing he were .to pay double the price for his labour, what would be the result ? —The result to the cane-grower of having to pay an extra amount for white labour would be an extra expense on the raw-sugar manufacturer, who would pass it on to the refiner, who would either have to pay it out of his large dividends or get it from the consumer. 621. Do you think the employment of white labour would completely change the nature of the industry ? —I do not see that it would. 622. If a man only makes 5 per cent, with the cheap kanaka labour and he pays double for his white labour, what percentage would he then earn ?—The monopoly would still hold him in its clutches and allow him to make no more than he did previously. 623. Would he be worse oft?—l do not think so. I think he would still make, say, 5 per cent. 624. What wages would tempt white men to work persistently in the cane-fields ? —I think that, in the present state of the labour-market, £1 10s. and food, and with ordinary humane conditions with regard to housing, would secure all the labour required. 625. A witness stated here that he had a growing crop of cane, that he offered to white labour double the wages that he paid to kanakas to get it harvested, and that it had to be destroyed because he could not get any kind of white labour to do the work: do you think that statement would be untrue ?—I think an isolated case like that proves nothing, if it were true. Some of the most reckless statements have been made in connection with this campaign. 626. You have, of course, taken a great interest in the subject, and have read a good deal about it : do you know the history of the cultivation of sugar in the southern States of America ?— I am not prepared to say that I do. 627. Do you know the history of the cultivation of sugar in the West Indies ?—I do not know very much about it. 628. Do you know the history of the cultivation of sugar in Fiji?—l have an idea only. 629. Do any of those States employ a majority of white labourers in cultivating sugar ?—I am not prepared to say. 630. If not, why should you think they do not employ it ? Why is not white labour employed there ?—On account of the unlimited supply of cheap black or coloured labour. 631. Then, let us suppose that it is impossible to get the white labour for the sugar industry in tropical Australia, would you allow the industry to die out ?—I do not contemplate the possibility of that happening; but I think, of the two alternatives —that is, the perpetuation of an alien and inferior civilisation in connection with the sugar-growing or any other industry, or of killing the industry—in the event of a decision having to be arrived at, I think it would be better to let it go. 632. Do you know how much capital has been invested in it ?—A statement has been made that it is £7,000,000, but the nearest facts I could find out are from the Government statistics
A.—4
692
for 1899, which showed the amount involved for the cost of machinery and plant in the sugar milling and refining business is £2,306,812. I cannot see what has trebled the value of the industry since then. 633. Would you advocate, if the evidence we have got is true, the total abandonment of the sugar industry ?—lf it were true, yes ; but I do not contemplate the possibility of it. 634. Then, what becomes of northern Australia if you abandon the industry?— The land remains. 1 believe there has been a large development in connection with the northern districts of New South Wales during the last few years in the substitution of dairying and farming for sugargrowing, and if this was done in the sugar districts of Queensland, should that industry go, it might more than compensate for its loss. 635. Do you imagine that by any law of man you can exclude coloured people from a tropical country ? —I do. 636. Do you think if you tried to compel white people to live in a tropical country they are not fitted for, and to work there continuously, that they would not rebel against it ?—I believe white men can do all the work required in tropical Queensland. 637. Can you give us a case in point where they do ?—I think the sugar industry does not represent the only phase of such employment here. 638. Can you give us any case where the Anglo-Saxon lives and works for generation after generation in the tropics ?—I do not know about other countries. 639. Have you studied the subject ? —I can only speak of it from a local point of view, not from a world-wide one. 640. Can you give an illustration of any place where the Englishman has been able to live from generation to generation in the tropics?—lndia. 641. And worked there?—l do not suppose India is a good illustration. 642. Have we any right to believe, then, that Queensland will be settled differently from all other tropical countries ? —The especial difference here is this : that we have not an indigenous population of lower-grade aliens to compete with. 643. Is Queensland different from any other tropical country ?—I know of no other part of the world where the Englishman has not been confronted by an indigenous and alien coloured inferior population. 644. But you do not know of any place where he has been able to live from generation to generation and to work?—l know of no country where he has not been faced with an indigenous inferior coloured and alien population excepting Queensland. 645. Do you think that he will be able to work continuously in tropical Queensland, notwithstanding all precedents to the contrary ?—I have very great faith in the adaptability of the white race. 646. Does it not rather rest upon your Utopian hopes than upon actual experience ?—lt rests on the fact that they have survived and overrun the world. 647. In the tropics ?—ln all parts. 648. Hon. the Chairman.'] Is it not a fact that a great many other industries benefit from sugar-growing in Queensland? —Yes. 649. Where is the horse-feed obtained from for the horses engaged in that industry?—l do not think the plantations take much horse-feed. They either grow it themselves or feed the horses on sugar-cane. 650. Is there cot a considerable trade between Brisbane and the northern parts in goods for the sugar-plantations, and are not these goods carried by sea? —I do not think there is a very considerable trade. 651. We have evidence that steamers leave here regularly laden with goods for the sugarplantations, and you say that it is not so ? —I would not deny that there is some trade, but Ido not think it is very considerable. 652. If the alternative you speak of was adopted—letting the sugar industry go—would it not react very prejudicially upon many European people in the southern districts of this colony ? —I am not prepared to admit the possibility of its being done away with. 653. But if it came about, what would happen ?—Possibly it would affect the people of the southern districts somewhat prejudicially. 654. Mr. Leys.] The value of the sugar output has been given to us as £1,473,000 in 1898 : where does that money go to if it does not find its way amongst the tradespeople and the white population generally ? Do the kanakas take that money back to the islands with them ?—A good deal of their share of it, and a large amount of it, would go to the sugar-refining monopoly. 655. But that value represented raw sugar, not the refined sugar. Where does that money go to? —I think a good many sugar-growers are in the hands of the Sugar Company. 656. We have evidence that the colonial company does not grow much sugar-cane ?—No, it does not; but at the same time a great many sugar-growers are possibly in its hands. They s are practically mortgaged to it. 657. Do not the mills give the greater part of this money to the growers of the sugar-cane?— Ido not think the sugar-growers, generally speaking, make more than an ordinary living out of their industry. 658. But can you suggest what becomes of this money if it does not, as the Chairman says, find its way into the industries of Queensland ?—A lot of it may go into the pockets of the shareholders of the Colonial Sugar Company. I cannot say what becomes of the portion of it that does not remain here. Eichaed William Soholepibld examined. (No. 256.) 659. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you, Mr. Scholefield—A grazier and land agent at Toowoomba, of the firm of Scholefield and Godsall. 660. What is the extent of the Darling Downs ?—Probably fifty miles square may be said to cover Darling Downs proper.
A.—4
693
661. Is all that available for agriculture? —Yes, and for dairying. There is some ridgy country could not be ploughed. It is all occupied in blocks of, say, from 80,000 to 100,000 acres, the latter being only two or three holders at most. 662. Are there many blocks of about 500 acres ?—A large number. 663. What does it chiefly produce ?—Wheat, malting and Cape barley, and, after getting the land thoroughly cultivated, the farmers go in for lucerne on the creek-flats, and for dairying and fattening sheep. The average yield of wheat is about 25 bushels. We have had crops this year up to 40 bushels per acre, but in bad seasons we have got as low as 12. To sow and harvest jthe wheat would cost a man who works with his own family about £1 an acre, including the seed. 664. How many sheep per acre could you fatten in that district on the lucerne ?—At certain periods of the year it will carry up to twenty sheep to the acre, and sometimes more than that. 665. And how long?—As long as the rainfall continues favourable. In ordinary seasons the man who mows his crop will get six cuttings. 666. Year in and year out growing lucerne, how many sheep to the acre do you think a farmer could fatten ?—Ten to twelve. 667. Is the dairying industry increasing there? —Very fast. 668. Hon. Captain Russell.] How would the man with a 500-acre farm work it to the best advantage ? How much would he have in wheat ?—I can point out 500-acre farms in which every inch is under cultivation. 669. After he gets his crop off what does he do with it ?—He can also grow a crop of maize within the twelve months if he gets it in by Christmas ; then he commences ploughing again the land he does not put into maize ; then when he gets the maize off the other part he follows that up, and gets the whole into crop again; probably wheat, barley, or oats, or a couple of hundred acres of lucerne is laid down. 670. How many sheep would be run on a 500-acre farm after he gets his land in hand?—He could turn over five thousand sheep a year. 671. And keep them all the year round?— Yes. As a rule, a man would buy store wethers which only want fattening, and keep turning them off. 672. How long would it take to make them fat ?—That all depends on their condition. If he happened to get them in good condition he could fatten them off in from two to three months. 673. What profit will he make upon the transaction? —From 2s. 6d. to 3s. a head on an average. 674. What is the value of the freehold of that land ?—I have b4en acting for some years past as agent in the cutting-up of the Westbrook Estate of 84,000 acres, some of which I have sold to some of your New Zealand friends. Kept in the state of cultivation I speak of, land can be bought on the Downs now at from £6 per acre. 675. If a man has got a paddock in lucerne in 1900 and has a drought in 1901 what becomes of his lucerne ? —The droughts we have will not kill the lucerne ; it simply reduces the carryingcapacity of the land for a month or two. There are no serious droughts on the Darling Downs. 676. What will he carry that year ?—He will probably have to come down to three or four sheep to the acre during that period. 677. Can you grow any other grasses beside lucerne ?—The prairie grass; but there has been no serious attempt at growing English grasses on the Darling Downs, unless you class Cape-barley, which is very successful, as a feed-grass. 678. Will lucerne go on for ever?— Lucerne will last, according to the soil, from seven to ten years without resowing. All that would be required would be to go over it with a cultivator occasionally. 679. What is the rainfall at Warwick ? —The yearly average on the Downs is 30 in. The average in Toowoomba for the last eleven years is 40 in. 680. When does that come on ?—Sometimes we get heavy rains in November and December, but the monsoonal rains which came last week generally come within the first three months of the year. They are late this year. 681. Can they be fairly reckoned upon from January to March?— Yes. 682. And again in November ?—Yes. 683. We will take it that the land which will grow 25 bushels to the acre and fatten twentyfive to thirty sheep is worth £6 ?—Yes ; and the virgin land can be purchased, of a similar character, from £2 10s. to £3. It would cost for the first ploughing from 9s. to 10s. an acre by contract, but that does not include fencing. 684. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] I suppose that country is increasing in prolificness every year ?—lt is, but farming is only in its infancy here. 685. And there is country enough there on the Downs to more than meet the agricultural requirements of this country?—l quite believe there is for the present. 686. Do you not think it likely that you will have to import agricultural produce ?—I do not think so, excepting on the supposition that our people go in more for the stock-fattening business than growing cereals or hay for sale, which is quite possible. 687. Hon. Captain Russell.] What is the average temperature during the hot months ?—ln Toowoomba and on the Downs the maximum average is about 80 degrees in the shade, and minimum 60 degrees. 688. Mr. Beauchamp.] Is there much of that good land open for selection ?—lt is chiefly in private hands at present, chiefly for grazing sheep, but it will pay them better eventually to cut it up and sell it to farmers. We have been selling on twelve-years terms at an average of £2 10s., with interest at 5 per cent., and have other large estates shortly to offer. 689. What about the water-supply ?—You can get good water by sinking wells on any part of the Darling Downs. The supply is inexhaustible. 690. Hon. the Chairman.] Are the farmers in that district generally in a prosperous position ? —Very; the dairymen more especially, and those fattening sheep on lucerne and Cape-barley.
A.—4
694
Wednesday, 24th Apeil, 1901. Eight Hon. Sir Hugh M. Nelson, K.C.M.G., examined. (No. 257.) 691. Hon.-ihe You are the President of the-Legislative Council of Queensland? — Yes. I have been a member of the Legislature since'lBB3, and I was Premier of this colony for five years. 692. Did you take a prominent part in the Federal movement in Australia?— Yes, fairly prominent. I was a member of the Federal Council which used to sit at Hobart, and I was at all the Conferences of Premiers that were held prior to the Convention. 693. Do you approve of the present Constitution ?—Not altogether. I think the Federal Government have taken larger functions than there was any necessity for, thereby curtailing to an extent which was not desirable the autonomy of the colonies as they existed previously. 694. Do you think the jurisdiction of the Federal Council could have been extended to have met what was required ?—That is my opinion, and I expressed it repeatedly. I also do not like the representation under the Constitution. I was always of opinion that a purely population basis over the immense territory comprising Australia was not fair. I think the distance from the seat of Government ought to carry considerable weight, and be recognised as a factor in any kind of representation granted to each colony or State. Take Ireland in the United Kingdom : the population basis would rob Ireland of about half her representation—in fact, London would have as many representatives as the whole of Ireland. 695. You think that area as well as population should count? —Yes, to some extent, as also distance from the seat of Government. This applies to Western Australia as much as to Queensland, the youngest of all the colonies; and we are in a very small way of development as compared with New South Wales and Victoria. 696. Do you approve of the financial provisions in the Commonwealth Bill ?—I do not see any objection to what is called the " Braddon blot." I rather think it was a good provision in the interests of the smaller States. 697. How do you think that the finances of the smaller States will be affected by the right to levy Customs and excise duties being handed over to the Federal Government ?—I think it will affect them very seriously. In Queensland all our industries are in their infancy, and I say it would have been better for Queensland to have been allowed a fixed term of, say, ten years to adjust the tariff gradually in such a way as not to injuriously affect our growing industries. 698. Supposing that the financial result to the smaller States is a deficit, how is that deficit to be made up ?—The only recourse is direct taxation. 699. Do you think the Federal Parliament is likely to exercise the power it has of giving financial assistance to a State in the shape of gratuitous grants ?—I think not; but I think it is very probable that they might do the same as we do for local authorities—advance the money upon loan to tide over any difficulties, making the State which receives it responsible for its repayment by half-yearly payments, consisting of interest and redemption. 700. But how will the States be able to repay that loan if they cannot levy Customs duties ?— They must do it by direct taxation. I see no other source. 701. Supposing, after ten years, the Federal Parliament wishes to take the whole of the Customs duties, is there anything to prevent them ?—Nothing at all, if they require the money. 702. In your opinion, are the wants of the Federal Government likely to increase as time goes on or to decrease? —I think they are bound to increase. A body of that sort, endowed with authority, naturally grasps at as much power as it can assume, and the number of subjects contained in these thirty-nine subclauses is so great that before any length of time elapses the Federal Parliament will assume the government of the whole of Australia. What the States have now they cannot touch without altering the Constitution—that is, the management of our lands and mines. They have taken over emigration and immigration. That, I think, was a great mistake. I think each State ought to be allowed to manage its own immigration. 703. Do you think that any tariff is likely to be adopted by the Federal Government which will give the State Treasurers more funds than they have now under their present autonomy ?— No ; the people will not stand it. 704. What is your opinion about the States being ultimately absorbed in the Federal Parliament and a Union taking the place of the present Federal Government?— That is the danger we are now rather alarmed about—that this change will result to a large extent in unification as contrasted with federation. That arises from the immense amount of subjects that are put under the control of the Federal Parliament when they choose to take them over, and I think they will take over all that is allowed by the Constitution. Had the powers of the Federal Parliament been confined to defence, quarantine, post-offices, and such large subjects as that, I think we would all have derived a benefit from federation. I think that is all that was required. 705. What is your opinion as to Mr. Barton's idea of a " white " Australia becoming a practical fact ?—I think it is simply a lot of electioneering clap-trap. Ido not think they mean it, and I think it would certainly ruin the sugar industry. That is one thing in which we have rather rashly trusted to the Federal Parliament. The people in the southern districts of Australia do not know Queensland or its requirements—what applies to Melbourne, Sydney, or Adelaide does not apply to the northern part of Queensland. Even South Australia, although f it is not generally known, does what no other colony would allow for a moment —they employ skilled Asiatic artisans on the railway running to Port Darwin and in the Government workshops, which shows that they cannot do the work in those regions without coloured labour. 706. Hon. Captain Russell.] What do you think is likely to come of the large northern territories ? Will they be separated into further States ?—Probably that would be a good thing to do, because the treatment of these tropical portions must be essentially different from the treatment of the southern portions.
695
A.—4
707. Do you imagine that there will be two or three Queenslands? —I do not think so. I doubt if the Federal Parliament will agree to separation, because it would involve each new State having equal representation in the Senate, and they would consider that that would give us too much representation. 708. But not necessarily equal representation ?—Yes; according to the Constitution every State must have six Senators. 709. Mr. Reid.] " Every original State " ?—Well, our people would not accept separation, I think, into various States unless they were treated in the same way as other States. 710. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Would it not suit the views of northern Australia to have two or three States, even though they had a diminished number of Senators ? —I do not think they would agree to that. 711. Then, you think it is possible that the desire of Queensland to have a southern and northern Queensland might be possible under the Constitution ?—lt is probable, but I do not think it will be satisfactory unless they can be accepted on the same status as the original States. 712. We have heard that the finances of Tasmania will be very much hampered by federation : do you think it is possible that Tasmania may be absorbed by Victoria, the two merging into one State?—l think there is a possibility of that, and it might not be a bad thing to do, as they have to tax the people heavily to carry on. It would be a great advantage to have all the debts pooled under the Federation, and the railways taken over as an asset. I expect that to come to pass at some time or other. It would be one of the grand achievements of federation. The Convention could not agree upon a scheme, but it is quite possible that the Federal Parliament may. 713. Will that have the tendency to strengthen the bond of unity—to unification rather than federation ? —I do not think so, no more than having our defence all under one head. Everybody admits that it would be far better to have the defence of Australia under one executive body. 714. Do you imagine that there will be any difficulty in administering the railways, post-offices, or such matters from a central body rather than from the States ?—I do not think so, excepting that people with grievances will not have the same opportunity of getting redress, through being at such a distance from the head of the department. 715. Then, you do not imagine that there will be an increase in the number of the States in Australia ?—Not for some time to come, as the population does not warrant it. Central and Northern Queensland have only about one hundred and fifty thousand people, the bulk of the population being in the southern part of the State ; and there are more white men in the northern part than there are in the central. 716. I am concerned in my mind as to the possibility of Victoria and New South Wales completely dominating the whole of Australia ? —That is our danger. 717. Could not you guard against that by increasing the number of States?— They will not allow us. I think we shall be dominated by New South Wales and Victoria. 718. And if Tasmania is absorbed in Victoria that domination will be intensified?— But it is practically the case now, the Victorian and Tasmanian representatives are, I think, sure to band together. Victoria has a big stake in Tasmania in the shape of capital invested there. 719. In that case is there not a possibility, in connection with the financial disturbance in Tasmania, that that colony will find it convenient to be absorbed altogether by Victoria ?—I do not think that Tasmania would apply for it, because it would deprive that colony of six Senators. 720. Hon. Mr. Boiven.] Do you not think that in the future the tropics of Australia will probably be governed by the Commonwealth as a separate territory apart from the States ? Do you not think they would be more like the tropical colonies of England ?—I think not. I think that would be against the aspirations of our people, and I do not think it would ever get the consent of the people. 721. Take Port Darwin : that country would have to come in as an original State, would it not?— Not if it were made into a separate State, but it is not fit for it. It would have to be worked on a different system from what the southern part of South Australia is worked, because it is a tropical country and cannot possibly get on without coloured labour. 722. From your experience in the Federal Council, do you think that Council could have been made a practical thing and had practically done the work of federation if all the States had joined together?— That is what I always advocated when I was a member of the Council. The Queensland representatives who attended that Council were all unanimous on the subject, including the late Sir James Dickson. 723. Do you apprehend that there will be any difficulty in the working of the Inter-State Commission ? —The thing is only an idea at present. Their functions, powers, and authorities will have to be defined by Parliament. Ido not know what powers they will be intrusted with, or whether the Commission will be a success or not. The principal argument in its favour was to prevent differential rates being imposed as between two colonies—to prevent one colony trying to smuggle the trade of an adjoining colony—and for that reason I think it would be better for the railways to come under the Commonwealth. 724. Will not there be some difficulty in respect to the powers of the Commission ? Will it not be delegating the powers practically to a third party?— The Government will always be responsible for the actions of the Inter-State Commission. If they were to be a thoroughly independent body it would be a great mistake —that is to say, if they were to be an Imperium in imperio. In Queensland we have a Eailway Commissioner, also a Minister for Eailways, but nothing can be done by the Commissioner without the consent of the Governor in Council. 725. Mr. Millar.] Do you anticipate that that Inter-State Commission will have anything to do with the shipping laws of the several States ?—No. Their powers will be entirely confined to dealing with railways. 726. The clause dealing with the Commission indicates that they are to have a general sort of controlling-power in regard to commerce ? —lf that is so, and I have not looked at the clause
A.—4
696
lately, of course they would be in a position to advise on the question of the shipping laws as they relate to our ports. 727. If the Inter-State Commission were to rule that New Zealand shipping laws, which are in advance of those of other States, conflicted with the shipping interests and laws of another part of the Federation, would that Commission overrule the Parliament ? —lt would not be a proper position for any body of men to be placed in to be allowed to override the Parliament, and I condemn this Commission totally if they are to be endowed with any powers that enable them to act irrespective of the Parliament and Executive. I take it, however, that it will be merely an advisory body, and that anything that is done in the way you suggest will be by separate legislation. The Constitution gives the Parliament very great powers. 728. Have not the Railway Commissioners been appointed in the past with enormous powers ? —Our Commissioners can do nothing without the consent of the Executive. 729. Do you think that the States will be able to borrow as favourably for their public works as they have been able to in the past, seeing that the principal source of revenue has been taken over by the Federal Government who has a first charge on it ? —I am quite sure the States will not borrow as well. The idea is that they will refrain from borrowing—that any money they require will be obtained from the Central Government, which will do all the borrowing. If there are two kinds of loans put on the market, one Federal and the other a State loan, the latter would certainly be neglected. 730. What are the conditions of the treaty entered into by Queensland with Japan ?—As far as the bulk of the treaty dealing with trade is concerned, it is exactly the same as has been adoptfcd by the Imperial Government. The modification is that we reserve the right to legislate at any time with regard to the immigration and employment of Japanese labour. There was a little difficulty for a while as to what the word "labour" should include, but eventually they conceded what I held out for, that it should include not only unskilled labour but also artisans. Therefore under the treaty we have full power to legislate in any way we think proper with regard to the admission of the Japanese workmen. 731. There has been no legislation passed ? —lt has not been found necessary as yet. Whenever we have had any grievance respecting these immigrants the Japanese Government exerted themselves to put a stop to the matter complained of —such matters, for instance, as infamous women coming into this colony. They immediately passed a resolution that no woman could leave without a passport and inspector's certificate. Javanese can come in without restriction, because they are not included in the treaty, and any number of Japanese can come in under the treaty, but we have power to legislate to stop them if too many are coming in and prove a danger to the colony. 732. Do you think there will be such an influx of Japanese to this State as to be a menace to the State itself?—We have power to stop them, including mechanics. The benefit of having the treaty is that any law we pass under it receives the Eoyal assent at once without having to go before the Imperial Government, and it takes effect immediately, because it is included in the treaty. 733. Mr. Beauchamp.] Prior to the passing of the Constitution Act do you think there was any understanding between Western Australia and the other colonies as to the construction of a trans-continental railway?— No. 734. Do you think it is likely thac that railway will be constructed in the near future?—l do not think so. • 735. Did you oppose the Constitution Bill which finally became law? —I certainly wished it modified, but I was always in favour of a Federation. 736. But you consider that many objectionable clauses are still included in the Bill ?—Yes. 737. That being so, I presume you would scarcely recommend our colony to become a part of the family until such clauses are removed?—l do not know what I would do if I were a NewZealander, but I fancy I would be inclined to retain my independence. The advantage you would gain is with regard to reciprocal trade and commerce. 738. Do you think there is any prospect of our being able to establish a favourable reciprocal treaty with Australia?—l do not think it is possible, without your joining the Federation. lam in favour of free-trade throughout the British Empire. 739. Do you believe in an Imperial zollverein? —Yes, as an object we should aspire to. 740. Do you recognise that we would be under some disability as regards our distance from the Federal capital?—l think you ought to insist upon having a larger representation if you came in. 741. Mr. Luke.] Was it more a question of trade interests that prompted this federation, or was it more a matter of sentiment growing out of the South African difficulty?—lt was undoubtedly sentiment. 742. Do you think the outcome of it will be beneficial to the States on the continent?—lt may eventually be beneficial, but a State like Queensland must suffer at the start. 743. Then, you do not think the benefits that would accrue to the States on the continent would be extended to New Zealand, supposing she entered the Federation ?—I hardly think so ; but Ido not know enough of New Zealand to give an opinion. 744. Do yo think that unifying the States would be preferable to the present Constitution ?— It is doubtful; but it is almost the same thing. It will come to that. There are hundreds of people I meet every day who tell me now that they did not look at the question in a proper light when voting for federation. They distinctly say now that if they had to vote again they would not vote for it. 745. Do you think that will lead to friction between the Federal and the State powers ?—-I think that when the States begin to assert their rights there will be a tussle or two between them and the Central Government.
697
A.—4
746. Do you anticipate that in the near future the Federal power will absorb all the Customs duties ?—I do not think so. 747. Mr. Leys.] Why is it that the people who voted for federation would not vote for it again ? —Their eyes have been opened in the meantime." They are very much dissatisfied with the representation we have got, for one thing, and with the terms of Mr. Barton's manifesto. 748. You think that the interests of Queensland are being sacrificed for political purposes ?—To some extent I think so. 749. Do you think that New Zealand's interests are likely to be sacrified also, she being farther away, if she joined the Federation? —It is just as likely. . 750. With regard to tropical Australia, did you notice that the Premier of South Australia had already asked Mr. Barton to consider the propriety of taking over tropical South Australia ?—I saw something in the Press about it, but did not attach much importance to it. The Northern Territory is an annual loss to the South Australian Government; but it is their own fault, and Ido not see why they should hand it over to the Federal Government, or why they should be allowed to do so. 751. Do you think there will not be pressure brought to bear on the Federal Parliament to construct such works as trans-continental railways in the near future ? —I do not think those who asked for them would succeed. There is nothing that members of Parliament are so keen about as the building of railways, and unless other members get a quid pro quo they would never consent to it. 752. Do you not think that the Victorian interests in Western Australia might lead the Victorians to vote for it?—l do not think so. I was in Western Australia a little while ago, and the people there are not at all unanimous in favour of this railway. Many would rather see a railway built from Coolgardie down to Esperance Bay, while fast steamers will go as quickly frotti Adelaide to Fremantle or Perth as a railway. The railway will never take the goods traffic, which will go by sea, 753. If the Federal Government took over the railways and the debts who would construct the railways then ?—They would either be constructed by the Commonwealth Parliament or each State would be allowed to do them, borrowing the money for the purpose through the Central Government, in which case you would have to get the consent o"f the Federal Parliament first. 754. Would not the States have to get the consent of the Federal Parliament for every work it had to borrow for ?—Yes. 755. Does not that mean practically emasculating the States altogether ?—No doubt it would ; but it might be a check on extravagant expenditure. 756. Hon. Major Steward.] Under the Braddon clause the Commonwealth Government has power to use for Federal purposes 25 per cent, of the Customs revenue, returning what they do not want to the States. Is it not almost certain that the Commonwealth requirements will increase in time ?—Yes, undoubtedly. 757. Is it likely, therefore, that any proportion of that 25 per cent, will be returned to the States Parliaments ?—I think not; they will require it all. 758. Is it not probable that, after the ten years have expired, a very much larger proportion than 25 per cent, will be required ?—Yes. The Federal Parliament has full powers of taxation if the Customs tariff is not sufficient, andthey have the right to levy direct taxation also. In the case of New South Wales, where they have an income-tax, the Federal Parliament might put on another income-tax, and then you would have two such taxes —one for the State and another for the Federal Parliament. Albert W. D. White examined. (No. 258.) 759. Hon. the Chairman.] What are you?—l am a grazier, residing at Bluff Downs, Northern Queensland, and I am thoroughly acquainted with the sugar-plantations there, having had a butchering business for fifteen years in the centre of the sugar districts, My experience goes to show that the sugar industry cannot be carried on by whites, as white men, apparently, are unable to do the field-work involved in trashing and cutting the cane. I object strongly to that class of work. It has been tried with white gangs, but they gave it up. In my opinion, if the cultivation of sugar is left entirely to white labour it will mean a general collapse of the industry. I am not intimate with the southern portions of Queensland, and can only speak of the northern part. The collapse of the industry would affect every trade in Queensland, more or less. 760. Mr. Leys.] I suppose the heat is very intense in the sugar-cane districts ?—Yes ; it is a muggy heat in the cane-fields, as there is no air. It is very trying to white men. The open country is not so bad. 761. Then, you say that whites cannot do the labour connected with the field-work?— They seem indisposed to undertake it; in fact, they have a strong objection to it. 762. Mr. Luke.] Apart from the trashing and cane-cutting, could white labour do the rest of the work ? —I think so. 763. Does the black labour show a tendency to increase or decrease ? —I do not know that there is a tendency to increase the black labour, but the industry has been increasing, and naturally the black labour must grow in proportion. 764. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] What is the average height of the cane when it is being trashed?— You might get cane 15 ft. or 16 ft. long, but, of course, it is interlaced and tangled up. It is difficult to give the average height. It would be over a man's head. 765. Hon. Captain Russell.] Why are the whites indisposed to do the field-work ?—Because they find the labour too trying. 766. Do you think it is that they have not already acquired the feeling that they might be called " mean whites "if they work at that particular form of labour?—l do not think so, nor do I think there is a sufficient supply of white labour in the north to do the work. 88—A. 4.
A.-4
698
767. Do you think that high wages would tend to make white men work there systematically ? —I do not think so ;it is not a matter of wages at all. If the wages were from £1 to £2 and found I do not think the white man would continue to work, although it might tempt him to take it in the first place. We have had a trial to that effect when white gangs contracted to do the work but threw it up. 768. Are there many coloured people where you live?— Japanese, Javanese, Chinamen, Cingalese, Hindoos, kanakas—almost every nationality. 769. How have those people come there ?—The Japanese and Javanese have been engaged and brought over. 770. Do they bring many women with them ? —Very few. In fact, Ido not think the Chinese or the Cingalese bring any women at all. I question whether there would be five women to a hundred men amongst them all. 771. Are these men employed in other industries besides sugar?— No. The Hindoos interfere more than the others in local industries. The Chinese engage in banana-growing to a large extent, but they are not employed in factories. Their conduct is decidedly good. The coloured race hardly drink anything at all, and what drinking there is does not involve any disturbance. 772. Are there any cases of theft and violence ?—There are cases of theft, but not of violence. Amongst the kanakas theft is almost unheard-of. 773. Which race is the theiving race ?—The Cingalese and coolies. 774. Supposing that, by legislation or otherwise, the sugar industry was destroyed, could not the ground be used for other purposes ? —Yes ; for grazing. 775. Would it produce anything like the same return as a sugar-crop ? —No. 776. Do you think it would be a great blow to all tropical Australia?—lt would be the greatest blow Queensland has ever received. 777. Hon. the Chairman.] Can cotton be successfully grown in Queensland? —In the southern parts ; it is too wet for it in the north. 778. Does the kanaka come into competition in any way excepting in his special occupation in the sugar-fields?—No; and he spends pretty well all his money in the country before he goes away again. 779. Hon. Captain Bussell.] Does the health of the average European deteriorate from long residence in tropical Australia?— Not if he is abstemious in his nabits. 780. What about the women ?—lt affects the women. They get run down very much. They require a constant change, generally two or three months a year in a colder climate. 781. Would that be possible with the labouring-class?—l do not think so. 782. What would be the result in two or three generations to people who cannot get a change?— Very bad; and we see it in the rising generation, without looking two or three generations ahead. 783. You think the first generation is not as good as their predecessors?— No. The children look very healthy up to about five or six years of age, and then they begin to get thin and weak. 784. Do you think that the climate will affect their power of work ?—I think it will eventually. lam speaking of the coastal districts; the climate inland is totally different. 785. Mr. Leys.] Are the kanakas looked after well?—-As well as any men could possibly be. They improve under civilisation. They are finer and more muscular men when they go back to their islands than when they come here. 786. Do they gain in intelligence and morals by residence in Queensland, or otherwise ?— I think they improve in intelligence, but I question whether their morals improve to the same extent. 787. Is there any effort made to educate or civilise them ?—Yes. 788. Is that carried on systematically ?—I should not say it was. 789. Do the Government provide them with religious instruction ? —Not that I am aware of. It is undertaken by nearly all the clergymen visiting the districts. 790. But have the Churches no systematic work there, no missionary-work there ?—Yes; not so much amongst the kanakas as the aboriginals. The latter are looked after by the Government. 791. Are the Churches carrying on missionary-work amongst the kanakas?— Not to any great extent. Thomas Glassey, Senator, examined. (No. 259.) 792. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of Parliament, Mr. Glassey?— A member of the State House of Eepresentatives, and I have been recently elected to the Senate in the Federal Parliament. I have lived in Queensland for seventeen years. 793. Have you interested yourself in the sugar industry in Queensland? —Merely as an investigator into the working of the industry and as a representative for Bundaberg, one of the largest sugar-producing districts in the colony. I also represented one of the Gulf districts in Northern Queensland for two years, and am well acquainted with that part of the country. 794. Speaking of Bundaberg and southern Queensland, we want you to give us your opinion as to whether the sugar industry can be successfully prosecuted by white labour?—My opinion on that matter is very emphatic, and that is that it can be undertaken and successfully prosecuted by white labour, both in the fields and in the mills. 795. Does that apply to Northern Queensland ?—I think it would. I have not the slightest doubt about it in my own mind. The white men can do the work and will do it if they are reasonably paid, fairly housed, and have fair conditions of labour. 796. We have had evidence to the effect that it is not so much a question of whether the white man can do the work as that he will not do the work: what is your experience?—To the contrary White men will do the work, but not alongside of kanakas or coloured races in the field.
A.—4,
699
797. Supposing the kanaka were not employed, is there any objection to the present rate of wages paid to the white labourer?—Of course, men working in the cane-fields want decent wages. Mr, Gibson, one of the largest planters in Queensland, said, at a conference of manufacturers in Melbourne, in 1899, that if the planters could get a sufficiently high protective duty on sugar from abroad they would be able to employ the white labour successfully at £1 10s. a week and found. 798. Is there sufficient white labour available in Queensland if the wages were satisfactory ?— I think so. A Royal Commission which sat here in 1888, and reporteds on the matter in 1889, reported that sugar could be grown by white labour alone south of Townsville, but that they did not think it could be grown north of Townsville by white labour only; but the quantity of sugar produced north of Townsville is not very much. In 1899 there were 123,000 tons of sugar manufactured in the colony, 88,000 tons of which were produced south of Townsville, and only 35,000 tons north of Townsville. Townsville is six hundred miles north of Bundaberg. 799. Hon. Captain Russell.} Upon what do you base your belief that you can grow suga.r under entirely different circumstances from what it is grown now? —I agree with Mr. Gibson that if there is a reasonably high protective duty placed on sugar imported from abroad, where black labour is cheap and plentiful, and the Australian market is secured to us, the conditions will be so altered that white men can be employed and reasonable wages paid them, and under decent conditions. 800. Do I understand that the industry under natural conditions cannot last : must you have artificial conditions before you can employ white labour?—l am not prepared to say. I merely take the conditions as they exist at present, and i say that, provided these duties are levied, the industry can be carried on by white labour. 801. I understand you to mean that "the profit of the sugar-grower is to be made out of a protected industry, and not out of the industry proper?— Probably there may be something in that. 802. Would that be an element ?—lt would be an important element. 803. Why is so much more sugar grown south of Townsville than in the north ?—Because, I suppose, the fields are much older. 804. Does that point to the fact that the closer you get to the tropics the less possible the cultivation becomes ?—No ; the area under sugar-cane at Maekay and Bundaberg has increased very considerably. Probably Maekay has increased more than Bundaberg. Maekay is four hundred miles north of Bundaberg. In 1890 the area under sugar-cane in the Bundaberg district was 14,875 acres. There were only 10,448 acres crushed that year. The rest of the crop stood over for the next year. The sugar produced that year totalled 23,181 tons. In 1899 there were 24,911 acres, and the area crushed was 19,758 acres. I have not got the figures for north of Bundaberg. 805. What is the amount that was produced in 1899? —33,310 tons. 806. After that Commission sat did the Government take any action on its report?— Not until 1892. In 1885 they decided that recruiting from the islands was to cease in 1890, but by an Act which was passed in 1890, and which was in my opinion unjustifiable, they repealed, that law, and allowed recruiting to be renewed. 807. I think they offered some capital to the sugar-growers on certain conditions ?—Not that I am aware of. 808. We have been told that £60,000 was allotted for the purpose of encouraging the growing of sugar by white labour alone : are you aware of that ? —I do not remember aaything of the sort. 809. For the establishment of crushing-mills?— That is so ; but it was in 1886 when two mills were erected at Maekay. That occurred before I entered Parliament. The mills were erected in 1886, and I was returned in 1888. I presume the subsidy was offered for the purpose of encouraging the growth and cultivation of sugar by white labour. 810. What was the result of that experiment ?—Fairly satisfactory. 811. Were there many farms cultivated entirely by white labour consequent on that offer?— That I could not say. 812. Do you know how long the success was permanent ?—No. 813. We had evidence that it broke down at once ? —That is not so, because during my thirteen years in Parliament the matter has cropped up from time to time, and the balance of argument was in favour of the establishment of mills because they were successful. 814. We had evidence from a Government official that they broke down entirely, and that the mills were obliged to take cane grown on farms, where kanaka labour was employed, in order to keep going ?—-I think there was something in that. 815. In other words, the system, though aided by the Government, of Employing white labour broke down ?—That is true enough as regards the employment of kanakas, and so long as you have the kanakas in any particular district so long will people employ them. I should like to see the matter decided in a district where there are no kanakas at all, and in my opinion it could be carried on without the coloured labour. 816. Taking the history of the sugar industry in other countries, can you tell me of any country where cane-sugar is grown by Europeans? —I do not know of any. 817. Do you know how the industry is carried on in Fiji ?—Presumably, by black labour chiefly. But I attach no importance to that. 818. But if the history of the whole world goes to show that cane-sugar is not grown by white labour do you think that Queensland can show the world an example?—l think so. I know it is done by means of white labour, both in the mill and the field. lam speaking of Bundaberg. 819. Please tell us the name of one firm that does it ?—I cannot give the names. I have the names here, but I am not permitted to use them.
A.-4
700
820. But is it discreditable to grow sugar with white labour?—lt is not discreditable, but these men, finding there is a great agitation against black labour, are not inclined to come into contact with persons to whom they are perhaps under an obligation. 821. We had evidence that on the small farms there is no such thing as white labour—that there is black labour there?—l might tell you that a gentleman named Benson, who sold out of Bundaberg in 1899, had not employed any kanakas for six years, and for all those years he managed his farm absolutely by white labour. Another man named Chappels also conducted his farm for four years absolutely by white labour. 822. Why did the first gentleman sell out his farm ?—He did very well by sugar-growing, and, I suppose, found he could live without farming. , 823. In other words, he found that sugar-cultivation without black labour was too hard ? — Certainly not. On the contrary, he found that he had done so well previously out of sugar by means of white labour that he was able to sell out. 824. What size farm had he?— About 60 acres. 825. You are quite sure that both of those gentlemen employed no black labour? —That is the statement made to me. 826. Do you not know it to be the fact ?—I am taking the man's statement made in the presence of another person. 827. You told us that white men can do the work but will not do the work?—l deny that they will not. 828. We had evidence that only half of one crop could be cut because white labour could not be got under any circumstances ? —I do not believe it. Ido not believe that such a thing has ever occurred in Bundaberg. 829. But in the Northern Territory ? —I am not able to speak of that. 830. But if a gentleman came and deliberately said he was managing an estate, and that in order to get his crop reaped he was willing to pay double the wages that he would have had to pay to black labour and that he could not get it, and was obliged to leave half his crop, should you say that he had deliberately made a misstatement ? —I do not think he would. 831. Then, you think there would be an instance in which money has not induced white men to take such work ?—There might have been such a case, but I do not know of any such instance. 832. You say that the white man could work, and would work if he got sufficient wages, in the tropical part north of Bundaberg ?—I think so. I never heard a planter say that a white man would not or could not do the work. lam speaking of Mackay and the tropics about six hundred miles from Queensland. 833. How is it that there are unemployed in Queensland if it is difficult to get labour up there ? How is it that the men will not go there and work ? —I deny that men will not go there and work. 834. Are there unemployed in Brisbane?— Yes, and at Mackay and Townsville. 835. But why are they unemployed ?—There is nothing for them to do. 836. Do you mean to say that if a white man can work in the cane-fields and he is unemployed he refuses to take such work ? —lf the man has nothing to do in the cane-fields, what is the good of any unemployed man going there to look for work ? 1 have found numbers of unemployed all along the coast —at Bowen and Townsville. 837. Do you think that it is not attributable to the fact that the men cannot work systematically in a tropical climate?— Certainly not. Men in Townsville complain to me that they are prepared to go and work if they get a reasonable wage. 838. What is a reasonable wage?—l am sure if they got £1 10s. or £1 ss. a week and found they would not object to do the work. 839. Would you be able to depend on them as well as on the kanakas ?—I think so. 840. Would a European be able to do much more than a kanaka?—l think so. 841. How much more ?—I am not prepared to say. 842. Do you know what wages a kanaka gets? —For the first three years 2s. 6d. a week and found. The old boys get more. 843. If the European got double the kanaka's wage is there any reason why he should not be employed ? —I think he ought to be employed instead of the kanaka, and at good wages. 844. But you think the European employer refuses to employ him, even under those conditions ?—I might say that, while some employers are bad, others are splendid men. But they are not going to employ a man at £70 a year if they can get one at £30. 845. But he could do double the work ?—He ought to, but it does not follow that he will. 846. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Do you think it is advisable to induce European labourers to go and work in that climate ?—We have quite a number of white labourers working there now. 847. I mean field-labour?— And I mean all kinds of labour. 848. We have it in evidence that white men cannot work in the cane-fields ?—I dispute that statement most emphatically. 849. And you have been in that country and seen the men at work ?—Yes ; scores of times. 850. The white men ?—Yes. 851. You say that it would not be correct evidence that men have been tried at double the wages and they gave the job up ?—I would doubt it. 852. And that it also has been tried by white men for a time, and by others who have been living there, and that the second generation is deteriorating fast ?—I do not know how they can prove that, because the oldest cane-fields are only thirty years of age. 853. But the white men's children distinctly feel the climate?—l am inclined to dispute that statement. I found in Northern Queensland men doing all kinds of work.
701
A.—4
854. On the coast? —No; in the interior, and the coast as well. 855. Do you know of any kind of work in which white men labour in the open and where the work has been tolerable to white men—l mean, of course, in the cane-country ? —I am not prepared to speak of that. 856. Do you think it would be advisable that white men should be induced to go up there to work the cane ?—I am quite satisfied that if the conditions were moderately good white men. would be glad to go there and take their families with them. 857 Then, if we have any evidence to the effect that they tried it and then gave up the job it is not true ?—I would not say that, but I would be inclined to dispute it as a general rule. When a man can work in the hold of a ship under a tropical sun he would work in the cane-fields. The bulk of the trashing is done in the winter when there is cold weather, and the coldest weather I have ever experienced is up on the Herbert Tableland, about 2,000 ft. 858. Were they growing sugar there ? —Yes. 859. Mr. Luke.] What would you deem sufficient protection in the case of sugar ?—Mr. Gibson says £5 or £6 a ton. 860. What is the price of raw sugar ? —About £9 or £10. 861. Do you think the Continent of Australia would be agreeable to that duty?—l think so. 862. As to the two mills referred to by Captain Eussell, to which some subsidy was granted by the Government on condition that the cane was grown by white labour, do you not know that these properties were leased in order to evade the provisions of the Act ?—I believe some were, but I am not sure when. 863. Does the cane deteriorate if it is left in the field from one season to another?—No; it rather improves. 864. What is the great objection to kanaka labour —as to its cheapness, or on moral grounds? —Both. We are not objecting to the introduction of coloured races merely on the grounds of the displacement of white labour, but on moral grounds as well. 865. But they do not intermarry with the people of Queensland? —Not to any great extent. 866. Do you not think that, compared with the average settler in this district, a kanaka is on moral grounds equal to the average settler? —It is very difficult to define morality, and I would be rather loth to go into the question, as it is a very intricate one. 867. Are not the kanakas superior to the Japanese and the Chinese?—l think they are the least objectionable of the coloured races; but they are very troublesome, treacherous, and not at all acceptable in the community of Bundaberg to my knowledge. 868. Is the agitation confined to the kanaka ?—Certainly not. He is more tolerated because he comes here under a special law; but my objection is to all the coloured races. I have the least objection to the kanaka. 869. Mr. Leys.] What is the temperature in those northern districts?—ll9 degrees in the shade would be an exaggeration, but you could get the correct returns from the department here. 870. Could you give us the rainfall and the humidity ?—No. 871. We are told the rainfall exceeds 100 in. ? —At Mackay they have been suffering for want of rain. There is a wet belt where we get too much rainfall, but, speaking generally, the canefields suffer from the dearth of rain. 872. When you say it is not extremely hot or extremely humid, why do you come to that conclusion unless you know the temperature ?—I did not say that that was the general rule, but that there are periods when that humidity of atmosphere exists. But it is not regular over all. 873. Do you want us seriously to believe, Mr. Glassey, that in a colony of this vast extent, where there are only 500,000 people, there is no other better employment for white men than putting them to such work as this ?—I am not here to enforce your belief. 874. Is that the impression you wish to convey ?—Certainly not. I merely wish to convey this impression : I deny that there is anything about the cultivation of sugar that white men cannot do, and I deny it is detrimental to their best interests. 875. Do you say that this lack of employment is due to the presence of the kanakas ? —No. I say that is an element. There are so many coloured people here that there is no room for the white men. But that is not the exclusive cause —there are others. 876. Do you think that a population ten times larger than the present one could be employed ? —Yes. 877. Do you think, in view of all this, it is sound public policy to try and force a white man to such labour as this?— There is no compulsion involved. We merely say that this class of labour should not be here, and should be gradually removed in a series of years in order to make room for white people, who would grow sugar under better conditions than exist now. 878. Do you not think that the continual employment of white men at such work will bring them down to the level of the negro ?—No. 879. What is the proportion of coloured labour to the whole of the labour employed in the sugar industry ?—lt is a big proportion. 880. What do you suppose becomes of the money earned by the sugar industry in Queensland ? —lt disappears. 881. Do you think that white labour gets a pretty large share of it?— Certainly ; but it would get a larger proportion were the coloured races not here. 882. Does not white labour get the whole of it ? Does the kanaka take any of that money back to the New Hebrides with him? —White labour gets a proportion, and the kanaka takes a proportion back with him. He spends a portion here. During the last few years the value of money is better known by these natives and better appreciated by them than it was a few years ago. 883. Will not the whole of that money be circulated amongst the white population of Queensland ? —Certainly it will not. Some of it will go back to the islands.
A.—4.
702
884. Then, it has been suggested that machinery should be used for cane-cutting : would the introduction of machinery benefit white labour in any way ?—Yes. I think it would be the means of solving the difficulty that some people allege to exist in connection with the canecutting. 885. If the kanakas were replaced by machinery would the sphere of employment for whites be greatly enlarged ? —lt would to the extent that white men would not only manufacture the machines, but would tend them. 886. Hon. Major Steward.} We have had evidence to the effect that if kanaka labour were interdicted cane-cutting could not be carried on, because white labour is not available: your evidence is to the contrary?— Entirely. 887. As a member of Parliament you know of no such a sum as £12,000 having been paid by way of compensation to a man who says he was unable to get the necessary white labour to cut his crop of cane, the kanakas having been withdrawn by the Government?— Not to my knowledge. It is the first time I have heard of it. 888. The allegation made to us was that the Government withdrew 120 kanakas who were in his employ, alleging that they had been improperly obtained : he was able to prove the contrary, and that he could not get the white labour to replace them, and he obtained £12,000 by way of compensation. Do you know of any such sum having been paid?— This is the first time I have heard of it. But lam not saying it is not true. I simply do not know. 889. Hon. the Chairman.] What was the number of acres under crop in Bundaberg in 1890 ? —14,875 acres under cane-crop. 890. Would you object to my asking you if you stood for the Senate in the labour interest ?— No. In the interest of the policy enunciated by Mr. Barton. But I have always gone for white labour. 891. What is the total amount of coloured labour employed in the sugar-plantations in Queensland ? —About eight or ten thousand; but we have about twenty-four thousand coloured persons here altogether. 892. And the number of white people?— About 480,000. Andbeson Dawson, Senator, examined. (No. 260.) 893. Hon. the Chairman.] You are a member of the Federal Parliament ?—Yes, of the Senate. 894. And have been Premier of this colony?— Yes. 895. And a member of the State Legislature from 1893 to date ?—Yes. 896. You have a good knowledge of the sugar industry in Queensland ?— Yes. 897. We are concerned to inquire as to whether the sugar industry can be successfully carried on without employing coloured labour : what is your opinion ?—That alien labour is not necessary to carry on the sugar industry successfully. 898. Do you think white labour can do it both in northern and southern Queensland? —I certainly do. As a matter of fact, we fought the battle- of the Federal elections here on that particular point—"white" Australia against a "coloured" Australia. The cry is advanced by the • alien advocates that the white men cannot do the work. I, as a miner, representing a goldfield, where I was reared and worked at my occupation 2,000 ft. under ground in a temperature of 115 degrees, can say that a white man can and does do the work that the aliens do, and that the white man will be only too glad to do without the kanaka and to do the work the kanaka does. 899. Have you any experience of the fact that white men refuse to do the work?—l had this experience : that white men, when they go into the sugar districts, are not sure of getting work, and therefore those districts do not get this particular class of casual labour during their crushing season. If the casual worker were satisfied that he had a reasonable chance of getting work during the cutting and trashing season you would get white labour to take the work. 900. Are the wages sufficient to attract the white labourer to the sugar-fields ?—No. And it is not only that, but if the planters would give the men a reasonable guarantee when letting a contract that a white man would get the contract provided he employed white labour they would get plenty of contractors for the trashing and cutting seasons. 901. Do you think there is any chance of the work in the cane-fields being successfully done by machinery ? —I could not say, not being an engineer. 902. Are you satisfied with the provisions of the Federal Constitution?— Yes. 903. Have you any fear of the finances of the State being in any way imperilled through difficulties arising out of the right to levy excise and Customs duties being handed over to the Federal Government ?—I have no fear whatever. 904. Have you no fear of there being a deficit in the revenues of the States?- There will be a deficit at first. 905. Have you no fear of commercial embarrassment arising in the States through that ? —Not unless all the bankers are anti-Federalists. 906. What are the States to do if they want to borrow money ?—I suppose they will have to borrow it locally. 907. From what source does Queensland derive its revenue for State purposes?— From Customs and the dividend-tax. 908. Unless the Commonwealth takes over the debts do you not think there is likely to be embarrassment between the States?—lt will be only temporary. I think they will pool their debts. 909. How are you going to get funds for the prosecution of public works after the State has parted with its revenue ?—I suppose in the usual way—by depending on the credit of the States. 910. Mr. Leys.] Then, would the interest on their borrowing be provided by direct taxation ? —I think so, and I intend to advocate that. I think that is one of the planks of the Federal Government —that it will impose direct taxation.
703
A.—4
911. You think direct taxation will be inevitable in the case of the States? —I think so, and I think it a desirable thing. 912. Have you lived in the northern tropical territory?—l was born and reared there. 913. Have you ever worked on sugar-plantations ?—No. 914. Do you know whether the contract system has been tried, and contracts have been taken by white men to do the field-work, but have been thrown up on account of their inability to stand the work ? —I believe there have been some cases in Mackay; but there are other cases where a white man has undertaken to trash, cut, and load the cane for 3s. 6d. a ton and has made money out of it. 915. Do you know whether that has been tried to any extent ?—No ; for the reason that white labour will not go into the sugar districts without a reasonable assurance that they might get the work. 916. Do you not think there ought to be better work for white men in a place like Queensland than working amongst the sugar-case ?—There ought to be plenty of work, but we have got so many " piebalds " —all nationalities. 917. But in the temperate parts of the colony ought there not to be plenty "of work for white men? —There ought to be; but we are in this unhappy position : that while we have public works going on we have hundreds of people camped in the towns, and the " Chow " and Jap. and Javanese and Afghans are finding work and prospering. 918. What proportion of the sugar-cane industry is carried on by coloured labour ?—At least a half. 919. Does not a lot of the money derived from the production of sugar find its way into the industries and branches of other trades in Queensland ? —I suppose it does. 920. Is it not fair to assume that that gives a large amount of employment to the farmer ? —lt does not. It keeps the other man out of work, because the farmer employs the kanaka for a pound of rice, a pannikin of tea, and four " bob " a week ; whereas if he employed white men he would have to pay the latter more, and there would be more money spent amongst business-people generally, who would reap the benefit of the larger expenditure. 921. But as it is now does not the white man get the benefit of the whole of the money in some form or another? —No. The great evil about the kanaka is that he is a menace to our white women. It is not safe for a white woman to go through the "principal street of Bundaberg after dark without the fear of being outraged by these kanakas. 922. Have you ever heard of such things happening in relation to the whites ?—Very rarely. But those things are frequently occurring in connection with the kanakas. The murders by kanakas at Mackay are awful —that is in my district. Besides, Ido not think we ought to bring anybody into our country unless we can give them the full rights of citizenship. 924. Mr. Luke.] Then, that latter evidence of yours seems to be in direct opposition to a good deal of evidence that we had that the kanaka is a fairly moral subject ?—I say he is a most immoral subject. He is immoral in this way: that he is deprived of his own women and he ravages our women. 925. Do not the kanakas bring a fair proportion of women with them ? —No. 926. Do you not think that the laws of nature have put certain limitations on the white man as to where he can live and labour successfully ?—I do not think so. I think the white man can work and live, and propagate, where anybody else can. 927. But will his species, propagated under those circumstances, develop strength and stamina?— They will. I think the white man is the superior race. 928. Can he go into the extreme north of Queensland and develop his species there ?—I have done so myself; I am responsible for foiir myself. I was born in Eockhampton, that city of " Sin, Sorrow, and Satan," and lived twenty-seven years on Charters Towers, working in the mines there. 929. Is that as trying as the work in the sugar-fields ?—I think it is more trying. What about the dynamite-fumes? 930. Have you not the artificial draught in the mines ?—We have the propeller-fans. 931. Hon. Captain Russell.] You are thoroughly convinced, Mr. Dawson, that the sugar industry would not be imperilled by getting rid of the coloured labour ?—Absolutely convinced. 932. Do you think it would increase or decrease if the coloured labour were sent away?—lf the coloured labour were done away with farmers would take up small holdings and work the farms themselves. There would be an extension of the central-mill system, and the gross result would be an increase in the sugar-production. Sir Samuel Griffiths solved the whole difficulty with his central-mill and small-farm experiments. 933. Do you remember the experiment which was made when the Government offered the subsidy for the central mills, provided they only employed white labour ?—The Racecourse Mill was tried here, but it was not a success. At that time the Mackay district was not paying ; there were large plantations then, but now, under the system of small farms and central mills, it is the most prosperous sugar district in Queensland. 934. So long as the mills were confined to taking cane grown by white labour were they a success? —Yes. 935. We have been told that ultimately there was an evasion of the Act, and that the cane had to be taken from anywhere in order to keep the mills going : was that so ?—The great trouble with the sugar-growers was this: You can only crush cane at certain periods of the year in order to get the quality and strength of the sugar, and the owner of a mill could refuse to take your cane unless you liked to sell it at his price; but when the Government subsidised the mills the farmers got a chance, as they were then not dependent on the private mills. 936. We have been told that these mills could not get the cane crushed by white labour ?-—I would like to know of a place where they could not get the cane.
A.—4
704
937. We are informed that these very contractors who agreed to run the mills in the interest of white labour had to evade the Act in order to keep the mills going: is that correct ?—That information is correct that they evaded the Act, but whether they had to do it is another matter. 938. But the experiment of white labour cultivating the sugar, even with Government aid, did not prove a success, did it ?—lt has proved a success all right. There are quite a number of mills that have not got an alien on the field, and never had one, and do not want one. One white man can do in eight hours three times what the kanaka does in twelve. 939. Then, why do they not employ the white man ? —He will only go to a place where he can get a reasonable chance of employment. 940. But if a white man can do three times the work why do they not employ him ?—I think it is due to fat-headedness. 941. In other words, that the sugar-planter is a stupid man who does not understand his business? —I would not like to say that, but I take it that he is prejudiced to such an extent that he has become fat-headed over this particular matter. 942. In the course of your reading, do you know of any country in the world where sugar is produced by European labour ?—No. 943. Do you think that Queensland is, above all other parts of the world, the place that is able to do it ? —I do. 944. What are its special advantages?—l do not think that Queensland is the only place ; there is the Richmond and the Clarence. 945. Do you know of any other place where it has been tried ? —I do not; but I say they are able to do it if they try. 946. Do you think that Australia is going to show the world the way to do it ?—I do; and we have shown the world in one or two instances that we can beat them—the one-man-one-vote principle and the secret-ballot system, for instance. Colonel Habby Finn examined. (No. 261.) 947. Hon. the Chairman.'] What is your rank, Colonel Finn?— Commandant of the Queensland Defence Forces, to which I have been attached one year. 948. What is the total Defence Force of this State ?—lncluding rifle-clubs and cadets, between ten and eleven thousand. 949. What is your annual allowance of ammunition to Volunteers ? —They get their ammunition for their musketry course (60 rounds) free, and an additional thirty rounds (free) if they complete their annual course. 950. At what price are they allowed to purchase ammunition ? —The -303 at half price. They are armed with the Martini-Bnfield -303. 951. Have you been in New Zealand?—l have not. 952. In the event of war with a foreign Power, assuming England has command of the sea, do you think that Australia and New Zealand would be able to render each other assistance in the shape of land forces? —I should think they could. 953. In New Zealand we have an enrolled force of eighteen thousand men : would that be sufficient for the land defence of the colony ?—No one could tell without having visited the colony and knowing its local conditions. But that number ought to be sufficient to provide a good defence if the lateral communications were sufficiently good. 954. Assuming that the force maintained in Australia was only twenty-five thousand, which we have been told is the case, would Australia be able to render New Zealand efficient assistance in the event of England being at war ?—I think not. 955. In your opinion, should there be a small-arms-ammunition factory maintained in Australia? —There is one at Melbourne now. 956. Is that able to supply the requirements of the Commonwealth ? —I should think not. 957. In any case, whether New Zealand federates with Australia or not, should there, in your opinion, be a small-arms-ammunition factory in New Zealand?— Yes. 958. Have you any hope of artillery ammunition being manufactured in Australia ? —I cannot say positively ; I have a hope, but it ought to be quite possible in the future. I hope it will be. 959. Hon. Captain Russell.'] Have you formed any idea as to the possibility of attack on the State, and, in the event of an attack, how many men could be landed ?—lf England retains command of the sea Ido not think they could land a large number. Any attack would be more in the nature of a filibustering expedition. A cruiser or two might go for one or two of our towns and make them pay up. 960. Could an enemy land ten thousand men, for instance ? —Possibly ; but I would not like to say on how many given points they might land these men. 961. Would it be possible for them to evade all our cruisers and land a considerable army? — It would be barely possible. 962. Assuming that they could not land more than ten thousand men in New Zealand, would you imagine that eighteen thousand local troops, with the possibility of a levy en masse, could deal with them ?—lt comes back to my first answer as to the number of points they would try to tackle with ten thousand men. 963. Hon. Mr. Bowen.] Would it not be extremely difficult for any Power, so long as England ruled the sea, to land any force on these shores ? —I cannot quite admit that, because it is so far possible that it would be dangerous to assume that they could not do it. 964. I suppose their great difficulty would be to provide coaling-stations at sea?—lt would; but boats can coal at sea now a great deal more quickly than they could at one time. 965. Hon. Captain Russell.] Would you deem it necessary to keep the ammunition-factory some distance away from the sea on account of the possibility of a surprise ? —Yes, and make it as little conspicuous as possible.
705
A.—4
966. Thirty or forty miles away'?— Yes, that would be an advantage. 967. Mr. Luke.] Supposing New Zealand did enter this Federation, do you not think that we in that colony would be obliged to look to our own resources rather than expect in a great crisis help from Australia? —I think you would. - 968. Mr. Reid.] Are you prepared to say whether as a matter of prudence it would be advisable for us in New Zealand to have the manufacture of ammunition controlled by the Government instead of leaving it to private enterprise ?—The latter is more economical, and I do not see why it should not be possible to so arrange as to have sufficient control even over a private factory as to insure the Government requirements being always fully met. 969. Is there not this danger : that on account of labour troubles a private firm might have to suspend operations just at the critical moment ?—There is a danger of that, but it could be overcome in a place like New Zealand. I should not think that men in the time of national troubles would let their private grievances stand in the way of the manufacture of ammunition necessary to defend their country, and it would be better to have it in the hands of the Government; but I'do not think your requirements would be sufficiently large to warrant your establishing a Government factory. 970. Would not it be advisable to have the factory directly under Government control?—lt would be better, but it is a matter of money. If you can afford to have it under your control, it would be better to have it so. 971. But the defence of a country is not purely a matter of finance? —I am assuming that if you have only £5 you cannot spend £7. You must have the money to spend it. 972. But, as a general principle of providing systematically and without delay for all requirements, would you not rather have the control of such a factory in the hands of the Government than leave it to private enterprise?—l say Yes to that without any hesitation. 973. Mr. Leys.] You have been attending a military conference, have you not? —I have. 974. Was any scheme of organization for the defence of the Commonwealth drawn up there? —It was a confidential assembly, and therefore I cannot say anything about it. 975. We have had from the Commandant of South Australia a statement that he thought fifty thousand troops would be necessary for a Commonwealth army. Giving your own opinion, apart from anything that might have happened at this conference, do you agree with that estimate ?—Yes ; I certainly think you want that number of men, even supposing that the rest of the male population are trained to shoot. 976. Do you think a large proportion of that should be a permanently paid force or mainly Volunteers? —I would not have a large proportion of permanent men, but sufficient to act as models for the others to be trained upon, with a fair proportion of partially paid. 977. Do you think that a large increase in the expenditure of the various States will be necessary in order to maintain an efficient defence for Australia?—No, I do not think a large increase will be necessary. 978. Do you think the prefent expenditure would be sufficient if the defence system were better organized ?—Yes. 979. Do you contemplate that it would be desirable to establish an Australian navy ?—I have not formed a definite opinion, but I do think that the first line of defence is not sufficiently recognised out here. 980. You think there ought to be an increase in the Australian squadron, whether it is provided by part contribution from the colonies or in any other way ? —I think so. 981. Do you think the present system of the colonies contributing to the cost of the navy works well ? —I hardly think that it works well from a Queensland point of view. 982. Hon. Major Steward.'] From what you have been able to gather during the twelve months you have been here, and from what you know of the various other States and of the coastal towns which would be liable to attack, supposing that your forces numbered from forty to fifty thousand men, and England were at war with a first-class Power, do you think you would be able to spare any men to help us ?—I think not. 983. General French, in giving his evidence, mentioned that one advantage of New Zealand joining the Federation would be that the whole of the Australian and New Zealand forces would be under one commanding discipline : do you agree with that view?— Your distance would be a disadvantage, and I say that after having an experience in connection with Burmah, where the command is under the Officer Commanding the Madras Presidency. 984. Do you think there was any great advantage in Burmah being under the Madras Presidency ?—Yes ; because we were assured that one system would be followed out, and we were armed with the same arms. 985. Do you not think it would be an advantage if the whole of the Australian forces were armed with the same weapon ?—Yes. 986. Do you agree with the view that there should be an Australian Military College ?—Yes, whether New Zealand joins us or not. 987. Then, is it not possible that even without federating we might agree with Australia to establish such a college so that our men could be trained under proper conditions ?—That ought to be possible, and it would be a great advantage if the college were under one control. 988. Would not it also be possible for us to mutually agree to adopt the same pattern of arms? --That would be a good thing, but it could not be made compulsory. 989. Hon. the Chairman.] Do you not think that the best means of defence, both for Australia and New Zealand, is to increase the subsidy to the Imperial navy so as to have a better class of ships here and more of them?—l do not know sufficient of the details of that arrangement to iotra. an opinion, but I do not consider the present condition of things is satisfactory. 89—A. 4.
A.—4.
706
990. Is there anything you wish to add to your evidence?—l might say that in India we attach very great importance to every part of our armament and equipment being interchangeable, and if we are all under one head that is more likely to be arranged for than if we are under separate Governments. I think the defence forces ought to be more efficient for the money spent by being one supreme control. 991. Are all the forces in Australia armed with the same pattern of rifle?—No, and I do not know where you will find any force on the Continent of Europe or elsewhere that fs armed with the same rifle throughout. That weapon is being changed so frequently, and there is always the desire on the part of every Power to have the best rifle, that it would involve vast expenditure to keep on arming your forces with every new rifle that is brought out. 992. Has not experience proved that in time of war there is very great trouble in obtaining supplies of arms and ammunition from the Mother-country?— Yes, and that is the difficulty existing at present. We have a great difficulty in getting ammunition from Home, and we are getting it form Melbourne instead.
707
A.—4
EXHIBITS.
EXHIBIT No. 1. [Extract from " The Seven Colonies of Australasia," 1899-1900.] In New Zealand information regarding the manufacturing industry is obtained only at the quinquennial census. In 1886 there were 1,946 establishments, employing 22,095 persons; in 1891 the establishments numbered 2,254, and the hands 25,633; and in 1896 there were 2,440 establishments, employing 27,336 persons. Labour Department ... ... 4,647 establishments, 32,387 hands. Eegistrar-General... ... ... 2,440 „ 27,336 „ Difference ... ... 2,207 „ 5,051 „
Return of Wages paid in various Trades in the Australasian Colonies. (By J. Mackay, Inspector of Factories.)
90—A. 4.
Trades. New Zealand. New South Wales. Victoria. Queensland. South Australia. Western Australia. 1900. 12s. 5s. to £1 7s. to 10s. 1899. 9s. to 10s. 2s.6d.tol6s.8d. 8d. to 12s. 6d. 8d. to 7s. 6d.( 2 ) 3s.4d.tol2s.6d. 1899. 9s. 7s.ld.to9a.2d.(!) 6s. 2d. to 7s. lOd. to3s.4d.(») 10id.tols.3d.(i), Is. to 2s. 6d.( 5 ) 6s. 8d. to 8s. 5s.10d.to8s.4d.; 10s. to 12s. 5s.tolls.8d.( 6 ) 1899. 8s. to 12s. 1897. 9s. 1899. Bricklayers Brewers Bootmakers |4s.6~d.to7s.6d. 7s. 7s. 6d. tolls. 8d. 4s. to 13s. 4d. Brick & pottery makers 5s. to 9s. 10s. 10s. 6d. per 1,000 Basketmakers Brush & broom makers Blacksmiths Butchers Boatbuilders Carpenters and joiners Coopers Coachbuilders Cycle engineers Cabinetmakers 3s. to 9s. 6d. 3s. to 8s. 7s. to 10s.' 8s.6d.tolls.8d. 10s. to 12s. 10s. 8s. to 9s. 6d. 7s. to 10s. 8s. to 10s. 8s. to 9s. 6:3. 3s. 4d. to 9s. 3d. 3s. to 8s. 2d. 3s.4d.toll3.8d. 7s. to 10s. 7s. to 10s.( 6 ) 10s. 5s. 3d.(") 10s. to 15s. 8s. 4d.(") 4s.9d.tolls.8d. 3s.4d.tol2s.6d. 3s. 4d.tolls. 8d. 5s. to lis. 8d. 5s.10d.to9s.4d. 2s.6d.to7s.6d. ('I 5s. 6d. to 7s. 6d. 5s. to 15s. 10s. to 16s. 8d. 7s.6d.tol8s.4d. 10s. 2s.6d.tol8s.4d. 9s. 7s. to 9s. 4s. 2d. to 8s. 4d. 7s.6d.tol0s.6d. 8s. to 10s. 6s. to 10s. 6d. 9s. 8s. 6d. to 9s. 10s. to 13s. 4d. 8s. to 13s. 4d. 6s. 8d. to 9s. 2d. 5s. to 9s. 8s. to 9s. 6d. Chairoiakers Compositors Electrical engineers.. Engravers Electroplaters Flourmillers Flaxmillers ' .. Galvanised-iron workers Monumental masons Miners 8s. to 9s. 6d. 9s. to lis. 6d. 10s. to £1 7s. to 10s. 8s. to 10s. 5s. to 10s. 5s. to 8s. 7s. to 10s. 10s. to 12s. 8s. to 10s. ( 8 ) 8s. 8d. to 10s. 6s. 8d. to 10s. 9s.'2d. 9s. 9s.6d.tol2s.6d. 5s. to lis. 6s. 8d. to 10s. 2s. 3d. to 13s.( 9 ) 8s. 8d. to 10s. 8s. Plasterers Plumbers Painters Piano & organ builders Rope & twine makers Shipwrights Saddlers Sail and tent makers Tanners, fellmongers, and woolscourers Wheelwrights Tailors Dressmakers (per week) Watchmakers Wax-vesta makers .. Wire-mattress makers Tailoresses.. Farm-labourers( 15 ) .. Ploughmen( 15 ) Men cooks on farms .. Shepherds (per year) Shearers( K ) lis. to 13s. 8h. to lis. 9s. 4d. 7s. to lis. 6d. 6s. 6d.to8s.6d. 10s. to 12s. 8s. 5s. to lis. 6d. 5s. to 10s. 8s. to 9s. 6s. 8d. to 8s. 5s. to 9s. 3s. 9d. to 6s.p) 2s. 3d. to 8s. 5s. to 10s. 2s. 6d. to 5s.( 10 ) 8s. 10s. to 13s. 4d. 8s. 8s. to 10s. 7s. 9s. 9s. 8s. 9s. to 10s. 12s.tol3s.4d.(») lis. 8s. to 15s. 8s.6d.tol3s.4d. 6s. to 9s. £9 per month 4s. 2d. to 10s. 7s. to 8s. loin. 8s. 4d. 3s. 4d. to 9s. 4d. 2s.6d.tol0s.8d. 5s. to 6s. 8d. >s.6d. tol0s.( 18 ) .Tanners, 7s. 6d. Curriers, 8s. 6d 8s. 6d. Is. per hour 7s. to 9s. •• 5s. to 9s. 7s. to 10s. 4s. to £1 5s. 3s. 9d. to 15s. 2s. 6d. tolls. 8d. 5s. 5d. to 8s. 4d. Is.3d.to5s.10d. 5s. 6d. to 9s. | 3s.4d.tol0B.10d., 5s.to£l 17s.(») 5s. to 16s, 8d. 7s. 6d. to 8s. 4d. 12s. to £1 5s. ! 6s.8d.tolls.8d. 8s. to 10s. 7s. to 10s. 10s. to 13s. 4d. 4s. to 13s. 4d. 5s.10d.to8s.8d. Is. 8d. to 5s. 2s. Id. to 2s. 6d. 3s. 4d. to 5s. 2s. Id. to 2s. 6d. 2s. 6d. to 3s. 4d. £45 to £65 £39 to £78 13s. to 15s.(») 2s. to 3s. 4d. 2s. to 3s. 4d. 4s. 2d. to 5s. £52 to £75 £1 2/1 to 2/6 ('«) £45 to £50 17s. 6d. to £1 4s. 8d. £45 13s. 17s.6d.'to£l( 15 ) (1) Maltsters. P) Wc (?) Chinese. («) Per sh (ii) Apprentices, nil to 5s. >men. (•'<) Appre lift. (») Boys ii (15) And found, sntices. (i) Pott ncluded. (10) ] (i«) Per 100 she ;ers, per hour. Boys. (11) Go! eep. («) With i (5) Brickmakers, l Id-miners. (12; rations. >er 1,000. (6) Sli Improvers only. tughtermen only. (13) Curriers.
A.—4.
EXHIBIT No. 2. Eetuen foe the Yeak 1899 showing the Average Weekly Wages paid in various Trades in Victoria, compiled from information supplied by manufacturers. (Prom the Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories.) Proprietors, general managers, and a number of casual employes are often not included. The trades are arranged according to the average weekly wages paid to all employes. The working-hours for females are forty-eight per week. For males the usual working-hours in a majority of the factories are also forty-eight per week, but this rule is by no means general, and in some factories the hours are as high as sixty per week. • '
708
EXHIBIT ] No. 2. Ibturn for the Yeak 1899 showing the average web iled from Information sup: EKLY 1 Wages paid in vabious Trades in Victoria, by Manufacturers. comp: ■PLIED Proprietors, general manai The trades are arranged a< The working-hours for fen if the factories are also forty-e lours are as high as sixty per (From the Report of the Chief ] Inspect or of Factories.) gers, and a number of casual ccording to the average weekl aales are forty-eight per week iight per week, but this rule ii week. • emplo ly wag :. Po: iyes are often not included. ;es paid to all employes. r males the usual working-hours in a majority no means general, and in some factories the is by : Class of Trade. i 3 i Age-: i t£5 :ale. •a -■ >i > qj a So^3 2 c a * OJ CO i—i Age—Fi jmale. 5 o "o EH m ■4) 5 i EH ; u §,Sfs Wool-dumping— Number of employes Average weekly wage Organs and musical instruments— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Refrigerating and iee— Number of employes Average weekly wage Preserving-works (meat) — Number of employes Average weekly wage Distilleries — Number of employes Average weekly wage Billiard-tables, AcNumber of employes Average weekly wage Malt and malt-extract — Number of employes Average weekly wage Paint, varnish, white-lead, plaster-of-paris, &o.— Number of employes Average weekly wage Electric light, batteries, &c — Number of employes Average weekly wage Cutlery— Number of employes Average weekly wage Lead and shot works— Number of employes Average weekly wage Flour-mills— Number of employes Average weekly wage Bark-mills— Number of employes Average weekly wage Wood-patterns— Number of employes Average weekly wage Bacon— Number of employes Average weekly wage Stone-breaking by machinery— Number of employes Average weekly wage Pyrites and metallurgical works — Number of employes Average weekly wage Small goods, sausages, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage Breweries, bottling ale, &o. — Number of employes Average weekly wage Die-sinking and engraving— Number of employes Average weekly wage Sugar-refining— Number of employes Average weekly wage Foundries, machinery, iron, brass, copper works, tools, &o. — Number of employes Average weekly wage Bricks, potteries, earthenware, &c— Number of employes Average weekly wage Modelling, plasterwork, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. 1 10/0 1 7/6 1 5/0 1 7/6 1 6/6 1 7/6 5 10/6 2 16/3 4 12/10 6 15/1 1 17/6 1 10/0 3 17/6 17 9/8 1 10/0 21 12/8 51 2/7/1 19 2/14/9 72 2/3/5 88 2/4/4 58 2/5/4 3 2/10/0 84 2/1/11 9 2/2/8 115 2/5/9 ■ 10 2/7/5 10 2/0/8 228 2/2/9 51 2/7/1 25 2/3/11 74 2/2/9 93 2/2/7 65 2/1/11 4 2/1/11 85 2/1/6 13 2/1/3 132 2/1/1 12 2/1/0 10 2/0/8 250 2/0/1 132 12 10 250 51 25 74 98 05 4 SB 13 £ s. d. 2 *7 1 2 8 11 2 2 9 2 2 7 2 1 11 2 i 11 2 16 2 13 2 i 1 2 10 2 0 8 2 0 1 17 1/19/8 17 1/19/8 17 1 19 8 1 5/0 1 2/6 1 7/6 8 2/11/6 11 1/18/10 11 1 18 10 6 6/9 72 2/0/10 78 1/18/5 78 1 18 5 1 15/0 28 1/18/11 29 1/18/1 29 IB 1 1 17/6 51 1/18/5 52 1/18/0 52 lie o 15 13/6 156 1/18/4 171 1/16/2 171 1 16 2 12 7/2 11 7/10 78 12/4 483 2/1/4 584 1/16/1 584 1 16 1 3 5/0 17 13/1 40 2/8/0 60 1/16/0 60 1 16 0 2 7/6 18 10/7 41 13/10 210 2/2/7 271 1/15/11 2 13/6 2 20/0 4 16/9 275 lie 7 3 4/2 44 5/11 141 7/1 1,225 10/4 4,149 2/4/1 5,562 1/15/4 5,562 1 is 4 5 5/10 17 7/6 89 11/7 520 2/0/8 631 1/15/4 631 1 15 4 1 6/0 8 1/18/11 9 1/15/39 1 15
A.—4.
EXHIBIT No. 2— continued. Return for the Year 1899 showing the Average Weekly Wages paid in various Trades, etc. — contd.
709
Class of Trade. I CO r-t 3 in Age-] [ale. 1pg5i £S2§ J Iff I •a Age-Fi imale. 13 aw Mrt (w t> o 0 <o O K S Sill SS°g 3 ft 1 0 H 03 ■QJ >. C ! w o alt 5 ■= N CO !alt-refining— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Jernent— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. tlauure (chemical), bone mills, dessicaticg-works, glue, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Cooperage— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. <faila — Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Jarpenters' and joiners' works, sawmills, &o. — Number of employes Average weekly wage rlarble and masons' work Number of employes Average weekly wage .. jamps — Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Jutter, oheese, preserved milk, &c. — Number of employes Average weekly wage ewellery, watohes, electro-plating, &o. — Number of employes Average weekly wage .. J'ellmongers— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. handles, soap, tallo.v works, &c. — Number of employes Av.erage weekly wage .. firewood— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Lanneries— Number of employes Average weekly nage .. Jhaff-eutting, grain-crushing, &c. — Number of employes Average weekly wage ikin paoking, sorting, &o.— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. .. I Carriages, wagons, drays, &o. — Number of employes .. Average weekly v> age Eucalyptus oil— Number of employee Average weekly wage Pastry— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Vhips— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. Jlass bottles, &c. — Number of employes Average weekly wage .. ilass-staining— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. i'lumbers— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. filters— Number of employes Average weekly wage Printing, stationery, bookbinding, card boxes, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. — Number of employes Average weekly wage .. derated waters, &c. — Number of employed Average weekly wage 1 5/0 2 5/6 2 3/9 4 6/0 11 6/1 1 5/0 13 4/9 3 7/2 8 7/5 4 5/3 4 7/8 1 8/0 1 6/0 8 9/7 1 3/0 3 7/4 28 6/11 4 5/0 18 5/5 5 9/0 13 7/6 3 11/4 15 14/0 17 10/7 14 15/11 287 11/10 29 11/11 2 8/9 30 11/7 103 9/7 23 14/1 48 10/8 111 12/6 3 1/15/0 47 1/16/3 125 1/19/11 73 2/0/10 49 2/3/2 1,029 1/19/4 142 1/17/7 10 1/16/11 142 1/16/8 269 2/4/9 292 1/13/7 298 1/16/5 2 1/11/6 629 1/15/2 3 1/15/0 50 1/14/9 153 1/14/9 92 1/14/6 69 1/14/5 1,355 1/12/7 176 1/12/5 12 1/12/3 172 1/12/4 405 1/12/7 318 1/11/11 363 1/11/8 1/11/6 1 17/6 11 9/8 1 15/0 1 1/5/0 4 1/4/5 2 1/0/0 2 1/1/3 15 13/7 3 18/4 3 50 153 92 I 69 .. 1,355 176 12 174 420 318 366 2 £ a. d. 1 15 0 1 14 9 1 14 9 1 14 6 1 14 5 1 12 7 1 12 5 1 12 8 1 12 2 1 11 11 1 11 11 1 11 6 1 11 6 757 1/11/2 757 1 ii 2 3 9/10 3 11/0 38 11/9 287 1/13/6 331 1/10/7 331 1 10 7 1 10/0 9 8/0 42 1/15/8 52 1/10/4 52 1 10 4 2 3/9 10 3/10 39 5/9 423 9/7 925 2/0/10 1,399 1/10/1 1 15/0 1/0/0 2 17/6 1,401 1 10 1 1 5/0 3 14/2 6 2/7/11 10 1/13/6 2 12/6 2 12/6 12 1 10 0 1 15/0 4 6/3 13 11/8 51 1/18/6 69 1/11/3 6 10/0 1 1/5/0 7 12/2 76 19 6 3 12/4 10 1/14/5 13 1/9/4 13 19 4 4 6/3 7 8/4 143 11/1 218 2/2/4 372 1/9/4 372 19 4 5 6/3 4 11/2 13 2/2/5 22 1/8/6 22 1 *8 6 2 3/0 1 7/6 2 3/3 45 7/9 81 2/1/6 131 1/8/6 131 18 6 3 11/4 3 2/4/0 6 1/7/8 6 17 8 35 6/1 89 6/0 148 6/6 793 11/3 1,840 2/6/3 2,905 1/12/11 2 4/3 20 5/7 39 5/8 866 10/2 67 1/3/11 994 10/10 3,899 1 7 4 1 18/0 47 1/17/10 48 1/17/5 35 12/11 2 1/0/0 37 13/4 85 1 6 11 1 5/0 6 7/9 110 12/6 259 1/13/11 376 1/7/2 1 5/0 1 7/0 11 10/8 13 9/11 389 '6 7
A.—4.
EXHIBIT No. 2— continued. Return for the Year 1899 showing the Average Weekly Wages paid in various Trades, etc. —contd.
710
Class of Trade CO 03 GO Age-] Me. " " is p< > <d 2 <D O U 3 Sail. 3 H Age—Female. tZ <s ® Vα V u > ~ ■a 5 3 o 9 I, o "S 3 H 3 o EH lisa 5 * 1 2 H Cycles— Number of employes Average weekly wage Sausage-skins— Number of employes Average weekly wage Bedsteads, iron— Number of employes Average weekly wage Packing-cases— Number of employe? Average weekly wage Harness, saddlery, &c. — Number of employes Average weekly wago Tinware— Number of employes Average weekly wage Hats (straw, felt, &o.), caps, &o. .. Number of employes Average weekly wage Photographs— Number of employes Average weekly wage Wire-works — Number of employes Average weekly wage Glass bevelling, silvering, and cutting Number of emplojes .. Average weekly wage Brushes, brooms, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage Wickerwork and bamboo furniture— Number of employes Average weekly wage Lenses (glass)— Number of employes Average weekly wage Cigars, tobacco, cigarettes, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage Chemical works — Number of employes Average weekly wage .. • InkNumber of employes Average weekly wage Mats, rugs, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage Picture-frames — Number of employes Average weekly wage Pneumatic tires — Number of employes Average weekly wage Grocers' sundries, maizena, spices, AcNumber of employes Average weekly wage Furriers — Number of employes Average weekly wage Preserving - works, jams, pickles, sauces, &c. — Number of employes Average weekly wage Woollen-mills — Number of employes Average weekly wage Carpets, curtains, cushions, &o. — Number of employes Average weekly wage Laundries (Chinese) — Number of employes Average weekly wage Leather fancy goods— Number of employes Average weekly wage Dye-works, &c. — Number of employes Average weekly mage .. £ s. d. 2 4/6 11 7/10 47 10/1 83 1/18/6 143 1/6/4 1 10/0 1 1/5/0 2 17/6 145 16 3 12 10/4 2 15/6 25 1/14/9 39 1/6/3 39 16 3 34 13/4 49 1/13/10 83 1/5/5 83 15 5 2 8/6 16 12/6 40 1/11/4 58 1/5/4 58 15 4 1 3/6 9 4/2 22 4/7 104 9/11 224 1/16/6 36C 1/6/0 3 3/4 11 13/5 3 1/1/8 17 13/1 377 15 5 14 5/8 30 7/4 156 10/6 236 1/17/8 436 1/4/10 436 1 4 10 2 5/6 7 7/5 15 8/4 62 12/0 261 2/8/5 347 1/19/1 13 4/8 20 6/9 336 11/8 135 1/4/6 504 14/9 851 1 i 8 2 7/6 1 3/0 42 13/1 50 2/4/0 95 1/19/2 5 5/8 43 9/6 31 1/9/3 79 17/0 174 13 8 1 5/0 7 7/0 6 6/7 24 11/8 37 1/16/8 75 1/3/1 75 13 1 4 5/0 28 10/9 27 1/18/7 59 1/3/1 59 1 '3 1 2 9/6 4 6/0 8 7/4 36 11/4 120 1/12/5 170 1/5/11 3 4/8 5 5/8 36 12/10 6 1/2/2 50 12/9 220 1 '2 11 4 5/0 13 5/1 11 5/11 35 9/7 63 1/17/11 126 ' 1/2/10 126 1 2 10 2 6/3 5 1/12/6 7 1/5/0 1 5/0 1 5/0 8 12 6 3 6/0 12 7/1 17 7/1 102 13/3 363 1/17/1 497 1/10/8 2 7/6 7 5/3 9 7/5 413 12/5 25 1/7/11 456 13/0 953 12 0 2 5/3 37 11/0 55 1/17/9 94 1/6/6 1 8/0 1 8/0 41 13/4 12 18/0 55 14/2 149 12 0 5 7/11 4 8/6 16 1/9/6 25 1/1/10 25 1 i 10 4 1/8/1 4 1/8/1 3 11/10 3 11/10 7 1 i 2 1 5/0 4 5/4 22 10/5 22 1/16/3 49 1/1/6 3 10/10 1 1/5/0 4 14/4 53 1 0 11 1 5/0 3 5/4 48 13/1 37 1/12/6 89 1/0/9 3 14/2 1 1/2/6 4 16/3 93 10 7 4 4/6 9 5/10 8 6/3 95 12/4 184 1/18/8 300 1/8/1 235 10/5 9 1/6/1 244 11/0 544 10 5 2 7/6 2 11/0 7 2/5/0 11 1/12/0 23 12/7 8 1/5/2 31 15/10 42 10 1 2 7/0 11 6/4 32 7/0 142 11/8 275 1/12/0 462 1/3/4 1 6/0 4 8/6 157 10/5 1 1/0/0 163 10/5 625 0 19 11 17 6/5 40 6/5 30 7/11 101 11/10 212 1/15/10 400 1/3/6 1 5/0 12 6/0 20 6/5 201 12/1 145 1/3/10 379 16/1 779 0 19 10 7. 7/10 21 1/3/7 28 19/S 28 0 19 8 29 13/1 28 1/6/5 57 19/8 57 0 19 8 1 2/6 2 6/0 1 7/0 14 10/8 20 2/1/10 38 1/6/6 29 10/2 4 1/0/0 33 11/5 71 0 19 6 7 12/1 14 2/1/2 21 1/11/5 2 4/0 2 4/6 43 13/1 17 1/3/3 64 15/3 85 0 19 3
A.—4.
EXHIBIT No. 2—continued. Return for the Year 1899 showing the Average Weekly Wages paid in various Trades, etc. — contd.
711
Class of Trade. ir. « Age—Male. I 13 5 S^ u > K P 9 ° n >H > CD « i 3 o H -Ji \ I 90 £ f Age-Pi to imale. an fcc^; « s ~ m £ *'>u tH > O 0 S 1.2 ft r* qj cD tj m 0 I ■X o w % o "E. S H H o H & '£ O=(-. >> CD O,2 Sis « }-t s < Hair-carding— Number of employes Average weekly wage AsbestosNumber of employes Average weekly wage Tea-packing— Number of employes Average weekly wage Bedding, mattresses, &o. — Number of employes Average weekly wage Blinds (Venetian, &c.) — Number of employes Average weekly wage Waterproof clothing— Number of employes Average weekly wage Umbrellas — Number of employes Average weekly wage Rope, twine, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage Florists (manufacturing bouquets)— Number of employes Average weekly wage Pire-kindlers and matohe-i (wax) — Number of employes Average weakly wago Corsets — Number of employes Average weekly wage Sign-writing— Number of employes Average weekly wage Biscuits, confectionery, &c.— Number of emp'oyes Average weekly wage Laundries (European)— Number of employes Average weekly wage Marine stores — Number of employes Average weekly wage ToysNumber of employes .: Average weekly wage Bags (gunny)— Number ot employes Average weekly wage Boxes, trunk?, &o. — Number of employes Average weekly wage Safety-fuse— Number of employes Average weekly wage TiesNumber of employes Average weekly wage Hosiery— Number of employes Average weekly wage Dresses, millinery, mantles, &c.— Number of employes Average weekly wage .. 1 6/0 1 6/0 12 7/3 2 6/6 1 5/0 9 6/10 1 6/0 4 7/2 15 9/2 1 5/0 1 8/0 3 12/0 3 6/0 27 8/5 2 6/9 8 12/3 5 9/10 54 12/1 17 10/2 16 8/7 4 9/4 G 11/3 76 11/5 2 8/0 8 11/10 11 1/11/11 7 1/5/2 63 1/12/9 18 1/8/9 13 1/13/9 13 2/5/5 11 I 2/5/2 119 1/13/9 1 1/5/0 7 1/11/10 23 1/0/9 12 18/9 145 1/0/4 36 19/4 32 18/8 20 1/13/2 21 1/7/11 232 1/2/4 3 13/8 18 18/9 2 5/0 2 5/0 6 4/7 8 6/6 3 13/0 2 9/6 42 13/4 3 10/8 89 14/0 42 12/11 145 10/7 8 8/9 32 14/11 23 10/10 1/0/0 46 1/2/6 8 1/1/10 10 1/4/0 7 1/0/9 11 1/8/7 5 9/10 42 13/4 3 10/8 141 16/5 50 14/4 155 10/4 18 17/3 42 15/9 34 16/7 28 12 187 39 32 161 71 387 21 60 34 £ s. d. 0 18 10 0 18 9 0 18 9 0 18 8 0 18 8 0 18 6 0 18 5 0 17 6 0 16 9 0 16 8 0 16 7 3 10/10 2 1/5/0 5 16/6 5 0 16 6 8 6/0 76 6/11 69 7/2 1 7/6 273 10/3 272 1/18/4 698 1/0/6 1 6/0 2 2/9 12 7/8 435 9/8 18 1/1/11 468 10/1 1,166 0 16 3 9 1/10/1 10 1/7/10 8 5/11 271 13/9 96 1/2/8 375 15/10 385 0 16 2 3 12/6 1 1/5/0 4 15/8 4 0 15 8 4 6/10 3 10/6 3 1/13/4 10 15/11 10 0 15 11 8 11/3 4 1/10/11 12 17/10 12 12/9 12 12/9 24 0 15 3 1 5/0 4 4/10 10 6/4 13 11/11 14 1/9/3 42 15/6 1 7/6 3 14/2 4 12/6 46 0 15 3 6 5/0 5 10/2 5 2/10/11 16 21/0 1 5/0 27 10/1 1 1/0/0 29 10/3 45 0 14 1 1 5/0 1 7/6 10 13/2 14 1/19/6 26 1/6/9 1 2/6 13 4/6 155 10/7 18 1/3/1 187 11/4 213 0 18 3 1 5/6 59 11/10 4 2/5/0 10 1/4/5 2 6/0 4 4/4 18 5/3 119 12/1 1/1/0 148 11/3 158 0 12 1 1 6/0 5 12/6 19 2/6/9 25 1/18/3 4 2/6 56 2/9 238 3/4 4,166 8/6 518 1/10/9 5,042 10/9 5,067 o io ii
712
A.— 4.
EXHIBIT No. 3. Wages paid in vaeious Tbades in New South Wales. (Supplied by the Department of Labour and Industry, New South Wales.) I. — Persons engaged in treating Haw Material, the Product ll. — "Persons engaged in Trades connected with Food and of Pastoral Pursuits. Drink, or the Preparation thereof— continued. From. To. Prom To Boiling down- £s. d £c. d. Condiments- £s. d. £ s.'d. " "? 2 5 o2 n Foremen .. .. 210 0 40 0 Offal-and bone-men .. ..150 250 Mill-hands arid journeymen .. 110 0 300 Bone-dust makers .. .. 110 0 2 0 0 Paokerg '.. ..100 250 Tallowmen .. .. 115 0 2 0 0 b 0 4 0 0 8 0 Oil-and grease-makers .. .. 110 0 30 0 Bottle-washers, boys '.'. '.'. 06 jO 010 0 Glue-makers .. ..150 AlO 0 Q enera i hands, girls and women ..060 014 0 FF - - !?8 "8 VI ° 0 C °^ O em O en ery - .. ..300 400 Flashers ■• "■i in n oiK n Sugar-boilers and pan-men ..100 270 Curriers • • ■• » " !Xf n » improvers .. 010 0 110 0 Ploklera ■• ■• 110 ° 2 5 0 ' t- ..070 011 0 Beamsmen .. .. 110 0 215 0 Packerg __ ..100 218 6 Rollerinen .. .. 110 0 10 0 > b __ . ..060 015 0 Limemen .. .. 110 0 2 o 0 General oon f e otioners .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Yardmen .. ..100 200 Assistants and i mprov ers ..070 110 0 Wool-washing- Storemen .. .. 110 0 2 0 0 Foremen .. ■• » 5 0 0 Porewomen .. .. 017 6 17 6 Wool-sorters .. "" }jn n ! n Confectioners .. .. 015 0 110 0 Woo pullers .. .. 110 0 210 0 assistants, females ..070 012 0 Woo -washers .. .. 110 0 15 0 p aoker s and wrappers, , ..050 015 0 Wool-packers .. .. 115 0 3 0 0 pj our Wool-driers .. 110 0 2 5 0 Foremen .. ..300 600 Wooi-soakers .. .. 110 0 2 5 0 Mulerg [[ .. 110 0 410 0 Skinmen .. .15 0 25 0 juniors .. .. 015 0 25 0 Sparers and drivers .. ..150 250 Samplers ..200 250 ll, — Persons engaged in Trades connected with Food and Sleevemen .. .. 116 0 2 0 0 Drink, or the Preparation thereof. Stackers .. .. 116 0 2 0 0 Aerated waters Smutters and oilmen .. 1 16 0 2 0 0 Foremen .. ..200 600 Packers .. .. 110 0 200 Makers .. ..200 400 . boys .. .. 016 0 150 Packers .. ..176 250 Purifier-men .. .. 110 0 200 Bottlers .. ..100 2 10 0 Mixers " .. ..150 200 Washers .. .. 015 0 115 0 General hands, yardmen, &c. .. 10 0 116 0 Wirers and corkers .. .. 015 0 115 0 Boys .. .. 010 0 015 0 Labellers .. ..060 1 0 0 Ice and refrigerating— Carters .. ..150 210 0 Foremen .. ..250 500 Cart-boys .. ..050 015 0 Journeymen .. ..200 300 General hands- Boys .. .. 010 0 018 0 Males .. .. 0 17 6 2 0 0 Engineers .. ..250 400 Females .. .. 012 0 015 0 Jam- and fruit-canning— Boys .. ..050 015 0 Foremen .. ..200 410 0 Bread, biscuits, and pastry— Jam-boilers .. ..100 210 0 Foremen .. .. 210 0 4 0 0 Tinsmiths and solderers.. .15 0 2 8 0 Bakers (bread) .'. ..176 326 Tinsmiths' boys .. ..050 015 0 assistants .. .. 015 0 115 0 Labellers .. ..050 015 0 apprentices .. ..076 150 Packers .. .. 010 0 110 0 Jobbers .. .. 1/3 to 1/6 per hour. Case-makers .. ..150 200 Biscuit-bakers .. ..150300 Engineers .. .. 112 6 250 Brakesmen .. .. 018 0 2 0 0 Boys .. ..060 012 0 General hands ... .. 010 0 200 Fruit-preparers .. ..060 012 0 Machine hands .. .. 015 0 15 0 Packers, females .. ..050 016 0 boys .. ..070 010 0 Labellers „ .. ..050 012 6 Pastrycooks .. ..100 350 Meat-preserving and small-goods— apprentices ..050 100 Foremen .. ..300 600 Packers males .. ..080 013 0 Preserver and extract-maker .. 210 0 310 0 Carters ' .. .. 1 5 0 210 0 Tallow-maker .. ..200 215 0 Forewomen .. .. 015 0 10 0 Salter .. ..200 215 0 Packers, females .. ..060 015 0 Slaughtermen .. ..200 300 Labelling and cleaning tins .. 0. 7 0 012 0 . boys .. ..100 110 0 Breweries- Boners .. ..100 2 10 0 Foremen .. .. 210 0 5 0 0 Fillers .. ..100 115 0 Topmen .. .. 110 0 210 0 Labourers .. ..100 200 Cellarmen .. .. 110 0 210 0 „ boys ' .. ..090 018 0 Cask-washers .. ..100 2 10 0 Tinsmiths .. ..126 300 General hands .. ..100 210 0 . boys .. .. 010 0 016 0 Bottlers .. ..100 200 Coopers .. ..200 2 14 0 Coopers .. .. 115 0 3 5 0 Small-goods men .. .. 110 0 210 0 boys .. 010 0 10 0 Oatmeal, self-raising flour, and baking-powder — Packers .. ..100 2 10 0 Foremen .. ..250 350 Storemen .. ..110 215 0 Mixers and packers .. ..100 200 Draymen .. ..1126 215 0 Boys .. ..070 010 0 Boys .. ..076 018 0 Forewomen .. ..100 200 Coffee, cocoa, rice, spices, &c— Packers, weighers, and labellers, Foremen .. .. 210 0 410 0 females .. ..070 130 Millers .. ■.. 110 0 3 5 0 Girls .. ..070 010 0 Coffee and cocoa hands .. .. 117 6 3 0 0 Paper-bag makers, females .. 010 0 016 0 Jelly-makers .. .. 117 6 3 0 0 Sugar-mills— Boys .. ..060 018 0 Foreman mechanics .. ..360 312 0 Packers .. .. 015 0 210 0 Engineers and fitters .. ..300 360 boys .. ..080 015 0 Mechanics .. ..280 217 0 Labellers .. .. 012 0 110 0 Tinsmiths .. .. 110 0 210 0 Storemen .. ..200 300 Mechanios' apprentices .. ..050 1 10 0 Forewomen .. .. 015 0 10 0 Pan-boilers .. ..250 400 Packers, females .. ..050 015 0 „ apprentices .. ..050 110 0
713
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 3— continued.
Wages paid in vabiotjs Tbades in New South Wales— continued. 11. Persons engaged in Trades connected with Food and lll. — Persons engaged in the Manufacture of Clothing and Drink, or the Preparation thereof —continued. Textile Fabrics —continued. From. To. From. To. Sugar-mills— continued. £s. d. £s. d. Clothing-factories (slops)— continued. £s. d. £c. d. Foreman bag-maker .. .. .. 3 0 0 Coat-finishers, females .. ..040 126 Bag-sewers, boys .. .. 010 0 019 0 Vest machinists, „ .. ..060 176 Sack-repairers .. .. 115 0 210 0 „ finishers, „ .. ..050 050 Labourers .. ..220 280 Apprentices .. ..026 010 0 Tea packing and blending— Clothing-factories (order tailoring)— Foremen .. ..250 310 0 Foremen .. .. 3 0 o 600 Blenders ..176 312 0 Cutters, males .. .. 210 0 900 Packers '.'. .. 010 0 210 0 Coat hands, „ .. 2 0 0 310 0 Labellers ..050 015 0 „ improver*, males .. 010 0 176 Case-makers .. .. 116 0 2 5 0 ~ apprentices, „ ..026 010 0 Forewomen .. ..100 200 Vest-makers, males .. ..150 260 Packers females .. ..050 100 Trousers-makers, males .. ..150 215 0 Labellers .. ..050 015 0 Pressers, males .. ..100 350 Bag-makers arid blockers ..070 012 0 Trimmers, „ .. .. 017 6 250 Vinefar-works- Coat hands, females .. 015 0 10 0 Manufacturers .. ..200 300 . improvers, females ..060 012 fa Bottlers and labellers .. .. 010 0 110 0 „ apprentices, „ ..026 076 Vest hands, „ ..076 1 10 0 111. — Persons engaged in the Manufacture of Clothing and „ improvers, „ ..050 017 0 Textile Fabrics. „ apprentices, „ ..026 076 Boots and shoes- Trousers-makers „ .. 015 0 110 0 Foremen .. ..200450 . improvers „ .. 010 0 0 0 Machine operators, males .. 112 6 30 0 „ apprentices,, ..026 00 0 improvers and assistants, Machinists, ■ „ .. 017 6 110 0 males ..050 110 0 . apprentices, „ ..026 010 0 learners, males ..050 076 Shirt-makers, „ .. 012 6 100 Clickers, males .. ..150300 . improvers and apprenimprovers and assistants, ,Iocs •• " ? n n ? J 7, males 0 7 0 12 6 Embroideresses .. ..100 110 0 apprentices, males ..096 017 6 „ improvers .. 010 0 012 0 Makers, males .. ..100 310 0 . - apprent.ces ..026 050 improvers, males ..050 150 Dressmaking and millineryapprentices, „ ..050 015 0 Forewomen .. ..250 600 Finishers.males .. ..100 210 0 Cutters and fitters .. "200 l improvers and assistants, Bodice hands .. ..076 10 0 males .. 010 0 015 0 ~ improvers .. ..026 010 0 apprentices, males .. 011 0 015 0 apprentices! .. •• •• 02 6 Rough-stuff cutters, . .. 017 6 210 0 Skirt hands .. "° £ 0 115 0 improvers, males 010 0 10 0 „ improvers .. .. 0 i 0 0 7b Trimmers, males .. .. 110 0 210 0 „ apprentices! .. •• •■ 0 2 6 Pressmen ..150 210 0 Sleeve hands . .. ..060 126 Heelers and sluggers, males .. 1 0 0 212 6 „ .. ..026060 Lasters, males .. ..150 200 Generaldressmakers .. .. 086 110 0 Edge-setters, featherers, and Machinists .. .. 012 fa 12 b breasters, males .. .. 016 0 2 0 0 Head mantle-makers .. ..300 4 0 0 Channelclosers, males .. .. 014 0 2 0 0 Mantle-makers .. ..096 200 Skivers ..100 200 „ improvers ..026 056 Eyelett'ers, "„ .. .. 017 6 15 0 Blouse-maker .. .. 012 6 10 0 Brushers, sockers, dressers, scourers, Milliners .. .. 0 7 b 110 0 &c, males .. .. 014 0 110 0 „ improvers .. ..026 01 6 Repairers, males .. .. 115 0 214 0 . , apprentices* .. .. .. 02 6 Sole-sewers, „ . .. .. 110 0 215 0 Furriers- - Packers .. 015 0 2 5 0 Furriers .. ..176 276 Boys " " ..040 012 0 Boys .. ..070 013 0 Forewomen .. ..126 250 Fur-sewers .. .. 010 0 150 Machinists, females .. .. 010 0 110 0 Hats and capsapprentices, females ..040 012 0 Journeymen, males .. .. 017 6 3ld 0 Fitters, females .. ..076 136 Assistants, „ .. .. 076 012 6 „ apprentices, females ..040 070 Apprentices, „ .. ..076 0 6 Tiersofi and bench hands, females.. 03 0 09 0 Foremen ■ .. .. 2ld 0 35 0 Trimmers, sockers, &c, . ..050 015 0 Forewomen .. .. 1 0 0 o 0 Clothing-factories (slops)- Machinists, females .. .. 010 0 115 0 Foremen .. 210 0 6 0 0 Finishers, „ .. ..060 015 0 CuZs males .. ..150 500 Trimmers „ .. 0 5 0 126 assistants and improvers, Improvers, &c .. 0 4 b 010 6 males ..076 110 0 Apprentices, „ .. ..026 036 Pressers, males '.. .. 115 0 310 0 Shirt-making, females- , apprentices and assistants, Shirt cutter .. ..200 <> ° 0 males 0 6 0 110 0 Shirt-makers .. ..090 150 Seam-pressers, males '.'. ..050 110 0 Apprentices .. ■■"SO 070 TrimmVra 010 0 3 0 0 Machinists .. : .. 010 0 10 0 Examiners " " .. 014 0 217 6 Finishers .. .. 013 0 016 0 Folders and brushers, males ..100 300 Buttonhole-workers .. ..076 016 0 Engineers and mechanics, &c, males 12 6 3 0 0 Waterproof clothing-Errand-boys and messengers, „ 03 6 017 6 Forewomen .. .. 210 0 dOO Machinists, males .. ..200 310 0 Machinists .. .. 010 0 110 0 Coathands, . .. .. 110 0 310 0 . improvers .. ■• 010 0 females .. ..076 115 0 Finishers .. .. 012 0 015 0 Trousers hands, „ .. 010 0 17 6 „ improvers .. .. 05 0 07 6 Vest hands, males .. ..110 240 Table hands .. .. 010 0 150 females ..050 176 „ improvers .. ..026 076 Apprentices ..026 010 0 White work and ladies' and children's clothing factory— Forewomen " .. 110 0 3 0 0 Forewomen, designers, and cutter .. 110 0 2 5 0 Slop-trousers machinists, females ..060 140 Machinists, females .. .. 010 0 150 finishers 0 3 0 10 0 , improvers, females ..070 010 0 Button-hole machinists, „ .. 010 0 15 0 . apprentices, „ " ° 6 04 0 finishers 010 0 12 6 Finishers, females .. .. 0 b 0 10 0 Coat machinists, ' . .. 010 0 15 0 Learners „ .. ..026 070 • Receive no pay for the first cix or twelve months. t Unpaid for the first three or six months.
714
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 3— continued.
Wages paid in various Teades in New South Wales— continued. HI, Persons engaged in the Manufacture of Clothing and IV. — Persons engaged in connection with Building Materials, Textile Fabrics —continued. . dc. (continued). White work and ladies' and children's J * r ° m ' Quarrying and stone-crushing-«mto!. & a. & s d. clothing fzctotj-continued. £s. d. &s. d. Quarrymen .. .. 2 0 0 2 8 0 Presses, females .. ..076 100 Masons .. ..200300 Sorters . .. ..066100 B one-breakers .. .. 110 0 220 Cutters, males .. ..100 200 Stone-feeders .. .. 116 0 220 Prefers, . .. .. 010 0 2 5 0 Sawmills-Woollen-mills- Foremen .. .. 2 8 0 410 0 Foremen .. ..400 500 Saw-sharpeners .. .. 110 0 28 Carders .. ..200 300 Benchers .. .. 110 0 210 0 Wool-sorters .. ..200 250 . assistants .. .. 100 200 Finishers .. ..200 250 Sawyers .. .. 110 0 214 0 Dyers .. ..200 300 Sawyers' assistants .. .. 012 6 1 IQ O . assistants .. .. 015 0 110 0 Measurers .. .. 116 0 25 0 Spinners .. ..126 215 0 Tailers-out .. .. 015 0 100 Warpers .. ..100 110 0 labourers .. .. 110 0 220 Wool-scourers .. .. 115 0 2 0 0 Machinists .. ..200 330 Pressmen .. 110 0 2 0 0 | Machinists' Assistants .. .. 010 0 110 0 Weavers • • '' nln n n i"? n V.—Persons engaged in Engineering, Metal-works, dc. l:T* :: :: S" ° 6 I™ % n .. ..300 500 s ' feraaks - Vll SS I SKS3. :: :: i« I» S S ln 3herS ' " • ■ ' ■ 012 0 017 6 Turners and fitters .. ..250 5 0 0 BST " :: :: J". B SE.! B& :: :: jjj. ..| IV.-Persons engaged in connection with Building iron'mo'uiders " "116 0 310 0 Jfatenafa, <&c. assistants .. ..050 018 0 Asphalting and tar-paving— Iron-dressers .. .. 112 0 2 8 0 Asphalt-makers .. .. 115 0 2 8 0 p urDacemen .. .. 110 0 2 6 0 Woodblock makers .. ..150 220 p attern . mak e rs .. .. 112 0 214 0 Brickworks— Boiler-makers - .. .. 116 0 3 0 0 Foremen .. ..280 500 Oo p persmiths .. .. 210 0 330 Clay-diggers and pitmen .. 116 0 116 0 B rass-moulders .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Panmen and grinders .. .. 115 0 210 0 Brase . finiBh ers .. .. 116 0 3 3 0 Setters .. .. Ilb 0 215 0 Tinsmitha .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Brickmakers and moulders .. Ilb 0 2, lo U assistants .. ..060 150 Pressers .. .. 115 0 215 0 Smel t ers .. .. 210 0 3 0 0 Burners .. ..20 0 0 0 Pl um bers and gasfitters .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Loaders-out .. .. 116 0 10 0 Plumbers' boys .. ..050 015 0 Stackers .. .. 116 0 2 8 0 Meter . makers .. .. 119 0 3 3 0 Carters .. .. 110 0 2 5 0 p ainters .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Building— Stove-fitters .. ..150 300 Bricklayers .. .. 214 0 8 0 0 Galvaniserg .. ..150 310 0 Carpenters .. ..280 3 0 0 wireworkers .. ..160 330 Painters .. -280 2140 Ja era ~. ..130 210 0 Plasterers .. ..280 214 0 Engme .a rivers ail( j firemen .. 110 0 300 Plumbers .. .. 214 0 3 3 0 Bricklayers .. ..220 300 Stonemasons .. ..300 360 Carpenters .. .. 110 0 300 Cement— Labourers .. .. 110 0 2 2 0 Millers .. •■225 S n £ Carters '■ . • 110 0 290 Burners .. ..20 0 3 0 0 Storekeepers .. .. 110 0 210 0 Kiln-fillers .. •• 116 0 25 0 Dri i lere .. ..080 116 0 Labourers ' .. .. 110 0 2 2 0 Trunk . makers ~ ..150 250 Joinery, wood-turning, and carving— Canister-makers .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Foremen .. •• 3 0 0 4 0 0 Lead . millers .. .. .. 3 6 0 Joiners •■ _.. 2 0 0 3 6 0 Apprentioeg .. ..040 110 0 Turners '" Xlβ 0 3 3 0 B^s '" -.050 015 0 Apprentices '.'. '.'.070 015 0 Vl.—Persons engaged in Ship-building, Repairing, &c. Lime-works— • Ship-building, docks, AcForemen • • ..300 310 0 Foremen .. ..300 700 Quarrymen .. .. 116 0 2 5 0 Shipwrights .. ..280 312 0 Crane-drivers .. .. 116 0 2 0 0 Boiler-makers and riveters .. 210 0 3 8 0 Lime-drawers .. ..200 280 Pattern-makers .. ..250 300 Burners •• ..200 280 Bolt-screwers .. ..200 280 Marble and monumental masons— Ship joiners .. ..280 300 Foremen .. .. 210 0 3 0 0 Marine opticans .. ..200 300 Letter-cutters and carvers ..200 300 Ships' compasses, sextants, and baroMarble and stone masons .. 110 0 3 0 0 meter repairers .. ..200 300 improvers .. 015 0 110 0 Sails and tarpaulins — Polishers .. .. 110 0 2 5 0 Sailmakers .. ..150 300 improvers .. .. 012 0 10 0 Tent- and tarpaulin-makers .. 015 0 2 7 0 pjxera .. ..150 250 Apprentices and boys .. ..050 018 0 Boys .. ..050 015 0 Forewomen .. ..100 110 0 Modelling, cement and plaster decorations — Women and girls .. ..600 019 0 Modellers 110 0 2 5 0 Vll—Persons engaged in the Manufacture of Furniture, ?T '' "' 010 0 110 0 Bedding, d-c. Casters •• ..oiuuxiuu j< Paint and varnish— f° re ™., t 7 fi 0 -~ n =™ :: ;:!SS Id I f>- :j «JS • •■! • 1™ .. ..280 400, apprentice, .026 160 Throwers .. ..200 300 Polishers .. .. 110 0 S 0 0 Hpe makers .. ..200 300,, apprentices .. 076 176 T,,, rncVß 2 0 0 3 0 0 Chair-makers . • ... 110 0 216 0 Clayg ters " .. 110 0 28 0 Chair-fitters .. "}' *0 12 0 Quarrying and stone-crushing- Frame-makers .. .. 110 0 2 5 0 Foremen •• ..200 300 Wood-carvers .. ..200 300
715
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 3— continued.
Wages paid in various Teades in New South Wales— continued. VII.— Persons engaged in the Manufacture of Furniture, Vll. — Persons engaged in Printing, Lithographing EstablishBedding, <tc— continued. _ ments, (£c. —continued. From. To. From. To. £ c. d. £ a. d. Bookbinders— continued. £ s. d. £ s. d. Wood-turners .. .. 116 0 210 0 Apprentices, male .. ..070 100 Upholsterers .. ..200 3 5 0 „ female .. ..026 076 „ apprentices .. ..050 110 0 Boys, messengers, &o. .. ..050 013 6 Carpet hands .. .. 115 0 3 5 0 Paper boxes and bags— Drapery-cutters .. ..220 450 Foremen .. .. 2 10 0 2 15 0 Forewomen .. ..150 115 0 Forewomen .. .. 017 6 110 0 Upholeteresses .. .. 012 6 2 0 0 Cutters .. .. 017 0 2 0 0 Girls .. ..050 012 0 Boys .. ..076 014 0 Drapery hands, females .. .. 016 0 2 0 0 Girls (box- and bag-makers) ..050 110 0 Machinists „ .. .. 0 10 0 12 6 Apprentices .. ..026 040 Seamstresses .. ..090 126 General hands .. ..126 250 Carpet-sewers, females .. 0 10 0 15 0 Girls • • ..050 010 0 XX. — Persons engaged in the Manufacture of Vehicles, Window-blind makers and fixers .. 110 0 210 0 Saddlery and Harness, and Bicycles. v B T v •■ •• 9,2 2 °o\l 2 Coacnbuilding-Venetaan-blind makers .. - 1 210 0 Poremen 8 ~ .. 210 0 40 0 painters .. ..150 250 Bndv mafem-s ni O 300 Revolving. shuUer makers.. .. 110 0 214 0 »ffi? ta [ J° ° °°0 ° Mattress-makers .. ..\l 10 0 2180 1 ET " "JuS 300 Picture-frame makers .. .. 115 0 4 0 0 strikers __ .. 010 0 110 0 Mount-cutters .. .. 115 0 218 0 yicemen .. ..150 280 fXs "■ "1 0 0 1 TrimmerS •• •• US 0 30 0 *'" ers •■ •" n c n inn Painters .. ..100 300 XT- \« wt. A " -.050100 Nave . turnera .. .. 116 0 250 Hair and flock hands- Spoke-turners .. .. 116 0 25 0 5" i?™* •" ■" n« n ? ifi n Improvers .. .. 015 0 110 0 Machinists .. .. 015 0 116 0 ADDrentices 0 5 0 10 0 Rag-sorters, females .. \\ 017 0 10 0 Sft X y IndVrness- " " T,n erS i/ •• - 2n n 2n n Foremen .. .. 210 0 40 0 BiU.ard-table makers .. ..200 300 Saddle . ma kers .. .. 110 0 210 0 Apprentices .. ~ ° a l* 2 I n Hamess-makere .. .. 115 0 300 Ivory-turners .. .. 2 0 0 3 0 0 Collac . m , kera .. ..110 300 Chinese cabinet-makers .. .. 015 0 210 0 strap . hands .. ..150 215 0 • P° llBhers •• •• 014 0 115 0 Macninists . .. 115 0 2 0 0 • oar ™ rs •• •• 1 ° ° ? ° °, Female hands .. ..076 115 0 . wood-turners .. .. 0:4 0 115 0 Im „ .. .. 010 0 12 6 • eandpaperers .. .. 010 0 110 0 Apprentices .. ..050 017 6 Vlll.—Persons engaged in Printing, Lithographing Establish- Making and repairing bicycles — ments, &c. Foremen .. .. 2 10 0 3 0 0 Readers .. ..200 300 Turners .. .. 110 0 215 0 Readers' assistants .. 015 0 2 0 0 Fitters .. 110 0 210 0 Compositors, jobbing offices— Tire- and wheel-makers '.'. ..150 276 Journeymen .. ..150 310 0 B oya ..060 010 0 Improvers .. .. 017 6 2 0 0 'Apprentices .. ..050 100 x __p ersons engaged in the Production of Light, Fuel, Compositors, newspaper offices— " * h t &* Foremen .. ..300 700 Electrio Hsht works ' Machine compositors .. ■•**?• , to "■ Foremen "" .. ..3 00 500 Compositors .. .. 9d. to Is. Id. per Eng i Deer s .. .. 210 0 410 0 Linotype operators .. .. 3d. 1(m E | e 8 0tricians .. ..200 310 0 Female type-distributors .. 1M ■ Installing workmen .. ..200 210 0 with Gasworks— v v. -..u allowances Foremen .. ..3 10 0 6 0 0 Mftoh.nists , boys .. .. 0 6 6 015 0 stokers and firemen .. ..220 218 0 Apprentices .. .. 010 0 15 0 Fitters .. ..280 360 Letterpress machinists— Plumbers .. ..250 215 0 Poremen •• ■• ?!n n fan Main-layers .. .. 116 0 215 0 Journeymen .. .. 110 0 40 0 Servioe .f ayers .. .. 116 0 215 0 Improvers .. .. Oli 0 110 0 Lamp . lign t ers .. .. 112 0 112 0 Apprentices .. ..080 015 0 p ue i_ Stereotypes- Sawyers and yardmen .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Poremen •• - 6 0 0 Car / era ■ .. 110 0 2 5 0 Journeymen .. .. 115 0 3 0 0 B ..050 100 Eleotrotypers— J Journeymen .. .. 115 0 315 0 XL-Persons engaged in Miscellaneous Trades. Engravers •.. ..200400 Lithographers— Basket-making, wicker-work, mats, and Journeymen .. ..200 400 makingImprovers .. ..100 110 0 Basket-makers ... ..100 200 Apprentices .. ..060 100 Apprentices and boys .. ..050 015 0 Stone polishers and cleaners .. 015 0 112 6 Mat- and matting-makers ..100 110 0 Artists, illuminators, and photo- Boys .. ..070 012 0 graphers .. .. 115 0 610 0 Box and packing-case makingArtists'apprentices .. ..076 017 6 Foremen .. .. 210 0 300 Cutters .. .. 212 0 216 0 Box-makers .. .. 110 0 210 0 Varnishers, transferrors, &o. ..200 300 Sawyers .. .. 110 0 220 Feed- and fly-boys .. ..050 100 Machinists .. .. 110 0 280 Bookbinders— Apprentices .. ..076 00 0 Foremen .. ..200 500 Boys .. ..050 olb 0 Rulers .. ..100 400 Broom-making— Binders .. ..100 400 Broom-makers .. .. 110 0 250 Finishers .. ..100 310 0 Assistants and apprentices ..050 100 Forewomen .. .. 017 6 110 0 Broom-sewers .. .. 115 3 2 0 0 Book-sewers, female .. .. 010 0 110 0 Sorters .. ..050 180 Book-folders „ .. ..050 150 Brush-making— Embossers „ .. ..080 100 Journeymen .. ..150 d 0 0 Numberers, pagers, wire - stitohers, Female hands .. ..040 015 0 packers, &c, female .. ..050 100 Boys and apprentices .. ..090 011 0 91—A, 4.
A.—4
716
EXHIBIT No. 3— continued.
Wages paid in various Trades in New South Wales— continued. Xl. — Persons engaged in Miscellaneous Trades —continued XI. -Persons engaged in Miscellaneous Trades —continued. From. To. Chemicals, drugs, patent medicines, &c—£ s. d. £s. d. " Prom. To. Foremen .. ..260 400 Photography— continued. £s. d. £s. d. Manufacturers .'. '.'. 1 0 0 2 7 6 Betouohers .. .. 110 0 3 5 0 Chemists .. .10 0 210 0 Zinc-etchers .. .. 110 0 215 0 improvers .. ..076 150 Enlargers .. ..200 300 Lead-burners and platinum-men .. 12 0 214 0 Framers .. .. 017 6 2 5 0 Acid-makers 110 0 2 5 0 Retouchers, females .. .. 012 6 115 0 Bottle-washers '.'. '.'. 012 6 10 0 Printers „ .. ..050 150 Packers .. . 014 0 2 5 0 Spotters „ .. ..050 1126 Forewomen .. 015 0 210 0 Sorters „ .. ..050 076 Bottlers and labellers, female ..040 015 0 Portmanteaus and bagsPackers, female .. ..060 100 Bag-makers .. .. 110 0 300 Manufacturing-hands .. .. 0 6 0 010 0 • • • .. 016 0 110 0 Cooperage— Improvers .. ..076 126 Coopers .. 115 0 3 0 0 Trunk- and portmanteau-makers .. 110 0 3 0 0 Apprentices .. '.'. 0 8 0 12 6 Blaoksmiths and japanners .. 015 6 115 0 Machinists .. 016 0 210 0 Machinists, females .. ..060 140 Dye-works— Rope-works — Dyers .. 17 6 210 0 Foremen .. ..400 410 0 Pressers, men .. .. 110 0 2 5 0 Ropelayers .. ..220 280 women .. ..110 140 Reelers .. .. 110 0 200 Feather- and glove-oleaners, &c. .. 0 2 6 14 0 Hand spinners .. .. 110 0 2 5 0 Explosives Machinists .. .. 018 0 110 0 Mixers .. ..150 250 Jenny-boys .. ..060 015 0 Cartridge-fillers .. ..100 200 Rubber-works— Packers .. ..100 115 0 Journeymen .. ..200 300 Labourers .. .. 110 0 118 0 B °y s ■ • .. 010 0 10 0 Florists Sewing-machines, pianos, &c— Florists and shop assistants, females 0 5 0 12 6 Foremen .. .. 310 0 40 0 Glassworks (bottles, &c.)— Tuners .. ..200 500 Foremen .. 3 0 0 4 0 0 Polishers .. ..100 312 0 Glass-blowers .. .. 110 0 317 0 Repairers .. ..126 400 Packers .. ..070 176 Apprentices and boys .. ..050 100 Finishers .. .. 110 0 317 0 Stringers and spinners .. .. 010 0 15 0 Apprentices .. .. 010 0 115 0 Packers and fitters-up .. .. 110 0 28 0 Boys .. ..060 015 0 Soap- and candle-works— Glassworks (ornamental)— Stearine-and candle-makers ..140 210 0 Cutters and silverers .. ..200 300 Moulders .. .. 0 15 0 1 10 0 Bevellers .. .. 110 0 3 0 0 Soap-boilers .. .. 116 0 3 0 0 Glaziers .. .. 110 0 210 0 Assistants .. ..050 110 0 Carters .. .. 110 0 2 0 0 Packers .. .. 010 0 110 0 Stencil-outters, boys and girls ..050 080 B °y s • • ..050 015 0 Boys _, ..050 100 Packers, females .. ..060 100 Hair-dressing and hair-working— Tobacco and cigarettes-Hair-dressers and wig-makers ..100 300 Foremen .. .. 215 0 500 Hair-frame makers .. ..050 110 0 Cutting-room hands .. ..100 210 0 females ..050 110 General hands .. ..100 250 Laundries (steam and hand)— Box-makers .. ..150 300 Washhouse-hands, males .. 015 0 2 0 0 Stemmers .. .. 012 0 15 0 Packers, males .. 015 0 2 2 0 Twisters .. ..120 350 Boys .. ..070 010 0 Pressors .. .. 012 0 210 0 Carters .. .. 010 0 2 5 0 Plug-coverers .. .. 015 0 2 5 0 _ ' . , f0 10 0 1 0 0 ! Finishers .. .. 110 0 215 0 Washers, females .. .. j „ t(j 4a> per fl . Cigarette-machinists .. .. 115 0 310 0 Sorters and packers, females ..080150 Boys—general work .. ..050 016 0 Folders „ ..050 015 0 Forewomen .. .. 015 0 110 0 Starchers „ ..060 120 Stemmers, females .. 010 0 100 Machine-ironers „ ..090 100 Coverers, „ .. 015 0 113 0 Callender hands „ ..060 010 0 Cutting-room hands, females .. 010 0 100 ♦Shirt- and collar-ironera, females .. 018 0 2 0 0 Cigarette-making— *Starch-ironers „ .. 013 0 16 0 Machine-hands, females ..070 014 0 •Plain ironers , .. 012 0 018 0 Cigarette-makers, „ .. 016 0 14 0 Hangers-out .. 010 0 013 0 Mouth-piece makers „ .. 012 6 016 6 Paper-making Filling and closing, &c, females ..050 080 Sorters and classers .. ..100 200 Packers, females .. ..070 017 0 Beater-men .. ..150 2 10 0 Umbrella-making— Rag-boilers and cutter-men .. 015 0 118 0 Males .. .. 012 0 2 5 0 Maohinemen .. .. 012 6 210 0 Females .. .. 010 0 15 0 Labourers .. 0 18 0 1 16 0 Watchmaking and jewellery, &o.— Paper-sorters, female .. .. 010 0 015 0 Watchmakers .. .. 110 0 5 0 0 Perambulator-making— . „ apprentices ..050 010 0 Carpenter .. .. 115 0 2 2 0 Jewellers .. .. 110 0 6 0 0 Blacksmiths .. ..110 220 „ apprentices .. .. .. 010 0 Fitters .. ..100 250 Instrument-makers .. ..126 300 Painters .. .. 010 0 10 0 Opticians .. .. 110 0 210 0 Upholsterers. .. ..100 1 10 0 Polishers .. ..150 2 15 0 Boys .. ..060 0 10 0 Gem-outters .. ..200 300 Machinists, female .. .. 010 0 10 0 Engravers .. ..200 500 Photography— Packers .. .. 0 17 6 17 6 Operators .. ..200 4 10 0 Electroplaters .. .. 1 10 0 400 Printers .. ..100 2 10 0 Burnishers, females .. ..100 1 10 0 assistants .. ..076 100 Boys .. ..050 0 17 6 * Shirt- and starch-ironers are paid by piecework; other branches by daily or weekly wage.
717
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 4. Sik,— Trades Hall, Goulburn and Dixon Streets, Sydney, 18th April, 1901. I have the honour to forward to you, as requested by Mr. Miller, the union rate of wages paid in the various trades, and the number of hours, worked per week by each trade in the Sydney district. The only statutes in force for the protection of the workers are the Factories Act, limited in its operation to certain trades or callings, and the Early Closing Bill, most useful to shopassistants. Those are the most important at present. Should there be any further information required on the state of trade-unions, I shall be most happy to supply it, if possible. I have, &c, Geo. Euttbe, Secretary, Trades Hall Association. The Chairman, New Zealand Federation Eoyal Commission. Union Eate of Wages, and Number of Houbs worked pee Week in the various Trades. Iron Trades. Boilermakers ... ... ... 10s. to 12s. per day on new work; old work, Bd. per day extra. Engineers— Fitters ... ... ... 10s. (minimum) per day of eight hours. Turners ... ... ... 10s. „ „ Pattern-makers ... ... 10s. Bd. „ „ Machinists ... ... 9s. 4d. „ Drillers ... ... ... Bs. Bd. Blacksmiths ... ... 10s. to 12s. „ Ironmoulders ... ... 10s. to 10s. 4d. „ Tinsmiths and sheet-iron workers 9s. to 10s. „ All the above trades work forty-eight hours per week. Overtime is paid for at double time for the first two hours, and time and half after. The average is one boy to each four adults permanently employed; and apprentices' wages run from about 6s. per week at the start to £1 ss. to £1 10s. at the end of apprenticeship. Printing Trades. Compositors—£2 12s. to £2 16s. per week of forty-eight hours. Piecework, Is. per thousand " ens," day-work ; Is. Id. per thousand " ens," night-work. Linotype operators—3d. per thousand, with all " fat." Bookbinders and paper-rulers—£2 12s. to £2 16s. per week. Lithographers—£2 15s. to £3 per week of forty-eight hours. Apprentices—One boy to every four men permanently employed. Building Trades. Stonemasons ... ... ... lls. per day ; forty-four hours per week. Bricklayers ... ... ... 10s. „ forty-eight hours per week. Carpenters and joiners ... ... 10s. „ „ Painters ... ... ■•• 9s. „ „ Plumbers and.gasfitters ... 10s. to lls. „ „ Slaters ... ... ... 10s. Plasterers ... ... ... 9s. to 10s. Labourers ... ... ... 7s. to 9s. „ „ Steam-crane drivers ... ... 10s. „ average about fifty-four hours. Quarrymen ... ... ... 9s. to lls. „ forty-eight hours per week. Miscellaneous Trades. Coopers ... ... • • • 10s. per day ; forty-eight hours per week. Electricians ... ... ... 9s. to 10s. „ „ Saddle-and collar-makers ... 7s. to 9s. „ mostly piecework. Tailors average from £2 to £3 per week, all piecework. Pressers average from £2 to £3 per week of forty-eight hours. Shipwrights —lls. to 12s. per day; forty-eight hours per week. Coachmakers—Bs. to 10s. per day; forty-eight hours per week. Tobacco-workers (different branches) average from £1 10s. to £3. Cigar-makers* average from £1 17s. 6d. to £2 per week of forty-eight hours. Glass-workers—£2 to £2 12s. per week of forty-eight hours. Furniture Trade. Cabinetmakers—ls. ljd. per hour ; forty-eight hours per week. Chair-makers —Is. Id. per hour; forty-eight hours per week. French-polishers —Is. per hour; forty-eight hours per week. Turners —Is. per hour ; forty-eight hours per week. Upholsterers average £2 lls. 6d. per week of forty-eight hours. Boys average one to four men in better work. Number of Chinese employed in metropolitan area in furniture-making, 431.
• This trade is very much troubled by boy-labour, and the average cannot be got. Some factories ate almost exclusively run with boy- and girl-labour.
A.—4.
EXHIBIT No. 5. Number of Persons employed in various Trades in New South Wales. (Supplied by the Department of Labour and Industry, New South Wales.)
718
Class of Trade. T , , _,_, Over Sixteen and Un<jer Sixteen. under Eighteen . Malee. Females. Males. ' Females. Over Eighteen. Males. Females. Total. Total. Males. Females. Wool-washing and tanning Meat-preserving lt ... Flour-mills Condiments n ' • • Confectionery ... a ... ... Jam ... Boots it • • ■ • ■ ■ Clothing // ... ... Engineering 20 6 15 3 11 8 42 4 1 43 4 3 6 3 "8 6 21 3 39 21 37 4 19 1 17 11 15 55 20 6 5 8 89 65 26 20 5 6 7 13 9 11 20 5 2 36 7 21 3 5 8 27 42 8 52 81 152 218 323 I 62 35 34 55 48 35 40 85 62 170 159 62 42 734 1,379 136 133 93 117 242 69 43 93 105 5 6 190 63 11 92 6 17 17 30 39 20 85 39 152 100 152 218 380 66 35 34 82 49 67 54 111 125 232 169 67 51 866 1,448 165 159 101 123 250 82 60 110 139 13 9 252 75 14 108 "e 46 20 35 52 47 148 50 243 202 152 218 380 72 35 34 128 69 102 106 158 125 380 219 310 253 866 1,448 165 159 101 123 285 83 95 159 162 52 50 252 139 140 118 Blacksmithing... Iron-foundry Furniture Woollen-mills ... Printing, job ... "i 8 6 14 3 1 26 5 3 6 4 4 1 1 1 7 1 7 2 18 20 28 1 30 38 20 20 20 35 1 35 49 23 39 41 Paper boxes ... it ... ... Tobacco 1 13 3 50 3 60 63 7 64 126 10 it ... ... Cigarettes ... Sewing - machines and pianos Eope... Pottery 10 124 163 50 18 1 52 24 2 ib 72 110 47 6 124 147 50 16 it ... ...
A.—4.
EXHIBIT No. 6. Number of Persons employed in various Trades in Victoria. (Supplied by the Inspector of Factories, Victoria.)
EXHIBIT No. 7. Employment of Chinese in the Furniture Tbade in Sydney in 1899. (Supplied by the Department of Labour and Industry, New South Wales.) Number of Chinese employed in making furniture— Eecorded on books of department ... ... ... ... 515 Estimate of actual number employed ... ... ... ... 560
719
As,"' tale. ige—Pei tali Total [alea. Total Females. gg d I 1 S 3 in S 1 I 31 § S 5jS © o as 3 1 § H CO Ia> CD 2 s II an CO 53 ingineering A .. B .. C .. 2 7 4 16 15 9 23 12 15 15 10 12 17 7 12 10 11 7 8 269 146 101 62 59 91 269 146 101 2 27 47 42 39 29 26 516 212 516 Soots A .. B .. C .. * * I '2 1 10 10 8 3 4 13 5 5 7 3 8 7 1 3 131 69 102 3 16 6 5 3 3 10 8 6 7 5 5, 5i 1 8 i 5 21 7 3 34 26 43 46 26 44 131 69 102 54 35 38 34 26 43 * " ! 7 19 23 23 18 11 302 3 27 16 . 21 15 14 31 103 116 302 127 103 ilothing A .. B .. C .. I ■ 15 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 22 34 45 2 8 8 15 4 17 7 13 8 Isj 18 20| J 12 ! 12 '21 13 1 14 89 112 136 4 3 15 22 34 45 83 43 96 222 89 112 136 i 3 2 3 6 io I 2 5 2 3 6 4 101 2 14 18 36 28 51 45 28 22 101 337 furniture A .. B .. 0 .. 337 i 2 1 3 2 1 4 1 39 11 23 1 2 Q o 1 10 14 12 1 6 39 11 23 7 2 10 14 i ■1 1 2 ■■ I •• 3 1 4 2 3 5 1 73 1 2 3 1 24 19 73 9 24 loap and candles A .. B .. 0 .. ■« 2 e 10 hi 11 i 8 7 1 3 4 1 5 2 1 i i 174 30 26 36 3 24 174 30 26 3 I 7 I 13 14 11 10 3 2 230 63 230 'rinting A .. B C .. 1 2 7 i 19 14 29 1 11 6 30 91 20 5 1 14 2 6 8 1 2 8 1 4 4 43 50 190 1 2 9 14 ii 24 2 17 22 3 31 17 2 28 9 1 22 8 1 4 35 46 44 120 43 50 190 97 9 122 35 6 144 144 10 62 47 88 20 16 11 9 283 1 11 25 43 56 47 32 13 210 283 228 185 Voollen-mills A .. B .. G .. 185 3 5 1 _ 2 5 1 4 3 5 2 3 1 1 2 6 28 31 24 2 i 1 1 2 1 3 2 8 1 3 9 1 1 8 2 1 9 11 22 28 37 26 18 35 28 31 24 21 10 40 22 28 37 " "i 1 8 I ' 12 "a 1 1 1 7 8 12 6 9i I ! 83 3 2 4 13 13 10 12 14 79 83 87 87 71
A.—4
720
EXHIBIT No. 8. Table showing Horse-power employed and Value of Plant in the Manufactories of New Zealand and the States of the Commonwealth. (From "The Seven Colonies of Australasia.")
EXHIBIT No. 9. Table showing Value of Production of the Manufactories of New Zealand and the Commonwealth for 1899. (From "The Seven Colonies of Australasia.")
EXHIBIT No. 10. Table showing Total Value of Production of all Industries of New Zealand and the States of the Commonwealth for 1899, and also the Total Value distributed among the various Industries. (From "The Seven Colonies of Australasia.")
State. Year. Horse-power employed. Value of Plant. New South Wales Victoria Queensland ... South Australia Western Australia Tasmania New Zealand* 1899 1899 1899 1899 1898 1898 1896 Number. 33,180 33,046 27,580 13,493 7,432 2,853 28,096 £ 5,640,384 4,632,629 4,536,508 1,835,850 1,254,935 302,418 2,988,955 Total 145,680 21,191,679 • Figures are not obtainable later than 1896 for New Zealand.
State. i Value of Production. Value per Inhabitant. New South Wales Victoria Queensland... South Australia Western Australia ... Tasmania ... £ 9,207,000 10,052,000 4,772,000 2,655,000 1,515,000 465,000 £ s. d. 6 16 10 8 13 0 10 0 1 7 4 4 8 18 8 2 11 9 Commonwealth ... New Zealand 28,666,000 4,650,000 7 14 10 6 4 0 Australasia... 33,316,000 7 9 8
State. Agriculture. Pastoral Industries. SBJ »*BL. Forestry and Fisheries. Manufactures. Total Value of Production. Value per Inhabitant. <Iew South Wales fiotoria.. Queensland iouth Australia .. Vestern Australia 'asmania £ 5,582,000 6,435,000 1,848,000 2,568,000 500,000 996,000 £ 14,527,000 7,219,000 7,283,000 2,503,000 869,000 687,000 £ 2,543,000 3,384,000 889,000 671,000 251,000 285,000 £ 6,081,000 3,579,000 3,140,000 516,000 6,346,000 2,539,000 £ 639,000 201,000 629,000 45,000 734,000 118,000 9,207,000 10,052,000 4,772,000 2,655,000 1,515,000 465,000 £ 38,579,000 30,870,000 18,561,000 8,958,000 10,215,000 5,090,000 £ b. d. 28 13 7 26 11 4 38 18 4 24 6 11 60 4 10 28 G 4 Commonwealth Tew Zealand 17,929,000 7,318,000 33,088,000 7,707,000 8,023,000 2,354,000 22,201,000 2,657,000* 2,366,000 611,000 28,666,000 4,650,000 112,273,000 25,297,000 30 6 8 33 14 7 Australasia 24,858,000 25,247,000 40,795,000 10,377,000 2,977,000 33,316,000 137,570,000 30 18 0 *Kai iri-gum prodm stion included herein.
721
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 11. Statistics of the Seven Colonies of Australasia, from 1861 to 1899. (Compiled by T. A. Coghlan, Government Statistician, New South Wales.)
iXPOETS. Colony. 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1899. Tew South Wales Victoria Queensland iouth Australia ... Vestern Australia 'asmania £ £ 6,609,461 i 11,261,219 13,828,606 j 14,557,820 709,599 I 2,760,045 2,032,311 ! 3,582,397 95,789 i 199,281 905,463 740,638 £ 16,307,805 16,252,103 3,540,366 4,508,754 502,770 1,555,576 £ 25,944,020 16,006,743 8,305,387 10,642,416 799,466 1,440,818 £ 28,445,466 18,567,780 11,942,858 8,547,046 6,985,642 2,577,475 Commonwealth lew Zealand 24,181,229 J 33,101,400 1,370,247 i 5,282,084 42,667,374 6,060,866 63,138,850 9,566,397 77,066,267 11,938,335 Australasia 25,551,476 38,383,484 48,728,240 72,705,247 89,004,602 BxpoBTS pee Head of Population. Colony. 1861. I 1871. 1881. I 1891. 1899. New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia ... Western Australia Tasmania £ 8. d. 18 14 2 25 12 4 22 14 8 16 3 11 6 2 10 10 1 3 £ s. d. 22 3 2 19 15 1 22 18 8 19 7 11 7 18 1 7 6 3 £ s. 21 9 18 13 15 18 16 -6 17 0 13 6 d. 0 6 6 7 8 3 £ s. d. 22 14 3 13 19 7 20 18 11 33 0 0 16 1 2 9 13 6 £ s. d. 21 2 11 15 19 7 25 0 9 23 4 7 41 3 11' 14 6 10 Commonwealth New Zealand 20 19 15 6 0 8 19 14 10 20 10 0 18 13 7 12 5 11 19 13 11 15 3 8 20 16 15 18 5 4 Australasia 20 10 10 19 16 10 17 11 0 18 19 2 19 19 11 BXPOBTS if Domestic Pboduce, as 'eb Customs Retubns. Colony. 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1899. lew South Wales Victoria jueensland ... iouth Australia ... Vestern Australia 'asmania £ 5,016,891 10,596,368 698,747 1,838,639 95,000 838,343 n 9,227,108 11,151,662 2,407,888 3,289,861 198,250* 730,946 £ 10,784,327 12,480,567 3,478,376 3,755,781 498,634 1,548,116 £ 21,085,712 13,026,426 7,979,080 4,810,512 788,873 1,367,927 £ 19,221,854 14,038,600 11,697,139 4,101,081 6,793,946 2,557,315 Commonwealth Jew Zealand 19,083,988 1,339,241 27,005,715 5,171,104 32,545,801 5,762,250 49,058,530 9,400,094 58,409,935 11,799,740 Australasia 20,423,229 32,176,819 38,308,051 58,458,624 70,209,675 * Estimated. BXPOBTS if Domestic 'boduce, pee Head of Poi 'ULATION. Colony. 1861. I 1871. 1881. 1871. 1891. 1899. New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia ... Western Australia Tasmania £ s. d. 14 4 0 19 12 7 22 7 9 14 13 1 6 1 10 9 6 4 £ s. d. 18 3 1 15 2 7 20 0 2 17 16 3 7 17 3 7 4 4 £ a. d. 14 1 11 14 6 10 15 12 11 13 11 3 16 17 10 13 5 0 £ p. a. 18 9 2 11 7 6 20 2 5 14 18 4 15 16 11 9 3 8 £ s. d. 14 5 9 12 1 8 24 10 6 11 2 11 40 1 3 14 4 6 Commonwealth' New Zealand 16 10 14 19 8 9 16 20 2 1 1 4 14 4 11 11 13 9 15 6 14 18 1 5 15 15 15 14 7 8 Australasia 16 8 5 16 12 8 13 15 11 15 4 10 15 15 6
A.—4
722
EXHIBIT No. 11— continued. Statistics of the Seven Colonies of Australasia— continued.
lIVE-STOCK IHEEP. Colony. 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1899. New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia... Western Australia Tasmania No. 5,615,054 6,239,258 4,093,381 3,038,356 279,576 1,714,498 No. 16,278,697 10,002,381 7,403,334 4,412,055 670,999 1,305,489 No. 36,591,946 10,267,265 8,292,883 6,810,856 1,267,912 1,847,479 No. 61,831,416 12,928,148 20,289,633 7,745,541 1,962,212 1,662,801 No. 36,213,514 *13,180,943 15,226,479 5,721,493 2,282,306 1,672,068 Commonwealth New Zealand 20,980,123 2,761,583 40,072,955 9,700,629 65,078,341 12,985,085 106,419,751 18,128,186 74,296,803 19,348,506 Australasia... 23,741,706 49,773,584 78,063,426 1124,547,937 93,645,309 * 1894 figures ; returns not colli icted for 1899. LlVE-STC ick —Horned Cattle. Colony. 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1899. New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia... Western Australia Tasmania No. 2,271,923 628,092 560,196 265,434 33,795 87,114 No. 2,014,888 799,509 1,168,235 143,463 49,593 101,540 No. 2,597,348 1,286,677 3,618,513 314,918 63,009 130,526 No. 2,046,347 1,812,104 6,192,759 676,933 133,690 167,666 No. 1,967,081 *1,833,900 5,053,836 526,524 297,081 160,204 Commonwealth New Zealand 3,846,554 193,285 4,277,228 436,592 8,010,991 698,637 11,029,499 831,831 9,838,626 1,210,439 Australasia... 4,039,839 4,713,820 8,709,628 11,861,330 11,049,065 * 1894 figures; returns not collected for 1899. Liv] 5-STOCK —Horses. Colony. 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. ■ 1899. lew South Wales Victoria Queensland iouth Australia ... Vestern Australia Tasmania No. 233,220 84,057 28,983 52,597 10,720 22,118 No. 304,100 181,643 91,910 78,125 22,698 23,054 No. 398,577 278,195 194,217 159,678 31,755 25,607 No. 459,755 440,696 399,364 202,906 40,812 31,262 No. 482,200 *431,547 479,127 180,335 65,918 31,189 Commonwealth lew Zealand 431,695 28,275 701,530 81,028 1,088,029 161,736 1,574,795 211,040 1,670,316 261,931 Australasia ... 459,970 782,558 1,249,765 1,785,835 1,932,247 • 1894 figures ; returns not coll :oted for 1899. Bu , 'ter, Cheese, and Swine Products, 18' 19. Colony. Dairy Cows. Butter made. Cheese made. Swine. Bacon and Hams cured. New South Wales Victoria Queensland ■iouth Australia ... Western Australia Fasmania No. 399,327 464,469 -131,000 84,498 -22,500 41,482 Lb. 33,033,881 53,327,585 8,462,595 5,581,231 *275,000 +2,094,000 Lb. 2,385,987 4,512,706 1,910,300 946,930 *850 1628,000 No. 239,773 |337,588 139,118 84,262 55,953 74,451 Lb. 6,831,943 10,886,314 7,147,760 12,619,000 *225,000 +1,448,000 Commonwealth New Zealand 1,143,276 343,556 102,774,292 +30,940,000 10,384,773 113,430,000 931,145 249,751 29,158,017 16,195,000 Australasia ... 1,486,832 133,714,292 23,814,773 1,180,896 35,353,017 * Approximate. f Estimated ; returns not complete. } 1894 figures ; returns not colleoted for 1899.
723
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 11— continued. Statistics of the Seven Colonies of Australasia— continued.
EXHIBIT No. 12. Agricultural Statistics, 1899-1900. (Compiled by E.J. Von Dadelszen, Registrar-General, New Zealand.)
92—A. i.
UBLIC Revenue, 11 >, PEE EAD OF 'OPULATION. Taxa: ;ion. Railways and Posts and Telegraphs. Public Lands. All other Sources. Total Revenue. Colony. Import and Excise Duties. Other. Tramways. New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia Northern Territory Western Australia Tasmania £ s. a. 1 5 7| 1 19 0; 3 6 5 1 13 3 7 2 10 5 9 2 2 9 10 £ s. d. 0 13 0 0 11 7 0 15 11 0 14 0 0 13 4 0 14 3 0 11 1 £ p. d. 2 12 6 2 11 9 2 19 0 3 3 11 3 1 10 7 7 3 115 £ s. a. 0 11 10 0 9 7 0 12 10 0 14 10 0 4 5 14 4 0 10 3 £ s. d. ! £ a. d. 1 11 1 0 13 0 0 6 5 0 9 9 15 8 0 10 5 0 7 10 0 18 2 2 16 8 12 3 0 15 2 16 1 0 7 11 0 4 6 £ s. d. 7 7 0 6 8 1 9 10 3 7 12 0 15 1 4 16 16 3 5 5 0 Commonwealth New Zealand ... 2 1 2 18 0 1 0 13 0 18 0 8 2 17 2 3 1 1 0 12 0 13 0 0 0 18 7 0 12 0 6 11 i 0 11 5 7 7 14 7 11 1 4 Australasia 2 3 10 0 13 11 2 14 9 0 12 2 0 16 8 j 0 12 3 7 13 7 Publ: :c Debt. Colony. 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1900. New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia Western Australia Tasmania £ 4,017,630 6,345,060 70,000 866,500 1,750 £ 10,614,330 11,994,800 4,047,850 2,167,700 £ 16,924,019 22,426,502 13,245,150 11,196,800 511,000 2,003,000 £ 52,950,733 I 43,638,897 29,457,134 20,347,125 1,613,594 i 7,110,290 £ 65,332,993 49,324,885 34,349,414 26,156,180 11,804,178 8,413,694 1,315,200 Commonwealth New Zealand ... 11,300,940 30,139,880 600,761 8,900,991 66,306,471 29,659,111 155,117,773 ! 195,381,344 38,844,914 : 47,874,452 Australasia 11,901,701 ; 39,040,871 95,965,582 193,962,687 ; 243,255,796 Public Debt, per Head IF POPULATIO: Colony. 1861. 1871. 1881. 1891. 1900. New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia Western Australia Tasmania £ 8. 11 4 11 14 2 0 6 16 0 2 a. 5 3 9 8 3 £ a. d. 20 10 0 16 0 11 32 6 11 11 13 7 £ s. d. 21 14 8 25 9 7 58 7 2 39 2 1 17 0 6 16 16 10 £ s. d. 45 10 8 37 14 4 73 12 5 62 9 11 30 5 8 46 11 10 £ s. d. 48 0 0 42 4 6 70 7 9 70 16 5 66 4 11 46 3 1 12 18 5 Commonwealth New Zealand ... 9 13 6 1 8 4 17 13 11 33 6 9 28 10 59 4 9 2 47 14 61 5 1 3 52 63 2 10 2 5 Australasia ... 9 8 0 19 16 4 34 0 2 49 18 4 53 19 10
Colonies. Land in Crop. Land broken up but not under Crop. Land in Sown Grasses. Total Land in Cultivation (including Sown Grasses). Queensland .. Tew South Wales Victoria iouth Australia Vestern Australia (1898-99) .. Tasmania .. Jew Zealand Acres. 420,746 2,440,968 3,159,312 2,238,240 171,164 225,126 1,632,691 Acres. Aores. 34,899 19,204 326,079* 378,852 509,244 151,949t 822,013 21,593 44,836 29,665 288,777 78,751 10,853,302} Acres. 474,849 3,145,899* 3,820,505 3,081,846 216,000 543,568 12,564,744} * Cleared and prepared for cultivation. t This refers only to areas in connection with cultivated holdii imde to ascertain the whole area under permanent artificial grasses. J In grass after being ploughed, 4,337,594 >loughed, 6,615,708 acres. igs, no attempt being acres; not previously
A.-4
724
EXHIBIT No. 12— continued. Agricultural Statistics, 1899-1900— continued.
EXHIBIT No. 13. Agricultural Statistics for Victoria, 1900-1. Preliminary Return according to Returns collected by Municipal Authorities under the Local Government Act. (Compiled by J.J. Fenton, Assistant Government Statist, Victoria.)
In Wheat. In Oats. In Barley. In Maize. Colonies. Yield Land. Produce. per Acre. Yield Land. Produce. per Acre. Yield Land. Produce. per Acre. Land. Produce. Yield per Acre. Queensland Jew South Wales Victoria iouth Australia .. Vestern Australia (1898-99) Tasmania few Zealand I Acros. 52,527 |1,426,166! ,2,165,693] 11,821,137 74,732 Bush. 614,41' 113,604,161 115,237,94! 8,453,13! 864,90! Bush. 11-70 9-54 7-04 4-64 11-57 Acres. 714 29,125 271,280 20,229 3,072 Bush, i Bush. 10,712 15-00 627,904 21-56 6,116,046; 22-54 218,331 10-79 55,854] 18-18 Acres 7,474 1,154 79,57? 15,767 2,186 Bush. Bush. 118,443: 15-85 132,476 ! 18-52 1,466,088' 18-42 188,917 11-98 29,295 13-40 142,721 ! 18-76 1,585,145 33-02 Acres. Bash. 110,4891,965,598 214,697 5,976,022 11,037 624,844 110 1,365 133 17,429 669,896 Bush. 17-79 27 83 5661 12-41 I 64,328 , 269,749 1,101,301 8,581,891 17-12 31-81 45,110 398,243 1,148,160 25-45 16,325,832 40-99 7,606 48, oo;-38-44 896 In Hay of all Kinds In Potai ;oes. Colonies. Beans and Peas. [n other Cereals. Land. *«*«■ v^L. Land. Prodi In other Root Crops ioe. Held per Acre. Queensland New South Wales Victoria South Australia Western Australia (1898-99).. Tasmania New Zealand Acres. 69 728 12,243 3,842 186 13,337 10,180 Acres. 517 4,885 1,050 Acres. 58,939 554,048 450,189 311,440 78,923 42,492 68,234* Tons. 103,409 546,850 596,193 229,800 77,017 51,123 t Tons. 1-75 0-99 1-32 0-74 0-98 1-20 t Acres. 10,766 34,968 55,469 8,406 1,675 26,951 36,984 Tons. 22,675 81,337 173,381 19,716 5,698 101,670 222,124 Tons. 2-11 233 3-13 2-35 340 3-77 6-00 Acres. 3,919 999 5,808 514 225,647 2,081 224 4,881 551,250 * Excluding iaten hay. + Produce not ascertained.
Name of Crop. Area under Crop. Pr, luce. Average per Acre. Wheat Oats Barley— Malting Other ... • ... Maize Rye Peas and beans Potatoes— Dug Not dug ... Mangel-wurzel Beet, carrots, turnips, and parsnips Onions Hay— • Wheaten ... Oaten Other Acres. ■• ; =2,011,428 *362,427 Bags. 4,205,810 2,186,181 Bushels. 17,790,576 9,575,472 Bushels. 8-84 26-42 50,030 9,097 9,388 823 7,921 229,820 49,392 +155,822 2,905 36,550 1,013,506 211,398 1-623,288 12,056 148,759 20-26 23-24 66-39 14-65 18-78 6,676 32,048 635 438 2,811 Tone. 21,319 Tons. 3-19 7,616 3,532 12,739 11-99 8-06 4-53 242,909 253,101 3,947 288,601 381,321 6,061 1-18 1-51 1-54 Grass cut for seed Green fodder of all kinds Artificial grass Vines Orchards and gardens Other tillage Land in fallow 2,168 18,832 203,988 25,382 57,454 2,836 602,754 Cwt. 5,909 Cwt. 2-73 Total tillage 3,907,093 * Included in the area under wheat 19,495 aori failed. t Partly estimated. Crop not yet completely g is, and in the are: under oats 3,280 aores, are reporl ;ed to have ithered.
725
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 13—continued. Agricultural Statistics for Victoria, 1900-1— continued.
EXHIBIT No. 14. The Value of the Sugab impoeted feom Fiji, and the Duty paid thereon, as compaeed with the Same feom Australia, foe 1899. Value of Sugar imported. £ £ Fiji (raw sugar) 217,110 113,000* Australia (refined sugar) 128,275 40,040* * Estimated.
Note.—Ii Wheat, 253-50 224 lb.; rye, ! statistics are n( i the season lb.; oats, lit 148-93 lb.; an it quite compL i»uu-i ine i-27 lb.; ma! id peas and ete, but esth i computed average weights per bag were as follow: [ting barley, 220-57 lb. ; other barley, 21414 lb.; maize, beans, 244-09 lb. In several of the municipalities the nates have been made for the returns not to hand. irea under Crop. Year. Wheat. Oats. Barley. Potatoes. Hay. Malting. Other. Total. 1895-96 1896-97 1897-98 1898-99 1899-00 1900-01 Acres. 1,412,736 1,580,613 1,657,450 2,154,163 2,165,693 2,011,428 Acres. 255,503 419,460 294,183 266,159 271,280 362,427 Acres, 71,789 53,421 26,118 33,584 65,970 50,030 Acres. 6,649 8,952 11,087 14,275 13,603 9,097 Acres. 78,438 62,373 37,205 47,859 79,573 59,129 Acres. Acres. 43,895 : 464,482 43,532 , 416,667 44,197 580,000 41,252 565,345 55,469 450,189 38,724 499,957 Gros. Produce of Crop. Year. Wheat. Oats. Malting. Barley. Other. Barley. Total. Potatoes. Hay. 1895-96 1896-97 1897-98 1898-99 1899-00 1900-01 Bushels. 5,669,174 7,091,029 10,580,217 19,581,304 15,237,948 17,790,576 Bushels. 2,880,045 6,816,951 4,809,479 5,523,419 6,116,046 9,575,472 Bushels. 624,388 641,406 502,411 776,785 1,197,948 1,013,506 Bushels. Bushels. Tons. 91,204 715,592 117,238 174,199 ; 815,605 146,555 256,043 j 758,454 67,296 335,782 j 1,112,567 161,142 268,140 ; 1,466,088 173,381 211,398 , 1,224,904 * Tons. 390,861 449,056 659,635 723,299 596,193 675,983 * Returns inci with 7,875 acres a: implete. The qi id 28,800 tons ir lantity derived the preceding Erom 6,676 acn pear. is whioh had been dug was 21,319 tons, ai compared Avert ige Yield pe: " Acre. isariey. Barley. Year. Wheat. Oats. Malting. Other. Total. — I Potatoes. Hay. .895-96 .896-97 .897-98 .898-99 899-00 900-01 Bushels. 4-01 4-49 6-38 909 704 8-84 Bushels. 11-28 16-25 16-35 20-75 22-55 26-42 Bushels. 8-76 12-01 19-24 23-13 1816 20-26 Bushels. 13-70 19-45 2309 23-52 19-71 23-24 Bushels. 9-12 13-08 20-38 23-25 18-42 20-72 Tons. 2-67 3-37 1-52 3-91 3-13 Tons. 0-84 1-08 1-14 1-28 1-32 1-35 * The average on area dug was 3 19 tons per aore, as against 366 tons, 1899-1900.
A.—4
726
EXHIBIT No. 15. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899 (Specie and Foreign Produce excluded). Provincial District of Auckland.
Pro] Aucklar Comix portion of id Exports to ionwealtb — Groups of Principal Items exported. Auckland Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. To: Dal Ai ickli Pro] >ortion Exports. per Cent. To Total Auckland Exports. To New Zealand Exports to Commonwealth. )he mine— Coal Gold Silver Minerals £ 3,453 17,515 593 4,621 1-33 6-72 0-23 1-77 £ 12,778 624,739 40,838 6,212 0-58 28-26 1-85 0-28 2702 2 80 1-45 74-39 74-45 2-71 10000 82-09 26,182 382 3-99 1005 684,567 30-97 )he fisheries — Fish Oysters Other kinds ... 910 0-35 004 2,655 0-12 0-01 34-27 53-63 4-80 70-24 118 220 'he forest— Fungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn .. Other kinds 1,028 0-39 2,875 0-13 3-58 4-83 1,966 165,707 321 075 6356 0-12 4,773 607,919 184,049 2,613 0-22 27-49 8-33 0-12 0-32 90-03 12-28 100-00 92 89 4827 167,994 64-43 799,354 36-16 21-05 91-05 Animals and produce— Bacon and bams Beef and pork, salted Butter Cheese Hides Live-stock Meats — Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins Skins — Babbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow Wool .. Other kinds 548 122 6,101 1,696 7,809 2,188 021 005 2-34 0-65 2-99 0-84 1,801 7,514 65,732 2,931 17,032 7,841 008 0-34 2-97 0-13 0-77 0-36 30-42 1-62 9-28 57-86 45-85 27-90 4-93 3801 10-61 2-93 2918 24-08 178 0-07 18,057 110,044 2,511 0-82 4-98 0-11 0-98 078 0-74 2-53 20 378 3,551 2,336 914 0-14 1-37 0-89 0-35 9,859 30,258 359,321 2,257 0-45 1-37 16-25 0-10 3-83 11-78 0-65 40-49 10-64 13-65 918 2766 25,841 635,158 28-73 4-07 10-42 Agricultural products— Bran and sharps Chaff .. .. Flour Grain— Barley Beans and peae Maize Melt Oats .. Wheat Hops Oatmeal Potatoes Seeds, grass and clover Other kinds 9-90 603 0-03 3 1,002 0-04 0-29 0-04 75 61 24,509 135 0-03 002 9-40 0-06 215 147 24,616 135 177 154 0-01 34-88 41-49 99 56 10000 0-44 1-23 98-36 0-33 Oil 0-01 001 51-94 0-22 80 0-03 531 674 617 021 0-27 0-23 2,508 1,079 2,311 32,947 0-11 005 0-11 2117 62-46 26-69 1-44 4-28 6-59 1-48 80-99 6-11 26,685 10-25 Manufactures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 22 167 5,087 34 6,872 0-01 0-07 1-96 001 2-64 1,292 7,755 20,021 295 23,966 0-06 0-35 0-91 0-01 1-08 1-70 215 2541 11-52 28 67 1-39 1-13 17-83 0-42 16-55 Miscellaneous 12,182 4-69 53,329 2-41 22-85 13-19 776 0-29 2,616 0-12 29-66 Total exports (colonial produce and manufactures) 260,688 lOO'OO 2,210,846 10000 11-79 15-88
727
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Wellington.
Proportion of Wellington Exports to Commonwealth— Groups of Principal Items exported. Wellington Exports to Commonwealth.; Proportion per Cent. Total Wellington Exports. Proportion per Cent. To Total To New Zealand Wellington Exports to Exports. Commonwealth. 'he mine— Ooal Gold Silver Minerals £ 714 0-74 £ 35,952 1-59 1-99 15-38 'he fisheries — Pish Oysters Other kinds 714 0-74 35,952 1-59 1-99 0-11 1,067 25 110 003 1,272 25 80 0-06 83-96 100-00 5-63 1-17 'he forest— Fungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn .. Other kinds 1,092 1-13 1,377 006 79-30 514 1,009 0-05 40-93 11-28 413 0-43 2,882 73 2-97 0-08 2,929 107 0*18 98-39 68-22 1-62 10-98 inimals and produce— Bacon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter Cheese Hides .. Live-stock Meats — Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins SkinsRabbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow Wool .. Other kinds 3,368 3-48 4,045 . 0-18 83-26 1-83 86-41 32-50 3,614 3-73 4,182 019 13,417 10,444 6,900 1,360 13-84 10 78 7-12 1-40 121,810 34,668 6,924 1,990 5-39 1-53 0-81 0-09 1101 30-12 99-65 68-34 23-33 1801 25-78 14-97 4,186 1 504 4-32 0-52 23,186 556,182 21,293 102 2462 0-94 18-05 2-36 17-36 5000 63-72 439 9,544 15,557 314 0 45 9-85 1605 0-32 2,508 52,937 104,386 1,124,752 843 0-11 2-34 4-62 49-78 0 04 0-83 9-14 1-38 37-24 12 36 3669 6110 9-50 Lgrioultural prodvrots— Bran and sharps Chaff .. .. Flour Grain— Barley Beans and peas Maize Malt .. Oats .. Wheat Hops Oatmeal Potatoes.. Seeds, grass and clover Other kinds 66,280 6838 2,055,661 90 98 3-22 26-77 0-27 644 0-03 40-68 5-27 262 14 1,585 i>07 729 1,413 742 0-75 1-45 077 1 964 1,702 800 0 04 0-08 0-04 75-62 83 02 92-75 1-98 8 98 7-92 3,146 3-24 5,910 0-26 5323 0-72 Manufactures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 43 101 18,775 0-04 0-14 19-37 118 10,725 139,279 i>47 6-17 36-44 094 13-48 2-74 0-69 65-82 4-65 1,929 1-99 4,722 0-21 40-85 20,848 21-54 154,844 6-85 13-46 22-57 Miscellaneous 81-50 1,450 1-49 1,779 0-08 Total exports (oolonial produce and manufactures) 2,259,568 100 00 4-28 5-90 96,898 10000
A.—4
728
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Canterbury.
Pro] Canterbi Comrn portion of jxy Exports to ionwealth — Groups of Principal Items exported. Canterbury Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Canterbury Exports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Canterbury Exports. To New Zealand Exports to Commonwealth. The mine— Coal Gold Silver Minerals £ 25,656 0-85 The fisheries— Fish Oysters Other kinds 25,656 0-85 88-42 0-89 168 0-09 190 The forestFungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn .. Other kinds' 168 0-09 190 88-42 0-79 4 16 25-00 0-60 Animals and produoe— Bacon and hams Beet and pork, salted Butter Cheese Hides .. Live-stock Meats — Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins SkinsRabbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow Wool .. Other kinds 16 25-00 5,095 80-82 45-83 2-73 6,304 0-21 446 4,076 662 2,415 0-24 2 18 0-36 1-29 22,950 9,006 662 8,415 0-76 0-30 0-02 0-28 1-94 45-26 10000 28-69 0-77 703 2-47 2658 8,655 1 267 4-63 0-14 13,839 846,969 11,885 046 2804 0-39 62-54 2-25 35-88 50-00 33-75 78 4,986 943 481 0-04 2-67 0-50 0-26 313 157,609 108,163 1,194,413 1,260 001 522 3-58 39-55 004 005 4-61 0-08 38-18 2-19 19-17 371 14-55 Agricultural products— Bran and sharps Chaff .. .. Flour Grain — Barley Beans and peas Maize Malt .. Oats .. Wheat Hops Oatmeal Potatoes Seeds, grass and olover Other kinds 28,105 15-04 2,381,788 78-86 1-18 11-34 10,907 109 6,964 5-84 0 06 3-73 11,712 109 7,964 0-39 93-13 100 00 87-44 60-56 100-00 84-19 0-26 11,059 3,766 5-92 2-02 11,728 9,083 039 0-30 94-29 41-46 65-03 75-69 21,198 27,096 17,693 10 114 31,752 8,792 6,343 11-35 14 51 9-47 21,198 90,511 284,244 10 114 32,246 48,154 8,818 0-70 3-00 9-41 100-00 29-94 622 10000 100-00 9843 18-25 7101 51-38 14-99 47-76 0-04 0-67 86-06 55-88 67-74 0-07 17-00 4-71 3-40 1-07 1-59 0-29 Manufactures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 145,803 78-08 525,891 17-40 27-72 33-40 1,459 1,249 1,271 3,176 5,271 0-78 0-67 0-68 1-70 2-82 1,818 57,663 16,311 3,290 6,875 0-06 1-91 0-54 0-11 0-23 80 25 2-17 7-79 9653 76-67 92-81 8-50 4-45 39-44 12-69 12,426 6-65 85,957 2-85 14-45 13-46 Miscellaneous 24-05 260 014 1,081 004 Total exports (colonial produce and manufactures) 3,020,579 6'18 11-37 186,766 100 00 100-00
729
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Otago.
Proportion of Otago Exports to Commonwealth— Groups of Principal Items exported. Otago Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Exports. per Cent. To Total i To New Zealand Otago Exports to Exports. ! Commonwealth. ?he mine— Coal Gold Silver .. Minerals £ 39 399,241 51-98 £ 3,058 526,719 0-14 23-45 1-28 7. r r79 0-84 61-82 932 i>12 3,021 0-13 30-85 16-56 ?he fisheries— Pish Oysters Other kinds 400,212 52-10 532,798 23-72 75-11 60-94 14,548 2,103 50 1-89 0-28 0-01 14,846 2,103 50 0-66 009 9799 10000 100-00 76-89 98-83 29-76 ?he forest — Fungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn .. Other kinds 16,701 2-18 16,999 075 98-24 78-57 235 69 0-03 0-01 236 76 99-58 90-79 0-14 10-53 304 0-04 312 97-44 0-16 A Lnimals and produce— Bacon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter Cheese Hides .. Live-stock Meats — Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins Skins— Babbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow .. Wool .. Other kinds 542 180 8,806 33,137 5,014 2,750 9,718 0-07 0-02 1-15 4-32 0-65 0-36 1-27 742 180 46,485 59,635 5,368 4,064 23,194 327,195 3,680 003 0-01 2-07 2-67 024 0-18 1-03 14-56 0-16 73 05 100 00 1894 55-56 93 40 67-66 41-89 4-87 56 39 15 32 57-14 18-73 30-26 40-29 1,838 2,351 4,979 4,895 1,189 0-24 0-31 0-65 0-64 0-15 78,028 30,205 26,941 707,707 2,219 3-48 1-35 1-20 31-51 0-10 2-35 7-78 18-48 0-69 53-58 10000 6619 19-15 19-23 35-98 75,399 9-83 1,315,643 58-59 5-73 30-41 tgrioultural products— Bran and sharps .'. Chaff .. Flour Grain — Barley Beans and peas Maize Malt .. Oats Wheat 7,103 1,305 4,903 291 45 19,598 153,616 19,274 324 16,810 2,863 4,351 1,424 0-92 0-17 0-64 0-04 7,421 1,333 4,903 613 45 19,598 195,400 52,094 324 16,853 2,881 10,018 1,572 0-33 0-06 0-22 0-03 95 71 97-90 100-00 47-47 10000 100 00 7861 37 00 10000 99 75 99-38 43-43 90-58 39-44 15-77 28-83 5-85 018 47-50 85-01 52-02 1-28 99-33 7-76 2765 1520 Hops Oatmeal Potatoes Seeds, grass and clover Other kinds 2-55 20-00 2-51 0-04 2-19 0-37 0-57 0-19 0-87 8-70 2-32 0-01 0-76 013 0-45 0-07 231,907 3019 313,055 13-95 7408 53-10 Manufactures— Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 48 13,166 477 4,843 24,624 0-01 1-71 0-06 0-63 321 89 21,683 498 4,855 39,334 0-97 002 0-22 1-75 53-93 60-72 95-78 9975 62-60 3-06 89-68 1-67 6014 59-33 43,158 5-62 66,459 2-96 6494 46-73 ilisoellaneous 53-54 333 0-04 622 0-03 Total exports (oolonial produce animanufaotures) 768,014 10000 2,245,888 100-00 34-20 46 76
A.—4
730
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Hawke's Bay.
Proportion of Hawke's Bay Exports to Commonwealth— Groups of Principal Items exported. Hawke's Bay Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Hawke's Bay Exports. Proportion per Cent. To Total To New Zea]an( j Hawke's Bay Exports to Exports. Commonwealth. ?he mine— Coal Gold Silver Minerals.. & £ 'he fisheries— Pish Oysters Other kinds 1,213 821 1,244 013 97-50 6-40 )he forest— Fungus .. Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn .. Other kinds 1,213 8-21 1,244 0-13 97-50 5-71 4,635 31-35 4,635 0-47 100-00 2-60 4,635 31-35 4,635 0-47 100-00 2-51 L nimals and produce— Bacon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter .. Cheese Hides Live-stock Meats— Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins SkinsRabbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow Wool Other kinds 1,330 335 831 8-99 2-27 5-62 1,330 340 4,503 195,655 3,454 0-14 0-03 0-46 19-82 0-35 100-00 98-53 18-45 4-97 3-69 3-45 297 2,882 240 121 2 01 19-50 1-62 0-82 11,482 30,785 730,158 142 1-16 3-12 73-96 0-01 2-59 936 003 8521 8-36 11-08 0-94 3-66 Lgricultural products— Bran and sharps Chaff .. .. Flour Grain — Barley Beans and peas Maize Malt .. Oats Wheat Hops Oatmeal.. Potatoes.. Seeds, grass and clover Other kinds 6,036 40-83 977,849 99-05 0-62 2-43 660 4-47 660 0-07 100-00 3-88 363 2-46 363 0-04 100-00 Y-46 721 504 34 4-88 3-41 0-23 721 821 34 007 0-08 10000 61-38 100 00 1-96 3-21 0-36 lanufaotures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 2,282 15-45 2,599 0-26 • 87-80 0-52 306 0-03 616 4-16 625 0-06 98-56 1-49 616 4-16 931 0-09 66-16 0-67 rlisoellaneous Total exports (colonial produce and manufactures) 14,782 100-00 987,258 100-00 1-49 0-90
731
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Taranaki.
93—A. 4.
Prop Taranak Commi lortion of d Exports to onwealth— Groups of Principal Items exported.' Taranaki Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Taranaki Exports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Taranaki Exports. To New Zealand Exports to i Commonwealth. 'he mine— Coal Gold Silver .. Minerals £ & 100-00 0-02 1 1 'he fisheries — Fiah Oysters Other kinds 100-00 'he forest— Fungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn Other kinds 3,250 7-50 4,811 104 67-55 \ 88-72 .nimals and produce— Bacon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter Cheese Hides .. Live-stook Meats— Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins Skins— Rabbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow Wool Other kinds 3,250 7-50 4,811 1-04 67-55 1-76 97-41 11-87 1,320 304 1,335 0-28 28,736 8,584 465 66-20 19-77 1-07 312,217 35,455 550 10 67-44 7-66 012 920 24-21 84-54 49 97 14-81 1-74 231 053 7,810 37,253 1-69 8-04 2-96 095 12 91 244 003 0-21 0-56 9,661 53,002 244 2-09 11-47 0-05 0-12 0-17 100-00 005 036 7-38 39,683 91-41 457,537 98-84 8-67 1601 igrieultural products— Bran and sharps Chaff .. .. Flour Grain — Barley Beans and peas Maize Malt .. Oats Wheat Hops Oatmeal Potatoes.. Seeds, grass and clover Other kinds 12 003 12 100-00 0-03 lanufaotures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 12 003 12 10000 089 11 130 390 003 008 100-00 1-37 390 62 014 62 001 100-00 0-15 452 1-03 593 0-12 0-49 lisoellaneous 10000 14 003 14 Total exports (oolonial produce and manufactures) 9-37 2-64 43,412 10000 462,968 10000
A.—4
732
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Marlborough.
Proportion of Marlborough Exports to Commonwealth— Groups of Principal Items exported. Marlborough Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Marlborough Exports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Marlborough Exports. To New Zealand Exports to Commonwealth. The mine— Coal Gold Silver Minerals £ £ The fisheries— Fish ' .. Oysters Other kinds 465 465 0*81 The forestFungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn Other kinds 0-31 Animals and produce — Bacon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter Cheese Hides Live-stock Meats— Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins Skins — Rabbit .. Sheep, and pelts Tallow .. Wool .. Other kinds 48 39 1-07 0-87 ••• 839 123 39 15,564 0-56 0-08 0-03 10-41 3902 100-00 0-08 0-15 246 4,833 1,400 115,757 11 0-16 3-23 0-94 77-42 0-01 902 2015 0-77 3-54 Agricultural produots— Bran and sharps Chafi Flour GrainBarley Beans and peas Maize Malt Oats Wheat .. Hops Oatmeal Potatoes Seeda, grass and clover Other kinds 989 2209 138,812 92-84 0-71 0-40 77 595 1-72 1329 77 2,348. 0-05 1-57 10000 25-34 0-45 11-96 322 7-20 322 i>22 100-00 0-79 399 0-27 185 4-13 185 012 100-00 0-50 144 3-22 144 0-09 10000 1-53 Manufactures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 1,323 29-56 3,475 2-32 38-07 0-30 2,047 46-34 6,687 4-47 31-01 7-28 2,074 46-34 6,687 4-47 3101 2-25 Miscellaneous 006 100-00 2-01 'JO Total exports (colonial produce and manufactures) 4,476 100-00 149,529 10000 2-99 0-27
733
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Nelson.
Proportion to Con 3f Nelson Exports imonwealth— Groups of Principal Items exported. Nelson Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Nelson Exports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Nelson Exports. To New Zealand Exports to Commonwealth. 'he mine— Coal Goia Silver .. Minerals.. £, 432 24,635 079 45-27 £ 5,641 26,779 5-19 24-66 7-66 91-99 9-32 3-82 25,067 46-06 32,420 29-85 77-32 3-82 'he fisheries— Pieh Oysters Other kinds 685 1-26 685 0-63 10000 3-62 'he forest — Fungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn .. Othur kinds 685 126 685 063 10000 3-22 b'-io 103 0-09 51-45 7-97 53 inimala and produce— Baoon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter .. Cheese Hides .. Live-stock Meats— Preserved Frozen Sausage-skins Skins— Rabbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow .. Wool .. Other kinds 53 010 103 0-09 51-45 003 001 1-63 100-00 4-68 15 003 15 1,766 1,726 9 8-17 002 1,726 9 159 0-01 . 10000 10000 6-45 009 295 054 295 027 100 00 1-22 23 1,296 0-02 1-19 0-73 39,416 36-31 100 1-55 395 igrioultural produets— Bran and sharps Chaff .. Flour .. GrainBarley Beans and peas Maize Malt .. Oats Wheat Hops Oatmeal Potatoes Seeds, grass and olover Other kinds 2,440 4-49 44,546 4103 5-48 098 233 0-43 233 0-22 100-00 1-37 ::/ 25,044 4602 28,711 26-44 87-23 98-68 101 0-19 101 009 100-00 027 197 036 298 0-28 100-00 2-10 Manufactures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 25.575 4700 29,343 2703 8716 5-85 0-83 57 1,225 005 113 36-73 1-58 450 142 0-26 192 018 73-96 0-35 592 1-09 1,474 1-36 40-16 064 if iscellaneous 001 33-33 15 Total exports (colonial produce and manufactures) 50-11 3 31 54,417 10000 108,586 10000
A.—4.
734
EXHIBIT No. 15— continued. Return showing the Value of Principal Items of Exports to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899 — continued. Provincial District of Westland.
Pro] Westlai Coma lortion of id Exports to onwealth— Groups of Principal Items exported. Westland Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Westlana Exports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Westland Exports. To New Zealand Exports to Commonwealth. The mine— Coal Gold Silver .. Minerals £ 204,459 9605 £ 334,943 97-48 61-04 31-65 75 i>04 304 009 24-67 1-33 The fisheries— Fish Oysters .. .. Other kinds 204,534 96-09 335,247 97-57 6101 31-14 370 10000 1-96 0-17 370 011 The forest— Fungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn Other kinds 370 0-17 370 011 100 00 1-74 4,900 2-30 4,900 1-45 100-00 2-75 #■ 4,900 2-30 4,900 1-45 100-00 2-66 Animals and prodiioe— Bacon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter .. Cheese .. Hides .. Live-stock MeatsPreserved Frozen Sausage-skins SkinsBabbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow .. Wool .. Other kinds 2,818 30 26 1-82 0-01 001 2,818 30 26 i>82 100-00 100-00 10000 10-53 0-33 011 9 55 101 42 003 005 0-02 9 55 101 42 0-01 003 0-01 10000 100-00 10000 10000 0-26 0-21 0-39 1-27 Agricultural products— Bran and sharps Chaff Flour GrainBarley Beans and peas Maize Malt .. Oats .. Wheat Hops Oatmeal Potatoes.. Seeds, grass and clover Other kinds 3,081 1-44 3,081 0-87 10000 1-24 \ Manufactures— Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds 9 Miscellaneous 1 Total exports (colonial produce and manufactures) 212,885 100 00 343,608 100-00 61-95 12-97
A.—4
735
EXHIBIT No. 16. Return showing Values of Principal Items of Exports from New Zealand to (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899 (Specie and Foreign Produce excluded).
Groups of Principal Articles exported. New Zealand Exports to Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total New Zealand Exports. Proportion per Cent. Proportion of New Zealand Exports to Commouwealth to Total New Zealand Exports. 'he mine — Coal .. GWd Silver Minerals £ 4,638 645,850 593 5,629 0-28 39-23 004 0-34 & 83,085 1,513,180 40,838 6,998 0-70 12-82 035 0-06 5-58 42-68 1-45 80-45 'he fisheriesFish Oysters Other kinds 656,710 39-89 1,644,101 13-93 39-94 18,961 2,128 168 1-15 0-13 0-01 21,265 2,128 815 0-18 0-02 89-16 100-00 20-61 'he forest— Fungus Gum, kauri Timber, sawn and hewn Other kinds 21,257 1-29 24,208 0-20 87-81 3,663 1,966 178,399 665 0-22 0-12 10-84 0-04 10,593 607,919 196,749 2,482 0-09 5-15 1-67 002 34-58 0-32 90-68 26-78 inimals and produce— Bacon and hams Beef and pork, salted Butter Cheese Hides Live-stook MeatsPreserved Frozen Sausage-skins Skins— Rabbit Sheep, and pelts Tallow Wool.. Other kinds 184,693 11-22 817,743 6-93 22 59 11,119 321 57,506 57,985 26,763 9,087 0-68 0-02 3-49 3-52 1-63 0-55 14,364 7,831 571,799 141,818 36,095 22,689 0-12 0-06 4-85 1-22 0-31 0-19 77-41 4-09 10-06 40-88 7414 4005 24,120 2 791 1-47 0'05 90,910 2,088,856 42,823 0-77 17-70 0-36. 26-53 1-84 1,838 3,552 26,009 25,460 3,305 0-11 0-22 1-58 1-55 0-20 81,11* 268,230 311,649 4,324,627 6,927 0-69 2-27 2-64 36-65 0-06 2-27 1-33 8-34 0-59 4 77 Lgricultural products— Bran and sharps Chaff.. Flour Grain — Barley Beans and peas Maize Malt Oats Wheat Hops Oatmeal Potatoes Seeds, grass and clover Other kinds .. 247,858 15-07 8,009,736 67-89 3-09 18,010 109 8,272 109 0-01 0-50 19,736 109 10,299 0-17 0-08 91-25 100-00 80-31 17,007 4,975 24,917 41,253 180,712 37,047 25,378 16,924 36,894 15,734 9,363 1-03 0-30 1-51 2-51 10-98 2-25 1-54 103 2-24 0-96 0-57 17,816 12,835 25,024 41,253 286,102 338,476 29,045 16,968 39,618 61,974 14,423 015 0-11 0-21 0-35 2-42 2-87 0-25 0-14 0-33 052 0-12 95-46 38-76 99-57 100-00 63-16 10-95 8737 99-74 93-12 25-39 64-92 436,595 lanufactures — Apparel Leather Phormium Woollens Other kinds .. 26-52 913,678 7-72 47-78 1,572 14,683 28,524 8,053 41,543 0-10 0-89 1-73 0-49 2-52 3,328 98,319 184,411 11,014 80,994 0-03 0-83 1-56 0-09 069 47-23 14-93 1547 7311 51-29 94,375 5-73 378,066 3-20 24-96 liscellaneous, including parcels post 12,208 38-34 4,681 0-28 0-13 Total exports (oolonial produce and manufactures) 1,646,169 100-00 11,799,740 100-00 13-95
A.—4
736
EXHIBIT No. 17. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899 (Specie and parcels post excluded). Provincial District of Auckland.
Proportion of Auckland Imports from Commonwealth — Groups of Principal Items imported. Auckland Imports from Proportion per Cent. Total Auckland Imports. Proportion per Cent. Commonwealth. To Total To New Zealand Auokland Imports from Imports. Commonwealth Apparel and slops Boots and shoes Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery ... Hats and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery ... Silks ... Woollens £ 3,738 2,933 2,971 1,784 925 648 550 633 1,182 1,923 6,726 1-45 1-14 1-15 0-69 0-36 0-25 0-21 0-24 0-46 0-75 2-61 £ 97,846 35,950 126,571 76,386 12,946 25,223 29,728 25,213 8,073 28,109 93,116 4-44 1-63 5-75 3-47 0-59 1-14 1-35 1-14 0-37 1-28 4-23 3-82 8-16 2-35 2-34 7-15 2-57 1-85 2-51 14-64 6-84 7-22 40-46 29-64 29-46 28-60 15-76 44-97 51-72 57-65 57-45 38-33 38-84 Totals ... 24,013 9-31 559,161 25-39 4-29 34-64 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Eails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... . ... Eailway plant ... Sewing-machines .*. Tools, artificers'... 1,144 269 3,263 250 4,641 0-44 010 1-27 010 1-80 3-75 0-08 002 0-23 0-19 12,473 7,324 56,895 6,904 126,844 85,016 6,886 5,374 8,004 22,628 0-57 0-33 2-58 0-31 5-76 3-86 0-31 0-25 0-36 103 9-17 3-67 5-74 3-62 3-66 11-36 3-18 0-95 7-60 2-12 19-79 48-74 29-96 14-50 22-07 19-73 22-27 10000 10-93 14-28 9,658 219 51 608 479 Totals ... 20,582 7-98 338,348 15-36 6-08 20-82 Sugar ... Tea 5,461 7,728 2-12 2-99 223,219 34,389 10-14 1-56 2-45 22-47 4-17 18-37 Totals ... 13,189 511 257,608 11-70 5-12 7-62 Beer ... Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 368 4,701 5,308 3,254 014 1-83 2-06 1-26 6,599 36,684 73,159 . 7,159 0-30 1-66 3-32 0-33 5-58 12-82 7-26 45-45 37-59 22-82 21-95 15-67 Totals ... 13,631 5-29 123,601 5-61 1103 20-49 Paper ... Priated books Stationery 1,389 6,959 2,117 0-54 2-70 0-82 33,991 24,751 25,815 1-55 1-12 1-17 4-08 28-12 8-21 20-37 24-52 20-69 Totals ... 10,465 406 84,557 3-84 12-38 23-03 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... 182 17,249 1,928 9,646 0-07 6-69 0-75 3-74 9,969 17,249 23,852 55,739 0-45 0-79 1-08 2-53 1-83 10000 8-08 17-31 2-58 18-72 27-87 15-95 Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils 20-95 4,410 1-71 26,393 1-20 16-71 Totals 33,415 12-96 133,202 6-05 2509 17-81 Other imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 142,592 55-29 705,835 32-05 20-22 25-53 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 257,887 10000 2,202,312 100-00 11-71 21-50
737
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 17— continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Wellington.
Pro; Wellingtoi Comrr portion of i Imports from ionwealth — Groups of Principal Items imported. Wellington Imports from Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Wellington Imports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Wellington Imports. To New Zealand Imports from Commonwealth. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes... Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery Hats and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks ... Woollens £ 1,722 3,769 2,996 1,680 2,664 303 253 368 112 907 2,153 0-67 1-47 1-16 0-65 1-04 0-12 010 0-14 004 0-35 0-84 £ 107,607 45,715 106,347 108,014 38,289 16,025 23,628 11,759 8,874 21,293 59,085 4-94 2-10 4-88 4-95 1-76 0-73 1-08 0-54 0-40 0-98 2-71 1-60 8-24 2-82 1-55 6-96 1-89 1-07 3-13 1-26 4-26 3-64 18-64 38-08 29-69 26-93 45-45 21-03 23-86 33-51 5-44 18-00 12-44 Totals 16,927 6-58 546,636 25-07 3-10 24-42 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Eails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... Eailway plant Sewing-machines Tools, artificers'... 717 42 2,821 4,620 12,733 176 0-28 0-02 1-09 i-79 4-95 0-07 15,256 4,147 65,998 35,222 206,080 68,803 10,820 13,024 10,138 26,761 - 0-70 0-19 303 1-62 9-45 316 0-49 0-60 0-46 1-23 4-70 1-01 4-27 2-24 18-51 1-63 12-56 7-58 25-90 21-97 26-01 17-82 3,261 686 1-27 0-27 8217 2-56 58-59 20-45 Totals 25,056 9-74 456,249 20-93 5-49 25-35 Sugar ... Tea 15,541. 16,890 604 6-57 15,850 64,430 0-73 2-95 98-05 26-21 11-85 40-15 Totals 32,431 12-61 80,280 3-68 40-40 18-73 Beer ... Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 398 4,518 6,855 5,652 0-15 1-76 2-67 2-20 15,979 55,493 36,338 15,196 0-73 2-55 1-67 0-69 2-49 8-14 18-86 37-19 40-65 21-93 28-35 27-20 Totals ... 17,423 6-78 123,008 5-64 14-16 26-19 Paper ... Printed books Stationery 2,837 8,378 3,702 1-10 3-26 1-44 39,751 41,432 35,152 1-82 1-90 1-61 7-14 20-22 10-53 41-59 2952 36-17 Totals 14,917 5-80 116,335 5-33 12-82 32-84 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils 713 10,296 2,414 17,533 0-28 4-00 0-94 6-82 9,053 10,296 29,720 54,674 0-41 0-47 1-36 2-51 7-88 10000 8-12 32-07 10-11 11-17 34-89 28-99 4,689 1-82 31,254 1-44 1500 22-28 Totals 35,645 13-86 134,997 6-19 26-40 18 99 Other imports (excluding parcels post and specie) 114,778 44-63 722,957 33-16 15-88 20-56 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 257,177 10000 2,180,462 100-00 11-79 21-45
738
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 17— continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899 — continued. Provincial District of Canterbury.
Pri Canterbi Com: iportion of ry Imports from nonwealth — Groups of Principal Items imported. Canterbury Imports from Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Canterbury Imports. Proportion per Gent. ; To Total Canterbury Imports. To New Zealand Imports from Commonwealth. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes... Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery Hats and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks ... Woollens £ 1,332 1,252 2,062 1,099 1,024 233 78 90 255 1,419 3,263 0-49 0-46 0-75 0-40 0-37 0-09 0-03 003 0-09 0-52 1-19 £ ■ 62,438 31,874 76,064 70,773 17,494 9,520 15,416 15,092 8,136 21,282 44,365 3-98 2-04 4-85 4-51 1-12 0-61 0-98 0-96 0-52 1-36 2-83 213 3-93 2-71 1-55 5-85 2-45 0-51 0-60 3-13 6-67 7-36 14-42 12-66 20-44 17-61 17-50 16-17 7-27 8-20 12-37 28-27 18-84 Totals 12,107 4-42 372,454 23-76 3-25 17-47 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery... Hardware and ironmongery Bails, railway bolts, &c. ... Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &e. Machinery Nails ... Eailway plant ... Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' ... 1,501 77 1,866 31 1,377 8,481 84 0-55 003 0-68 0-01 0-50 310 0-03 29,455 2,341 38,368 4,200 115,378 56,006 4,059 45,390 4,€65 12,768 1-88 015 2-45 0-27 7-36 3-57 0-26 2-89 0-26 0-81 5-10 3-29 4-86 0-76 1-19 15-14 2-07 26-13 13-89 17-13 1-80 6-55 17-33 8-50 711 218 0-26 008 17-49 1-71 12-78 6-51 Totals 14,346 5-24 312,030 19-90 4-60 14-51 Sugar ... Tea 41,904 8,123 15-30 2-97 44,172 26,301 2-81 1-68 94-86 30-88 31-97 19-31 Totals 50,027 18-27 70,473 4-49 70-99 28-89 Beer Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 18 3,490 3,140 2,923 • 001 1-27 1-15 1-07 4,796 40,665 18,955 10,576 0-31 2-59 1-21 0-67 0-38 8-58 16-68 27-64 1-84 16-94 12-99 14-07 Totals 9,571 3-50 74,992 4-78 12-77 14-38 Paper ... Printed books Stationery 732 3,359 1,308 0-27 1-22 0-48 27,528 20,503 14,944 1-76 1-31 0-95 2-66 16-38 8-75 10-73 11-84 12-78 Totals 62,975 8-57 11-88 5,399 1-97 4-02 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... 747 50,908 899 8,074 0-28 18-59 0-33 2-95 54,198 50,908 14,678 20,959 3-46 3-25 0-94 1-33 1-38 10000 612 38-52 10-60 55-24 13-00 13-35 Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils 17-33 17-98 3,786 1-38 21,852 1-39 Totals ... 64,414 23-53 162,595 10-37 39-62 34-32 Other imports (excluding parcels post and specie) 117,934 43-07 512,485 32-68 23-01 2113 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 273,798 10000 1,568,004 10000 17-46 22-83
739
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 17— continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899 — continued. Provincial District of Otago.
94—A. 4.
Pn Otago Oomr iportibn of [m porta from lonwealth— Groups of Prinoipal Itema imported. Otago Imports from Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Otago Imports. Proportion per Gent. To Total Otago Imports. To New Zealand Imports from Commonwealth. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes ... Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery Hats and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks Woollens £ 2,090 1,753 1,791 1,237 1,167 242 130 7 471 651 4,585 0-65 0-55 0-56 0-39 0-36 008 0-04 £ 103,955 32,149 108,839 118,576 14,214 13,219 16,184 10,916 10,780 15,887 69,065 4-99 1-54 5-23 5-69 0 68 0-63 0-78 053 0-52 0-77 3-32 201 5-45 1-65 105 8-02 1-83 0-80 22-62 17-70 17-75 19-82 1988 16-79 12-30 0-64 22-85 12-92 26-48 015 0-20 1-44 4-37 410 6-64 Totals 14,124 4-42 513,784 24-68 2-75 20-36 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Bails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... Bail way plant Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' ... 2,020 149 2,287 1,443 8,883 0-63 005 0-72 045 2-78 48,599 4,237 46,410 15,114 164,700 2-33 0 20 2-23 0-73 7-91 3-93 0-33 4-16 3-51 4-93 9-55 5-40 14-60 5-07 35-17 26-90 20-99 83-70 42-21 24-38 35-73 11,936 351 3-74 011 81,750 6,925 7 7,597 21,890 975 1,530 0-30 0-48 0-37 1-05 12-84 6-99 17-51 45-51 Totals ... 29,574 9-26 397,229 19-08 7-45 29-92 Sugar ... Tea 66,554 7,307 20-84 2-29 69,887 48,193 3-36 2-31 95-23 15-16 50-77 17-37 Totals • ... 73,861 2313 118,080 5-67 62-55 42-65 Beer Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 81 3,996 4,872 5,019 003 1-25 1-52 1-57 7,484 59,942 39,506 12,170 0-36 2-88 1-89 0-59 1-08 6-66 12-33 41-24 8-27 19-39 2015 24-16 Totals 13,968 4-37 119,102 5-72 11-73 20-98 Paper ... Printed books Stationery 1,745 7,553 2,623 0-55 2-36 0-82 26,358 33,622 21,280 1-27 1-61 1-02 6-62 22-47 12-33 25-58 26-62 25-63 Totals 11,921 3-73 81,260 3-90 14-67 26-24 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... 5,283 6,787 911 19,620 1-66 2-12 0-29 6-14 47,473 6,837 36,151 38,038 2-28 0-33 1-73 1-83 11-13 97-81 2-52 51-58 74-95 7-36 13-17 32-44 Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils 6,895 2-16 38,484 1-85 17-92 32-75 Totals 39,496 12-37 166,983 8-02 23-65 21-05 Other imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 136,444 4272 685,779 32-93 19-90 24-44 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 319,388 10000 2,082,217 100-00 1534 26-63
A.—4
740
EXHIBIT No. 17— continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Hawke's Bay.
r Pri Hawke's ] Com] ■portion of Say Imports from uonwealth — Groups of Principal Items imported. Hawke's Bay Imports from Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Hawke's Bay Imports. Proportion per Cent. « To Total Hawke's Bay Imports. To New Zealand Imports from Commonwealth. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes ... Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery Hats and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks Woollens £ 240 165 224 362 35 15 25 068 0-47 0-64 1-03 010 004 0-07 £ 7,169 2,244 10,318 5,255 1,110 1,675 2,002 4,369 557 1,269 5,594 3-37 1-06 4-85 2-47 0-52 0-79 0-94 205 0-26 0-60 2-62 3-35 7-35 2-17 6-89 315 0-90 1-25 2-60 1-67 2-22 5-80 0-60 104 2-33 39 76 568 011 0-22 1-61 7 00 5-99 10-15 1-89 1-51 3-28 Totals 1,749 4-97 41,562 19-53 4-28 2-53 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery... Hardware and ironmongery Eails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... Railway plant Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' ... 159 11 368 713 736 93 0-45 003 1-05 2-03 2-09 0-26 1,815 893 7,686 20,523 - 0-85 0-42 3-61 9-64 2-84 0-57 8-76 1-23 4-79 3'48 12-17 7-71 2-79 1-99 3-37 3-40 1-50 9-41 6,046 1,206 7 75 0'-02 0-22 354 4,421 6-17 2-07 1-98 1-48 013 2-26 Totals 2,162 6-15 42,944 20-17 5-03 2-19 Sugar ... Tea 9 102 0-02 0-29 32 2,504 001 1-18 28-12 4-07 0-01 0-24 Totals 111 0-31 2,536 1-19 4-38 006 Beer Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 77 2,171 1,249 1,275 0-22 6-17 3-55 3-63 2,316 12,622 6,230 3,287 1-09 5-93 2-93 1-54 3-32 17-20 2005 38-79 7-87 10-54 5-16 6-14 Totals 4,772 13-57 24,455 11-49 19-51 7-17 Paper ... Printed books Stationery 20 428 254 0-06 1-22 0-72 1,695 4,314 1,817 0-80 2-03 0-85 1-18 9-92 13-98 0-29 1-51 2-48 Totals 702 2-00 7,826 3-68 8-97 1-55 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils ... 5,973 241 2,861 16-98 0-68 8-16 1,853 5,973 2,063 4,370 0-87 2-80 0-97 2-05 10000 11-68 65-47 6-48 3-48 4-73 721 204 3,700 1-74 19-49 3-42 Totals 9,796 27-86 17,959 8-43 54-55 5-22 Other imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 15,873 45-14 75,593 35-51 21-00 2-85 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 35,165 10000 212,875 100-00 16-52 2-93
A.—4
741
EXHIBIT No. 17— continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Taranaki.
Proj Taranaki Comm >ortion of i Imports from ionwealth— Groups of Principal Items imported. Taranaki Imports from Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Taranaki Imports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Taranaki Imports. To New Zealand Imports from Commonwealth. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes Cotton piece-goods Drapery ... . ... Haberdashery Hats and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks ... Woollens £ 6 4 4 34 0-05 003 0-03 0-28 £ 2,037 769 5,350 3,312 299 399 1,049 92 4 244 2,235 2-75 1-04 7-23 4-48 0-40 0-54 1-42 0-12 001 0-33 302 0-29 0-52 012 11-37 0-07 004 006 0-58 3 002 1-23 006 Totals 51 0-411 1-14; 15,790 21-34 0-32 0-07 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Eails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... Eailway plant Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' ... 141 "77 49 4,732 26 6-62 oW 38-37 0-21 389 168 1,695 2,341 8,370 567 12 63 1,322 0-53 0-22 2-29 3-16 11-81 0-76 0-02 009 1-79 26-25 4-54 2-09 56-54 4-59 2-47 0-71 0-24 9-67 2-63 23 0-19 1-74 0-69 Totals 5,048 40-93 14,927 2017 33-82 5-10 Sugar ... Tea 8 2,977 001 4-02 Totals 2,985 403 Beer Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 37 98 591 528 0-30 0-79 4-79 4-28 37 1,025 3,311 537 005 1-38 4-48 0-72 10000 9-56 17-85 98-32 3-78 0-47 2-44 2-54 Totals ... 1,254 10-16 4,910 6-63 25-54 1-89 Paper ... Printed books Stationery 35 553 89 0-28 4-49 0-72 2,138 1,614 449 2-89 2-18 0-61 1-64 34-27 19-82 0-51 1-95 0-87 Totals 677 5-49 4,201 5-68 16-12 1-49 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... 4 0-01 Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils ... 220 539 i-79 4-37 "844 2,097 1-14 2-83 2607 25-70 8-17 0-89 115 0-93 1,108 1-50 10-38 0-55 Totals 874 7-09 4,053 5-48 21-56 0-47 Other imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 4,430 35-92 27,132 36-67 16-33 0-80 I Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 12,334 10000 73,998 10000 16-67 103
742
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 17— continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Marlborough.
Marlborough Imports from Commonwealth. Pr Marlboro; Com; •oportion of ugh Imports from monwealth — Groups of Principal Items imported. Proportion per Cent. Total Marlborough Imports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Marlborough Imports. To New Zealand Imports from Commonwealth. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes ... Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery Hats and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks ... Woollens £ 2 0-12 684 5-09 029 0-02 1 0-06 1,629 1,152 96 15 125 12-12 8-57 0-71 011 0-93 009 0-02 60 56 719 0-45 0-42 5-35 Totals 3 018 4,536 33-75 007 o Agricultural implements ... Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Bails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... Railway plant Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' ... 62 "28 53 6 3-75 T-70 3-21 0-36 92 49 688 1,151 497 50 0-69 0-36 5-12 8-57 3-69 0-37 67-39 4-07 4-60 1-21 1-09 6-26 0-25 0-01 14 0-85 7 350 0-05 2-61 4 00 0-42 Totals 163 9-87 2,884 21-46 565 016 Sugar ... Tea 216 73 13-08 4-43 216 159 1-61 1-18 10000 45-91 016 0-17 Totals 289 17-51 375 2-79 77-07 017 Beer Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... "21 1-27 "266 T-98 7-89 010 235 14-24 235 1-75 100-00 i 13 Totals 256 15-51 501 3-73 51-10 0-39 Paper .. Printed books Stationery 6 138 19 0-36 8-36 1-15 128 242 44 0-95 1-80 0-33 4-69 57-02 43-18 009 0-49 0-19 Totals 163 9-87 414 308 3937 0-36 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... 109 6-61 461 3-43 23-64 1-85 Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils 7 39 0-42 2-36 93 39 6-69 0-29 7-53 100-00 o-io 006 233 1-73 Totals 155 9-39 826 6-14 18-77 0-08 Other imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 622 37-67 3,904 29-05 15-93 011 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 1,651 100-00 13,440 100-00 12-28 0-14
743
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 17— continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Nelson.
Prc Nelson Comrj iportion of Imports from aonwealth— Groupa of Principal Items imported. Nelson Imports from Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total Nelson Imports. Proportion per Cent. To Total Nelson Imports. To New Zealand Imports from Commonwealth. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes... Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery Hate and caps ... Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks Woollens £ 107 21 44 72 13 0-37 007 015 0-25 004 £ 7,421 2,203 9,128 5,862 889 2,065 2,339 1,213 337 1,625 6,309 4-78 1-42 5-88 3-77 0-57 1-33 1-51 0-78 0-22 1-04 4-06 1-44 0-95 048 1-23 1-46 1-16 0-21 0-44 116 0-23 27 009 1-16 2-52 46 21 "6 : 16 0-07 2-83 0-33 0-91 0-12 Totals ... 351 1-20 39,391 25-36 0-89 0-51 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Bails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... Bail way plant ... Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' 1 83 132 198 0-29 0 : 45 0-68 583 362 3,274 417 6,651 7,103 474 - 0-38 0-23 2-11 0-27 4-28 4-57 0-31 0-27 2-54 1-99 2-79 0-18 0-76 0-63 0-40 3 95 6-01 0-33 5Q5 1,337 0-36 0-86 0-53 7-11 006 2-83 Totals 512 1-76 20,766 13-37 2-47 0-52 Sugar ... Tea 1,065 591 3-65 203 1,150 2,591 0-74 1-67 92-61 22-81 0-81 1-40 j Totals - ... 1,656 5-68 3,741 2-41 44-27 0-96 Beer Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 1,087 1,412 748 3-73 4-84 2-56 1,948 6,932 4,279 1,334 1-25 4-46 2-76 0-86 15-68 3300 56-07 5-28 5-84 3-60 Totals 3,247 11-13 14,493 9-33 22-40 4-88 Paper ... Printed books Stationery 57 861 97 0-19 2-96 0-33 1,553 3,097 1,262 100 1-99 0-81 3-67 27-80 7-69 0-84 3-03 0-95 Totals 1,015 3-48 5,912 3-80 17-17 2-23 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... 15 945 272 1,952 0-05 3-24 0-94 6-69 556 945 1,015 4,330 0-36 0-61 0-65 2-79 2-70 100-00 26-80 45-08 0-21 1-03 3-94 3-23 Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils 332 1-14 2,812 1-81 11-81 1-58 Totals 3,516 12-06 9,658 6-22 36-41 1-87 Other imports (excluding parcels post and specie) 18,865 64-69 61,364 39-51 30-74 338 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 29,162 100-00 155,325 10000 18-77 2-43
A.—4
744
EXHIBIT No. 17 —continued. Return showing the Values of Principal Items of Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899— continued. Provincial District of Westland.
Proportion of Westland Imports from Commonwealth — Westland Imports from Total Westland Imports. Groups of Principal Items imported, Proportion per Cent. Proportion per Cent. Commonwealth. To Total To New Zealand Westland Imports from Imports. Commonwealth. £ £ 4,526 692 3,168 6,330 471 43 64 13 135 28 232 Apparel and slops Boots and shoes Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery ... Hats and caps Hosiery Linen manufactures Millinery Silks Woollens ] 0-01 8-24 1-26 5-77 11-52 0-86 0-08 012 002 0-25 0-05 0-42 002 0-01 Totals 001 15,702 28-59 0-01 Agricultural implements ... Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Bails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &c. Machinery Nails ... Bail way plant Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' ... 4 100 562 0 : 03 0-79 4-45 84 163 2,352 181 1,054 0-15 0-30 4-28 0-33 1-92 2-45 4-25 53-32 0-72 0-92 2-68 473 36 3-75 0-29 3,883 375 7-07 0-68 12-18 9-60 097 3-64 "237 1-88 '"" 8 1,996 b'-02 8-63 lT-87 7-05 Totals 1,412 11-19 10,096 18-38 13-99 1-43 Sugar ... Tea 343 1,255 2-72 9-94 344 2,152 0-62 3-92 99-71 58-32 0-26 2-99 Totals .... 1,598 12-66 2,496 4-54 64-02 0-92 Beer Spirits ... Tobacco Wine ... 521 754 1,140 4-13 5-97 9-03 2,177 2,465 1,143 3-96 4-49 2-08 23-93 30-59 99-74 2-53 3-12 549 Totals 2,415 19-13 5,785 10-53 41-75 3-63 Paper ... Printed books Stationery 148 25 T-17 0-20 440 330 314 0-80 0-60 0-57 44-91 7-96 0-52 0-24 Totals 173 1-37 1,084 1-97 15-96 0-38 Bags and sacks ... Coals ... Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oil 26 218 6*21 1-73 '"229 281 6 : 42 0-51 11-36 77-58 6-38 0-36 104 0-82 1,131 2 06 9-20 0-49 Totals 348 2-76 1,64] 2-99 21-21 0-19 Other imports (excluding parcels post and specie) 6,675 52-88 18,125 33 00 36-83 1-20 Total imports (excluding specie and parcels post) 12,622 10000 54,929 10000 22-98 106
745
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 18. Return showing Values of Principal Items of New Zealand Imports from (1) the Commonwealth, and (2) the World, for 1899 (Specie excluded).
rroups of Principal Artioles imported. New Zealand Imports from the Commonwealth. Proportion per Cent. Total New Zealand Imports. Proportion of New Zealand t, .. Imports from the TrTnT Commonwealth per Cent. tQ ToU] New Zealand Importe, per Cent. Apparel and slops Boots and shoes Cotton piece-goods Drapery Haberdashery Hats and caps Hosiery Linen manufactures ... Millinery ' . . Silks Woollens £ 9,238 9,887 10,092 6,241 5,830 1,441 1,073 1,098 2,06.1 5,038 17,316 0-76 0-82 0-83 0-51 0-48 0-12 0-09 0-09 0-17 0-41 1-44 £ 393,689 151,593 447,495 395,696 84,808 68,184 90,545 69,167 36,932 87,639 297,387 1-57 1-78 5-19 4-59 0-98 0-79 1-05 0-80 0-43 1-02 3-45 2-35 6-52 2-25 1-58 6-81 2-11 119 1-59 5-58 5-75 5-82 Totals 69,315 5-72 2,123,135 24-65 3-26 Agricultural implements Cutlery Hardware and ironmongery Bails and railway bolts, &c. Iron and steel, other, pig, wrought, wire, &o. Machinery ... Nails Railway plant Sewing-machines Tools, artificers' 5,706 554 10,921 1,624 20,939 49,046 988 51 5,562 3,320 0-47 004 0-90 0-13 1-74 406 0-08 17,063 19,764 255,701 -63,557 632,182 405,551 31,363 63,807 30,801 59,066 0-20 0-22 2-97 0-74 7-34 4-71 0-36 0-74 0-36 0-69 ■ 33-44 2-80 4-27 2-56 3-31 12-09 3-15 008 1806 5-62 0-46 0-27 Totals 98,711 8-15 1,578,855 18-33 6-25 Sugar Tea 131,100 42,082 10-82 3-47 354,925 183,691 4-12 2-13 36-94 22-91 Totals ' 173,182 14-29 538,616 6-25 32-15 Beer Spirits Tobacco Wine 979 20,972 24,106 20,873 008 1-73 1-99 1-72 39,166 215,685 184,173 ! 51,640 0-46 2-50 2-14 0-59 2-50 9-72 1309 40-42 Totals 66,930 5-52 490,664 5-69 13-64 Paper Printed books Stationery ... 6,817 29,292 10,241 0-56 2-42 0-85 135,482 122,260 100,875 1-58 1-42 1-17 5 03 23-96 1015 Totals 46,350 3-83 358,617 4-17 12-92 Bags and sacks Coals 7,037 92,765 6,922 60,560 0-58 7-66 0-57 5 00 123,596 92,815 110,114 180,590 1-43 1-08 1-28 2-10 569 99-95 6-29 33-53 Fancy goods Fruits (including fresh, preserved, bottled, and dried) Oils 21,042 1-74 126,967 1-47 16-58 Totals 188,326 15-55 634,082 7-36 29-70 Other imports (excluding specie) Parcels post... 556,140 12,614 45-90 104 2,819,593 70,094 32-74 0-81 19-72 18-00 Total imports (excluding specie) 1,211,568 100-00 8,613,656 10000 14-07
A.—4
746
EXHIBIT No. 19. INTERCHANGE OF TRADE BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND AND THE STATES OP THE COMMONWEALTH IN 1899. I. New South- Wales. Exports of Neiv Zealand Produce to New South Wales. £ £ Oats ... ... ... ... 96,774 Leather ... ... ... ... 6,751 Timber ... ... ... ... 92,511 Onions ... ... ... ... 6,389 Cheese ... ... ... ... 43,825 Seeds ... ... ... ... 6,262 Malt ... ... ... ... 40,486 Woollen piece-goods ... ... 4,524 Potatoes ... ... ... ... 32,572 Coals ... ... ... ... 4,513 Butter ... ... ... ... 29,651 Fish, frozen ... ... ... 4,357 Wheat ... ... ... ... 27,584 Horses ... ... ... ... 3,971 Tallow ... ... ... ... 24,182 Beans and peas ... ... ... 3,764 Wool ... ... ... ... 23,096 Fungus ... ... ... ... 3,663 Maize ... ... ... ... 19,512 Sulphur ... ... ... ... 3,483 Bran and pollard ... ... ... 15,592 Agricultural machinery ... ... 3,241 Hides ... ... ... ... 14,518 Meats, potted and preserved... ... 2,986 Flax ... ... ... ... 14,065 Bacon ... ... ... ... 2,668 Hops ... ... ... ... 12,676 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 40,596 Barley ... ... ... ... 10,079 Flour' ... ... ... ... 8,160 j 616,405 Oatmeal ... ... ... ... 7,188 Gold ... ... ... ... 466,046 Hams ... ... ... ... 6,766 £1,082,451 New Zealand Imports of New South Wales Produce. £ £ Coal ... ... ... ... 55,954 Glass bottles ... ... ... 3,432 Timber ... ... ... ... 33,930 Drugs and druggists' wares ... ... 3,047 Manures ... ... ... ... 32,203 Carriage and carriage materials ... 2,842 Lead, sheet ... ... ... 17,617 Furniture... ... ... ... 2,387 Fresh fruit ... ... ... 16,753 Spirits ... ... ... ... 2,282 Tin ingots ... ... ... 11,016 Metal manufactures ... ... 2,160 Grindery... ... ... ... 6,579 Copper ingots ... ... ... 1,966 Cordage ... ... ... ... 6,303 Wine ... ... ... ... 1,678 Leather and leatherware ... ... 5,520 Skins ... ... ... ... 1,547 Horses ... ... ... ... 4,452 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 20,087 Machinery ... ... ... 3,683 £235,438
11. VICTOEIA. Exports of New Zealand Produce to Victoria. £ £ Timber ... ... ... ... 73,523 Eabbit-skins ... ... ... 1,838 Oats ... ... ... ... 42,712 Tallow ... ... ... ... 1,807 Butter ... ... ... ... 11,907 Fish ... ... ... ... 1,790 Flax ... ... ... ... 11,458 Oysters ... ... ... ... 1,480 Potted and preserved meats ... ... 10,373 Woollen piece-goods ... ... 1,265 Fish, frozen ... ... ... 8,572 Kauri-gum ... ... ... 1,169 Grass and clover seeds ... ... 8,215 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 13,554 Hides ... ... ... ... 7,680 Hops ... ... ... ... 6,698 214,883 Leather ... ... ... ... 4,484 Gold ... ... ... ... 179,660 Cheese ... ... ... ... 3,984 Wool ... ... ... ... 2,364 £394,543 New Zealand Imports of Victorian Produce. £ £ Sugar and molasses ... ... 18,962 Acids ... ... ... ... 1,507 Bicycles ... ... ... ... 16,887 Wine ... ... ... ... 1,484 Machinery ... ... ... 7,093 Furniture... ... ... ... 1,390 Leather and leatherware ... ... 9,538 Woodware ... ... ... 1,097 Spirits ... ... ... ... 4,695 Drugs and druggists' wares ... ... 1,049 Glass bottles ... ... ... 3,431 Metal manufactures ... ... 704 Eaisins ... ... ... ... 2,892 Plants ... ... ... ... 593 Books ... ... ... ... 2,871 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 30,210 Stationery ... ... ... 2,671 Fresh fruit ... ... ... 1,848 £108,922
747
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 19— continued. 111. Queensland. Exports of New Zealand Produce to Queensland. £ £ Oats ... ... ... ... 12,037 Agricultural machinery ... ... 523 Wheat ... ... ... ... 7,961 Flax ... ... ... ... 304 Timber ... ... ... ... 6,059 Potted and preserved fish ... ... 304 Maize ... ... ... ... 5,405 Onions ... ... ... ... 260 Barley ... ... ... ... 4,799 | Beans and peas ... ... ... 211 Hops ... ... ... ... 3,760! Malt ... ... ... ... 208 Potatoes... ... ... ... 2,1201 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 2,287 Leather ... ... ... ... 2,099; Woollen piece-goods ... ...921 50,726 Cheese ... ... ... ... 816 Gold ... ... ... ... 144 Oatmeal ... ... ... ... 652 £50,870 Neiv Zealand Imports of Queensland Produce. £ £ Sugar and molasses ... ... 94,990 ; Preserved meats ... ... ... 151 Manures ... ... ... ... 7,512 j Miscellaneous ... ... ... 1,092 Charcoal... ... ... ... 5,118 I £108,863
IV. South Australia Exports of New Zealand Produce to South Australia. £ £ Oatmeal ... ... ... ... 5,966 Beans and peas ... ... ... 598 Timber ... ... ... ... 4,203 Cheese ... ... ... ... 544 Flax ... ... ... ... 2,422 Butter ... ... ... ... 503 Hops ... ... ... ... 2,244 \ Fish ... ... ... ... 255 Potted and preserved meats... ... 2,036 j Pumice-stone" ... ... ... 252 Hides ... ... ... ... 1,652 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 1,840 Leather ... ... ... ... 1,313 Oats ... ... ... ... 830 £24,658 New Zealand Imports of South Australian Produce. £ £ Wine ... ... ... ... 12,435 Baisins ... ... ... ... 307 Salt ... ... ... ... 7,494 Manures ... ... ... ... 250 Bark ... ... ... ... 4,784 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 1,073 Spirits '... ... ... ... 906 £27,249
V. Tasmania. Exports of New Zealand Produce to Tasmania. £ £ Butter ... ... ... ... 10,283 i Oysters ... ... ... ... 578 Hides ... ... 2,779 ! Agricultural machinery ... ... 565 Preserved milk ... ... ... 2,337 i Sheep ... ... ... ... 365 Binder-twine ... ... ... 2,195 (Horses ... ... ... ... 313 Potted and preserved meats... ... 1,818 Flax ... ... ... ... 275 Cheese ... ... ... ... 1,300 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 3,154 Seeds 8141 Timber 708 j £27,484 New Zealand Imports of Tasmanian Produce. £ £ Timber ... ... ... ... 9,071 Fresh fruit ... ... ... 4,752 Bark ... ... . ... ... 5,571 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 833 £20,227
VI. Westebn Austealia. Exports of New Zealand Produce to Western Australia. £ £ Oats ... • ... ... 28,359 Wheat ... ... ... ... 1,501 Cheese 7,516 Timber 1,395 Potted and preserved meats ... 6,811 Potted and preserved fish ... ... 1,251 Butter ... ... ... ... 5,162 Hams ... ... ... ... 931 Preserved milk ... ... ... 4,525 Malt ... ... ... ... 559 Oatmeal ... ... ... ... 2,783 Bacon ... ... ... ... 398 Bran and pollard ... ... ... 2,089 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 1,228 Potatoes ... ... ... ... 1,655 £66,163 New Zealand Imports of Western Australian Produce. Not available ; very small, if any. 95—A. 4.
A.—4
748
EXHIBIT No. 20. Inteeohange of Tbade between New Zealand and the Commonwealth in 1899. Exports of Netv Zealand Produce to the Commonwealth. £ £ Oats ... ... ... ... 180,712 Oatmeal ... ... ... ... 16,924 Timber ... ... ... ... 178,399 Seeds ... ... ... ... 15,734 Cheese ... ... ... ... 57,985 Leather ... ... ... ... 14,683 Butter ... ... ... ... 57,506 ; Fish, frozen ... ... ... 12,931 Malt ... ... ... ... 41,253 i Preserved milk ... ... ... 9,336 Wheat ... ... ... ... 37,047; Flour ... ... ... ... 8,272 Potatoes ... ... ... ... 36,894 Hams ... ... ... ... 7,857 Flax ... ... ... ... 28,524 Woollen piece-goods ... ... 6,981 Hides ... ... ... ... 26,763 i Onions ... ... ... ... 6,876 Tallow ... ... ... ... 26,009 Fish, potted and preserved ... ... 5,725 Wool ... ... ... ... 25,460 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 89,016 Hops ... ... ... ... 26,3781 Maize ... ... ... ... 24,917 1,000,319 Meats, preserved and potted ... 24,120 Gold ... - ... ... 645,850 Bran and pollard ... ... ... 18,010 Barley ... ... ... ... 17,007 £1,646,169 New Zealand Imports of Commonwealth Produce. £ £ Sugar and molasses ... ... 113,952 Glass bottles - ... ... ... 6,863 Coal ... ... ... ... 56,337 Grindery... ... ... ... 6,579 Timber ... ... ... ... 43,417 Cordage ... ... ... ... 6,336 Manures ... ... ... ... 40,182 Charcoal ... ... ... ... 5,118 Fresh fruit ... ... ... 23,388 Horses ... ... ... ... 4,771 Lead, sheet ... ... ... 17,617 Drugs and druggists'wares ... ... 4,105 Bark ... ... ... ... 18,199 Furniture... ... ... ... 3,947 Bicycles ... ... ... ... 16,887 Carriages and carriage materials ... 3,295 Wine ... ... ... ... 15,597 Eaisins ... ... ... ... 3,199 Leather and leatherware ... ... 15,300 Books ... ... ... . 3,197 Tin ingots ... ... ... 11,016 Stationery ... ... ... 3,008 Machinery ... ... ... 10,776 Metal manufactures ... ... 2,864 Spirits ... ... ... ... 7,883 Miscellaneous ... ... ... 49,372 Salt ... ... ... ... 7,494 £500,699
A.—4,
EXHIBIT No. 21. 1899.—Exports of New Zealand Produce to Australia, compared with the Total Exports of New Zealand Produce.
749
New South Wales. Queensland. I! if 5 '8 S Exports New Total Exports Zealand New Zealand Produce to Produce to Australia. , Whole World. Article. Victoria. Kits 'imber (sawn and hewn) Jheese imtoc /Talt Vheat 'otatoes 'lax lides 'allow Vool lops laize leats (potted and preserved).. 5ran and pollard iarley )atmeal leeds (grass and clover) jeather 'ish (frozen) lilk (preserved) 'lour £ 42,712 73,523 3,984 11,907 1 323 11,458 7,680 1,807 2,364 6,698 10,373 258 1,782 333 8,215 4,484 8,572 97 108 50 1,265 64 1,790 294 515 £ 96,774 92,511 43,825 29,651 40,486 27,584 32,572 14,065 14,518 24,182 23,096 12,676 19,512 2,986 15,592 10,079 7,188 6,262 6,751 4,357 2,030 8,160 6,766 4,524 6,389 2,022 3,764 3,971 4,513 3,241 3,663 1,329 3,483 2,668 70 797 £ 12,037 6,059 816 208 7,961 2,120 304 134 3,760 5,405 96 71 4,799 652 75 2,099 194 £ 830 4,203 544 503 217 2,422 1,652 2,244 2,036 5,966 242 1,313 153 £ 28,359 1,395 7,516 5,162 559 1,501 1,655 6,811 2,089 129 2,783 - 126 24 4J525 £ 708 1,300 10,283 7 275 2,779 20 1,818 218 2 814 12 2 2,337 4 11 56 2 103 39 313 125 565 £ 180,712 178,399 57,985 57,506 41,253 37,047 36,894 28,524 26,763 26,009 25,460 25,378 24,917 24,120 18,010 17,007 16,924 15,734 14,683 12,931 9,336 8,272 7,857 6,981 6,876 5,725 4,975 4,799 4,638 4,570 3,663 3,524 3,483 3,262 2,128 1,966 1,838 1,764 1,572 748 514 109 45,463 £ 286,102 196,749 141,818 571,799 41,253 338,476 39,618 184,411 36,095 311,649 4,324,627 29,045 25,024 90,910 19,736 17,816 16,968 61,974 98,319 12,973 12,012 10,299 8,972 7,355 8,089 7,954 12,835 10,665 83,085 4,638 10,593 3,524 3,483 5,392 2,128 607,919 81,118 6,637 3,328 2,230 514 109 2,548,319 lams Voollen pieoe-goods.. hiions 'ish (potted and preserved) .. Jeans and peas lorses !oals laohinery (agricultural) 'ungus Undertwine Sulphur Jacon )ysters Cauri-gum .. tabbit-skins iheep ipparel and slops ... 'umice-stone jinsoed !haff liacellaueoua 921 260 304 211 "99 191 931 24 161 1,251 69 255 598 "l65 523 20 "56 2,'l95 26 1,480 1,169 1,838 549 268 32 398 'l38 578 850 1,236 469 374 14 31,405 365 20 48 27 252 140 "95 1,515 8,591 918 639 2,395 Total (excluding gold).. 214,883 179,660 616,405 466,046 50,726 144 24,658 66,163 27,484 1,000,319 645,850 10,286,560 1,513,180 iold Total (including gold) .. 394,543 1,082,451 50,870 24,658 66,163 27,484 1,646,169 11,799,740
A.—4
750
EXHIBIT No. 22. 1899.— Imports of Australian Produce into New Zealand, compared with Total Australian Imports and All Imports.
Article. Victoria. INew South Wales. Queensland. South i Western rja Australia.] Australia. o<d a a a© d « -- eS d ■^irS- £« 3 3 o = i — jhN -^ sr teg 5 »>SrO -8s fc • •a jhZ; e m^- 1 ~- B N o « jr D j EHr5 d £ 18,962 £ £ 94,990 383 £ £ £ 113,952 56,337 43,417 40,182 23,388 18,199 17,617 16,887 15,597 15,300 11,016 10,781 7,883 7,494 6,863 6,579 6,336 5,118 4,771 4,105 3,947 3,295 3,199 3,197 3,008 2,864 2,074 2,000 1,966 1,855 1,781 1,676 1,619 1,107 1,097 928 520 167 13 32,564 £ 131,100 92,765 74,983 62,504 39,030 34,088 16,931 31,247 20,873 23,397 13,216 49,046 20,972 14,036 14,659 1,817 3,623 2,259 12,580 8,407 15,480 4,677 11,094 29,292 10,241 11,006 8,020 9,887 2,563 5,286 9,238 1,843 1,448 £ 354,925 92,815 83,084 124,919 99,686 34,628 20,509 112,615 51,640 85,018 14,085 405,551 215,685 29,876 34,439 20,605 27,180 2,273 14,450 63,481 48,135 31,975 34,923 132,260 100,875 70,882 41,189 151,593 13,628 13,115 393,689 2,687 1,702 Sugar and molasses !oal .. 'imber (includingpalings) /failures i'resh fruit 3ark .. jead (sheet) .. Jicycles and parts Vine.. jeather and leatherware ingots Machinery n.o.e.* Spirits Salt .. iiass bottles irindery* Jordage* Ibarcoal lorses )rugs, &c. furniture Jarriages and materials laisins 3ooks Stationery /Tetal manufactures* .. lice ioots 'opper ingots .. LCids.. ipparel 'lants ikinst Machinery (agricultural) J Voodenware .. ?urs .. >hoto. goods .. leats (preserved) 'earl-barley liscellaneous 416 217 1,848 7,132 16,887 1,484 9,538 7,093 4,695 3,431 88 271 1,049 1,390 453 2,892 2,871 2,671 704 2,074 1,125 55,954 33,930 32,203 16,753 712 17,617 1,678 5,520 11,016 3,683 2,282 3,432 6,579 6,303 4,452 3,047 2,387 2,842 34 51118 20 250 1 4,784 12,435 22 5 906 7,494 9 150 oi a o 0 >> C3 O b P< oi s 03 '5 > o 9,071 4,752 5,571 220 48 306 337 2,160 "l8 307 2 1,507 1,627 593 72 1,107 1,097 14 238 875 1,966 348 149 1,074 1,547 5 9 "l3 15,418 914 282 16 15j 074 151 628 879 565 5,736 586 1,191 23 23 416,401 25,469 4,838 22,750 2,069 169 5,634,244 8,613,656 125,977 108,922 235,438 108,863 27,249 20,227 500,699 1,211,568 Specie 60,000 168,922 60,000 125,260 235,438 108,863 27,249 20,227 560,699 1,336,828 8,739,633 * Various classifici fttions. J Some inc luded unde: r "Hides." JTol Dais included in " Mai minery n.o.e. 1 Owing to different clai (rindery, skins, &c, canno ssincatiom it be comp prevailini .red. j in variou is colonies, items li ike machinery n.o.e i., metal mai vufactures
A.—4.
EXHIBIT No. 23. Table showing the Value of the Imports and Exports of the Colony of New Zealand from and to each under-mentioned Country, Colony, or Port during the Years 1900 and 1899.
751
1900., 1899. Impoi •ts from. Exports to. Impoi ■ts from. iports to. Country, Colony, or Port. Totals. Produce and Manufactures of the Colony. British, Foreign, and other Colonial Produce and Manufacture-. Totals. Totals. Totals. United Kingdom £ £ 6,504,484 £ 10,238,461 £ 20,881 £ 10,259,342 £ £ 5,526,645 £ £ 9,427,515 British Possessions. Australia— Victoria New South Wales Queensland South Australia .. Western Australia I 552,013 1,052,792 99,050 29,116 2,811 491,380 1,124,217 34,549 28,446 59,627 22,851 68,353 799 453 264 514.231 1,192,570 35,348 28,899 59.891 407,078 748,201 118,730 30,165 663 412,822 1,118,699 52,644 25,75i 66,321 1,735,782 1,304,837 1,676,237 Tasmania 1,738,219 92,720 1,830,939 41,196 22,551 5,092 27,643 31,991 31,799 Pacific Islands— Norfolk .. Fiji Maiden Ellice 140 364,510 12,665 75 611 34.745 72 914 8,844 168 1,525 43,589 240 569 250,706 13,973 2,360 28,244 681 377-390 265,248 31,285 Europe — Gibraltar Malta I 35,428 9,926 45.354 20 20 23 40 Africa— Cape Colony Natal Mauritius 23 I . 20 4° 487 15 165 20 116,536 286,085 2,686 112 7 119,222 286,197 7 206 61, 141 29,041 25 4 667 2IO 90,207 402,621 2,805 405,426 Asia— Hongkong Bengal Bombay Madras Burmah Ceylon Singapore 20,953 255,9" 345 523 n>773 123,333 26,292 12,911 8,693 47 84 666 364 13.577 9,O57 47 84 18,363 212,654 77 310 2,959 116,833 19,884 10,799 2,098 12 222 500 445 178 228 118 228 118 429,130 371,080 14,254 22,081 1,030 23,111 America — Canada British Columbia.. Falkland Islands .. West Indies 32,169 8,996 10 277 10 277 55.O2I 8,229 10 6,353 94 " 19 41,184 141 63,391 6,457 Foreign Countries. 28 7 287 Europe— France Spain Portugal Italy Austria Germany Switzerland Greece Norway Sweden Denmark Belgium Holland Russia Turkey 26,326 1,129 773 6,975 1,062 182,074 1.179 15,653 285 10,101 247 49.295 17.13° 15.592 9 15,601 19,481 979 2,238 6,934 946 160,605 4.454 13,075 475 6,199 919 44,561 21,643 4,579 59,082 II 37 22,741 121 1.445 11 37 24,186 121 11 9 28,027 57 9 5 6,227 222 869 2 500 9 5O5 6,227 222 869 2 2 1 1,060 212 538 11,486 534 312,763 37 282,547 105,064 America— United States: On the East Coast On the West Coast 1 45,836 1.954 47.79O 387,614 45,885 958,286 103.587 423,116 33,56l 1,198 1,921 424.3 J 4 34,482 687,906 87.403
752
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 23—continued. Table showing the Value of the Imports and Exports of the Colony of New Zealand from and to each under-mentioned Country, Colony, or Port during the Years 1900 and 1899 — continued.
1900. I99. Imports from. Exports to. Impoi ■ts from. Exports to. Country, Colony, or Port. Totals. Produce British, and Foreign, and Manufactures other Colonial of the Produce and Colony. Manufactures. Totals. Totals. Totals. Foreign Countries — continued. America— continued. Brazil Chili Uruguay Paraguay Argentine Republic Mexico West Indies £ £ £ 684 201 915 £ £ 684 201 915 £ £ .. £ 782 no 117 315 2,530 £ 2,353 2,353 2 4 1 1,405 2,344 ■• 5 1,063,278 ■ 777,696 437,358 Africa— Egypt Canary Islands South African Republic 46O , 83O 2,119 462,949 840 76 518 131 ; 13,139 5 5 13,144 Asia— China Japan Philippine Islands Asia Minor Macao 916 654 1,495 43,404 12,474 ; 20,725 160 5,007 4,516 4°,543 6,632 ",354 J74 1,654 576; 5,0076 6 78,258 63^45 i i 2,404 Pacific Islands— New Caledonia New Hebrides Friendly Savage Navigators Cook, Society Sandwich Surprise Chesterfield Marshall Caroline New Britain Phoenix Baker Gilbert New Guinea 101 8,895 215 1,123 29,477 10,778 153 1,558 3,487 8,763 67 27,938 373 17,252 9,020 17,608 1,546 8 407 592 328 5,013 515 41 19,336 1,647 15,811 8,892 8,131 9,278 108 47,274 2,020 33,063 17,912 25,739 1,546 8 5,013 8 55 11,235 17 i>349 17,969 12,658 361 3,660 i>937 1,894 1 276 39,253 949 23,004 12,162 : 21,532 2,478 3 8 415 592 332 •• 1 •• 4 252 : 252 552 3,9o6 1,332 . , •■ •« 3,000 ! 61,025 I 138,287 52,249 4 102,611 83,902 54,385 Totals 8,739,633t n,938,335t 10,646,096* 13,055.249 190,912 13,246,161* • In. :ludes speci ie: Imported, £438,770. Exported, £22,903. f Includes specie : In E: iported, £125,977. tported, £14,913
753
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 24. Table showing Due Dates and Rates of Interest on State Loans on 30th June, 1899. (From Australasian Statistics, compiled by the Government Statist of Victoria.)
Amounts Outstanding at each Rate of Interest in— When Repayable. Victoria. Queensland. Western Australia. t Total. 4 per Cent. Tasmania. Other Bates. Tasmania. Total. 4 per Cent. Other Kates. Total. 4 per Cent. 3J per Cent.* Total. 4 per Cent. 3% per Cent. Cent. Other Bates. 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1907 1908- .. 1910 1911 1912 1913 J £ 3,OO0ioO0 457,000 £ (3J%) 590,000 •• (4£%) 5,000,000 £ 590,000 3,000,000 5,457,000 £ £ £ £ 800,000 250,000 £ 500,000 £ (6%) 32,500 (5%) 34,000 (5%) 31,500 £ 800,000 250,000 532,500 34,000 : 31,500 17,600 13,630' 1,876,000 £ £ 7,220 I , ( 24,000 I lb/o, ] 100,000 j 28,100 J ( 3,100 55,680 21,870 10,400 (5%) 100 .300,000 '.'. 1,000,000 £ 31,220 100,000 31,200 55,680 21,870 10,500 300,000 1,000,000 4, 2,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 (5%) 17,600 2,107,000( 16 ) 2,107,000 63,000 1,8761000(2°) 13,630 746,795(1") 4,000,000 (3%) "63,000('0) } 1,466,500 1,466,500 3,500,000 1,100,000 545,950 (3£%) 700 800,000 t 546,650 800,000 4,746,795 1914 1915 1916 1917 1919 (3%) 2,790,482 «» 2,790, 482 4,000,000 11,728,800 11,728,800 750,'OOOH (3%)2,750,000( ao ) (3%) 1,100,000(20) 4,000,000 •■ ( 300,000 I j /q lo/ , q Ana enn/an I 1,000, 000( 2 ») j" (d * h ) 3,45b, 500(-") 4,756,500 1920 6,000,000 6,000,000 1921 1922 1923 1924 1926 1927 1929 1930 1934 1945 1947 Annual ) Drawings j Indefinite (3J%) 5,000,000( 5 ) 5,000,000 19,065 19,065 25,473j (3J%) 7,000,000 7,000,000 8,189,000 4,784,834 12,973,834 (3%) 25,473 ■• (3%) 1,000,000 1,000,000 67,600 67,600 (3%) 1,600,000(2") 1,600,000 3,704,800 3,704,800 972,595 .. 2,000,000 (3%)l,724,480 2,000,000 1,724,480 972,595 .. . • • * 165,300 (4§%) 79,700 (3£%) 71,000 5,141,773 245,000j 71,000 Total .. 26,310,795 4,082,960 1,263,630 10,488,363 4,136,820 j 22,043,482 48,354,277 21,384,300 12,214,114 33,598,414 3,584,400 7,721,220
A.—4
754
EXHIBIT No. 24— continued. Table showing Due Dates and Rates of Interest on State Loans on 30th June, 1899— continued.
Amounts Outstanding at each Bate of Interest in— When Bepayable. New South Wales. South Australia. New Zealand (31st March, 1899). 5 per Cent. 4 per Cent. 3J per Cent. Other Bates. Total. 6 per Cent. , 5 per Cent. 4 per Cent. Other Bates. Total. Cent. Cent. Cent * Per Cent. 3i per Cent. Other Bates. Total. * £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ 56,700 £ 212,502 £ 134,100 £ 605,990 £ 1899 (£4 lis.' 3a %) 243,500 ■• £ 1,009,292 1900 857,100 (5J%) 4,500 (6%) 30,000 (6%) 59,700 3,700 861,600 60,000 1 1 303,500 . 327,100 327,100 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 390,900 399,300 420,900 459,000 1,003,700 58,000 903,800 224,900 67,300 65,000 65,000 37,500 47,500 37,500 67,300 65,000 65,000 62,500 72,500 37,500 250,000 |100,000 {150,000 54,300 250,000 100,000 150,000 151,400 1,000,000 58,000 25,000 25,000 901,500 224,900 (6%) 2,300 97,100 ( 500,000 117,000 . •• 1907 37,500 1,000,000 1,037,500 1,000,000 1 - 1,500,000 1908 1,450,000 1,450,000 11,000 1,940,100 1,951,100 283,000 400,000 1909 1,799,500 1,799,500 28,100 3,094,600 3,122,700 40,000 I (3f%) I 349,000 1 389,000 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 2,863,700 2,609,350 - (3%) 3,232,622 2,863,700 5,841,972 60,300 18,300 35,000 46,300 35,000 25,000 50,000 60,300 68,300 85,000 46,300 35,000 35,000 25,000 27,900 • 469,600 12,300 385,925 •• 410,925 497,500 333,800 3,800 10,000 3,800 321,500 . . I 1916 1917 20,000 20,000 26,000 26,000 ( 1,917,300 \ 1,560,400( 19 ) ( 2,182,400(«)1 ( 1,317,800 j 1,438,500 (3%) 3,151, 710=»= I 6,675,410 12,200 12,200 •• 3,546,200 1918 12,826,200 12,826,200 9,900 26,000 (1919) 26,000 (1920) 26,000 1,474,400 1919-20 .. I (1919) j (3) 220,050 I 220,050 i " ' (3J%, 1920) 310,300 ]- 362,300 1924 1925 1926 16,500,000 I ,„> (198,065 j [ ' 1222,255 16,698,065 222,255 1,651,300 1,651,300 1929-45 .. •• I f •■ 1 (1933) 9,686,300 . •• (3%,'l935) I 5,500,000) •• 15,186,300 ( (1929) '( 200,000 (3%) 839,500 (3J%, 1939) 3,052, 700f 839,500 | 3,252,700 •• " 1 (1929) 29,150,302 (1940) 6,161,167 (3%,'1945) 5,662,120 |40,973,589 Annual ) Drawings ) Indefinite 429,000 429,000 2,700 530,189 532,889 61,572,831 •• •■ •■ Total .. 1,708,000 21,065,439 29,326,200 9,473,192 726,200 24,916,310 , 8,651,482 6,011,120 46,937,606 290,000 16,302,400 7,597,710 56,000 807,200 265,402 31,146,402 the si^P^''-^^cXS^^^
755
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 25. Letter feom R. L. Nash. Sib,— Daily Telegraph Office, Sydney, 23rd March, 1901. Since my evidence was taken I have gone "through the records available here, so as to ascertain more closely how the Colony of New Zealand would be affected financially and commercially by entering the Commonwealth. The result, I consider, does not materially modify my evidence at any point. Briefly, I embodied the figures in the accompanying statement in the Daily Telegraph, because it is desirable to attract public attention to the points under consideration by the Eoyal Commission. The revenues and expenditures of New Zealand which would be transferred to the Federal Government I have taken as under :— Revenues transferred. Expenditures transferred. £ £ Customs and excise .. .. .. 2,190,000 Defence.. .. .. .. .. 150,000 Posts and telegraphs .. .. .. 490,000 Posts and telegraphs .. .. .. 390,000 Other (say) .. .. .. ~ 20,000 Customs .. .. .. .. 75,000 Property transferred (interest at 3J per cent.; upkeep at 1 J per cent.) .. .. .. 110,000 Other (say) .. .. .. .. 75,000 800,000 Exoess of revenue transferred .. .. 1,900,000 Total .. .. .. 2,700,000 Total .. .. .. 2,700,000 Probably the revenue from posts and telegraphs will be less under the universal penny postage, and the expenditure under that head greater. I have no data as to the value of New Zealand property which would be transferred, and I have taken it roughly at nearly £2,500,000. The allowances for " other revenue " and " other expenditure " need more accurate determination ; but the excess of revenue transferred cannot, I think, be very far wide of the actual amount. The estimate I have formed is that, including New Zealand, the Commonwealth would be compelled to raise £10,500,000 by the tariff, and that the return to New Zealand, based on present figures, would be about £1,550,000, as under :— £ Proportion of £10,500,000 tariff collected in New Zealand ... 1,950,000 £ Less —Commonwealth requirements, as above ... 290,000 Proportion of new expenditure ... ... 110,000 — 400,000 Balance returnable ... ... ... ... £1,550,000 All figures and estimates must be expected to expand gradually from year to year. What reason is there for the assumption that the Commonwealth would have to raise £10,500,000 by the tariff? In the first year or so the Commonwealth might itself need rather less. Afterwards it is certain to need more. But to at least four of the States (a majority) £10,500,000 will certainly be needed, and the Commonwealth must provide the funds. The yield of the New Zealand section of the tariff under federation would, on the £10,500,000 basis, probably be lessened by about 12 per cent. There would be larger returns upon tea, rice, and some other imports, which would in part compensate losses under other heads. But it is perfectly certain, whether Protectionists or Free-traders are in office, the Commonwealth must have a tariff which will yield a high revenue to all the States. At present the yield of the New Zealand tariff reaches about 22-3 per cent, of the total raised in Australasia. After federation I consider that 20 per cent, would be a fair estimate, but I have in the above estimates allowed for only 19 per cent., so as to be quite on the safe side. I am strongly of opinion that New Zealand should join the Federation within the next few years; and I think that if she stipulated that the Commonwealth should take over her existing debt, making no return to her whatever out of the tariff, it would be fair in her case. I have, &c, Albert Pitt, Esq., E. L. Nash. Chairman, New Zealand Federation Eoyal Commission.
EXHIBIT No. 26. Sia ; — Eegistrar-General's Office, Hobart, 16th May, 1901. In accordance with my letter of 10th instant to you, I have now much pleasure in enclosing herewith two separate tables (A and B), prepared by me to illustrate approximately the probable effects of the Federal finance provisions to each State under the following assumed, conditions :— (a.) That the stage of the Commonwealth uniform tariff has been arrived at: (b.) That New Zealand has been included in the Commonwealth on equal terms with the original States: (c.) That £8,500,000 has been agreed upon as the aggregate amount to be derived annually from Commonwealth Customs and excise : (d.) That three-fourths of (c)— viz., £6,375,000 —is to be returned to the several States as a surplusage, to make good the revenue deficiencies caused to each State Treasury by the transfer of its principal source of revenue (Customs and excise) to the Commonwealth : 96—A. 4,
A.—4
756
(c.) That, owing to the practical difficulties of the so-called "book-keeping" system, the surplus (d) —£6,375,000 —be distributed as nearly as possible on the basis of population. I now, for the sake of more definite illustration, take for New Zealand the figures for the finance year ending 31st March, 1900, in order to shew roughly the effect upon the New Zealand Treasury when the full effect of the conditions above assumed, are brought into actual operation. From Table A it will be seen that the gross revenue for the year stated amounted to £5,699,618. The Federal transfer will cause the local Treasury to lose £2,676,105 of this, leaving to the command of the State only a sum of £3,023,513 to provide for functions which will still have to be maintained by the State, and which in the year referred to cost to New Zealand the sum of £4,461,928. This will cause a shortage to State Treasury yearly of a sum of about £1,438,415, without looking to the loss to it of its surplus in the year referred to of £559,490, which would raise the actual loss to Treasury (not the State itself) to a sum of £1,997,905. The shortage part of this loss it is evident must be made good somehow. If we now turn to Table-B it will be seen that if even a sum of £6,375,000 be available as a Commonwealth surplus, and that it is distributed to each of the seven States on the basis of population, there would still be a yearly loss to New Zealand State Treasury of £363,323, without reckoning its particular surplus in the year taken as a base, which represents a further Treasury (not State) loss of £559,490, or, in all, a loss of £922,813. It must, however, be admitted that the mere surplus loss is not material. At most it can only be regarded as a loss of financial power to local Treasury, not an aotual yearly loss, which, as already stated, I only estimate roughly at a sum of £363,323 yearly. As all such estimates of the near future are necessarily based upon figures of the place and period most nearly related,-and as each year's figures vary to some extent, I need hardly remind the members of your Commission that the conclusions I have arrived at can only be regarded as broadly correct. Allowance must ever be made for existing tendencies, and for the eccentricities of trade and finance cycles, which usually have a complete range of from eight to eleven years. In these observations and tables I hope I have answered as far as possible all the remaining questions put to me by your Commission. I have, &c, E. M. Johnston, Government Statistician, Tasmania. Morris Fox, Esq., Secretary Federal Eoyal Commission, Wellington, New Zealand.
Table A. Federal Finance.—Statement for the Year 1899-1900; showing the State Revenue and State Forms of Expenditure which would remain undisturbed by Federal Transfer; also showing for the same Year the Amount of Shortage which would require to be made good by the Creation and Proper Distribution of a Federal Surplus as Compensation for Loss caused by Federal Transfer:—
New South vi/.tnv; n c Queens- South Western Tas- New Seven Wales.!) vicioiia.<. i and .b Australian Australia.!) mania.a Colonies. Be wenue. Gross revenue 9,973,736 7,396,944 4,588,207 £ 2,731,208 2,875,396 £ 943,970 £ 5,699,618 £ 34,209,07! Less —Customs Excise Post and telegraph 1,397,227 338,394 800,480 1,918,721 315,721 553,672 1,461,690 148,423 309,471 591,813 37,415 254,552 883,783 904,802 425,574 28,915 22,546 208,108 92,096 1,141,825 540,216 1,733,571403,754 2,107,567 80,292 488,246 8,807,39. 971,701 2,706,62; Total revenue transferred .. 2,536,101 7,437,035 2,788,114 1,919,584 2,676,105 12,485,72; 21,723,35. Total undisturbed revenue.. 4,608,830 2,668,623 1,847,428 3,023,513 Gross expenditure Expenditut 14,540,418 362,908 59,609 102,964 64,765 re. 2,777,614 213,384 26,418 32,777 16,214 871,454' 78,095 8,851 17,473 Less—Post and telegraph Customs and excise Defences Harbours, lights, and beacons Quarantine 9,811,402 754,527 54,222 247,677 67,892 7,114,706; 514,500 66,290 197,585 29,802 2,615,675 239,309 28,765 31,484 16,928 5,140,128 388,582 35,628 162,940 91,050 32,871,39' 2,651,80! 279,78! 792,901 286,65: 4,011 3,000 17,536 717 809 26,07; Total expenditure transferred 1,128,329 811,177 6,303,529 607,782 3,932,636 289,510 317,295 104,419 678,201 3,936,71! Total undisturbed expenditure {Including surplus Deduct surplus Aotual State deficisnoy 8,683,073 2,488,104 2,298,380 767,035 4,461,928 28,934,081 1,407,772 162,334 1,976,937 282,238 1,311,802 47,789 :>94, 270 (-)46,400 924,530 259,721 435,797 72,516 1,997,9a 559,49 8,549,013 1,337,682 1,245,438 1,694,699 1,264,013 640,676 564,809 363,281 1,438,415 7,211,331 •Finance year ended 31st Deci 10th June, 1899. * Finance year enc smber, 11 ied 31st I 99. h Pin :arch, 190( Mice yoar ended 30th June, 1900. "Finanoe i ■ear ended I,
757
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 26— continued. Table B. Federal Finance.—Statement for the Year 1899-1900. Statement based upon the Figures for the Financial Year 1899-1900, showing the Amount of the State Revenue and Expenditure which will remain to the several States undisturbed by Federal Transfer; also showing the Excess or Shortage to each State on the Assumption that Three-fourths of an Aggregate Commonwealth Revenue of £8,500,000 from Customs and Excise are distributed among the Seven States in the Proportion of their respective Populations.
EXHIBIT No. 27. Lettee from Secbetaky, Teades Hall, Dunedin. Sic,— Trades Hall, Dunedin, 18th March, 1901. I am instructed by the Otago Trades and Labour Council to forward you the following resolution passed at a meeting held on the Bth instant: — " (1.) That the Otago Trades and Labour Council, while noting that most of the witnesses who recently gave evidence before the Eoyal Commission declare that the proposed federation of New Zealand with Australia would be disastrous to the colony from several points of view—social, political, and industrial — respectfully ask the electors to vote against the federation of New Zealand with the Australian Commonwealth while we retain our independence under the British flag. (2.) That a copy of this motion be sent to the Hon. Colonel Pitt, Chairman of the Eoyal Commission on Federation." Yours, &c, E. Slates, Secretary. Hon. Colonel Pitt, Chairman, Federation Commission.
EXHIBIT No. 28. Seasons fob not Fedeeating.—Pb£cts of Eesolutions submitted foe Discussion and OAEEIED UNANIMOUSLY AT THE MEETING OF THE OtAGO KNIGHTS OF LABOUE ON WEDNESDAY, 20th Maech, 1901. In the opinion of this assembly, New Zealand has much to lose and little to gain by federating with the Commonwealth of Australia-, and that this resolution and the grounds on which it is founded, and hereto appended, be forwarded to the Federation Commission. Self-reliance. 1. New Zealand was the first colony on which the principle of self-reliance was imposed by the withdrawal of the troops during the Maori War. The principle was accepted by the colonists, only a few along the frontier of the disturbed districts expressing anxiety, and naturally so. On this glorious principle our little colony, by pacific measures, brought the war to an end, reconciling the Natives and gradually conferring on them equal privileges. By union, our brotherly treatment of the Maoris would be endangered, and racial distinction introduced —a grievous loss. Harmonious Action. 2. We have had jarring and jealousies among ourselves in the past, which have been or are being settled without outside interference, satisfactory so far, each and. all of them adapted to our own peculiar position, but whicli under the bondage of outside control would require to cross the Tasman Sea to be confirmed, very much to our loss.
New South viVtni-in c Queens- South Wales.b "ctoria.c lan(J b Australia.' I Western -I Australia. 1 1 Tas- New rnania.a Zealand."! Seven States. Revenue remaining to State Expenditure £ 7,437,635 8,683,073 £ 4,608,830 6,303,529 £ 2,668,623 3,932,636 £ 1,847,428 2,488,104 £ 1,733,571 2,298,380 £ 403,754 767,035 £ 3,023,513 4,461,928 £ 21,723,35< 28,934,68i State deficiency Less proportion of £6,375,000* surplus distributed on basis of population State surplus 1,245,438 1,927,966 1,694,699 1,653,343 1,264,013 685,553 640,676 530,619 564,809 243,059 363,281 259,308 1,438,415 1,075,092 7,211,33 6,375,001 682,528 State deficiency 41,356 578,460 110,057 321,750 103,913 363,323 559,490 836,331 Add State surplus enjoyed prior to transfer Total State gain by transfer (-)46,4#C 72,516 1,337,682 162,334 282,238 47,789 259,721 520,194 Total State loss by transfer 323,594 626,249 63,651 581,471! 176,429 922,813 2,174,013 a Finance year ended 31st Dei 10th June, 1899. * Finance year ei ♦ Three-f :ember, 18! ided 31st K Durths of )9. »Pii [arch, 190 i> revenue iance yeai if £8,500,( ended 3< 00. ith June, 1900. Finance ear ended ).
A.—4
758
Affinity. 3. It is true that with Sydney, Melbourne, and Hobart we have a community of interest in many respects, but in tropical Australia the future is involved in great mystery, which will take years to solve. In the meantime New Zealand would stand almost hand-bound to see what would eventuate, to our loss indeed. Polity. i. The lines on which New Zealand legislation has been based for many years past are liberal, progressive, and eminently suited to our isolated position as an almost experimental community. These lines are opposed and repugnant to the ideas of the federated States in many respects. We stand proudly prominent before the world in our social, industrial, and financial legislation. No other colony comes up to us as regards life insurance, electoral laws, land for settlement and its tenure, advances to settlers at a fair interest, labour laws, Conciliation and Arbitration Courts for trade disputes, old-age pensions, compensation for injuries, penny postage, and State coal-mines, each and all of which are being modified and altered as their practical working demands. Federating, many of these would be abrogated or suspended. Insular. 5. Twelve hundred miles distant from an immense sparsely occupied continent, and which may never be overtaken on account of its tropic barren zone, it would be perfect madness to sink our glorious healthy little colony in a maelstrom of conflicting interests. Intertrade. 6. Hitherto it has been supposed that Australia was the great market for our extra agricultural products. True, to a certain extent. Yet this intercolonial trade has been to our disadvantage. Our exports to Australia have not been for consumption there, but to a large extent for re-export to other parts of the world, thus putting profits into the pockets of middlemen and carriers which should have been the property of the producers. This degrading position is now being remedied by our Government arranging for steamers to different countries without reference to Australia. By joining the Commonwealth this new departure would be greatly frustrated, to our colonial loss. Tariff. 7. A great deal is made of prohibitive duties being imposed if we do not federate. The idea is absurd that such duties would be detrimental to our interests. New Zealand produces everything required in our economy, and what with us is deficient Australia cannot supply from its own resources. The whole world is an open market to us. Australia cannot feed itself. For oats, bacon, cheese, &c, it must import or starve; and if by prohibitive duties its nearest neighbour, New Zealand, is put to a disadvantage—which cannot be done— the consumers, the workers in the Commonwealth, pay the duty out of their earnings before the food reaches their dwellings. Disaffection. 8. The different States in the Commonwealth are already showing great signs of discontent, which will take many years and great discretion to subdue and reconcile. The conflicting interests over such an immense area are so different, bribes and sops are held out here and there to bring harmony. It will, however, be of no avail. Some of the States are now almost ripe for revolt. It is of no use: bound hard-and-fast, they cannot get clear. Can any one in New Zealand calmly contemplate the outlook from our seagirt islands and not at once conclude it would be to our loss to be involved in this disagreeable melee ? Expenses. 9. Different computations are made as to the cost of the Federal Government. The estimates rule from ten to eleven millions a year, absorbing almost the whole of the Customs and excise revenues. The Eailway, Post, and Telegraph Departments are to be absorbed. The further development of the State will depend on the Federal Government; and, having no other revenue to depend upon, the State will be told to wait for the good time coming. Contrast the position of New Zealand standing alone or federated, shorn of its strength. Our position in the money-market of the world, —London Stock Exchange quotations show our credit to be higher than any of the other colonies. Our revenues, notwithstanding heavy reductions in duties, extraordinary expenditure in connection with the Transvaal War, demonstrations of loyalty, increased expenditure in other departments, will this year, quite unexpectedly, show a surplus of £400,000 available for public works. Can any one look at the picture and, contrasting it with what it would be if federating, without exclaiming, " What a fall! going back as an appendage to a big combination " — somewhat relative to New South Wales in the early days. Gains. 10. It is asserted there would be a gain to New Zealand by federation in the matter of defence —a piece of mere " bunkum." New Zealand can defend its borders far better than Australia can do hers. On this ground, however, there can be no ground for anxiety, as, whether federated or not, we are bound to assist each other by the common ties of kinship. If one member suffer, all the others suffer with it. If the injury is threatened by an enemy, in such an emergency our big brother the Commonwealth would have to go hand in hand with us, and ask our mother Britain to come and help, and which would be done without asking.
759
A.—4
EXHIBIT No. 29. Letter feom the Secebtaey, Woekbes' Political Committee. Sib,— Workers' Political Committee, Trades Hall, Dunedin, 6th May, 1901. I am directed to forward you the following resolution, which was carried unanimously: — " That this Committee are of the opinion that it is undesirable for New Zealand to federate with the Commonwealth of Australia, for the following reasons : (1.) That this colony is selfcontained, and has the elements and resources which go to make a country great. (2.) That we believe that our wants, wishes, and aspirations will be best met and interests conserved by full and immediate local control. (3.) That the Australian members of the Commonwealth Parliament will not be able to fully understand our aspirations and sentiments. (4.) That it will jeopardize outworkers and industries." I am, &c, Colonel Pitt, M.L.C. J. H. Hanson, Secretary.
EXHIBIT No. 30. Obsebvations on Appeals feom the Covet of Appeal in New Zealand. (By His Honour the Chief Justice.) In response to the request of the Commission I have much pleasure in making some brief observations on appeals from the Court of Appeal in New Zealand. At present there is an appeal as of right to His Majesty in Council if the amount directly or indirectly in dispute in a civil action is £500 or upwards. (See Order in Council of 16th May, 1871.) There is also an unrepealed Order in Council of 10th May, 1860, in which an appeal is given under the like circumstances from a final judgment of the Supreme Court. The Privy Council has ruled, however, that the Courts of the colony must be exhausted before the Privy Council will entertain an appeal. There is also the right of His Majesty in Council to grant leave to appeal in any case from a judgment of the Supreme Court or of the Appeal Court. There have been few appeals from New Zealand: the average is not quite two a year. Perhaps the uncertainty of the amount of costs, the difficulties an<3 delays of appealing, and the fact that the Court of Appeal in New Zealand may order the judgment pronounced to be executed, on the person entitled thereto entering into security for the performance of the decision of the Privy Council, have prevented appeals. As the colony increases in population, in business, and in lawsuits, the appeals will no doubt increase. The question of whether there should not be a Supreme Court of Appeal for the Empire, and how to make such an institution effective, is to be considered at a conference in London next year. Until the proposals of that conference are published one can hardly deal with the subject. If such a supreme tribunal could be established there is no doubt that it would be of great service from many points of view. It would tend to weld the Empire together, and be more than a mere symbol of unity :it would be a unifying institution. It would also tend to obtain the best expression of legal knowledge as a guidance for all citizens of the Empire. These benefits cannot, perhaps, be overestimated. On the other hand, this has to be borne in mind : that if all civil causes, or even one-tenth of the civil causes, in which £500 was directly or indirectly involved were appealed to a Court sitting in London, there would be such a block of business, and such delays, that the commercial world would feel the system intolerable. Earely is a case now decided in twelve months. One case just decided was decided by our Appeal Court on the 28th May, 1894. The outcry that- has been raised in some of the States in the United States of America at the delays of appellate tribunals would be intensified in the colonies when appeals become more numerous. There might be an ambulatory Court, some three or four of the Judges visiting Australia—say, Melbourne or Sydney—and Canada alternately. I cannot, however, speculate as to what might be done until the proposals regarding the Supreme Court of Appeal have been published. It was to meet what will, 1 believe, be in the future a great pressure on the Privy Council, and long delays in commercial cases, that I thought New Zealand, even if she did not federate, might utilise the High Court of Australia to be established by the Commonwealth, as an appellate tribunal. Of course, before this could be done statutes would have to be passed by, perhaps, the Imperial Parliament, the Commonwealth, and New Zealand, making due provision for the exercise of such a jurisdiction. I admit that the decisions of the High Court might not be deemed so satisfactory as those of an Imperial Court sitting in London, but they would be more readily obtained, and that will, I believe, be soon deemed of importance when appeals become more numerous. Provision would have to be made, perhaps, for New Zealand paying part of the cost of the High Court, having some say in the appointment of one or more Judges, and in allowing her barristers and solicitors to act in New Zealand cases, &c. And, if the High Court proves satisfactory, the suggestion of commercial cases being finally decided by the High Court may have to be considered, if not adopted. The Commonwealth Act (63 and 64 Vict., c. 12) has not, however, save in one particular, placed the High Court of Australia on a higher judicial position than that in which the Court of Appeal of New Zealand stands. Section 74 provides that "No appeal shall be permitted to the Queen in Council from a decision of the High Court upon any question, howsoever arising, as to the limits, inter se, of the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and those of any State or States, or as to the limits, inter se, of the constitutional powers of any two or more States, unless the High Court shall certify that the question is one which ought to be determined by Her Majesty in Council " &c.
A.—4
760
Then there is this exception : " Except as provided in this section, this Constitution shall not impair any right which the Queen may be pleased to exercise by virtue of her Eoyal prerogative to grant special leave to appeal from the High Court to Her Majesty in Council. The Parliament " — that is, the Commonwealth Parliament —" may make laws limiting the matters in which such leave may be asked, but the proposed laws containing afiy such limitation shall be reserved by the Governor-General for Her Majesty's pleasure." It is clear from this exception that the High Court of Australia is not a final Court of Appeal, and under its present constitution there would be no gain, but a great loss and delay, in sending cases from our Appeal Court to the High Court, the dissatisfied litigant having the right to petition for the hearing of his case in the Privy Council. Unless the High Court of Australia were a final Court of Appeal it could not be utilised for the hearing of New Zealand cases. I do not, therefore, see that at present, and under its present Constitution, this colony could utilise the High Court of Australia as an Appellate Court for the New Zealand Court of Appeal. If, however, the proposed Supreme Court of Appeal for the Empire is not placed on some satisfactory footing that will allow a rapid determination of appeals, then the question of making the High Court of Australia a final Appellate Court for all commercial cases, both in Australia and New Zealand, may well be considered. I may add that four New Zealand cases were heard in the Privy Council in 1900, and they were more rapidly decided than is usual in Privy Council cases. The dates of the decision in the colony and in the Privy Council are as follows :—Coates v. Eegina—New Zealand decision, 25th May, 1899; Privy Council, 17th February, 1900. Wasteneys v. Wasteneys —New Zealand decision, sth August, 1899; Privy Council, 15th May, 1900. Fleming v. Bank of New Zealand—New Zealand decision, 25th May, 1899 ; Privy Council, 27th June, 1900. Allan v. Morrison—New Zealand decision, 25th May, 1899 ; Privy Council, 11th July, 1900. Supreme Court Office, 14th May, 1901. Eobbet Stout.
EXHIBIT No. 31. "Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act." [63 & 64 Viot.] CHAPTER 12. An Act to constitute the Commonwealth of Australia.— [9th July, 1900.] Wheeeas the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established : And whereas it is expedient to provide for the admission into the Commonwealth of other Australasian Colonies and possessions of the Queen : Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows .— Short Title. 1. This Act may be cited as " The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act." Act to extend to the Queen's successors. 2. The provisions of this Act referring to the Queen shall extend to Her Majesty's heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom. Proclamation of Commonwealth. 3. It shall be lawful for the Queen, with the advice of the Privy Council, to declare by Proclamation that, on and after a day therein appointed, not being later than one year after the passing of this Act, the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, and also, if Her Majesty is satisfied that the people of Western Australia have agreed thereto, of Western Australia, shall be united in a Federal Commonwealth under the name of the Commonwealth of Australia. But the Queen may, at any time after the Proclamation, appoint a Governor-General for the Commonwealth. Commencement of Aot. 4. The Commonwealth shall be established, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth shall take effect, on and after the day so appointed. But the Parliaments of the several colonies may at any time after the passing of this Act make any such laws, to come into operation on the day so appointed, as they might have made if the Constitution had taken effect at the passing of this Act. Operation of the Constitution and laws. • 5. This Act, and all laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under the Constitution, shall be binding on the Courts, Judges, and people of every State and of every part of the Commonwealth, notwithstanding anything in the laws of any State ; and the laws of the Commonwealth shall be in force on all British ships, the Queen's ships of war excepted, whose first port of clearance and whose port of destination are in the Commonwealth.
761
A.—4
Definitions. 6. " The Commonwealth " shall mean the Commonwealth of Australia as established under this Act. " The States " shall mean such of the Colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia, and South Aμstralia, including the Northern Territory of South Australia, as for the time being are parts of the Commonwealth, and such colonies or territories as may be admitted into or established by the Commonwealth as States ; and each of such parts of the Commonwealth shall'be called " a State." " Original States " shall mean such States as are parts of the Commonwealth at its establishment. Repeal of Federal Council Act. 48 and 49 Viot. c. 60. 7. " The Federal Council of Australasia Act, 1885," is hereby repealed, but so as not to affect any laws passed by the Federal Council of Australasia and in force at the establishment of the Commonwealth. Any such law may be repealed as to any State by the Parliament of the Commonwealth, or as to any colony not being a State by the Parliament thereof. Application of Colonial Boundaries Act. 58 and 59 Viot. o. 34. 8. After the passing of this Act " The Colonial Boundaries Act, 1895," shall not apply to any colony which becomes a State of the Commonwealth ; but the Commonwealth shall be taken to be a self-governing colony for the purposes of that Act. 9. The Constitution of the Commonwealth shall be as follows :— THE CONSTITUTION. This Constitution is divided as follows :— Chapter I.—The Parliament : Part I.—General: Part ll.—The Senate : Part lll.—The House of Representatives : Part IV. —Both Houses of the Parliament: Part V. —Powers of the Parliament: Chapter ll.—The Executive Government: Chapter lll.—The Judicature : Chapter IV. —Finance and Trade : Chapter V.—The States : Chapter VI. —New States : Chapter Vll.—Miscellaneous : Chapter Vlll.—Alteration of the Constitution. The Schedule. CHAPTER I.—THE PARLIAMENT. Pact I.—General. Legislative power. 1. The legislative power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Federal Parliament, which shall consist of the Queen, a Senate, and a House of Representatives, and which is hereinafter called " The Parliament," or " The Parliament of the Commonwealth." Governor-General. 2. A Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her Majesty's Representative in the Commonwealth, and shall have and may exercise in the Commonwealth during the Queen's pleasure, but subject to this Constitution, such powers and functions of the Queen as Her Majesty may be pleased to assign to him. Salary of Governor-General. 3. There shall be payable to the Queen out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Commonwealth, for the salary of the Governor-General, an annual sum which, until the Parliament otherwise provides, shall be ten thousand pounds. The salary of a Governor-General shall not be altered during his continuance in office. Provisions relating to Governor-General. 4. The provisions of this Constitution relating to the Governor-General extend and apply to the Governor-General for the time being, or such person as the Queen may appoint to administer the Government of the Commonwealth ; but no such person shall be entitled to receive any salary from the Commonwealth in respect of any other office during his administration of the Government of the Commonwealth. Sessions of Parliament. Prorogation and dissolution. Summoning Parliament. First session. 5. The Governor-General may appoint such times for holding the sessions of the Parliament as he thinks fit, and may also from time to time, by Proclamation or otherwise, prorogue the Parliament, and may in like manner dissolve the House of Representatives. After any general election the Parliament shall be summoned to meet not later than thirty days after the day appointed for the return of the writs. The Parliament shall be summoned to meet not later than six months after the establishment of the Commonwealth.
A.—4
762
Yearly session of Parliament. 6. There shall be a session of the Parliament once at least in every year, so that twelve months shall not intervene between the last sitting of the Parliament in one session and its first sitting in the next session. Pakt ll.—Thk Senate. The Senate. 7. The Senate shall be composed of Senators for each State, directly chosen by the people of the State, voting, until the Parliament otherwise provides, as one electorate. But until the Parliament of the Commonwealth otherwise provides, the Parliament of the State of Queensland, if that State be an Original State, may make laws dividing the State into divisions and determining the number of Senators to be chosen for each division, and in the absence of such provision the State shall be one electorate. Until the Parliament otherwise provides there shall be six Senators for each Original State. The Parliament may make laws increasing or diminishing the number of Senators for each State, but so that equal representation of the several Original States shall be maintained, and that no Original State shall have less than six Senators. The Senators shall be chosen for a term of six years, and the names of the Senators chosen for each State shall be certified by the Governor to the Governor-General. Qualification of electors. 8. The qualification of electors of Senators shall be in each State that which is prescribed by this Constitution, or by the Parliament, as the qualification for electors of members of the House of Representatives: but in the choosing of Senators each elector shall vote only once. Method of election of Senators. Times and places. 9. The Parliament of the Commonwealth may make laws prescribing the method of choosing Senators, but so that the method shall be uniform for all the States. Subject to any such law, the Parliament of each State may make laws prescribing the method of choosing the Senators for that State. The Parliament of a State may make laws for determining the times and places of elections of Senators for the State. Application of State laws. 10. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, but subject to this Constitution, the laws in force in each State for the time being relating to elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State shall, as nearly as practicable, apply to elections of Senators for the State. Failure to choose Senators. 11. The Senate may proceed to the despatch of business, notwithstanding the failure of anyState to provide for its representation in the Senate. Issue of writs. 12. The Governor of any State may cause writs to be issued for elections of Senators for the State. In case of the dissolution of the Senate the writs shall be issued within ten days from the proclamation of such dissolution. Rotation of Senators. 13. As soon as may be after the Senate first meets, and after each first meeting of the Senate following a dissolution thereof, the Senate shall divide the Senators chosen for each State into two classes, as nearly equal in number as practicable ; and the places of the Senators of the first class shall become vacant at the expiration of the third year, and the places of those of the second class at the expiration of the sixth year, from the beginning of their term of service ; and afterwards the places of Senators shall become vacant at the expiration of six years from the beginning of their term of service. The election to fill vacant places shall be made in the year at the expiration of which the places are to become vacant. For the purposes of this section the term of service of a Senator shall be taken to begin on the first day of January following the day of his election, except in the case of the first election and of the election next after any dissolution of the Senate, when it shall be taken to begin on the first day of January preceding the day of his election. Further provision for rotation. 14. Whenever the number of Senators for a State is increased or diminished, the Parliament of the Commonwealth may make such provision for the vacating of the places of Senators for the State as it deems necessary to maintain regularity in the rotation. Casual vaoancies. 15. If the place of a Senator becomes vacant before the expiration of his term of service, the Houses of Parliament of the State for which he was chosen shall, sitting and voting together, choose a person to hold the place until the expiration of the term, or until the election of a successor as hereinafter provided, whichever first happens. But if the Houses of Parliament of the State are not in session at the time when the vacancy is notified, the Governor of the State, with the advice of the Executive Council thereof, may appoint a person to hold the place until the expiration of fourteen days after the beginning of the next session of the Parliament of the State, or until the election of a successor, whichever first happens.
763
A.—4
At the next general election of members of the House of Eepresentatives, or at the next election of Senators for the State, whichever first happens, a successor shall, if the term has not then expired, be chosen to hold the place from the date of his election until the expiration of the term. The name of any Senator so chosen or appointed shall be certified by the Governor of the State to the Governor-General. Qualifications of Senator. 16. The qualifications of a Senator shall be the same as those of a member of the House of Eepresentatives. Election of President. 17. The Senate shall, before proceeding to the despatch of any other business, choose a Senator to be the President of the Senate; and as often as the office of President becomes vacant the Senate shall again choose a Senator to be the President. The President shall cease to hold his office if he ceases to be a Senator. He may be removed from office by a vote of the Senate, or he may resign his office or his seat by writing addressed to the Governor-General. Absence of President. 18. Before or during any absence of the President, the Senate may choose a Senator to perform his duties in his absence. Eesignation of Senator. 19. A Senator may, by writing addressed to the President, or to the Governor-General if there is no President or if the President is absent from the Commonwealth, resign his place, which thereupon shall become vacant. Vacancy by absence. 20. The place of a Senator shall become vacant if for two consecutive months of any session of the Parliament he, without the permission of the Senate, fails to attend the Senate. Vacancy to be notified. 21. Whenever a vacancy happens in the Senate, the President, or if there is no President or if the President is absent from the Commonwealth the Governor-General, shall notify the same to the Governor of the State in the representation of which the vacancy has happened. Quorum. 22. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the presence of at least one-third of the whole number of the Senators shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the Senate for the exercise of its powers. Voting in Senate. 23. Questions arising in the Senate shall be determined by a majority of votes, and each Senator shall have one vote. The President shall in all cases be entitled to a vote ; and when the votes are equal the question shall pass in the negative. Pakt lll.—The House of Ebpebsbntativbs. Constitution of House of Eepresentatives. 24. The House of Eepresentatives shall be composed of members directly chosen by the people of the Commonwealth, and the number of such members shall be, as nearly as practicable, twice the number of the Senators. The number of members chosen in the several States shall be in proportion to the respective numbers of their people, and shall, until the Parliament otherwise provides, be determined, whenever necessary, in the following manner : — (1.) A quota shall be ascertained by dividing the number of the people of the Commonwealth, as shown by the latest statistics of the Commonwealth, by twice the number of the Senators. (2.) The number of members to be chosen in each State shall be determined by dividing the number of the people of the State, as shown by the latest statistics of the Commonwealth, by the quota; and if on such division there is a remainder greater than one-half of the quota, one more member shall be chosen in the State. But notwithstanding anything in this section, five members at least shall be chosen in each Original State. Provision as to races disqualified from voting. 25. For the purposes of the last section, if by the law of any State all persons of any race are disqualified from voting at elections for the more numerous House of Parliament of the State, then, in reckoning the number of the people of the State or of the Commonwealth, persons of that race resident in that State shall not be counted. Representatives in first Parliament. 26. Notwithstanding anything in section twenty-four, the number of members to be chosen in each State at the first election shall be as follows: New South Wales, twenty-three; Victoria, twenty ; Queensland, eight; South Australia, six ; Tasmania, five. Provided that if Western Australia is an Original State, the numbers shall be as follows : New South Wales, twenty-six; Victoria, twenty-three; Queensland, nine; South Australia, seven; Western Australia, five ; Tasmania, five. Alteration of number of members. 27. Subject to this Constitution, the Parliament may make laws for increasing or diminishing the number of the members of the House of Eepresentatives. 97—A. 4.
764
A.—4
Duration of House of Representatives. 28. Every House of Representatives shall continue for three years from the first meeting of the House, and no longer, but may be sooner dissolved by the Governor-General. Eleofcoral divinions. 29. Until the Parliament of the Commonwealth otherwise provides, the Parliament of any State may make laws for determining the divisions in each State for which members of the House of Representatives may be chosen, and the number of members to be chosen for each division. A division shall not be formed out of parts of different States. In the absence of other provision, each State shall be one electorate. Qualification of electors. 30. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the qualification of electors of members of the House of Representatives shall be in each State that which is prescribed by the law of the State as the qualification of electors of the more numerous House of Parliament of the State ; but in the choosing of members each elector shall vote only once. Application of State laws. 31. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, but subject to this Constitution, the laws in force in each State for the time being relating to elections for the more numerous House of the Parliament of the State shall, as nearly as practicable, apply to elections in the State of members of the House of Representatives. Writs for general election. 32. The Governor-General in Council may cause writs to be issued for general elections of members of the House of Representatives. After the first general election, the writs shall be issued within ten days from the expiry of a House of Representatives or from the proclamation of a dissolution thereof. Writs for vacancies. 33. Whenever a vacancy happens in the House of Representatives, the Speaker shall issue his writ for the election of a new member; or, if there is no Speaker, or if he is absent from the Commonwealth, the Governor-General in Council may issue the writ. Qualifications of members. 34. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the qualifications of a member of the House of Representatives shall be as follows : — (1.) He must be of the full age of twenty-one years, and must be an elector entitled to vote at the election of members of the House of Representatives, or a person qualified to become such elector, and must have been for three years at the least a resident within the limits of the Commonwealth as existing at the time when he is chosen : (2.) He must be a subject of the Queen, either natural-born or for at least five years naturalised under a law of the United Kingdom, or of a colony which has become or becomes a State, or of the Commonwealth, or of a State. Eleotion of Speaker. 35. The House of Representatives shall, before proceeding to the despatch of any other business, choose a member to be the Speaker of the House, and as often as the office of Speaker becomes vacant the House shall again choose a member to be the Speaker. The Speaker shall cease to hold his office if he ceases to be a member. He may be removed from office by a vote of the House, or he may resign his office or his seat by writing addressed to the Governor-General. Absence of Speaker. 36. Before or during any absence of the Speaker, the House of Representatives may choose a member to perform his duties in his absence. Resignation of member. 37. A member may by writing addressed to the Speaker, or to the Governor-General if there is no Speaker or the Speaker is absent from the Commonwealth, resign his place, which thereupon shall become vacant. Vacancy by absence. 38. The place of a member shall become vacant if for two consecutive months of any session of the Parliament he, without the permission of the House, fails to attend the House. Quorum. 39. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the presence of at least one-third of the whole number of the members of the House of Representatives shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the House for the exercise of its powers. Voting in House of Representatives. 40. Questions arising in the House of Representatives shall be determined by a majority of votes other than that of the Speaker. The Speaker shall not vote unless the numbers are equal, and then he shall have a casting-vote.
765
A.—4,
Pabt IV.—Both Houses of the Parliament. Right of electors of States. 41. No adult person who has or acquires a right to vote at elections for the more numerous House of Parliament of a State shall, while the right continues, be prevented by any law of the Commonwealth from voting at elections for either House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth. Oath or affirmation of allegiance. 42. Every Senator and every member of the House of Representatives shall before taking his seat make and subscribe before the Governor-General, or some person authorised by him, an oath or affirmation of allegiance in the form set forth in the Schedule to this Constitution. Member of one House ineligible for other. 43. A member of either House of the Parliament shall be" incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a member of the other House. Disqualification. 44. Any person who— (1.) Is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign Power, or is a subject or a citizen, or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen, of a foreign Power : or (2.) Is attainted of treason, or has been convicted and is under sentence, or subject to be sentenced, for any offence punishable under the law of the Commonwealth or of a State by imprisonment for one year or longer : or (3.) Is an undischarged bankrupt or insolvent: or (4.) Holds any. office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth : or (5.) Has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company consisting of more than twentyfive persons : shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a Senator or a member of the House of Representatives. But subsection (4) does not apply to the office of any of the Queen's Ministers of State for the Commonwealth, or of any of the Queen's Ministers for a State, or to the receipt of pay, half-pay, or a pension by any person as an officer or member of the Queen's navy or army, or to the receipt of pay as an officer or member of the naval or military forces of the Commonwealth by any person whose services are not wholly employed by the Commonwealth. Vacancy on happening of disqualification. 45. If a Senator or member of the House of Representatives— (1.) Becomes subject to any of the disabilities mentioned in the last preceding section : or (2.) Takes the benefit, whether by assignment, composition, or otherwise, of any law relating to bankrupt or insolvent debtors : or (3.) Directly or indirectly takes or agrees to take any fee or honorarium for services rendered to the Commonwealth, or for services rendered in the Parliament to any person or State : his place shall thereupon become vacant. Penalty for sitting when disqualified. 46. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, any person declared by this Constitution to be incapable of sitting as a Senator or as a member of the House of Representatives shall, for every day on which he so sits, be liable to pay the sum of one hundred pounds to any person who sues for it in any Court of competent jurisdiction. Disputed elections. 47. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, any question respecting the qualification of a Senator or of a member of the House of Representatives, or respecting a vacancy in either House of the Parliament, and any question of a disputed election to either House, shall be determined by the House in which the question arises. Allowance to members. 48. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, each Senator and each member of the House of Representatives shall receive an allowance of four hundred pounds a year, to be reckoned from the day on which he takes his seat. Privileges, &c, of Houses. 49. The powers, privileges, and immunities of the Senate and of the House of Representatives, and of the members and the committees of each House, shall be such as are declared by the Parliament, and until declared shall be those of the Commons House of Parliament of the United Kingdom, and of its members and committeeSj at the establishment of the Commonwealth. Rules and orders. 50. Each House of the Parliament may make rules and orders with respect to— (1.) The mode in which its powers, privileges, and immunities may be exercised and upheld : (2.) The order and conduct of its business and proceedings, either separately or jointly with the other House.
A.—4
766
Part V.—Poweks op the Pakliament. Legislative powers of the Parliament. 51. The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to — (1.) Trade and commerce with other countries, and among the States : (2.) Taxation ; but so as not to discriminate between States or parts of States : (3.) Bounties on the production or export of goods, but so that such bounties shall be uniform throughout the Commonwealth : (4.) Borrowing money on the public credit of the Commonwealth : (5.) Postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services : (6.) The naval and military defence of the Commonwealth and of the several States, and the control of the forces to execute and maintain the laws of the Commonwealth : (7.) Lighthouses, lightships, beacons and buoys : (8.) Astronomical and meteorological observations : (9.) Quarantine: (10.) Fisheries in Australian waters beyond territorial limits : (11.) Census and statistics : (12.) Currency, coinage, and legal tender : (13.) Banking, other than State banking ; also State banking extending beyond the limits of the State concerned, the incorporation of banks, and the issue of paper money : (14.) Insurance, other than State insurance; also State insurance extending beyond the limits of the State concerned : (15.) Weights and measures : (16.) Bills of exchange and promissory notes : (17.) Bankruptcy and insolvency : (18.) Copyrights, patents of inventions and designs, and trade marks : (19.) Naturalisation and aliens : (20.) Foreign corporations, and trading or financial corporations formed within the limits of the Commonwealth : (21.) Marriage : (22.) Divorce and matrimonial causes; and, in relation thereto, parental rights, and the custody and guardianship of infants : (23.) Invalid and old-age pensions : (24.) The service and execution throughout the Commonwealth of the civil and criminal process and the judgments of the Courts of the States: (25.) The recognition throughout the Commonwealth of the laws, the public Acts and records, and the judicial proceedings of the States : (26.) The people of any race, other than the aboriginal race in any State, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws : (27.) Immigration and emigration : (28.) The influx of criminals : (29.) External affairs : (30.) The relations of the Commonwealth with the islands of the Pacific : (31.) The acquisition of property on just terms from any State or person for any purpose in respect of which the Parliament has power to make laws: » (32.) The control of railways with respect to transport for the naval and military purposes of the Commonwealth : (33.) The acquisition, with the consent of a State, of any railways of the State on terms arranged between the Commonwealth and the State: (34.) Railway construction and extension in any State with the consent of that State : (35.) Conciliation and arbitration for the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes extending beyond the limits of any one State : (36.) Matters in respect of which this Constitution makes provision until the Parliament otherwise provides: (37.) Matters referred to the Parliament of the Commonwealth by the Parliament or Parliaments of any State or States, but so that the law shall extend only to States by whose Parliaments the matter is referred, or which afterwards adopt the law : (38.) The exercise within the Commonwealth, at the request or with the concurrence of the Parliaments of all the States directly concerned, of any power which can at the establishment of this Constitution be exercised only by the Parliament of the United Kingdom or by the Federal Council of Australasia : (39.) Matters incidental to the execution of any power vested by this Constitution in the Parliament or in either House thereof, or in the Government of the Commonwealth, or in the Federal Judicature, or in any department or officer of the Commonwealth. Exclusive powers of the Parliament. 52. The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have exclusive power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to — (1.) The seat of government of the Commonwealth, and all places acquired] by the Commonwealth for public purposes : (2.) Matters relating to any department of the public service the control of which is by this Constitution transferred to the Executive Government of the Commonwealth : (3.) Other matters declared by this Constitution to be within the exclusive power of the Parliament.
767
A.—4
Powers of the Houses in respeot of legislation. 53. Proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys, or imposing taxation, shall not priginate in the Senate. But a proposed law shall not be taken to appropriate revenue or moneys, or to impose taxation, by reason only of its containing provisions for the imposition or appropriation of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand, or payment, or appropriation of fees for licenses, or fees for services under the proposed law. The Senate may not amend proposed laws imposing taxation, or proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government. The Senate may not amend any proposed law so as to increase any proposed charge or burden on the people. The Senate may at any stage return to the House of Bepresentatives any proposed law which the Senate may not amend, requesting, by message, the omission or amendment of any items or provisions therein. And the House of Eepresentatives may, if it thinks fit, make any of such omissions or amendments, with or without modifications. Except as provided in this section, the Senate shall have equal power with the House of Eepresentatives in respect of all proposed laws. Appropriation Bills. 54. The proposed law which appropriates revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government shall deal only with such appropriation. Tax Bill. 55. Laws imposing taxation shall deal only with the imposition of taxation, and any provision therein dealing with any other matter shall be of no effect. Laws imposing taxation, except laws imposing duties of Customs or of excise, shall deal with one subject of taxation only ; but laws imposing duties of Customs shall deal with duties of Customs only, and laws imposing duties of excise shall deal with duties of excise only. Eeoommendation of money votes. 56. A vote, resolution, or proposed law for the appropriation of revenue or moneys shall not be passed unless the purpose of the appropriation has in the same session been recommended by message of the Governor-General to the House in which the proposal originated. Disagreement between the Houses. 57. If the House of Eepresentatives "passes any proposed law, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Eepresentatives will not agree, and if after an interval of three months the House of Eepresentatives, in the same or the next session, again passes the proposed law, with or without any amendments which have been made, suggested, or agreed to by the Senate, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Eepresentatives will not agree, the Governor-General may dissolve the Senate and the House of Eepresentatives simultaneously. But such dissolution shall not take place within six months before the date of the expiry of the House of Eepresentatives by effiuxion of time. If after such dissolution the House of Eepresentatives again passes the proposed law, with or without any amendments which have been made, suggested, or agreed to by the Senate, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Eepresentatives will not agree, the Governor-General may convene a joint sitting of the members of the Senate and of the House of Eepresentatives. The members present at the joint sitting may deliberate and shall vote together upon the proposed law as last proposed by the House of Eepresentatives, and upon amendments, if any, which have been made therein by one House and not agreed to by the other, and any such amendments which are affirmed by an absolute majority of the total number of the members of the Senate and House of Eepresentatives shall be taken to have been carried ; and if the proposed law, with the amendments, if any, so carried, is affirmed by an absolute majority of the total number of the members of the Senate and House of Eepresentatives, it shall be taken to have been duly passed by both Houses of the Parliament, and shall be presented to the Governor-General for the Queen's assent. Royal assent to Bills. 58. When a proposed law passed by both Houses of the Parliament is presented to the GovernorGeneral for the Queen's assent, he shall declare, according to his discretion, but subject to this Constitution, that he assents in the Queen's name, or that he withholds assent, or that he reserves the law for the Queen's pleasure. Recommendations by Governor-General. The Governor-General may return to the House in which it originated any proposed law so presented to him, and may transmit therewith any amendments which he may recommend, and the Houses may deal with the recommendation. Disallowance by the Queen. 59. The Queen may disallow any law within one year from the Governor-General's assent, and such disallowance, on being made known by the Governor-General, by speech or message to each of the Houses of the Parliament, or by Proclamation, shall annul the law from the day when the disallowance is so made known. Signification of Queen's pleasure on Bills reserved. 60. A proposed law reserved for the Queen's pleasure shall not have any force unless and until, within two years from the day on which it was presented to the Governor-General for the Queen's assent, the Governor-General makes known, by speech or message to each of the Houses of the Parliament, or by Proclamation, that it has received the Queen's assent.
A.—4
768
CHAPTER lI.—THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT. • ■ Executive power. 61. The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen, and is exercisable by the Governor-General as the Queen's representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of this Constitution, and of the laws of the Commonwealth. Federal Executive Council. 62. There shall be a Federal Executive Council to advise the Governor-General in the government of the Commonwealth, and the members of the Council shall be chosen and summoned by the Governor-General and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure. Provisions referring to Governor-General. 63. The provisions of this Constitution referring to the Governor-General in Council shall be construed as referring to the Governor-General acting with the advice of the Federal Executive Council. Ministers of State. Ministers to sit in Parliament. 64. The Governor-General may appoint officers to administer such departments of State of the Commonwealth as the Governor-General in Council may establish. Such officers shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General. They shall be members of the Federal Executive Council, and shall be the Queen's Ministers of State for the Commonwealth. After the first general election no Minister of State shall hold office for a longer period than three months unless he is or becomes a Senator or a member of the House of Eepresentatives. Number of Ministers. 65. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the Ministers of State shall not exceed seven in number, and shall hold such offices as the Parliament prescribes, or, in the absence of provision, as the Governor-General directs. Salaries of Ministers. 66. There shall be payable to the Queen, out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Commonwealth, for the salaries of the Ministers of State, an annual sum which, until the Parliament otherwise provides, shall not exceed twelve thousand pounds a year. Appointment of Civil servants. 67. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the appointment and removal of all other officers of the Executive Government of the Commonwealth shall be vested in the Governor-General in Council, unless the appointment is delegated by the Governor-General in Council or by a law of the Commonwealth to some other authority. Command of naval and military foroes. 68. The command in chief of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth is vested in the Governor-General as the Queen's representative. Transfer of certain departments. 69. On a date or dates to be proclaimed by the Governor-General after the establishment of the Commonwealth, the following departments of the public service in each State shall become transferred to the Commonwealth : Posts, telegraphs, and telephones; Naval and military defence ; Lighthouses, lightships, beacons and buoys ; Quarantine. But the Departments of Customs and of Excise in each State shall become transferred to the Commonwealth on its establishment. Certain powers of Governors to vest in Governor-General. 70. In respect of matters which, under this Constitution, pass to the Executive Government of the Commonwealth, all powers and functions which at the establishment of the Commonwealth are vested in the Governor of a colony, or in the Governor of a colony with the advice of his Executive Council, or in any authority of a colony, shall vest in the Governor-General, or in the Governor-General in Council, or in the authority exercising similar powers under the Commonwealth, as the case requires. CHAPTER lII.—THE JUDICATURE. Judicial power and Courts. 71. The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Federal Supreme Court, to be called the High Court of Australia, and in such other Federal Courts as the Parliament creates, and in such other Courts as it invests with Federal jurisdiction. The High Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and so many other Justices, not less than two, as the Parliament prescribes. Judges' appointment, tenure, and remuneration. 72. The Justices of the High Court and of the other Courts created by the Parliament— (1.) Shall be appointed by the Governor-General in Council: (2.) Shall not be removed except by the Governor-General in Council, on an address from both Houses of the Parliament in the same session, praying for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity : (3.) Shall receive such remuneration as the Parliament may fix; but the remuneration shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
A.—4
769
Appellate jurisdiction of High Court. 73. The High Court shall have jurisdiction, with such exceptions and subject to such regulations as the Parliament prescribes, to hear and determine appeals from all judgments, decrees, orders, and sentences— (1.) Of any Justice or Justices exercising the original jurisdiction of the High Court: (2.) Of any other Federal Court, or Court exercising Federal jurisdiction, or of the Supreme Court of any State, or of any other Court of any State from which at the establishment of the Commonwealth an appeal lies to the Queen in Council: (3.) Of the Inter-State Commission, but as to questions of law only: and the judgment of the High Court in all such cases shall be final and conclusive. But no exception or regulation prescribed by the Parliament shall prevent the High Court from hearing and determining any appeal from the Supreme Court of a State in any matter in which at the establishment of the Commonwealth an appeal lies from such Supreme Court to the Queen in Council. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the conditions of and restrictions on appeals to the Queen in Council from the Supreme Courts of the several States shall be applicable to appeals from them to the High Court. Appeal to Queen in Council. 74. No appeal shall be permitted to the Queen in Council from a decision of the High Court upon any question, howsoever arising, as to the limits inter se of the constitutional powers of the Commonwealth and those of any State or States, or as to the limits inter se of the constitutional powers of any two or more States, unless the High Court shall certify that the question is one which ought to be determined by Her Majesty in Council. The High Court may so certify if satisfied that for any special reason the certificate should be granted, and thereupon an appeal shall lie to Her Majesty in Council on the question, without further leave. Except as provided in this section, this Constitution shall not impair any right which the Queen may be pleased to exercise by virtue of her Eoyal prerogative to grant special leave of appeal from the High Court to Her Majesty in Council. The Parliament may make laws limiting the matters in which such leave may be asked, but proposed laws containing any such limitation shall be reserved by the Governor-General for Her Majesty's pleasure. Original jurisdiction of High Court. 75. In all matters — (1.) Arising under any treaty : (2.) Affecting Consuls or other representatives of other countries : (3.) In which the Commonwealth, or a person suing or,being sued on behalf of the Commonwealth, is a party : (4.) Between States, or between residents of different States, or between a State and a resident of another State : (5.) In which a writ of mandamus or prohibition or an injunction is sought against an officer of the Commonwealth : the High Court shall have original jurisdiction. Additional original jurisdiction. 76. The Parliament may make laws conferring original jurisdiction on the High Court in any matter — (1.) Arising under this Constitution, or involving its interpretation : (2.) Arising under any laws made by the Parliament: (3.) Of Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction : (4.) Eclating to the same subject-matter claimed under the laws of different States. Power to define jurisdiction. 77. With respect to any of the matters mentioned in the last two sections the Parliament may make laws — (1.) Defining the jurisdiction of any Federal Court other than the High Court : (2.) Defining the extent to which the jurisdiction of any Federal Court shall be exclusive of that which belongs to or is invested in the Courts of the States : (3.) Investing any Court of a State with Federal jurisdiction. Proceedings against Commonwealth or State. 78. The Parliament may make laws conferring rights to proceed against the Commonwealth or a State in respect of matters within the limits of the judicial power. Number of Judges. 79. The Federal jurisdiction of any Court may be exercised by such number of Judges as the Parliament prescribes. Trial by jury. 80. The trial on indictment of any offence against any law of the Commonwealth shall be by jury, and every such trial shall be held in the State where the offence was committed, and if the offence was not committed within any State the trial shall be held at such place or places as the Parliament prescribes.
A.—4
770
CHAPTER IV.- FINANCE AND TRADE. Consolidated Revenue Fund. 81. All revenues or moneys raised or received by the Executive Government of the Commonwealth shall form one Consolidated Eevenue Fund, to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth in the manner and subject to the charges and liabilities imposed by this Constitution. Expenditure charged thereon. 82. The costs, charges, and expenses incident to the collection, management, and receipt of the Consolidated Eevenue Fund shall form the first charge thereon ; and the revenue of the Commonwealth shall in the first instance be applied to the payment of the expenditure of the Commonwealth. Money to be appropriated by law. 83. No money shall be drawn from the Treasury of the Commonwealth except under appropriation made by law. But until the expiration of one month after the first meeting of the Parliament the GovernorGeneral in Council may draw from the Treasury and expend such moneys as may be necessary for the maintenance of any department transferred to the Commonwealth, and for the holding of the first elections for the Parliament. Transfer of officers. 84. When any department of the public service of a State becomes transferred to the Commonwealth, all officers of the department shall become subject to the control of the Executive Government of the Commonwealth. Any such officer who is not retained in the service of the Commonwealth shall, unless he is appointed to some other office of equal emolument in the public service of the State, be entitled to receive from the State any pension, gratuity, or other compensation payable under the law of the State on the abolition of his office. Any such officer who is retained in the service of the Commonwealth shall preserve all his existing and accruing rights, and shall be entitled to retire ftom office at the time, and on the pension or retiring-allowance, which would be permitted by the law of the State if his service with the Commonwealth were a continuation of his service with the State. Such pension or retiringallowance shall be paid to him by the Commonwealth; but the State shall pay to the Commonwealth a part thereof, to be calculated on the proportion which his term of service with the State bears to his whole term of service, and for the purpose of the calculation his salary shall be taken to be that paid to him by the State at the time of the transfer. Any. officer who is, at the establishment of the Commonwealth, in the public service of a State, and who is, by consent of the Governor of the State with the advice of the Executive Council thereof, transferred to the public service of the Commonwealth, shall have the same rights as if he had been an officer of a department transferred to the Commonwealth and were retained in the service of the Commonwealth. Transfer of property of State. 85. When any department of the public service of a State is transferred to the Commonwealth— (1.) All property of the State of any kind used exclusively in connection with the department, shall become vested in the Commonwealth ; but, in the case of the depart- ' ments controlling Customs and excise and bounties, for such time only as the Governor-General in Council may declare to be necessary : (2.) The Commonwealth may acquire any property of the State of any kind used but not exclusively used in connection with the department; the value thereof shall, if no agreement can be made, be ascertained in, as nearly as may be, the manner in which the value of land, or of an interest in land, taken by the State for public purposes is ascertained under the law of the State in force at the establishment of the Commonwealth : (3.) The Commonwealth shall compensate the State for the value of any property passing to the Commonwealth under this section ; if no agreement can be made as to the mode of compensation it shall be determined under laws to be made by the Parliament: (4.) The Commonwealth shall, at the date of the transfer, assume the current obligations of the State in respect of the department transferred. 86. On the establishment of the Commonwealth, the collection and control of duties of Customs and of excise, and the control of the payment of bounties, shall pass to the Executive Government of the Commonwealth. 87. During a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter until the Parliament otherwise provides, of the net revenue of the Commonwealth from duties of Customs and of excise not more than one-fourth shall be applied annually by the Commonwealth towards its expenditure. The balance shall, in accordance with this Constitution, be paid to the several States, or applied towards the payment of interest on debts of the several States taken over by the Commonwealth. Uniform duties of Customs. 88. Uniform duties of Customs shall be imposed within two years after the establishment of the Commonwealth.
771
A.—4
Payment to States befora uniform duties. 89. Until the imposition of uniform duties of Customs— (1.) The Commonwealth shall credit to each State the revenues collected therein by the Commonwealth. (2.) The Commonwealth shall debit to eath State—■ (a.) The expenditure therein of the Commonwealth incurred solely for the maintenance or continuance, as at the time of transfer, of any department transferred from the State to the Commonwealth; (b.) The proportion of the State, according to the number of its people, in the other expenditure of the Commonwealth. (3.) The Commonwealth shall pay to each State month by month the balance (if any) in favour of the State. > Exclusive power over Customs, excise, and bounties. 90. On' the imposition of uniform duties of Customs the power of the Parliament to impose duties of Customs and of excise, and to grant bounties on the production or export of goods, shall become exclusive. On the imposition of uniform duties of Customs all laws of the several States imposing duties of Customs or of excise, or offering bounties on the production or export of goods, shall cease to have effect, but any grant of or agreement for any such bounty lawfully made by or under the authority of the Government of any State shall be taken to be good if made before the thirtieth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-eight, and not otherwise. Exceptions as to bounties. 91. Nothing in this Constitution prohibits a State from granting any aid to or bounty on mining for gold, silver, or other metals, nor from granting, with the consent of both Houses of the Parliament of the Commonwealth expressed by resolution, any aid to or bounty on the production or export of goods. Trade within the Commonwealth to be free. 92. On the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free. But, notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, goods imported before the imposition of uniform duties of Customs into any State, or into any colony which, whilst the goods remains therein, becomes a State, shall, on thence passing into another State within two years after the imposition of such duties, be liable to any duty chargeable on the importation of such goods into the Commonwealth, less any duty paid in respect of the goods on their importation. Payment to State for five years after uniform tariffs. 93. During the first five years after the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, and thereafter until the Parliament otherwise provides— (1.) The duties of Customs chargeable on goods imported into a State and afterwards passing into another State for consumption, and the duties of excise paid on goods produced or manufactured in a State and afterwards passing into another State for consumption, shall be taken to have been collected not in the former but in the latter State : (2.) Subject to the last subsection, the Commonwealth shall credit revenue, debit expenditure, and pay balances to the several States as prescribed for the period preceding the imposition of uniform duties of Customs. Distribution of surplus. 94. After five years from the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, the Parliament may provide, on such basis as it deems fair, for the monthly payment to the several States of all surplus revenue of the Commonwealth. Customs duties of Western Australia. 95. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the Parliament of the State of Western Australia, if that State be an Original State, may, during the first five years after the imposition of uniform duties of Customs, impose duties of Customs on goods passing into that State and not originally imported from beyond the limits of the Commonwealth ; and such duties shall be collected by the Commonwealth. But any duty so imposed on any goods shall not exceed during the first of such years the duty chargeable on the goods under the law of Western Australia in force at the imposition of uniform duties, and shall not exceed during the second, third, fourth, and fifth of such years respectively four-fifths, three-fifths, two-fifths, and one-fifth of such latter duty ; and all duties imposed under this section shall cease at the expiration of the fifth year after the imposition of uniform duties. If at any time during the five years the duty on any goods under this section is higher than the duty imposed by the Commonwealth on the importation of the like goods, then such higher duty shall be collected on the goods when imported into Western Australia from beyond the limits of the Commonwealth. Financial assistance to States. • 96. During a period of ten years after the establishment of the Commonwealth, and thereafter until the Parliament otherwise provides, the Parliament may grant financial assistance to any State on such terms and conditions as the Parliament thinks fit. 98—A. 4.
A.—4,
772
Audit. 97. Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the laws in force in any colony which has become or becomes a State, with respect to the receipt of revenue and the expenditure of money on account of the Government of the colony, and the review and audit of such receipt and expenditure, shall apply to the receipt of revenue and the expenditure of-money on account of the Commonwealth in the State, in the same manner as if the Commonwealth, or the Government, or an officer of the Commonwealth, were mentioned whenever the colony, or the Government or an officer of the colony, is mentioned. Trade and commerce inoludes navigation and State railways. 98. The power of the Parliament to make laws with respect to trade and commerce extends to navigation and shipping, and to railways the property of any State. Commonwealth not to give preference. 99. The Commonwealth shall not, by any law or regulation of trade, commerce, or revenue, give preference to one State or any part thereof over another State or any part thereof. Nor abtidge right to use water. 100. The Commonwealth shall not, by any law or regulation of trade or commerce, abridge the right of a State or of the residents therein to the reasonable use of the waters of rivers for conservation or irrigation. Inter-State Commission. 101. There shall be an Inter-State Commission, with such powers of adjudication and administration as the Parliament deems necessary, for the execution and maintenance within the Commonwealth of the provisions of this Constitution relating to trade and commerce, and of all laws made thereunder. Parliament may forbid preferences by State. 102. The Parliament may by any law with respect to trade or commerce forbid, as to railways, any preference or discrimination by any State, or by any authority constituted under a State, if such preference or discrimination is undue and unreasonable, or unjust to any State; due regard being had to the financial responsibilities incurred by any State in connection with the construction and maintenance of its railways. But no preference or discrimination shall, within the meaning of this section, be taken to be undue and unreasonable, or unjust to any State, unless so adjudged by the Inter-State Commission. Commissioners' appointment, tenure, and remuneration. 103. The members of the Inter-State Commission— (1.) Shall be appointed by the Governor-General in Council: (2.) Shall hold, office for seven years, but may be removed within that time by the Governor-General in Council, on an address from both Houses of the Parliament in the same session praying for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity: (3.) Shall receive such remuneration as the Parliament may fix; but such remuneration shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. Saving of certain rates. 104. Nothing in this Constitution shall render unlawful any rate for the carriage of goods upon a railway the property of a State if the rate is deemed by the Inter-State Commission to be necessary for the development of the territory of the State, and if the rate applies equally to goods within the State and to goods passing into the State from other States. Taking over public'debts of States. 105. The Parliament may take over from the States their public debts as existing at the establishment of the Commonwealth, or a proportion thereof, according to the respective numbers of their people as shown by the latest statistics of the Commonwealth, and may convert, renew, or consolidate such debts, or any part thereof; and the States shall indemnify the Commonwealth in respect of the debts taken over, and thereafter the interest payable in respect of the debts shall be deducted and retained from the portions of the surplus revenue of the Commonwealth payable to the several States; or if such surplus is insufficient, or if there is no surplus, then the deficiency or the whole amount shall be paid by the several States. CHAPTER V.—THE STATES. Saving of Constitutions. 106. The Constitution of each State of the Commonwealth shall, subject to this Constitution, continue as at the establishment of the Commonwealth, or as at the admission or establishment of the State, as the case may be, until altered in accordance with the Constitution of the State. Saving of power of State Parliaments. 107. Every power of the Parliament of a colony which has become or becomes a State shall, unless it is by this Constitution exclusively vested in the Parliament of the Commonwealth or withdrawn from the Parliament of the State, continue as at the establishment of the Commonwealth, or as at the admission or establishment of the State, as the case may be.
773
A.—4
Saving of State laws. 108. Every law in force in a colony which has become or becomes a State, and relating to any matter within the powers of the Parliament of the Commonwealth, shall, subject to this Constitution, continue in force in the State; and, until provision is made in that behalf by the Parliament of the Commonwealth, the Parliament of the 'State shall have such powers of alteration and of repeal in respect of any such law as the Parliament of the colony had until the colony became a State. Inconsistency of laws. 109. When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid. Provisions referring to Governor. 110. The provisions of this Constitution relating to the Governor of a State extend and apply to the Governor for the time being of the State, or other chief executive officer or administrator of the government of the State. States may surrender territory. 111. The Parliament of a State may surrender any part of the State to the Commonwealth; and upon such surrender, and the acceptance thereof by the Commonwealth, such part of the State shall become subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commonwealth. States may levy charges for inspeotion laws. 112. After uniform duties of Customs have been imposed, a State may levy on imports or exports, or on goods passing into or out of the State, such charges as may bs necessary for executing the inspection laws of the State; but the net produce of all charges so levied shall be for the use of the Commonwaalth; and any such inspection laws may be annulled by the Parliament of the Commonwealth. Intoxicating liquids. 113. All fermented, distilled, or other intoxicating liquids passing into any State, or remaining therein for use, consumption, sale, or storage, shall be subject to the laws of the State as if such liquids had been produced in the State. States may not raise forces. Taxation of property of Commonwealth or State. 114. A State shall not, without the consent of the Parliament of the Commonwealth, raise or maintain any naval or military force, or impose any tax on property of any kind belonging to the Commonwealth, nor shall the Commonwealth impose any tax on property of any kind belonging to a State. States not to coin money. 115. A State shall not coin money, nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts. Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion. 116. The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth. Bights of residents in States. 117. A subject of the Queen resident in any State shall not be subject in any other State to any disability or discrimination which would not be equally applicable to him if he were a subject of the Queen resident in such other State. Recognition of laws, &c, of States. 118. Pull faith and credit shall be given throughout the Commonwealth to the laws, the public Acts and records, and the judicial proceedings of every State. Protection of States from invasion and violenoe. 119. The Commonwealth shall protect every State against invasion, and, on the application of the Executive Government of the State, against domestic violence. Custody of offenders against laws of the Commonwealth. 120. Every State shall make provision for the detention in its prisons of persons accused or convicted of offences against the laws of the Commonwealth, and for the punishment of persons convicted of such offences, and the Parliament of the Commonwealth may make laws to give effect to this provision. CHAPTER VI.—NEW STATES. New States may be admitted or established. 121. The Parliament may admit to the Commonwealth or establish new States, and may upon such admission or establishment make or impose such terms and conditions, including tho extent of representation in either House of the Parliament, as it thinks fit. Government of territories. 122. The Parliament may make laws for the government of any territory surrendered by any State to and accepted by the Commonwealth, or of any territory placed by the Queen under the authority of and accepted by the Commonwealth, or otherwise acquired by the Commonwealth, and may allow the representation of such territory in either House of the Parliament to the extent and on the terms which it thinks fit.
A.—4.
774
Alteration of limits of States. 123. The Parliament of the Commonwealth may, with the consent of the Parliament of a State, and the approval of the majority of the electors of the State voting upon the question, increase, diminish, or otherwise alter the limits of the State, upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed on, and may, with the like consent, make provision respecting the effect and operation of any increase or diminution or alteration of territory in relation to any State affected. Formation of new States. 124. A new State may be formed by separation of territory from a State, but only with the consent of the Parliament thereof; and a new State may be formed by the union of two or more States, or parts of States, but only with the consent of the Parliaments of the States affected. CHAPTER VII.—MISCELLANEOUS. Seat of Government. 125. The seat of Government of the Commonwealth shall be determined by the Parliament, and shall be within territory which shall have been granted to or acquired by the Commonwealth, and shall be vested in and belong to the Commonwealth, and shall be in the State of New South Wales, and be distant not less than one hundred miles from Sydney. Such territory shall contain an area of not less than one hundred square miles, and such portion thereof as shall consist of Crown lands shall be granted to the Commonwealth without any payment therefor. The Parliament shall sit at Melbourne until it meet at the seat of Government. Power to Her Majesty to authorise Governor-General to appoint deputies. 126. The Queen may authorise the Governor-General to appoint any person, or any persons jointly or severally, to be his deputy or deputies within any part of the Commonwealth, and in that capacity to exercise during the pleasure of the Governor-General such powers and functions of the Governor-General as he thinks tit to assign to such deputy or deputies, subject to any limitations expressed or directions given by the Queen; but the appointment of such deputy or deputies shall not affect the exercise by the Governor-General himself of any power or function. Aborigines not to be counted in reckoning population. 127. In reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives shall not be counted.
EXHIBIT No. 32. Customs Eevenue, 1900-1901. (No. 675/50.) Department of Trade and Customs. Wellington, 13th May, 1901. Sir, —In accordance with your request of the 10th instant, I have to inform you that the amount of Customs revenue received during the year ending 31st March, 1901, was £2,180,861 11s. 4d. The amount of excise duty was as follows : Beer, £85,170 10s. ; tobacco, cigars, &c, £3,871. I have, &c, Hon. Colonel Pitt, M.L.C., W. T. Glasgow, Chairman, Federal Eoyal Commission, Wellington. Secretary and Inspector.
775
A.—4
INDEX
Adelaide, 618. Administration, Federal, xvi, 54, 99, 165, 277, 312, 349, 372, 389, 403, 419, 497, 503, 513, 539, 547, 554, 557, 598, 663. Administration, Local, 56, 99, 107, 338, 400, 401, 423, 513, 621, 652, 663. Aggers, J., Auckland, 404. Agriculture, xvi, 52, 155, 161, 178, 185, 197, 210, 215, 256, 262, 286, 291, 310, 311, 335, 338, 352, 355, 359, 365, 369, 382, 389, 413, 420, 423, 430, 433, 440, 441, 443, 450, 451, 455, 521, 528, 538, 543, 552, 555, 572, 581, 589, 592, 607, 623, 637, 641, 664, 666, 669, 670, 673, 674, 093, 723, 724. Alderton, G. E., Auckland, 468. Allan, R., Christchurch, 178. American trade with New Zealand and Australia, 63, 68, 70, 79, 180, 224, 235, 294, 338, 406, 407, 429, 631, 640. Anderson, A., Christchurch, 249. Anderson, R. A., Dunedin, 14. Andrew, Rev. J. C, Wairarapa, 358. Appeal, Court of, xv, 38, 44, 98, 107, 109, 112, 212, 272, 275, 320, 331, 338, 348, 350, 386, 474, 551, 566, 664, 682, 759. Atkin, W., Auckland, 458. Auckland, 343. Baldwin, E. S., Wellington, 279. Barr, P., Dunedin, 58. Barton, Right Hon. E., Sydney, 478. Beavan, A. W., Christchuroh, 214. Beet-root industry, 615. Berry, Rev. J., Adelaide, 650. Beverley, F., Christchurch, 250. Bird, Hon. B. S., Hobart, 568. Bisley, A. H., Nelson, 468. Blackwell, G. H., Christchurch, 184. Booth, G. T., Christchurch, 172. Booth, W., Wellington, 307. Boot-trade, xix, 9, 47, 50, 68, 70, 79, 178, 224, 233, 247, 248, 249, 260, 286, 360, 392, 396, 404, 405, 407, 420, 446, 640. Bowron, G., Christchurch, 245. Braddon, Hon. Sir E., Hobart, 557. " Braddon-blot," The, xii, xiii, 99, 474, 484, 499, 528, 550, 554, 557, 580, 599, 656, 661, 662, 694, 697. Bridger, A. H., Dunedin, 70. Brisbane, 665. Broad, C. J., Invercargill, 13. Brown, J., Auckland, 423. Brown, S., Wellington, 258. Brown, S. C, Dunedin, 47. Bruce, G. J., Sydney, 489. Burford, W., Adelaide, 635. Buckland, W. P., Auckland, 433. Burgess, Hon. W. H., Hobart, 553. Burt, A., Dunedin, 60. Burton, E. W., Auckland, 463. Cable, W., Wellington, 299. Caldwell, R., Adelaide, 641. Candle-trade, xix, 179, 250, 258, 457, 636. Cargill, E. 8., Dunedin, 141. Carr, W., Dunedin, 80. Caselberg, M., Wellington, 311. Cement-trade, 123. Chambers, J., Auckland, 415. Chapman, F. R., Dunedin, 36. Chapman, M., Wellington, 271. Cheal, P. E., Auckland, 397. Christchurch, 143. Chrystal, W., Christchurch, 180. Clark, Hon. Mr. Justice, Hobart, 547. Clark, M. A., Auckland, 368. Clegg, T. 8., Sydney, 492, 712, 718, 719. Climate, Influence of, 51, 57, 65, 85, 103, 110, 147, 159, 161, 180, 293, 308, 324, 348, 353, 397, 398, 447, 461, 464, 465, 491, 565, 619, 630, 651, 660, 661, 666, 698. Clothing-trade, xix, 77, 392, 429, 454. Coal, 62, 138, 299, 375, 634, 659, 687. Coghlan, T. A., Sydney, 474, 720, 721. Cohen, M., Dunedin, 97. Coles, G. A., Auckland, 405. Collins, A., Wellington, 312. Collins, Captain R. M., Melbourne, 585. Coloured labour, xx, xxiii, 31, 33, 39, 81, 96, 104, 109, 138, 155, 171, 181, 216, 223, 254, 271, 297, 306, 308, 311, 312, 315, 325, 329, 348, 360, 374, 383, 386, 398, 409, 414, 422, 423, 439, 462, 479, 498, 504, 513, 518, 536, 560, 565, 581, 598, 615, 619, 651, 654, 658, 663, 665, 674, 676, 683, 686, 688, 694, 697, 698, 702. Commission, Copy of the, v. 99—A. 4.
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, vii, 37, 44, 98, 175, 313, 347, 363, 383, 478, 498, 519, 539, 563, 570, 608, 655, 656, 661, 760. Conciliation and arbitration, xix, 16, 53, 58, 65, 72, 112, 185, 222, 247, 258, 266, 306, 316, 327, 337, 369, 474, 483, 504, 520, 551, 565, 575, 607, 614, 620, 622, 625, 661, 690, 758. Contents, iii. Conversion of loans, xiii, 76, 287, 506, 507, 509, 560, 562, 597, 655, 658. Cooper, A. H., Wellington, 335. Copper, 62. Corrigaa, A. A., Wellington, 325. Cowley, Hon. A. S., Brisbane, 676. Crabtree, W., Wellington, 304. Creed, Hon. J. M., Sydney, 514. Crosby, Hon. W., Hobart, 556. Curzon-Siggers, Rev. W., Dunedin, 108. Customs revenue, 63, 67, 99, 108, 120, 153, 174, 184, 208, 213, 215, 252, 257, 340, 350, 351, 438, 450, 464, 489, 499, 503, 557, 599, 620, 627, 653, 657, 723, 774. Dalrymple, J. T., Rangitikei, 335. Danks, J., Melbourne, 612. Darlow, W., Christchurch, 248. Davidson, A., Sydney, 493. Davis, H., Adelaide, 640. Dawson, A., Brisbane, 702. Dearsley, H., Auckland, 396. Defence, xiv, 17, 22, 38, 55, 85,109,136,146,154,193,211, 269, 297, 307, 312, 324, 351, 357, 358, 371, 388, 398, 430, 433, 467, 469, 471,-474, 508, 516, 533, 550, 557, 585, 590, 601, 620, 704. Derham, Hon. P. T., Melbourne, 613. Dewar, A., Auckland, 411. Dibbs, Sir G. R., Sydney, 539. Dick, R., Auckland, 442. Dineen, T. 8., Auckland, 460. Distance from Australia, xv, xxiii, 52, 57, 75, 84, 100, 106, 113, 137, 143, 144, 155, 170, 175, 198, 203, 210, 265, 293, 306, 312, 315. 328, 334, 338, 349, 358, 360, 368, 371, 385, 387, 400, 415, 417, 424, 430, 448, 450, 463, 466, 467, 473, 496, 503, 508, 511, 518, 526, 554, 561, 564, 566, 569, 580, 598, 610, 621, 636, 650, 655, 661, 663, 758. Dobson, Hon. H., Hobart, 570. Donald, A. 8., Auckland, 373. Dowling, 8., Sydney, 524. Downes, Major-General, Melbourne, 590. Dredge-building, 15, 16, 62, 65, 93, 303, 605. Duncan, J., Adelaide, 629. Duncan, J., Wellington, 340. Dunedin, 26. Duthie, J., Wellington, 290. Engineering, 14, 18, 228, 299, 301, 304, 305, 440, 460, 605, 612, 624, 632. Entrican, A. J., Auckland, 454. Errata, iv. Evans, Rev. W. A., Wellington, 306. Evidence, Minutes of, 1. Ewington, F. G., Auckland, 469. Parqubar, G. P., Dunedin, 68. Faulkner, J. W., Dunedin, 86. Pawcus, J., Auckland, 438. Fenton, J. J., Melbourne, 588, 724, 753. Fielder, H., Wellington, 336. Financial aspect of federation, xi, 42, 57, 61, 95, 98, 103, 135, 146, 147, 155, 159, 179, 181, 257, 262, 269, 287, 309, 315, 345, 350, 359, 364, 368, 380, 399, 401, 408, 419, 434, 451, 460, 470, 472, 473, 480, 485, 499, 502, 533, 539, 540, 547, 553, 557, 561, 563, 566, 568, 570, 580, 589, 594, 596, 609, 618, 641, 652, 656, 660, 682, 685, 694, 702, 723, 753, 755, 758. Finn, Colonel H., Brisbane, 704. Fiah-trade, 437. Fisher, J., Christchurch, 249. Fliirscheim, M., Auckland, 407. Forrest, Rt. Hon. Sir J., Melbourne, 652. Freeth, P. C, Wellington, 324. French, Major-General, Sydney, 474. Friedlander, H., Ashburton, 154. Frostick, J. A., Christchurch, 233. Frozen meat, 138, 182, 371, 436, 645, 671. Fruit-trade, xviii, 19, 113, 121, 240, 333, 384, 395, 396, 403, 431, 452, 545, 548, 552, 571, 575, 608, 623, 637, 653. Fungus, 453.
A.—4
776
Furniture.trade, xix, 31, 54, 80, 152, 226, 285, 326, 336, 398, 412, 426, 576, 628, 717, 719. Gawler, 624. Gilkison, P. L., Invercargill, 12. Glendining, R., Dunedin, 66. Glasgow, W. T., Wellington, 340, 774. Glassey, T., Brisbano, 698. Gordon, Brigadier-General, Melbourne, 601. Gordon, P. R., Brisbane, 671. Gould, J., Christchurch, 197. Grain-trade, 1, 7,12,14, 17, 24, 25, 30, 125, 144,156, 160, 193, 218, 241, 335, 359, 368, 377, 424, 427, 437, 440, 459, 493, 522, 535, 615. Grant, A. 0., Brisbane, 668. Gray, W., Wellington, 322. Hadfield, T., Auckland, 360. Hall, E., Auckland, 451. Hall, Hon. Sir J., Christchurch, 210. Hall, R., Auckland, 423. Harper, W. J., Auckland, 409. Hat-manufacture, 75. Heeles, M. G., Wellington, 333. Hislop, Hon. T. W., Wellington, 326. Hobart, 547. Hodgson, T., Auckland, 407. Holden, H. J., Adelaide, 631. Holder, Hon. P. W., Adelaide, 618. Hood, W., Dunedin, 50. Hudson, R., Dunedin, 124. Hughes, J., Brisbane, 665. Hume, J., Auckland, 440. Humphreys, G., Christchurch, 202. Hunt, W. D., Invercargill, 7. Hurrell, H., Wellington, 285. Imperial federation, 90, 103, 117, 137, 191, 284, 306, 345, 381, 385, 401, 560, 661, 673, 683. Imperinl relations, xvi. Imports and exports, xvii, 22, 28, 49, 54, 130, 143, 162, 168, 173, 204, 216, 219, 236, 289, 291, 315, 355, 371, 444, 453, 721, 726, 735, 736, 745, 749, 750, 751. Inter-State Commission, xxi, 96, 169, 345, 365, 399, 485, 512, 695. Invercaigill, 1. Interchange of trade between New Zealand and Australia, 141. 289, 293, 389, 411, 432, 507, 740, 748, 749, 750, 758. Iron-trad(>, xix, 13, 24, 64, 87, 299, 301, 379, 415, 440, 456, •605, 631, 632, 643, 687, 717. Isaacs, A. L., Dunedin, 77. Izett, J., Wellington, 282. Jakins, G. S., Christchurch, 204. Johnson, J. R., Melbourne, 605. Johnston, J., Invercargill, 14. Johnston, R. M., Hobart, 552, 561, 755. Jones, J. M., Invercargill, 18. Justice, Administration of, xv., 473. Kaye, A., Christchurch, 250. Kays, J., Wellington, 294. Kelly, J. L., Wellington, 268. Kemptborrie, T. W., Dunedin, 117. Kenna, P., Brisbane, 688. Kennedy, M., Wellington, 261. Kennedy, T., Melbourue, 592. King, P. M.. Auckland, 459. King, J., Auckland, 417. Kirkbride, M, M., Auckland, 449. Kirkpatrick, S., Nelson, 333. Labour, Hours of, xix, 60, 63, 70, 75, 78, 83, 113, 128, 151, 185, 189, 222, 232, 248, 266, 287, 295, 312, 351, 373, 379, 405, 491, 510, 565. 569, 575, 605, 612, 620, 624, 625, 629, 630, 633, 643, 644, 667, 717. Labour in New Zealand and Australia, Comparative efficiency of, 59, 85, 104, 183, 237, 405, 461, 630, 666. Labour legislation, xix, 58, 65, 78, 102, 131, 144, 247, 304, 313,327,335,336, 361, 381, 392, 397, 404, 408, 426, 439, 459, 488, 492, 507, 510, 519, 537, 551, 559, 575, 582, 597, 612, 614, 625, 633, 635, 641, 655, 684, 686, 690, 758. Laishley, Dr. R., Auckand, 350. Lasoelles, E. H., 664. Leather-trade, 68, 70, 245, 373, 397, 406, 407, 455, 492, 631, 641, 644. Lees, C. A., Chrifitchurch, 241. Legislative Independence (v. Political Independence). Lethbridge, J.. Dunedin, 133, Lewis, Hon. N. E., Hob«t, 563. Lippiatt, W. E., Auckland, 430. Little, R., Sydney, 521. Low, G., Auckland, 395.
Lowrie, W., Adelaide, 637. Luke, J. P., Wellington, 301. Lynch, T., Wellington, 295. Macarthy, T. G., Wellington, 264. Machinery, 61, 214. Maekay, j., Wellington, 266, 707. Mackenzie, M. J. S., Dunedin, 105. Mackie, J. H., Auckland, 403. Mackley, J. C, Inveroargill, 21. Macky, J. 0., Auckland, 441. Maclaurin, Hon. H. N., Sydney, 511. Macmurray, Rev. G., Auckland, 385. Macpherson, M., Wellington, 280. Madocks, Major W., Wellington, 297. Mallard, P., Dunedin, 95. Mallee country, 594, 596, 638, 639, 664; Malticg-trade, 195, 335, 468, 611, 666. Manufactures, xviii, 9, 53, 63, 65, 67, 83, 92, 99, 101, 131, 134, 144, 151, 159, 175, 180, 191, 199, 253, 259, 320, 338, 365, 369, 373, 379, 387, 392, 394, 398, 403, 412, 416, 419, 423, 424, 436, 441, 454, 455, 464, 493, 512, 552, 569, 588, 613, 627, 636, 657, 663, 720. Maoris, xxii, xxiii, 225, 315, 333, 338, 358, 364, 386, 399, 436, 473, 483, 490, 567, 598, 651, 656, 757. Martin, D., Melbourne, 572. Martin, J. P., Gawler, 632. Masefleld, T. T., Auckland, 379. May, A., Gawler, 624. Meat-trade, 371, 416, 436, 608, 668, 671. Meeks, Hon. A. W., Sydney, 532. Melbourne, 572, 652. Melland, E., Dunedin, 338. Mennie, J. M., Auckland, 394. Milnes, J. W., Dunedin, 113. Mining industry, 397, 412, 427. Morran, J. M., Auckland, 454. Morris, W. A., Invercargill, 9. Morrison, J. H., Dunedin, 73. Myers, J. S., Christchurch, 221. Mr-Cnllough, J. A., Christchuroh, 221. MoDougall, R. E., Christchurch, 187. McKinlay, R., Dunedin, 79. McLachlan, J. M., Auckland, 465. McLaughlin, W., Auckland, 359. McLean, Hon. A., Melbourne, 607. McLean, P., Brisbane, 674. McMillan, Hon. Sir W., Sydney, 496. Nash, R. L., Sydney, 502, 755. Nathan, D. J., Wellington, 277. National types and character, Difference in (v. Climate, Influence of). Nelson, Hon. Sir H. M., Brisbane, 694. Newton, W., ChriHtchnrch, 226. Nicol, G. W., Invercargill, 17. Northern Territory, xxii, 110, 309, 426, 519, 535, 619, 622. Oakden, P., Dunedin, 123. Occupations of population, 67, 203, 718, 719. Onions, xviii, 156, 162, 180, 197, 221, 226, 255, 545. O'Brien, J., Auckland, 467. O'Connor, Hon. R. E , Sydney, 472. Ord, H., Melbourne, 575, 708, 719. O'Regan, P. J., Wellington, 313, 545. Overton, H., Christchurch, 237. Parapara, Mineral deposits at, 24, 94, 101,156, 230, 260, 300, 303, 399, 415, 416 417, 659. Park, J., Auckland, 356. Patents, 216, 279. Passmore, J. L., Dunedin, 115. Paterson, A. S., Duuedin, 26. Peacock, Hon. A. J., Melbourne, 580. Peacock, T., Auckland, 371. Peacocke, G. L., Auckland, 469. Pearse, A. W., Brisbane, 673. Pharazyn, C, Wellington, 340. Phillips, C, Wairarapa, 466. Political independence, x, 46, 49, 54, 56, 61, 95, 105,135,142, 155, 172, 181, 211, 216, 229, 269, 306, 316, 327, 339, 346, 351, 363, 373, 379, 381, 395, 428, 429, 442, 455, 466, 467, 469, 511, 564, 652, 6fJO. Postal and tel. graphic, xv, 182, 322, 472, 483, 497, 510, 519, 538, 547, 559, 567. 571, 597, 620, 621, 656, 685. Potatoes, xviii, 156, 11)7, 205, 219, 255, 332, 448, 495, 522, 535, 543, 551, 552, 608. Powley, G. H., Auckland, 429. Preedy, W., Sydney, 528. Printing-trade, 232. Proceedings, Minutes of, xxv.
777
A.—4
Produce-trade, 54, 125, 132, 173, 204, 226, 244, 311, 380, 395. 437, 443, 449, 451, 456, 459, 493, 502, 522, 611, 624, 639! 641, 645, 666, 668, 672, 674, 722. Production of industries in Australasia, Value of, 720. Purohas, Dr. A. G., Auckland, 428. Quinn, T. M., Auckland, 459. Railways, xxiii, 22, 105, 119, 145, 161, 208, 238, 276, 330, 364, 367, 473, 480, 499, 503, 508, 512, 536, 540, 549, 560, 564, 571, 598, 621, 632, 653, 656, 660, 662, 663, 669, 696, 697. Raymond, I. W., Invercargill, 24. Reciprocity, xxii, 57, 97, 103, 105, 149, 160, 182, 198, 214, 251, 256, 282, 320, 346, 355, 391, 433, 449, 456, 471, 487, 536, 538, 541, 568, 571, 585, 593, 598, 622, 652, 655, 661. Recce, W., Christchurcb, 150. Re-exports, xviii, 68, 384, 536. Reid, D., Dunedin, 56. Reid, J. M., Adelaide, 644. Reid, N., Wellington, 252. Report of Commissioners, vii. Representation in Parliament, 54, 57, 87, 100, 104, 135, 175, 272, 273, 293, 316, 330, 352, 372, 373, 386, 396, 404, 419, 482, 561, 663, 683. Reynolds, W. 8., Dunedin, 125. Rhodes, A. E. G., Christchuroh, 225. Riohmond, 543. Ritohie, J. M., Dunedin, 134. Robertson, D., Wellington, 305. Rodda, H., Dunedin, 49. Rolleaton, Hon. W., Christchuroh, 343. Roper, B. W., Chr'stchurch, 162. Ross, J. C, Dunedin, 75. Ross, J., Wellington, 339. Ross, W., Inverc*rgill, 15. Russell, A. E., Manawatu, 311. Russell, P. R., Wellington, 286. Rutherford, J. G., Auckland, 453. Rutledge, Hon. A., Brisbane, 682. Rutter, G., Sydney, 519, 717. Sanford, A., Auckland, 370. Sargood, P. R., Duncdin, 76. Schey, W. F.. Sydney, 510. Scholefleld, W. R., Brisbane, 692. Scott, J. R., Dunedin, 132. Scott, J. L., Christchurch, 228. Scott, W. J., Brisbane, 669. See, Hon. J., Sydney, 471. ■ Shaoklock, J. B , Dunedin, 87. Shipping, 122, 130, 157, 184, 239, 271. Simpson, A. A., Adelaide, 643. Simpson, R. X., Rangitikei, 310. Skervington, R. W., Adelaide, 645. Slater, R., Dunenin, 58, 757. Soap-trade, xix, 179, 250, 258, 637. Social aspects of federation, xix, 39, 51, 69, 96, 102, 109, 147, 180. 290, 320, 325, 396, 425, 436, 438, 470,498, 565, 651. South Sea Isiand->, xxiv, 39, 45, 325, 330, 374, 388, 415, 457, 467, 474 497, 501 503, 536, 540, 558, 563, 572, 599, 602, 610, 652, 656, 661, 682, 684, 687.
Sparrow, J., Dunedin, 91. Spragg, W., Auckland, 380. ' Stead, G. G., Christchurch, 143. Stevenson, W., Dunedin, 120. Stout, Hon. Sir R., Letter from, 759. Sturges, A., Auckland, 384. Sugar-trade, 159, 183, 220, 251, 252, 316, 379, 436, 457, 616. 620, 665, 674, 676, 688, 697, 698, 702, 725. Sydney, 471, 656. Tariff, xviii, xxiii, 73, 75, 176, 205, 214, 216, 220, 269, 290, 327, 340, 360, 369, 382, 405, 407, 422, 427, 429, 454, 467, 471, 489, 499, 501, 503, 505, 514, 533, 538, 548, 557, 559, 612, 618, 622, 629, 635, 641, 644, 676, 684, 694, 758. Technical education, 61, 101. Teece, R., Sydney, 656. Thomas, D., Ashburton, 158. Thomson, J. C, Dunedin, 83. Timber-trade, 13, 18, 84, 285, 307, 372, 413, 423, 425, 467, 468, 495, 552, 630, 687. Tin, 62, 613. Turner, Hon. Sir G., Melbourne, 596. Unification, xi, 504, 540, 657, 660, 662, 663, 683, 685, 696. Upton, J. H., Auckland, 399. Vaile, S., Auckland, 363. Valder, G., Richmond, N.S.W., 543. Van de Velde, C, Melbourne, 615. Virtue, P., Auckland, 355. Viticulture, 403, 431, 455, 468, 574, 589, 637, 646. Yon Dadelßzen, E. J., 723. Wages, Rate of, xix, 9, 16, 28, 33, 42, 47, 52, 60, 63, 70, 75, 78, 83, 110, 113, 128, 144, 151, 179, 185, 189, 222, 227, 232, 235, 248, 260, 266, 287, 295, 299, 312, 337, 351, 356, 358, 369, 373, 379, 384, 386, 404, 405, 415, 490, 492, 510, 553, 569, 575, 594, 605, 612, 613, 617, 620, 624, 625, 629, 630, 633, 636, 640, 643, 644, 667, 675, 676, 678, 690, 698, 700, 707, 708, 712, 717. Wallis, P. S., Adelaide, 625. Want, Hon. J. H., Sydney, 660. Wathen, W. A. W., Dunedin, 33. Watson, J. E., Invercargill, 1. Wellington, 252. Whitcombe, G. H., Christchuroh, 232. White, A. W. D., Brisbane, 697. Whitney, A. C, Auckland, 357. Wigram, H. P., Christchurch, 195. Williams, W., Christchurch, 247. Witnesses examined, List of, xli. Wiseman, J., Auckland, 395. Woman franchise, 273, 294, 399, 436, 483, 490. Wood, H., Christchurch, 193. Wood, W., Christchurch, 190. Wool- and woollen-trade, 15, 28, 66, 73, 180, 184, 333, 356, 412, 420, 537, 548, 557, 563. Young, J., Christchurch, 224.
Approximate Cost of Paper.— Preparation, not giveu ; printing (1,6a 1 ) copies), £640 Us.
By Authority: John Mack ay, Gov.-inn.eiH. Primer, Wellington Price os.]
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1901-I.2.1.2.16
Bibliographic details
REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON FEDERATION, TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE, AND APPENDICES., Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1901 Session I, A-04
Word Count
815,189REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON FEDERATION, TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE, AND APPENDICES. Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1901 Session I, A-04
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in