506 [ASSEMBLY.]

decicaed; the conditions of life have a.]-tered, people are ceanier, and the sanitaryarrangemnts are better than they- were]fl the old dayS. I have here dozens ofpam phlets which would convince honour-able members that in lots of eases vaci-iinai io'n does at great deal of harm. Ihave here also a petition, wvhich if it werein order I would present to the House.It cointajins 1.400 sigtiaftuies (if personIs infavouir of the Bill: and thlese names werecollected in two even ingms It must be re-membered tinat of I lie ii iiipa lit Lesa rouindc PenthI which have iliscussed thisquestion only one lids voted against thneBill. There joave been letters in'thne paperda' after day- iii favour of thne Bill. andout of 7.000 bithIs last year oni 'v 600children were vaccinaled. That siowNs tileweighlt of public opinion in favour of IheBill. It is not a Bill to abolish vaccinationit is only to affrdl exemption to peoplewlni have Conscienlijots scrnples atinlstI he operation.

Qiuestion pill and division taken withthe followingl result:-

Aves .. .. .. 6Noes . .10

Mjn'iitv q.lninsl .. 4

Ar :sNion. 10. Coninor Ilon. C. Sounmairslion. A. G. Jetkins Hon. T. P. 0. HrinageHanl. iR. D. iMKenzte I(Tone,-).lion. B3. C. 0 Brien

Ho iilion.lton.Hion.'iga-Hoall.

E. M. Clarke I to..1. D,. Connally no...1. W1. Ifackett :Hlon,S. J. Haynes lion.\V. Kingemnill.1. Wv. Uan,._ r

R-G.0.J.

LanuItoRond.ilThtruisee]31. Drew

(Tellor).

Questijoin thus niegati ved: (ihe Bill de-fea led.

U fi/o vtC,ad ;,!tw at (;.; pi.m.

Tym.doy, 51/ October, .1109.

Urgency inotion: Bonti Sentence, a. or MarthaRandall ..

Questuins: Public Serraiis' retiring alio'%,lnees, ANRepurchase of large estntes..............$20oLand Transfer, Coomberdaic..............SC)

Bills: Laud Act Special Lase, 2a.. ... ........ 2830Mfetropolitas Water Soppir. Sewenmga, and

Drainage .......................... K;5

The S' A1K ER took tile Chainr at 4.30pnm., and read Iliiyeis.

rwi, UNc YmoTION-])EAn 'V H SEX''INCE1. (CASEC OF MA RTT-tX

Afti. \\., I, K Pit (liar wna ) : . desire,,In. Spneakter, hi move (lie adjonimtentor thle louse Ionr thle reasons f hav e i vel

Mr. SP'EAWE R: I have received atinotice fronm tie lion. mnember fiat lie tie-sin-e$ to Blove tile adjournmnent of the[louse oil a question of utrgency. to callatenti on In the case of MHarlhIt Renulal I.

Seven membe,e invha '-n isen in thle irplaces,

Mr.~ WALKER said: I assitne you. 11r.s pelter, thnat it is with feelings of regnetthat I tmove tils innotion this aftenrnoon.I do so ivilhout liavinir asked a siiu-qeaemiber of this Chtamiber 11) Suipport fie.If I calli, at tliis last moment, say )liesingle wiord that wvillI save tile life oft awomain front jeopardy3, I shnall have elis-chairged at duty. If I cannsot attainii liatend I shall still have discharged a dit 'y,for 1 can not a low ti is afternoon to pass,feeling as I dto, thit possiblyu to-iiorrnowmnorning a very grave wvrong will Ile con-initted in the shape of what I dto notoffensively, bilt calmly, call at ilcijlmurder. I catinot allowv thiisafenonto pass without miaking soine effort, ]lnw~-ever feeble it mnay Ile. to try and save thiswoman. I amt aware that the ExecutiveC ouncilI. the Mliiistrv of thtis State, have

had vey tviig tline in the con~sidera-tion 'f this case duiring the ]last two orthree weeks. 1.ami not g-oing to accnl~ethem in the dlightest of not hiavinig dunerwhat they believed to be their duty. Imake uto Phlages againist anyone connected

Still

15 OC-roBER. 1909.]1s

-idt this tisatuer. h1111 011 revi'kvill ltewhole qof die evideince. in taking the came-is it wats presented to thle jury antdc beforetile 'Judge. and whbat hais been made pItliesince, all thle cirt'tinistltlc's. I say thereis enouigh room11 too allow <of a reasoniabledloubt. and -so ]ln, as there is a reasonl-able doubt thant %xv1nian is etiiled to, tilebenefit of it. It is a peculiar ca.e, and itis toileo4 those eases that. particitlarly oiltile l'ttl ofr lthe liublic. th~ey are liable in(be juzilgilet' o4 it to heronle obsculre he-eause 4of its, associations, and it tmay bepossible that atl this very momutent, tilesins-if I ma oexpiress it-of Mrm.Rendl0. lte fact that she has tnt ('Ott-fornit'd tii social customs, anti to socialhonour. the fact that there is that whichlshiocks evei'v hononrahie wife in the comi-try in her- career, niay he the reason forani tneomsciouslv biased judgment againsthler. .Therp is no' rontanece alimit herc areer: thiere ii; nothing in tier past 'his-tory that would touchl the sympathies ofmnikind to lift a hand For hier resce:ethere is nothing ill lite background, no(tl-iug ill tier coniparnonslup. nothinjg thatshe eall presetnt ii iiplpearance or career

ihi adppeals5 Cor symvipathy. and( whenthe *'ttenc'e irst becamie pulic, if it hethe oiffetice alleged to) be. there was silt'] ashriek tbrough the I'iss, sch a cry tofvorror. stielt a piling ion of I he black sideof thle pit i i. that U vent ire it) say, he-tore ever tile jury wvent illo the bo4)x, thewom11anl was tried ill tile piublic llliild and(already cndenineil. It is :a great niis-torttine that iin Ilxceven of tis chlaraiterit is {tiiost 11111osihie too get a jury t hatshall. l~ielit the facts fit' the first timeuponi iil. go into uilie box perfectly im-biased. and make their jiidgmieiu comlply'with tilt evidence there. :itd oinly there.presenlted. 1 ventur'e to think iii (hisease the whole of ouir newspapers werefilled with the heinousness of the woman'salleged g-uilt. and so not only was thlePress filled with facts that had to) be re-moved if (the woiman were tim be turniightiniInnocenit; bitt hearts blad become de-flected. feelingsn had been worked upon~.Passions had been aroused, and sueh pus,-siotIFs that at this n11iometit a ce itot dead inthe cotutiiiiitv-iie live even to) tismnortning in ouir daily papler. It is against

t'Mciitas sitick as thoswe that we halve tocontend in formiing- ail unbialsed juidg-mnent of this woman's position, In thismniitis paper there arc several letrt.Mtid. I do not need to iead. 1m0tour oniniem-' two at' themn. The first reads-

"A s-elected jIll rhlaving founmd Xlrs.114ndall gutiltY 01' fieniish i'nteltyv Andmurder, 1. wuld like to ask any of tiersy ilpa tilise, %itlu judgment thieyiitili pas dti her it the chtildren haidbrevi their'? Mry o)pinionl ol tiswvonanl is. that site is one of those pier-sns- whom we might well treat its h~ehas beenl fOL1( 4f rltit"Ndt gul fn titloeoif the pool. clild- ienutili She confesses,thlen bang~ hei' anid lbe lone withliheu'.There is lo uchel it' this Mrs. Mtithehpli-

liucall tu.;iiiess ttonit.Another is-

"As a mother at' children I say letthle extreme law take itS. course. Hang-ill-g seettis toio) i ti4 o mel ichas Mar i aRenclall. She shcitl lihe given spiritsto' salts inl the same way as shte admnitii-slered it to tlIe poor' children. Thereare still a few righit feeling- mothersleft in W~ester-n Australia."

Those are nlot thle only oines, but they in-dieatc' the state of miind in which1 sqnycpeol]e viewi tb h e m1 i oifii I uis W(Pl 181's

alleg-ed uitil. Isz it poss .ible no get cahlj1ii1giitetit tF0 111 :nViiii filled With feelinigsof this kindc ? It is imlpossible to clearlyJudge oi tlime weight 4)f' evidence. thie re-tern ie o if fmcts, itf we are stirredbyv t itotitilts nt' thlat smit. There is alway sinl litimniit v a savage inwtinct, which isdead ill the wikes anti best of us., andafe 14cr i it aa erSutl is arott.Setl it isI im~ibli' 1ltat we may do) anl injusitsice inlpuitilg ii. ttil it Is possible that thenixv whoi triedl tlie ease may have been

utider rthe infitence aiid powers of suchfeelings as; tose .I have just described,.and. theictoire. itiapable of taking a calmnand 4ispiassioutate view of the gitSilt. orotiherwise. oh. Mlr. Henidahi. I mayv beaked what is the obljec-t of imoving thlead j ourut tiletlt ol'f lie 1IL tuse f1' 1 womt anwho is to hang, til-tlliti4Iw inloritlg. Itis -with the view at tile lasr ininient (ofasking linac liiwes who direct thle oipera-jts of' mlercy%% to exticcise thii1t ilter't' at

the last nmomlent, That is tile pnrpo-e I

807

80.9 [ASSEMBLY.]

have in view. I shall, perhaps, be toldthat the facts have all been considered,that the evidence at the trial has beentaken pieee by piece. and adequatelywreighed. I shalt be told that thatcoure has been taken calmly, andthen I shall be informed, perhaps,thavt the Executive Council is naota court of appeal, 'that it is cir-cumscribed by the law, by the testi-mnony taken, by the trial completed, andif the law is to be followed, Mrs. Rendallhas been found guilty by a jury and sen-tenced by a judge, and confining the inl-vestigation to what there and then tran-spired . that there is nothing to warrantgoing beyond it. That is what we shall betold. BuLt we lirve in a civilised country: an din every civilised land there is one spotwhere the cold formalities of law ca) besoftened; there is in every civilised landone centre where the fount of mnercy canplay; but it is not possible in WesternAustralia. In the hands of His Excellencythe Governor there is power In reprievethis woman, even ali the last moment asshe ascends the steps; but T know thatHis Excellency is, by directions from theHome aunthori ties. almost wiompletelyhound by the advice of his advisers. Andit is here where the deadlock comnes in.He is bounid by his advisers-, tie adv isersthink thiemselves hound by the l-aw: andthe consequence is we turn-off this sourceof mercy, we entirely pievent the possi-

bilitv of saving a1 hn1man life that. inasv hemnarhied to the cold formityii ot la-wto-muorrowi-morning. T venture the opin-ion that there are those (in the Treasurybench to-day whose hearts would re-pirieve Martha hiendall were it not 1thatthey were actuated by what they believeto he a sense of duty to the laws they ad-minister. Where then are we to --o forijercy? Where is that element that existsini all organised States from tine con-nieninent of history that is able to trans-mute the sentence at the last, momient ?We have lost it in cold adherence to for-mality. For what are the facts uponwhich, T believe, the Government are re-lying-that the witnessesq presented theea~c, that Mfartha Kendall was defendedby a laiver and had a chance of callingevidenc aud failed to do so. and that the

jur ,y considered the evidence presented,and onl that evidence brought in a verdictof guilt, and onl that the Judge -was 'co-pelled to sentence, and on that the Ex-,eeuitive were comlpelled to advise His Ex-cellency to ca-zv out the law'? Is that notthe ])osition'? We have lost the possibilityof mnercy. W\Aas there ever in the annalsof history a ease of this kind? I ask lion.members, whose miinds are free, is therenot here grve reason for doubtI What 'isthe story of the prosecution?7 This womanihaving illicitly joined into comnpanionshipwith another wow an's husband, tookcharge of his children, and slowly day byday, one after another, procured their]death by a novel process of poisoning;and this; went oin one after another untilsome neighbonr complained to the police.The police then commenced anl exhuiin-lion. The bodies were exhumed. It wasfound that the womant had not been ver:Lacions in sonic particulars, and it wastherefore inferred that she was not ver-acious, in all, and therefore it wasm con-clusive evidence, on the fact that therehad been bought for that household spiritsof salts, that this woman has used thisspirits of sats; to poison the children ofMorris. That is the evidence, but I askthe Attorney General wher-e is the direct,proof of poisonling i the whole case-Spirits of salts was bought. 'Chat is true.That is consistenit with the innoccecv ofevervlbodv ; anybody can buy spirits ofsalts. One of the Mforris; children hads-pirits of salts down at the Daily Newsoffice before any chiarge of this kcind canenp--one of the boys put in the witnessbox, dismissed for falsehood because othis stiibborni lying: and when he was hfis-iised he promduced a bottle ol! spirits otsalts,. and when asked what they were,said, ''Oh, we use plenty of that athome." As a matter of fact, it is testifiedthat for soldering and work (of that kindwvhich was done hy the 'Morris hays theybad spirits of salts. But- who saw thiswoman administering this poison, aiidwho culi prove that it ever was adnain-istered directl y to these children? Andwhere a human life is concerned it is noto111- duty to inlfer guLi It; We Mulst prove itright up to the hilt. We are responsiblefor the death of the womian if we allow

808

[5 OeI'BER. 1909.1 0

werely inference without proof to deter-mine our verdict. T say there is no proofof the woman ever having done it. AndI want to ask ii here-,and it shouldcreate a reasonable doubt-how is it thatfor the first timie iii this case we learn ofibis matlerial as an agency of death-?Where has it been pointed out in our textbooks in the study of mnedicine that thisparticular kind of irritant is to be avoid-edt 'Where are. its dangerous effectswarned a-ga it? is it not a fact that wehave the testiniony, given ill the corres-pondence in the newspapers to-clay-andit is not only one, there was another Yes-terday-that doctors have recommendedthe use of! spirits of salts in the case ofthroat trouble? Under its technical nameit has been recomm~rended, not as an ac-tril core, but at least as a palliative forthroat disorders. Was a woman to beround guilty if she did use these spiritsof sailts onl the throats of the children!IIs it not perfectly consistent with her in-nocence that she" may have used it andhave done it for beneficial purposes, forthe purpose, of curing instead of destroy-ing the childr-en-? I submit the fact oughtnot to he forgotten. }low conies it for thefirst time tbis woman learns how to maili-ciousl ,y poison these childreni I take itthis same sliecilic itf taken ill large doseswould inieriately kill, and if taken iiitoo little (loses would never do harm. Whotaught this igniorant wvoian to use justenuigli. slowly and by degrees and so asIt) rlceive thle' doctors., just t hat amount to-send thne Morris children to their graves?Does it seem reasonable?' It is not provedshe ever learned that art or ever knew thepossiIoilities4 or capabilities of spirits ofsalts, if it is capable of doing what issaid; besides which we have the testimonythat doctors have recommvended it. not as.a poison. hut as a ure for throat troubles.Trheme is a lius,;dhility that Mrs. Rendallmight have believed it capable of curingthese children and so~ used it. In that caseshe is not a criminal bum a good nurse,that is from thle point oif riew of tryingto do the children good. I w'ant to knowif this point is not startling. A certainneigrhbouir gave information to the poliethat she heard these childreni crying."murder" : and this told her they were

being lMutrdered. I want to know hlow it isthat the doctors comie day by day. aidthe children suppose they are being-andthe latter ones; know they are bein-p~oisoned. and yet there is not a word tothe dloctor. la it possible that such a stateof things. could exist? Not a word to thedoctor. tflie one [hey' should coimplain to.if they are being treated differently lohis vrdcr-,. But there is not one tittie ofevidence to that effect. There is no coni-plainlt to anybody lint what, was over-hieard by a neighbjour. And 1. want toknow, if these children were cryingl"Mlurder" because spirits of sutits was puttipon them, how it is the father neverknew ? Is it possible the father could notknow? Thle children themiselvecs went forthis p)oison ; they brought it to theirlioni us; they,. are acr' iplces. Mrs. Carrwvent for it. As accomplices their evidenceis tainted. Yet the husband knowvs no-thing of it by thie vr-rdiet of the jury. Isthat possible? If these children were pi-sonied under the coniditions set forth, aiidupon which the Crown rely foir convic-tion, then the husband must have beenguilty; and it wvas hlis children that Mirs.liendall was poisoning. He is free to-day.tree from the chiarge; no mnr 4- an accusehini mnore; hut this woutani. tunless thec pre-rugative of miecy- is exercised t the lastnmonent, is to dtie to-muorrow. ]At us goone step further. The supposition is, whenthey, learnt of this spirits of salts, thatthis woman, by sonic inisighlt or knowtedgesuperior to thle rloCcOrs', had used this asa poison, and ani exIluinatioli of the bodieswas ordered. Now irat hiappeiied at theexhumation? I munst apologise for weary-jog the House while 1 read this-

I'Mi. E. k. Alann, Government An-alyst, stated that lie had received fromlDr. 'l'ynins eighit jars containingparts of hunlan . bodies, and liehad made a caref at analyvsis ofthem. He had also received somespir-its of salts fronm Detective--Sergeant 31ann. anti the intes-tinies of a guinea-pig fronri i. Steele.Ile read I6is report whichl ia, as ol

lw:-fbeg_ to furnLishl thle followingOreport, on tihe examitiationi just -onclu-ded of thle eXhulied bodies of (1) Ar-thur Joseph Morris: (2) Annie May

1909

810 [ASSEMBLY.]

M orris;' (3i) Olive Lilian Morris, andof other substances submitted to mein connection therewith. The tlreorr.submitted to me for test wvas, that thesechildren had been killed through theeffects of spirits of salts (commercialhydrochloric , or juriatic acid) ad-ministered to them either by the stem-achi or by application to thre throat.This theory opened up two possibili-ties, viz., thiat they had died from theeffects of the acid alone, or that theirdeath was partly due to poisonous imi-purities contained iii the acid. Of theimpurities generally contained inthis -acid, the only one havingany bearing upon the ease wouild lie ar-0

senic, whichi in such acids is derivedfrom thre use of materials preparedfrom arsenical poisons. As it was evi-dent that such arsenic would, if pres-cnt in any quantity. sLupplement thepoisonous effect of the acid this wasmadec the prnceipal object of muy search,but there wats another most importantreason for ,iriiug it fir-st attention. Itwould lie imnJossible to prove the useof spirits, of salts. diretly. Suceh acidwould soo'n be neutralised and becomeimpossible of detection, and as a matterof fact, the remains of the bodlies sub-raidted to mie were all strongly alkalinefrom- the products of post mortemn de-composition, sor that had an 'y acid beenpresent it had long since been con-verted into indisting-u isliable corn-pounids. As arsenic is the only, iar-puntyih Associated with spirits oif salts.which is absolutely foreign to thle humn-an hudy' and canl at the samne time bedletected definitelyv ill infinitesimaltraces,' its presence. evenl if inl quranti-lies of n IoNic significance. might fur-nish evidence of thle presence Of spiritsof salts. Incidentally, of course, othermnetallic poisonrs were also searched for.but special attention was directed tothe searchl for' arsenlic. A mlethod wasemployed eap able of detectiing 3.100,000

urin of mnetallic arsenic, and largequantities of materials (ill somle easesthe whole of that available) wereworkedl upl for a single test.'"

And then lie rrives lire results of these

cases. I think I should read them, theyare as follow:-

"Jar A.-Arthnr J. 11orris: Liver,spleen, and two kidneys. The amouinttaken for the last and principle testwas si'f-rirtls liver aind whole of theremainder. Result: Nil, Jar B.-Arthur J. Morris: Stomach intestines(except rectum) praruereas, omenturn,tonigue, pharynx, and oesophongus, five-ninths of whole. Result: Nil. Jarr C.-Arthur J. Morris: Bladder and ree-

tum : The whole. Lost through imupurenerds. Jar D.-Arthur J, Morris:Heart, lunigs, brain, portion of spinalcord, portion of muscle from front oftright femurV and spinal column: Thewhole. Result: Nil. Jar E.-OliveLilian Morris: Portion of debris fromti-egion of alidomenr ard lower part ofchiest: Tire whrole. Fourrd riretallicilerelav ,y 1.4.17 grains; dissolved rier-

ci ray, .2"rains; bisrnnth oxyrritrate,74.0 grains. Jar F.-Olive Lilian.Morri: Ribs, arid varioris bones: Thewhole. Resrrfrt: Nil. Jar 0.-Annie MayMorris: Contents of abdomninal ear-it'. arid portion of spine: The whole.Result , Nil. Jar H.-Annie May Mor-ris: Portion of brain from the skul.-Tire whole. Resurlt: Nit. The lires-enec of mercury arid bismuth in someeases is consistent with certain pre-scriptions submitted to me. by Detee-tive-Sergearit Mari.''

It shourid be muentionred that tire duet orwho attended to her prescribed inervturyarid bisrmuthi. These things are found iiitire stoniacli. but nor one portion, not oneg-rai nor. a fraction of a -,rain of arlsenlicnrot. thie slightest scintilla is found ofthrat *Thre relport rotirries-

"They as welt its other metallic pok-oars were p~rov~ed to Ire abselnt inl a.llother instairces,. 'rte absencep of ai-erieseeris strange ini view of [lire delicacyof ilre mei'hods of tstn employed.Rirt filrther' inqlrr showed that afterall i Iris was rrot so extraordinairv as at,first sightappea red. Coinmnercili 'rrdro-Obloric acid is often said to containas, muclm 1- .2.5 per cent if angeniousojxide, but an examination of samplesof alt the acids obtainable in Perth

810

[5 Ocroan, 1909.] 1

showed thiat the local supplies were offar greater purity. In fact, they mustbe considered as remarkably pure acids.

Here follow figures relating to sixsamples of spirits of salts. The re-

iults were-(l) .035 grains of arsenic;2) .010 grains; (3) .350 grains; (4)

.17.5 grains; (5) .070 grains; (6) .35Ln'atns. These amounts are equivalent'I) a pint). When these figures are,'ojnsidered, and alilowvanee is made for*bstribution of the arsenic throughoutthe body as well as elimination there-from 1) ' natural mieaus, it would, afterall, appear aI matter of some difficultyeven if sot large a quailtity u s one pintoft acid tadl been taken tit one time todetet ars-enic iii these bodies. Thes-uniary of moy research,. therefore, isthat wh~ile affording to proof of thease of h tydroehilonie acid, it, onl the'ather hanld. ,'i-veals 110 facts inconsist -ent Withi such Ilse."

I object to that. Here is a declarationth-at there is not the slightest evidencefrom the examination that this acid hadlbeen used, but he who makes the exam-inlation is allowed to prejudice those whoread by saying that it is not inconsistentwith the possibility of hydrochloric acidhaving been administered. That is nota fair anal ysis. We ask. "What didyou find, all' trace of poisoni alleged toiie administered by this womnan?"' andthe answer is. ''No."' One cannot makemore of it. ILook what they did. If thatuvoulain poisoned Ilie children. shr, musthave zot that acid two or three .%ea-s ago,and yet the detectivc's go niad buy' acidnow in the shops and find out that theacid nly in the shops is pure. and theyinfer fromi it that the acid this w'omanbou ,hlt must have been pure also andefontained a little arsenic: therefore shepoisoned the children. I think it isscandalous to draw ant in ference (If thiskind. These proofs are r'elied on, butthey do not help: they prove nothing.yet ont these proofs. combined with a feweirc'umstafltial sutrroundi ngs. they' arefoindr to hall, this woman. She is not

fonlguilty by the examination. Theexpe'rimenit of the possibilitY of the poi-son halviie! evaporated i, not sufficientro hang a woman uipon. Our doctors.

our analysts do not know the effects ofspirits of salts, and what do they do tobang- this wvoman? They experiment ongulinea-pigs, which die: arsenic is djs-covered in the carcases. but arsenic waslnt discovered iii the bodies of the chil-dreni. Is this fair? Is this a ctivilisedtest? What proportion of dilution wasused for the guinea-pigs? Is it fair totest a little animal against a humanbeing? The power of absorption is en-turely different, and yet just becausearsenic 'vas found in the guinea-pig- itis inferred tbat the children werepoisoned, although there is no trace ofit. no evidence of it. This action wasunfair: it was tiring the imaginations ofthe jury, this outside experiment on

guie-igs. Guinea-pig were procured,they died, arsenic was found in them.and the death of a guiea-pig is sup-posed to be on a level with the death ofthe children. The examination ofthe bodies of the children did not

show that they died fromt thesatme cau1Ses as the gunea-pigs.Arsenic wvas discovered in the guinea-pig-S. bitt not in the bodies of the chil-dtren. What are we to say of the medi-cal testininv? These children wereburied Wvithita death certificate. Howabout thle doctors who attended them 9There "'as more than one, although Dr.Cuthibert gave one certificate after an-oither. b)11 other doctors were called in.Where was the suspicion? They exam-inedl the throats and sturely could detectwhat was going on in the throats; yetthe doctor in) charge gave death certifi-cates entirely' inconsistent with foul play.How do they go back upon it now? Ifthis womn had been defended Withwvealth. if shte* had had money to spendin securing evidence, the prosecutionwould not have been allowed to producethese modern bottles of hydrochloricacid a11d to say it was Pure: it was notthe acid wvith which it was saidshe killed the children., hut some-thing bought yesterday' : whereas thechildre itl "ears ago. That is114.1 eo-ideu'e: there should havebeen evideuc,' of tine spirits ofsalts used at tin time they died. If thewoman had had a proper: mleanlS of de-

811

812 [ASSEMBLY.]

fending herself, such as a woman in herposition should have, much of the evi-dene given would not have been al-)owed; the doctors would not have givenmerely opinions and apologies, but doc-tors would have given evidence from thepharniaeopweia to show that hydrochloricacid is sometimes prescribed for affec-tions of the throat. This evidence 'wasnot brought, hut it is upon evidence tes-tifled all on the one side that this womanis to perish. I place little reliance uponthe doctors; not that I have any dis-respect for them, but it seems to mewhen they are called upon to give evi-dence they are just as liable to en- asany other mortal. I remember a case inSydney, and no doubt it will be freshin the minds of members, where a girlhad accused a coffe-house keeper of hav-ing committed a rape upon her. Theman -was tried for the offence, -which inthat State was punishable by death; he'was sentenced to death, the same as thisv'oman, on -the testimony of the doctor.-There was a doctor in Sydney who ex--amined the woman and gave his certifi-*cate that she had been a virgo intacta.It is one good thing to be borne to thememory of the late W. P. Crick that hewas convinced of the innocence of theman, and caused inquiries to be vigi-lantly and speedily made, and with whatresult? The news came down from Bris-bane that this woman, who was taking a-man's life away, had been a registeredprostitute in the city of Brisbane; hername was on the police books, there wasno question about it. Here was a mancondemned by the Executive Council ofNew South Wales to suffer the lastdread penalty of the law, and only atthe last minute this conclusive inmforrna-hon came down and saved him. On thetestimony of the doctoi-s, this man was todie. Fortunately that testimony was up-set at the last moment and the man es-caped from the gallows, only by the per-sistency with which his solicitor soughtthe evidence necessary to procure hisrelease, We are possibly in a similarposition to that. It does not follow be-cause a jury brings in a verdict of guiltythat a person is guilty. I might give acase that is a little nearer home. I have

no doubt the Premier will remember thecase of the in Bishop, of Ouildford,who was hanged for having murdered aChinaman (here, and some years after-wards a man on ascending the scaffoldto die for another crime confessed thathe was guilty of that murder, that hehad been present in the court in Perthwhen the trial was proceeding, that hehad heard the evidence, and desired tosave the man, but had not the courageto do so at the last moment. Bishopwent to his doom, was hanged, and hisinnocence was afterwards proved. Is itnot a fact that this very day the manSmith has been liberated -fromg-aol1? Is it not so? rrhe AttorneyGreneral nods his he-ad in airmiation.Why is thati man liberated ? Two months

oso ago hie. was fouind guilty by at jury:the sentence was pronounced and he hasbeen in gaol for over two mouths, and onlyto-day has hie been liberated. Wily?Because they have discovered die trueCulprit. To-dlay the man is released:;the t-rue culprit is discovered. That isthe tact I want to insist upon. Nay,more, is not. there a case of a n1Lan1 con-riemned for murder in Fngland who cameout here and wvas 15 years in pensl seryi-tide in Western Anstralia as a guiltyman ? %ndl not until this mian had servedhis sentence did the true perpetrator con-fess, And the man had been innocentatll that time, I 't is not a light mnatter.Tf there is the slightest room for doubtwe should not rush with these victims 10the slaughter: and I submit that in thisease there is very %'ide roomi for douhit.The womian protests her innocence in theface of death to-dlay. T do not know ifit. is possible for women who are crimin-als to preserve to the very last an un-moved character, but this is what she saidthis morning in the presence of herclergyman - -

"After the trial, reviewing all thatwas said and done, and in spite of themental anguish which I have sufferedthrough being found guilty of mnurder-ing Arthur Morris, and the accusationthat I had done the sanie to the othertwo children, and the solemin appeah-made by my spiritual adviser (Rev. T.

812

(5 OaToMR. 1.909.1 1

Allen) to confess in order to receivethe miercy of God through Jesus Christ.and that T might be fortified onl thegasllows. with the courage that I hadiage it clear statement to -man and

(4od. I most solemnly wish to statethat onl this, the lost mnorning of mylife. I am innocent before Gtod andMan of havingc done anything that in-.jured Ihe children in any degree. Thespirits of salts wvere ne'-er used by meon the children. If f had done it Iwould confess. I believe it would hecontrary to My most Solemn conIvictionsto Iprofess to manl to be innocent whenbefore Gad T should he found guilty,-which would be, to me, dying with alie on my lips and a crime onl my soulunctunfessed -unfogIiveni."

This is what this woman said this morn-ing-this woman who is to die to-morrow.It may be that we detest these creatureswho have fallen; but if she is innocentof this crime are we to punish her forthe other? Perhaps I shall he told thatthe evidence which might have saved herwas not hroughit. No doubt her lawyerthought he was doing well for her.

Mr. Angwin: Canl yon tell us why theDeily News kept that information baclks" longI

Mr. WALK ER : I in not knnvw. T awnot responsible. All I ask is, is it true!And I am inf ormedl that M.it. Esovekinwill take anl oath. if' it is fuece-sary, to-morrow, to-night, that it is true. Doesthe ban,1 member wvish to bipugn the state-ment?

Mr. Angwin: No.Mr, WALKER: Well, let uts accept it.

It has been placed before Cabinet, it is illthe possession of Cabinet. I say it shouldhave been produced at the trial. A% iid]there is more which should have been pro-dueed at the trial: doctors should havebeen called for the defence as well as forthe prosecution, and we should hare wtota different interplretation in respect tothe so-called use of spirits of salts. Ibelieve it was known at the time. I be-lieve that the solicitor knew that therecould he produced evidence testifying tothe unretiahle character of the boy Mor-risj. I believe it was known . althought Iwould not push my assertion too far onl

this p-int: still. I believe it was known.Yet it was onl the testimony ofboys whobe trtthifulnes.4 is now indoubt, that His Honour the Act-ing- Chief JLustice said :-"If that boy isbelieved to be trithlful, conviction shouldfollow." Then' is evidence now that theboys arc not truthful.

The Premier: Only one boy.itir. WVALKER: Never mind, it is in

the family. This hLas come out since.Then there is this evidence; we have hadthe testimuony of a witness who heard, asit wore, t'he cries of boys, and who hasgiven her story to the police, thle storywhichi was the foundation of the charge.But there are other neighlbours, next doorneighbours, who canl testify to the treat-mnent extended by this wvoman to thesechildren. But[ they are nut called ; any-thinL' iii taroiir or thle woman is notcalled. Then wve are told that there isone womani who can testify that on oneoccasion this. womian who is accused of themuriider recomimended for this visitor'schild thle cure site was using for the child-ren, and actuallyv administered it in thesarne way. with, of course, no serious re-sult. This at least showed the woman'psconfidence in the remnedy. Now, it is notthe C'abinet's fault, it is riot the FExeeu-tire1s fault if this evidence was notbrought; still1, it is the fault of somebody,or at least the mistake of somebody. Thecase for the prosecuition was closed; thelawyer defending. this womnan called noevidence. put nobody in the box, presum-ably because by that uteans lie Zat the lastword to the jury' . it was the course hielook, it was what seemed to hit,' to be in[ie best interest., of hlis, client. But thetacts, and statements as interpreted by theCrown and With thle CrownI's inlterpreta-tion put upon them were allowed to goInh thle jury, and not onle witniess wascalled inl order to shake these facts or toraise a doubt upon the inferences drawnfrom thern. Yon may say that was thelaw.yer's fanllt; but are youi going to banga woman because the lawyer does not takea course which miight have saved herl Thecourse hie dlid take was not strong enoughtol save her from the jury's verdict. How-ever. a higher power can now recognisethat error and make it good. At all

813

814 [ASSEMBLY-]

events, that woman is entitled to the bene-fit of whatever evidence we now hare.The jury imy be excused for their sen-lenee, and all conrnected with the trialmay he excused, because these facts werenot before them. But they are before us,and( if we Strike (lie blow that is to resultim death. with facts before us which makeus doubt, then we are committing a judi-cial mm-dcr-. I know of no other nameit could be called. There are those whowill testify to this woman's character:and there is her testimony at the last mno-ment, facing death, helieting, as she does,that she is to mneet the Judge of uts all andthat that Jludge knows her heart and herhistory, She says in the moment ofdeat h,' onl the brink of the scaffold, that-she is innocent. 'I want to take anotherview of it. Supposing she is guilty, Iwas struck by the remark of' the ActingChief Justice who presided, when he saidthat the wuman was a moral monstrosity,that her character was extraordinar'y.Well. if that be so, if the woman is oneof these moral monstrosities muade bynature, incalpable of knowing, the effectsof wrong-doing-if she be at monster, thenwe have no right to kill her. She is notresponsible in the same Sense as otherpeople are; shie is outside the ranks ofhuman beings, she is at creatUre ofimpulses uncontrollable. 'Much has beensaid of her stoical bearing while in thedock, how unmoved she was, and hlow tin-concerned, If this woman he innocent itis that spirit size would exhibit. It isy'ouir guilty personl that can break: into

ears; it is your actor or ad z-ess; I lint canlassume innocence. I hare seen p~eopleunder uinjust accusations, passing throughlife dull and calmu, apparently uninter-ested in anything about them, oppressedby the weight of the injustice put upon0them, unable to defend themselves becausethey would not -be believed. And it isquite consistent with fthis womnan's inno-ceence that her apparent resignation, hercalmness in her suffering, may be the con-sequence of the sense of xvrong that isbeing done her. 1. hate crime as much asanybody else. I am not palliating anyoffence outside this which the woman mayhave commiitted. Bitt I do say yon nowhave evidence that makes it possible to

doubt a .nd] whilst there is a possibilit~yof doubt you must not hang her, but sheimust have the benieft of it. The Govern-men may say, "If there be room fordoubt shie mray be innocent, and if inno-cent she should be acquitted?' That maybe the very stumbling block that is gvoingto have this woman hanged. The Govern-mient might coiidoe the sentence; onlyif the woman has not killed those childrenshe should not be in prison, she should beeiitirel v free. Thley' Say we cannot glowa womtani like this to get loose on societyagafin, She should he kept away tf-owtheni. f do not 'think the woman wouldcomplainl if you conimuted her sentenceto imprisonmient for life. I still say' theremay be roomn for believing-and I am notalbusing those who believe otherwise-that she is gukilty. but certainlyv it is somiedegree of mtercy to commuitte at sentencefrom death to imprisonment. All [ amasking is that there shall be that degreeof mnercy shown to thie woman ill res-ponse to the dloubt that mutst me toevery mnid. And do we degrade our-selves by talking' such a cour1se? IS it nota fact that as humanity has improved, thisfeature conlies; more and more uppermost,that of nicrey. I dralw the Attorney G-en-cral's attenitionl to one little nlote inSfeh'p/zc's ('oin in ('a/to-i r's. It says-

-'Blackstone here proceeds, top ob-serve regarding- lie stale of t-rinii-n aI law in his time, and whichhans lou'g ago been hiappily Changed. 'itis a1 nzclaueholv trolth that amour theva riety' of ac-tions which men are dailyliable to comimit no less than 160 havebeen declared by Act of Parliament tohe felonies without benefit of clergy, orinl other words to he worthyv of instantdeath. So dreadful a list, instead ofdiminishingr increases the number ofoffenders. The injured, through com-passion. will often forbear t(o ])rose-cute; jnries, through compassion, willsometimes forget their oaths, and eitheracquit the guilty or mitigate the natureof the offence, and Judges, throughcompassion, will respite one-half of theconvicts and recommend them to theRoyal mercy. Among so iuany chancesof escape the needy and hardenedoffender overlooks the multitude that

814

[5 OutOBRR 1909.] 1

tliller. 11 c u bldll i v egage, ilt St tludespetiaic attetti treilieve his wvnntsor to suplyl' his vices, and it'. lines-nectedly tit, hand of justive overtakes

hinm, hot ueem.,ai himself pe.'oliali 'v tili-fortunate itt tailing at last a sacrificeto those law., whlou ng iininiitv instauight imn to ronitemian.'

I want specially to empha~lsise thtan portionof tile note tha:t says thal ini Hlackstone'sday' there were 160 uoffenes p unisalheby deathn. We Ititre got rid ot tnhet,Or r-educed I Ient to very fewi. II an webecome greater el-iiia Is in soeiety since -H-as not cimei dinmin islhed? Has not thiedeath penalty bteen ,tavedi oft ? u hIl,i-lory places lite fact thant whent executionis,eere almost ,nnivtrsal, wvhen we did totexpect to lhave civilisatiott wil bout cxtc'u-liots, whenl it witn.t n eve Itoy at,1 eve andna t ooth font a tooth. thtat was the time

in pe~ople were not ,ocivilised. J s thleoldt savage race terivi nig ? There was itlime when we not only k-illecl people In'hanging, but we burnt them to cdeathInwvhen we not onil I beheaded thenm. bnll citthe iena 'U 11,t$ters and exhibited them

grtt~in, in elhains, rottinig till thle wvindsratled their bones as a wvarningt tin others.Tlere was a ltle when we pilt people intoiling- cauldrons to) p)fnish them): when

we tortured ifea to mnurider thIem. MehanVe trot rid ir thi. Are We Wvno'Se forit?0 Tui-la- the old law of halgilttg is,it h uts. anltI a 'vouln. above all othnersis to (lie to-miorrow. Shtould we Ibe woruseit w~e shotwedl merey an the last miontentSltud we deg-ranle this connntnity atl (liebeist nnomentt b-y a respite. I1w -ommulttatioiniI, tilhe sentence? XNo. B~ut we shouldsiny flint this State is tiot governed by thepaire diiv dead letter of tine law, bit thathiunan heatts could still beat in the hteatrtsioe officialdam : that is wyhat it wrould( show.W\hat good ate we going to do hy han-iag ]her? Bring these children to life1againl? You eantiot. Yon are goinig tonadil olne more death: to take life front afel law mortal. What for? It will notpunifish Iltr. Thie greatest kindne~s in one.sense that vil en, il d si ow to a1 woman11ider like circumttstances wvonld be to take.away the poissibiility of nutferinl-ildeath.that ends all. Jf site be guilty

lot her suffr. Lot1 bot' sttffer life.If she lie rui ltv let her live to have the

pnsof conscience, the tortures that willhaunti her. If' she is itnnocent , as thereis somie room to believe. he all menIsdo nt let its be houtntds. 61o not let utshave a sit of lI nelt law ill a i'iviliseclcou ittry . Let uts calmnily lonok at the facts.Admnit tli tIruthI, and sir that the womnhas not had the ease proved inl, to thehilt. Thei 1t1' needs pronof, nlot infer-ence, thInat we cannot escape. I have readtle letten's tat have been published to-dlay fron those whno hate tlte woilan be-cause sITe has been tin lie arms of herjmtaanomt and talf nursed his children.They vwouldl puntishi lier for thant, atid fleg reater in tuber wiatlc tear tier to pieces.'l'lnn wvotuld not wvant thle formalities of.a trial. told justice standls aloof fronunll these facts. That should be whet'ethie plain facts attd tilte lawi are weighleditt [lie sca leantd if ihIey arIe then we call-jot[ say there is Concltisive tproof of this

w nians grii i. I (d0 not earie who coin-tnits the Crime, or ill what Iname it hastbeen dotne, it is a 4ratntc to take away ahtuman life. I, need not Ctllpl'SisC tiat

urIse vOi'ds it) ettlorce it. Nothing ontarth In;at be hig~her. nobler. putret', moredivitte lit a hnumnt life, and 1 don not,-'are whthert it is in thle woman whtoselifte is at slake, or thle sister 'ye adore,it is a httutan life. 'it haive no moretightk to take tine one w~ithoiir gentui.nec'ause t(bait voo have to) take the other,anid y oul have it.. nmore tight to do thatb tline ]tell, o f thle hangmian of the Statethan Yom have liv a private citizen in thepublic street. They are onl the samecot-c. TIef bo othI take a hiumian life. We

have ifto righit to do that . we cail l1neter re-stone it. If thIis w'oman were proved in-nit ret toi'-ia ol'1 ' we ennotii bring hterhack. TIhtre is en ci tght tin in ake uts be-lieve t hat t here is tfite possibility of herinnocence being proved. That heitig s,,I ask. anid it is for that putrpose I havetaken this c-oilrse to-nighlt. thaqt this Gov-erimnii will. at thne Iast momett showmnercy' and' not w'ish to carry out the deadlet ten' of the lawi: show that mercy canlive in thle 191h~ c'enlttrv. and that it callbe L~ivenl even to a woutin whose soul issnil ed. but who, to the ttst and tile

S13

816 rCASSFJMI3 I.]

lowliest ini thle land is hated by the bulkof hier leliow beings; show t-hat mercycanl bend down and lift up the one thatis ulooind. I1 speak with somie feeling,for ] recianise the respoinsibility, and Isyinpatbisv with the Government, because] know that they recognise their sense ofresponsibilit 'y:' that their duty is higherindeed Ilan the mnere formal administra-tion of the law. They have a duty tohumnan life, to mankind itself, and thisis ai ease where they could safely, withoutdoing wrong to anybody. commnute thesenlIenee. This is a case of that kind.W"ho could be wronged by such %~course?

NXot justice, not society. Who could bewronged? 'Is it for the purpose that thlewoman is to die, or is it to yield to thlecry of savage vengeance? That ery isfromi thle ignorant. Read the letters inthe newspapeis. See those who have de-fended thle womani. Read those that howlfor her death. One has the stamip ofthought and care, the other of ignoranceand brutality. Thle civilised portion ofnmankind will never blame the Govern-muent for their clemenc *y in this case, aud

Mitcare they for thle untutored sectionof humanity; they are not concerned inobedience to the cry of the vulgar sectionof the community. Is there a lawyer inthis State who, having read the evidence,would say the womnan W~as justly Coii-demued?

The AtI ornev General : Undoubtedlythere is.

Mr. WALKER: I have met none. Ihare spoken to many' lawyers and theydo not soy so. In fact the hon, miemblerknows that lie had, on Saturday in thePremnier's office, one ivhoin hie could notdespise for his legal attainments. I meanRichard Septimlus Haynes.

The Attorney General: You asked ifthere were anly lawvyers who would Up-hold the verdict. Undoubtedly thiere are.

Mr, WALKCER: I prosuine the lion.IIemnbe n-

The Attorney General: I ami not mank-ing a personal reference.

Mr. WALKER: I did not either, bitwhen te lion. member puts it in thatsneering way, it is as mnuch as to saythat thie hulk of the legal taent-

The Attorney General: 1 did not saythe bulk of the legal talent.

Mr. WALKER: I ask those who hakeread tile whole of the evidence and takenthe whole of the circumstances intn con-sideration-let the bon, member produce~oie wvho has taken all the circumstancesinto consideration, and gone through 1all

thle evidence,' where is ha!The Attorne-y General: I wvill ask tle

H'ouse to take myv word fur it, that thereare0 lawyers of the highest eminence.

Mr, WALKER: The word of the Mini-ster against thme life of a humian creature.,Becanse (lie Attorney General says so,that this womian will swing into eternityto-morrow. No one's word should beweighed against at life. I plead for o1humillan being, no(t for his Veracity' orotherwise. I have conIsulted With thlos.e

whoarela~yers, who have gone throughthe ease, who have nmqde a study of theevidence, whomt have considered the wholeof thle cireinstances of this case thathave been retailed to-day. They saythere is room for doubt. There arethose who say she is not guilty, ; she isiinneent. That is what dile mlost doubt-full say. There are those who are doubt-fil, who sa v there is irom for doubt,and that is all I gay now. Whilst thereis that room for donubt there is thle mis-sion for mercy. and I ask for mercy. Itcannot. he deniied, because time ease hasbeen considered once,' or been consideredtiie that no good can be done by thle-erection of time gallows to-morrow. Whyerect themn? -Must we cl1ing to the oldfetish of b~ygne days, when there is achancle for justice? Our British Consti-ution proclapims that there shall be room

for imey as a final resort, and that finalresort ib aln appeal1. Sweep away thleimicie cobwebs of technicalities: sweepawaly thle verbiage upon your statilitc-books;: sweep away thle tramminels oin yourcustom11ary, evidence; look at the soul oethie thing aiid time truth of i(, and seethen if there is not room for doulbt. Letthle humii heart stand uip eusli the col;)dintality for. the Moment. and let utsfeel that there is manhood soniewhe:-c.It is a woman I plead for, 'voin may callher a fallen woman. hut she is cite ;of [luehunman fainily, and one of the frailer ser.

816

[5 Oaroass. m0Om.)s

For hier I ask that Atei shall lire. stifferin cuoiiiieent if Yo~u like-. tI lie -prisoiieil it ' you so wish. tip be deprivedof tilie eoliir14ilSliip I t ilhe rest of .he-World except those 'in a erimlinal level,'bait still III live. t'orgui ten an nilieglectedhr her kind. I ask ot~ 't hat, and whowill be harmned if lint he inn uted -mnthe contrary if not granted. who will beennobled by it? Wlio will blame theGovernrititaaImentt iclr ll ii 41(ht ac-count ? I for- one shaill feel that we inlthis Stalte arc becoming mnore human101 asthe years pass br . O th e tin'ld form o'fbrutality ItS4our liiw-aid noi part ofounr law needs so muchl refoirn still- as'dIrl Criminial Ia w-is goinghak irather we -,ire ping haiott;m rreaching amore civilised stage. I appealto bon. Members' hearts to say honestlywhether fie e will kill. this woman t..;_rnItow asa:1vitimi of the law. T askthem, hare they the heart to do it? Thor'mar' have at sense of duity, their dnty tohumanity, their duty~ to justice, iheirduty to that charity' which is most OUt]-like,. which is imiperative and standshigher ill plea' if a1 substitute for aIgr-eater blessing thian the law.

Trhe ATTORNEY GENERAIL (lloti. .1,. Nansou) : I am not entirel 'y clear as,to the object of the lion, memiber iiibringing- forward this motion. Does tilehon. miemlber mnake this appeal to themiembers of thle Exiecutive. or does he in-lend to appeal to the House as a whole!

Mr. Walker: I make the appeal forcelemencyv to the Executive.

Tile ATTORNEY GENERAL: ft isthe hon. member's wish, as I understandit, to appeal to the Execuitive: but itwould have been easy for him to haveavailed himself aif the oipportunities thathave existedi inl the time between ii"peruid this wonman was sentenced andthe present day, B~e has chosen ill lteiiudouled exercise of his con1stitutionalrigit top briiiwr this mnatter before toefhouse. The House has; the ight to ad-vise Ilie Exeentive or to express; Putop~inion to thle Execuitive onl any questiounof public concern: but while- there -iremany things- hon. members ay do whichdi-rectly 'v ieakiinfx are oitttoul.itduies no,1 follobw that biecause they vr

constitiutionial thiat thierefore they v'eexpedient. I cannout but think that itwvill be anl evil davfor WesternAm-tralia if the precedent set titis afternoonhr li te lion. iiember. ft indirectly eon-slt ii this Chamber a sort of informalc-ourt ut appeal in criuminal eases, is ottethat is to lbe folloiwed in thle future. 'T'lehon. miember, with 1hat wealthI of Ian-gulage and that eloqcuemice wbtich areluall ural tfi hini. hast- made all appeal to.moenibers osf the Execuative which weshould i ilfieil be (lest itute 1ff nati cfeeling if we did not feel to the full ex-tent, but I canl assure thle House that noaiptpeal iii that kind is iievessary to per-sitnde mnenmbers of fthe Executive of diegravest rvstniusihuitv that rests uipilltheir shoulders inl advising tilie (hovern'eirais to whether thie capital sentenceshould cur Aimutld not be carried out.I have no( initeniii of following thletion. niember iii his argument :islo tilhe varifiis points of I Iiis case;]. havxe nil in I ciiioni of add ressinig Itoui.itmembier., as it' -hec aer jury ti) decideiipoii thet guilt ora tilie irinir'eicu or thiswomnan. ori even cif addressing lhiu. mciii-hers as if they were a tribunlal to) saywhether f lie- prerogaitiv e uf Miercy Sho011ldfIr' should nkot lie exerciied, It( is iVlut y tob tell lion. umembers thait whatever

tiayv be die outcome of this debate, andif the iiioiioii of the hon. niember beforced ifi a. division, whatever mar be thleresult of that (livisionl it will not deflevtby one hair's breadth the decision to whichithe members or thle Exiecutive hare come.U cannot believe that there is any lion).member in lis House who thinks thatthe members of this ('hamber whim formthe Executive have not felt the burden ofrespoinsibility that rests. onl their, shoul-ders, or that they have not carefully iii-qutired into this ease while it was befourethem, or- that they hare not availed themt-selves of every possible formi of inforina-Hln mid of all advice open to themn; laidif at this eleventh hour having consideredthis ease in all its bearin, in conse-cquence of tlie speech made b 'y tlahe u.niember. (,r inl r-inseqnenee tuf anly decisionarriv-ed at by this House, the members. ofthe Execuitive were top allow themselvesto be turnedi Erom the muatuire result of

81.8 ASSEMBLY.]

their ilvlihen ations vand consideration ofthis case. they would be unworthy tofill the pisillioli of responsible advilseisto tile Crown.

Mn'. eailulan : You are considering dig-nitv ls'torc t'Inumno life.

'PTue ATTORNEY GENERAL: Aui in-terject ion of that kind is altogether u-warranted : it is it cruel interjection andnine to whichi, when tile jaemlbers of theGoverinment are endeavounring in a matterof this kind to fulfil a ncessarily painfulduty! they' should not be subjected.Thne hon, mnember for Kanowna broughtforward a considerable number of pointsinl eounx'tiinn with this ease," to which liedinected tine attention Of lion. muembers.As, T hav'e already stated. I will not at-tempt to argue thle case before tine Chm-lien', but I wrish to point out to lion. mnenl-bers thant there is not. one of those pointsadvanceed byv thle lion, memtiber to whichtine most fuH~ and coniplete considerationbus not been. given by thle Executive;there is inot one that has not. been madetine suibject IfT investigation: there is n-ota sinigle point, that canl be brou~ght for-ward iii favour of this wvoman to wvhichdue wveight Inns not been given. Wehnave consualted fle :Judge who presidledait tine trial, wre have hnad -thle advantageof tile opinlion of [lie Iauv officers of tineCrown. anid ever 'y individuial mnemiber ofthne Executive has considered tinis miatterin his own privaite little, and we have con-sidered it eoiliecti;-ely. I1 have to ask lion.meanben's nowv whethen' tihey Wish to takeupon thneir shoulders; a responisibility thatwe certainly (10d not take upon our11 shont-dc's.; wvithi pleasunne. T ani not here todefeind our action. non' ann T here to doirmon'e thlnln tell lion. mneniners whatI have alrneady toldi them- l1.i we haveapprn'oalncnl this sub1ject with the utmollstcare: wre have read thie evidence. not once,and in my case T shnonld say 1. hare gonethrouighn it carefully word lby word. ]lnehr line, and T believe thnat what I annsayinig is It-rue of every other mnember ofthe Govennment: and we found our-selvesunlable to recomnmend thant the p rcrok~a-tire of inerci' should Ihe exteinded. T doinot kunow that I Canl ,,aV more withoutturtin- inerl iis (m hber hitlln a sort oif final

court of appeal against the verdictdelivened i tine cri'inaiil i'iti 'is, aidfeeling as st ronigly as .1 do thatthat wuild be a disastrous course. reelingas I do that tine Executive in these mat-ters is tine best judge available under pre-senit conditions it should not be necessaryfon' tile to go further; but whatever lion.nuetabers may think individually in reg-aridto this ease, I should not like them to goaway with the idea. that the membersof the Oorvernnnent arc niot fally'i seizedoif their responsibility. I should not likethemn to goaway with the idea that thereIlas been any carelessness onl our part,or with the idea that there is doubt inonlr ininids. If we were at the eleventhhour to reverse the decision ait which wehare arrived, if we were at t his eleventhhour to reoninend that mnercy should beexteindled, wec should lie acting in violenceto otir consciences and in) violence to theconvictions we have formed. And 1'venture to say that erery- member of theExecuitive Council, fortified as lie hasbeen by the op~portunity of consnltation16i1h thle Judge who Irned the case,' anldwilt I he law officers (of the Crownl, andhaving tine feeling- nit great responsibilityresting uplon his shoulders, is more likelytoi he able to form a righlt judgment inthis cas:e than any boll. menmber who hasnot thle sam11e respoinsihilit -v uponl hisshounlden's. and whon canl scarcely linv;e lie-voted to thle case thle timte w-c nave de-ruled to it alid of whom,. however stronglylip may feel nun the nmtilr. it cannot besaid thiat hie hats the direct respionsibilitythie 'Ministers of the Crown have. I donoi quest ion tine right of thle member forhanowia if lie thiinks fit to bringW iUsmuntter lbefore [the House. althlough T tiofeel vkery- stronglIy thle inadvisability of'tile coursze lie has taken. However, I Vainonlyi~ rjeeat hilnt I haive aii-eady said tohomt. mnembers. that I do not want to makein;'A n'euuan'ks debatable or of' antv length,hat nothing has been advanced by thelion. nenuer that will1 recommiend the(Iovernient to depar-t fromt thle decisionarrivedl at. and that lion, memibers callfecl assurfed that in arriviing at that die-cin tihe Government have not done swithout taking all the care it is: possibleFor then] to take.

$1.8

[5 Ocvoas, 1909.1 1

Mr. BATH ( Brown HI): Withi manyof the szentiments uttered by the memberfor Kauownia in regard to the punish-ment wrhich those charged with the ad-ministration of the law are empowered bythat law to Mete out to those gruilty ofvarious crimes. I amn much in accord. Ihave long held tire opinion that in thesedays of enlighltenment, when there hasbeen a great dimiinution of cn'noes of this

sort, not by the operation of any' penaltyof capital punishment or of great sev-evity, but rather by tie advance of civiii-sation and hutnanitarianisin. the time haswvelt arrived] when, ai the law-makers, weshouldti dispense with that punishment

aloehr -whivh. in my opinion, is esseni-thial- a sur-vival oif savagery. But I mnustconfess that do-day I. synipatluise to thegreatest exlenit with the mnemrbers of theCabinet in the responsibility which hasbeen thrust upon them; and I want toassure themn anti members of the Housethat in no sense would 1 for one momentinfer that in this case they are less; actu-ated by humanitarian sentiments, and adlesire to examine the cuse to the fullestextent arid from every standpoint thanany umemiber of the House or ainy memberoft tire commniity, That beinig so. I couldriot undertake to; move such a motion forIhe adjourninient. and] if it were p~ressed1to a division I could niot undertake tosupport it. I did not think it would henecessary,% for anyone in the House todiscuss the ease or to advance any pointin order to) imipress on memibers of theCabinet thre need for reconsiderinig theirdecision or of giving consideration tothiese points. I betieve they have dlone so,and that Iirvy have arrivedf at the decisionoliev have arrived at after giving thme full-est Possible consideration. after diseuwsingit both individually and collectively. Thathieing so, rne does not like to even in theslight est 1 ,oslhble way convey the inferencethat the Executive have not been actuatedthroughout by the fullest sense of theirresponsibility. If one could express anyother opinion on this point it would bethix, that if nothing else resulted from thisdiscussion it would force honie upon therniinds of hon. members the necessity forgiving reconsideration to our criminal lawvin this respect with the view. I hope. later

on of its amendment so that oLur lawswould be more humane than they are atthe present timie.

The PREMIER (Hon. N. J. Moore):The Attorney Genleral has given the Houseain ouitline of what has taken place sincethe sentence of death was passed onMartha Rendrall. I can assure membersthat die Iiieniber% of the Executive Coun-cil have fully realised their responsibility,we have weighed minutely everyarilof evidence put forward. 1111( that everyletter wsritten by responsible and irrespon-sible people has, received muost carefuleonsidleration at the hands of the Execu-tive; and after giving every considerationwe do not feel justified in altering the de-cision arrived at a fortnight ngo. Iii ad-dition to that, 1 have had the opportunityagain to-day of consulting with the Act-ing Chief Justice in regard to the mat-ter, and he stated that he could see tnreason for disagr-eeing with the verdict ofthe jury. Fortified by this, and by theopinions advanced by the responsible offi-eers of the Crown, I maintain that hadwe taken any other action but that of con-firmuing the decision already arrived at,.we would have been shirking ouri respoin-sibility, the carrying out of our dtitiesand the obligations imposed on us by oroaths of office. I have had an opportunityof -eeing the Rev, -Mr. Allan to-tiax aflerhie hrad had an interview with th etri-denined womnan: and I realise that he. incommnon with many others, thinks there isa possibility of sontic doubt existing; hutI ant of opinion that lie in common withothers discharged their rint- to their con-

sinewhen they brough1t before theExecutive , with all the force at ttheircommnand, the fact, or jparticutlars theYconsidered m igh t have been of soncvalue in alterina- the decision arrivedat. I can only sax' in conclusion thant

Ireg-ret that the hou, member thoughtit necessary to bring this matter beforeParliament, as I think if the pre-eedent created to-day be followed up itmay create a condition of affairs whicmh.to some extent, would be awful to con-template: that is to say, if, after hai:exhbausted the 'machinery provided where-by a judge and jury are enabled to pro-inounce a verdict in connection with a

819

520 ASSEMBLY.J

crime, we should constitute either the E x-ecutive Council or the Parliament of theState a court of appeal without its hav-ing the samne opportunity the jury haveof observing the demeanour of wi tnessesand weighing the evidence submitted inconnection. with the case. I ean only sayin conclusion that I appreciate the words.that have fallen fromr the Leader of theOpposition inl reg-ard to this particularcase, and I am sure the House as a wholewill realise that were it. not hut for agrave sense of duty one would feel muchdisposed to 'Show the clemencrY whichi is sodesired.

Ali- SCAD DAN (I[vanhoe) :I ean as-sure lion. mnembers that I, feel some diffi-dence in intruding oin a subject of suchgreat importance. Aft the outset I de-sire to say, fin spite of myv own views inregard to capital puniishiienit, .t believethat iii a case of t.his kcid the ExecutiveCouncil would be wise to g-rant thatleniency desired by)- niany members -andby many of the public inl this ease untilsuch time as it canl he shown there isno possibility of doubt inl the case. Icanl see 11o justice inl causing this womian.to suffer thle extreme penalty of the law.Though I am opposed to capital punish-inenit, to the extreme penalty of thne lawbeing inflicted, the point to my liid isthis-it muist. lie remembered that thecase caused such a revulsion of feelingamong the public that the womnan waspractically condem ned before bein~gtried in our courts of justice. It is un-necessar~y for inc to say that even be-fore she was arrested the general opinionOf the public was, that she should behanged. and T have heard nmnny say thatif they could have got hands onl herafter the decision they would have lMnch-ed her there and theni. Thle ease causedthai feeling, but at time samne limie isthere that absoIlute proof beyond ashadow of doubt that she committed this,crinme9 And if to-mm-rrow she shouldhang we reniove any possibility* after-wards of having anything of a doiilt-fi nature being brought to light. Iam not prepared to lake thle responsibil-ity of saying that she is absolutely , vniltv,%beyond a shadow of doubt. T recognise

that the Executive Council are equallydesirous of doing justice as I am, and.-

rrecognise, too, thaft they fully realisethle responsibility resting on the m; biltthat: is a matter that is no concern onine; J am not concerned about tlie quecs-lion of the responsibility of the Execu-tive Council. I amn concerned abou~t Iilypersonal responsibility in the mnatter

Mr. Jacoby: You have not an.Mr. SCADDAN: The Executive Coun-

cil are only tile Executive of this Parlia-muent. I say absolutely they can only*continue at thle wvill of this Parliamient.and if thant is so, then -tile ExecutiveCouncil are only a body formed frowPar-liamient to carry out the instructionsof Parliament . and there is no higheritribunal in thme land than Parliament..All the eourts, the higher tribunals we-11mw so much about, are formed fromnPiirianment. and I say that Parliament.r-epresenting thle people as 'it does. i.,the highest tribunal. The hion. memubermust:ql rcognise it; and if we are preparedTto take tile responsibility, with the Exec-utive Colucil, in inflicting the extreme-pellilty of time law in a case where thereis a p~ossibility of doubt, then we havethie right to do so;, but I am not pre-pared to do it; and I hope the Executive,Council will iealise that, while doubtexists, it is not wise to inflict the ex-treme penalty of the law. I know no-thing of thle womian or anything of herconnections. Merely I feel within my-self that it is unwise to carry out thee.xt retne pelnalty of the law where thereis a possibility of doubt. and I say itdoues exist inl this case.

(Sifting stwspcnded fron? 6.15 to 7.30

Mr. HOLMAN (Wfurchison) . One eaii-not but symnpathise with the Executive-Counclil ill tile peisituin ill which tilecyairc placed. Still, when it conies to thetquestion oP duty' . immaterial of whatposition a mann holds, fie should alwaysbe prepared to) do that duty to the bestof his -ability. None can blame the Eix-ecutive Council for the action they' havetaken in this, case. and none cami sylupt-dth with thlell more than 1. knowin:

S20

[15 OCTrOBER, 1909.]81

the responsibility placed upon them, theposition in which they are in. I feelsure that everyone will agree with mewhen I say that not only the ExecutiveCouncil but also the jury and everyoneconnected with the case have given thismiatter their fullest and gravest con-sideration. Still, when we consider thesocial system in which we live, when welook around and see the difficulties placedin the way of an accu~sed getting evi-dence together, whey, we i-alise that inthis e~ase, as unfortunately in many othereases, instead of the full strength of thelegal ability of the State being placedat the disposal of the accused, personswho must give them every possible assist-.Alce-

The Attorney General: Assistance wasgiven.

Mr. HOLMAN: We realise what thatassistance must have been when we knowthat all the household effects, all thetools of the man, were sacrificed to geta few pounds together in order that thiswoman might be defended. We knowwell that prolier assistance could nothave been given. I would like to haveseen in this ease. and in every case of thekind. the fullest investigation in every di-reation, and that the accused persons,should be able to get all possible evidencetogether. The principle under which wework now is agalust what should 1)e thetrue principles of justice.

The Attorney General: The aiccused hasonly to miention any witness hie requires,and'if possible that evidence is procured.

Mr. HOLMAN: The fact that counselfor the accused did not take every ad-vantage th at mnight have b~een used shouldnot deter us from extending mercy tothose to whomn the fullest mercy. possibleshould lie shovn. Tn this ease bad theanalysts. had the detective force and otherwitnesse.s who appeared for the proseen-ion devoted the same attention which

they' paid to the endeavour to secure aconviction in endeavourng to get the ac-eased person off, then the result mighthave been very' different. The possibilitiesa're that ometbing might then have beendiscovered to prevent the verdict of guiltybeing brought in. The jury gave their de-

cision according to their oath. There isno doubt of that. To my mind they wereconv-inced that the verdict they gave wasthe just one; but we know that under oursocial laws when a jury go into the box.nd take the oath to give a decision onathe facts brought before them they haveto give that decision on the evidence andnothing else. For instance, it is possiblethat the position niight misc where a jury-iman was positive that the accused personwas innocent, hut if the evidence showedthat the accused was guilty the Juryinanmust bring in a decision according to thatevidence, and not according to what hieknows of his own knowledge. We haverend of oases where jiudges instruct juriesit. sink all their own knowledige, to payno attention to what they have heard, butto give their decision on the evidence ad-duced. We know the struggles that thefriends of the accused had in their endea-your to get the proper evidence and as-sistance, how they sold their householdgoods, how they sold tools from off theirload, all1 'va sacrificed in the endeavourto prove her innocence.

The Attorney General: That was untthe action of the Crown in any way.

Mr. HOLMAN: I do not b1lme thleCrown one iota; hot I mention the factsas they have occurred, and as they havebeen made public. I do niot baine anyonewho has worked in connection with (hiscase, for T am merely pointing on! asbriefly as possible all the circumstancesthat prove that some other systemt shouldbe introduced in these cases whereby ac-cused persons should have the same ab,-ility to produce evidenee or take othersteps to prove their innocence as that ex-ercised by the Crown in endeavouring tobring about a conviction.

The A1tfornev General : All the evidenceasked for is fort hcomiing'

'-%r. HOLMAN: T happen to knowsomething- in coniiection with these inat-ters.

The Attorney General: I wish vouwould mention cases where mnaterial evi-dence has been prevented from hezm,Called.

Mr. HOLMAN : I have not referred thatmaterialI evidence has been refused by the

821

822 J[ASSEMBLY.]

Crown, but hr a mistaken sense of dut 'yit happens in man 'y cases that those eon-

duetiug- the prosecution have seemled to beunder the imupressiont that the oiie ob-ject is to bflllW about ai conviction. If alawyer knows his client is guilty, lie ;villdo all lie possibly can) to get hint out ofthe position lie occupies: but the law rreragainst the accused will (10 all lie call toget the lprisolner convicted.

The Attorney General: That is nut so.Mr. Walker: 'it too itten-i is so.

IMr. HOLMA-N : It is s'o inl a itlod "'nuiicases, not thlit thter do it onl putrpose. buttheir training teaches them to tr y anidwinl their eases. I1 was Sorry to see thlestand taken by the Attorney General withregard to this mtlion. The coutrse adopitedby the memnber for Ivanoiwn is nol onlyconstitutional. hutl it i's al-4o liioitli( abotby at sense o C duiit 'i ywi ch he. aShosldtmlevery repi'Cseittat ive of the people. re-fuses to shirk. If I he lion. mnember thoughtMercy sholid be Slimwn1. or that justicehad not. been exercised. lie was qguite rightin hringing the tutu tar t'ur~xaid. 'rThe At-tortney Generl :iiltec a veirv differeitattitude. fromt thlit wliicht I shldt Introliked t0 have seen htini Jake upl with reI-gard to the miatter. for if' I rememberrightly lie said thaa in thle event (it. amajoril :y of the House decidhngr agrainsithle (leoisioli of Hie Executive Conicil thleGovernineiit wioulId not rematiin inl ilie liosi-tionl they now oceeuiy

The Attorneyv Geiirat : No: I stirttleExecuttive take thle full] responsibilityr fortheir decision. andtihlat whatever actioninir-lit he taken hr' this Hose wmnil [lotdeflet the decision u, thle E"xeeti ie illthe sli-ist4 degree.

Mr. I[OLAL\N: 1 would like tio with-draw the inference T niade. Ininateiialof whtat the decision of the ExeentiveCouncil is, they have gonle into lhis (tiles;-tion with .i a lrve. open. and lu1 llnind.prered~t to doi :)itivt lnng fliey pitossilleaut. I nun satisfied of thiat, and that weretheir decision reversed b)'y a majorit 'y ofmembers thie result. would nt reflect oneiota on filie 'Ministlers6 or the (Ciown. Tle vhave done their dut 'y miat iull r. withlontfear oft puliliv pi iII)i i - "1 fa v4ou Ir, and1

they- are to be commended for their so-tioti btt we have out duty also, and ifwe are of opinion that by the extenisionof mercy whet may be ni injustice wrilllie prevented we are perfectly just itied intaking, a stand on the matter. It is notfor us to dictate to courts of law as to,what they are 'to do; bitt it is for its touse any influence we hare to turn dile tideof justice if we know well that in ourown mlinds we are convinced just ice hasnot been done. in suchciustnewe are justified in expressing our uoniont,and in eudeavouring- to get justice, irre-spective of what we might suffer. Whowill stiffer if in this case the sentence isCoimutiled ? None Will stiffer JusticeWill itml ulur for' Within a, few h1ours allthe possible sufferings that could lie iu-flicred oil Iarlhai. Rendall will have bebtill ected. We know that if thle Sentenceof (leath is carried out . alt ]ier- sufferingsw-ill be etded. and theit this commlunity''will suiffer if. inl the futuire. sonietliig ibrought forward to show she is innocent.If thlat is so why should not the preroga~-tive of mnerry he extended and the dreadsetitence oif deathli e held over-. 1 Willitot bring in myl, feeliings onil te ques-tion of Caplitail pihnet.or any otherforeigon matter: hult I wouild ulrge alliuumhers to consider all the facts, of the

case ttu place themselves iut thle tesp-sAble posit tot we shouild all reailise iwe arein. Nut tie of its hbut fteds tile presentSitttZtt lol lcelr' . deeply, V and SittrerePl 'Anmd if We did nlot 1o oLur duty by lirec-venting ant injustice beingz clone we Wouldtnot lie wvorthy toi be enalied men. 1 riseto express; t1u3 Opiniotn onl this quest itllrthat iuder the circumstances, di inkingrand reading as we have done, and takingeverythting itnto consideratioti. toi say Wewill he only doin~g our- duty it wve decideto have Ie. sentence commtuted. TiltclutcStii is a diflirtik one to sp)eak oil'still we have our duty to do. and if I feeldint it 15 t 01111 iltty immuateriall o f irlatmiay trait-spirr ini thme future. venl if 11r.Rendall maikes a confession to-titm1-ti XO.tand we rote against this sent eace 1,einucarried ut. to lake the responsibility.Forl 111self I aml prepared to take it. Inlthle Iiciiu ne feet compelled to ex-

822

82-1.1[5 OCTOBER. 1909.1

piersF my ' % pinir o bi: hh occasion thatthe sentence should not be carried 'mt.

X&. HEITUALNK (Cue): 1. unider-stood from the member for Kanown.who moved this motion, that lie did notintend to appeal to members to decidewhether or not the capital punishmentshould be carried out in this ease. T uin-derstood himi to say that lie was appeal-ing to the members of tire ExeeutiveCouncil. Personally speaking, I am notafraid to east a vote onl this question.nor am .1 aware whether it is the inten-tion of thle mover of the motion to askthe members of the Chamber to cast avote. I think. and 1 feel strongly on filepoint, that it is anl unfair thing, in a easeof this kind, to ask members of the Chain-her to form themselves into a court ofappeal, not having had the opportunityof going- thoroughly inko the question. Ifully appreciate the responsibility of'theGovernment, and I may say that judgingfrom my own feelings" I consider no man.worthy of thle name of mant, would heguilty of not. giving a condemned womanthe benefi of any possible shadow ofdoubt. Therefore, if T am forced to casta vote onl this particular question, I shallbe forced to abide by die decision ofthose who have been in the position tojudge the question fi-om all sides and whohave backed up (lie decision of the .Iudgeand jury.

'My COLLIER (Boulder) : I have no0desire to prolong this debate. [ only riseto say that I entirely agree with the easeas put forward by the lior. niember forKranowna. andic I also agree with his at-tituide in bniinging it before tile House.I w~anit tom say, that thre contention of theAttorne v Getieral: that this House shouldnot lie turned inlto a erarelt ol' appe)al. hasvery little influence with ine. I hope thedlay wvill long he rlisiant when thIis Housewill not be a court of appeal, especiallywhenl [lie life o1f a fellow heillg is at staike.I wvould like to point out that after allthe Executive themselves hare sat as acourt of appeal on this ease. tf it beargued that threre is nio one sn capable ofdeciding- a matter of this kind as a Judgeaird jury. who have heard the whole orthe evidence: if it hie argued that no oine

else is in a pasifiuli to come to a de-cisioni onl this matter, I wat to kuow howit is that the Executive themselves sataid reviewed thle decision of the Judgearid ,L~ry? It may be said they haveevidence before them which this Househans iloL, but I1 venture to say' that ittjudging of the value of the evidence itis of very little assistance to one to readit.

Irhe Attorney General: Tire exercise orneroe- is thre ;)rerogative of the Crown.It in not- tire prerogative of Parliament.

Mr. COLLIER: I know exactly whatit is. but I say- that when a case is re-mutted to the 'EXeeCtive they bare to de-cide whether erserice shall be carried ottor tnt. Therefore. I say. to that extentthe Executive are a cour~t of appeal.

The Honor-an 3ly inister: They are not.Mr. Underwood: Undoubtedly they are.The Attorney General: The Executive

decides whether they' shiall extend theprei-ative of mnercy.

Mr. COLLIER : And to that extentthen are they riot a court ot appeal?[Does it not rest with the Executivewhether tie sentence shall be cardied outor. 11(00 Have wve riot liad instanceswhere tire prerogative has been exercisedin favour of accused in the past? I amnot going to prolong this debate. I onlywant to say with regard to the views ex-pressed by* the menmher for Cite that liehas. no evidence to guide hint in casting arote. Thte evidence. I thiiik. is containedin tie few remiark-s exlri-ec by tire.TumlgC whLo heard (lie cee arid they "-credint if tilew urnar was .rihnvt of thatcrimie she u-as a mral muontrosity. Irim riot g&oing- to argue whether thre wonmanis guiilt v or inrnocent. hut if she he g~uiltysire is ahl)ittely- not responsible for hie-ar-troms. Probablyv front the houirr of lien-deaithr she was foredoonied to thi.s crrune.and c all pei rson whoi~ will lie gilIty oif suLchIa crim ecould not he heldl resliorisihble. arid.therefore. we Avoirld [lilt hie doing, Just icein carry ig out Ilie senutetnce. For' tiatreason I express rnrY intenltionl to SUI)rpimoithle views aiid the attitude of IlII- nicrir-her for Kariownla.

irel HOYORARY' MINISTER (Hon..J. Pr-ice() I rsperak With great relmuctanice

824 [ASSEMBLY.]

on this question, but I would like to pointout to the hon. member that in eases ofthis description the final decision absolu-tely rests with the Government. I shallread a passage from Pazrliamentary Gov-ernment in the British Colonies by Todd,in which he says-

"Nevertheless under all1 circumstan-ce it is true that a Governor may (andindeed must, if in his judgment itseems right) decide in opposition tothe advice tendered to him."

I only draw attention to this to explainan interjection that I made just nowwhile the member for Boulder was speak-ing. I do not think anyone will say thatthe Executive have not given the greatestconsideration to this matter. There arethose of us, at all events I am one ofthem, -who would like to see capital pun-ishment abolished, and would gladly votefor its abolition. But as it is our[ clearduty to administer the law as we find it,we have in] this instance, very reluctantly,after having given careful considerationto all the evidence including the pointsraised by the member for Kanownia,come to the conclusion that the verdictof the jury was absolutely and entirelyjustified. It is a difficult matter for hon.members who have not had access to thedata, which we have had, to form a con-elusion. Bat in a matter of this kind, situ-ated as we have been] -with every form ofinformation available, we have been forcedreluctantly, as, I hare stated, into theposition that we are now placed in.

Mlr. UNDERWOOD (Pilbara) : Aswe shall be called upon to vote on thismlatter I just wish to state the reasonsw~hich will actuate me to vote in the man-

Der in which I intend to do. I agree en-t irely with the member for Boulder thatthe Executive Council is a court of ap-peal, There is no shadow of doubt aboutthat, and it is useless to bring books alongto say that they are not. You can bringhooks to say (hat the IKing governs Eng-land, whereas we know it is Parliamentwho are responsible. T just wish to saxYthat I ani going to vote against tilemiiiion for reasons similar to those givenbyv the member for Cue. I contendr am not ill the p-isition to judge Mrs.

Hendell. The lawv has provided that aftera Judge and Jury have decided to try acase, that it is for the Executive of theState to review the evidence given andif. in their opinion, there is reasonabledoubt, they have the power to commutethie sentence. In the present instance ithas been decided that the law shialt takeits course. I have no evidence, nor amI called upon to give a decision eon traryto the decision which has already beenigiven. T am totally opposed to capitalpunishimentt iii any shape or form, whetherit he in the case of a man or woman ;butI aml of opinion that a mnan or womanwho commnits murider is abnormal, in otherwords insane, and I hold that it is ineffect legal murder to hangz such a. man orwvollan. At the same time T hold that itis orl duty, if we think that, to allter thelaw: but while it is as it exists it is de-cidedly unfair to) ask the Executive tocomniitL one s entence ,and allow anotherIn he carried into force. Those who holdthant the sentence should he commutedShould make strenuous endeavours tot haeeca pital punishment abolished, anti I iminassure them J will support them. I in-tend to vote against the mrotion.

Mr. TAYLOR (Mft. Margaret) -Ihave addressed myself to this Chain-her on many subjects and mamytimes since I have had the hoaolnrof being a member of it, hut Ihave never done so with such reluct-ance as I do to-night. It is a subjectthat tine in a position like I am in my-self is practically even unable to gi vea %Vte that would do justice to oneselfor to the Rouse, for I have not read theevidence, nor have I watched the casesufficiently closely through all its pri)-ceedings to be Ale to say whether theaccused 'woman is guilty Or innocent, a~i.lI am afraid that there are other memn-bers in a similar position. That being-so, I say I am not in the position. to rp-cord a vote as to whether she is innocentor guilty. The member for Kanownapointed out veryv clearly and forciblythant thiere was a great discrepancy mus';me. of time evidence, which left greatromuni for dloubt as to this person's guilt.'rlm him. meniber has evidently gone

824

[5 OCTOBER, 1909.] 2

into the ease and knows him, the evi-dence appeals to himself. If I weregoing to cast my vote to-night as towhether I believe in capital punishmentor not, I would be able to do' it withoutfear or favour, because I am absolutelyagainst capital punishment. But i-court-ing my vote to-night against this resolu-tion would not indicate that I amagainst capital punishment. It wouldbe unfair to call upon me to take thisopportunity of indieatini- my opinion up-on capital pun ishmentI. For Parlia mentto intelligently deal with the (questionof capital punishment it should hebrought dowvn in the forn of a substan-tive motion, and not while a person iswaiting the passing of a few hours be-fore going ten the gallows. That in it-self precludes one fromt discussing thequestion in the broad spirit in which hiewould do in other circumstances. Know-ing the responsibility which surroundsthem, I believe the gentlemen on theTreasury benches who have consideredthis ease since the finding of the juryare no more anxious to haug this womanthan are any other six or seven memn-bers of this House. I say they have hadevery phase of the question put beforethem. If they have not they are lackingin their duty, and I would not accusethem of that in a case of this kind. Isay they have had an) opportunity ofsifting to the last degree any evidencethat was lacking before the Jury whichwould tend to mitigate the crime, andperhaps remove what the member for-Kanowvna calls a doubt. [ believe theExecutive have done all that theyv could]do. As one having had the hoour i'fbeing a Minister of the Crow~n in thisState I know the responsihilities --tattled to the position, and I rail realisethose responsihilities very fully in a caseof this natuiire. I repeat Illy Convictionthat those gentlemen have done theirduty. They have had facts before the,,,of which I know nothing. and I gitethem credlit for being as humane as I ammyself. or as is any other member of theHouse. No inatt Cr hiow wye mnav disagreein polities, when it comes to a questiinof taking human lifte I say) that ii(brand of polities we hold does not in-

fluence us. It is at subject upon whichone feels a great reluctance to speak, butas I am of opinion that I will have torecord a vote onl this quesation lo-night-

Mr. Walker: No.Mr. TAYLOR: WVell. if~ I am sure I

will not have to cast a vote I will havenothing further to say. I rose to givemy reasons for voting as I in-tended to vote. [ was not goingto cast a silent vote on' a question ofthis character, but as I am assured bythne mover that I wilt not have to recorda vote I have no desire to make anyfurther remarks it t his painful subject.

Mr. WAl [AER (in reply) : It has beenalmost as painful to listen to the debateats it was to m~ove in the first instance inthis matter; and all the more painful toknow that the object I have in view hasbeen misunderstood. M1 y only object Itried to make as clear as possible,namiely, to show that there is room for

doubt and to, ask for mercy. Even bymy own leader and by an' friends on myown side have [ been indesod I

have not asked for a review, for a r--hearing; but I have asked and do askthat there shall be mercy shown to thiswoman. The Attorney General in hisexplanation of the attitude taken by theGovernment questioned more or less, notmy right, but the wisdom of taking thiscourse; and I fancy lie suggested that Iought to have moved earlier and inter-viewed, or in some way influenced, theExecutive Council.

The Attorneyv General: Not moved inthis Chamber at all.

Mr. WALKER: No. butl to move theExecutive Council. the members of theExecutive Council. I do not quiteunderstand what course hie suggested Ishould have taken. Let ine say I didendeavour to make some movement lastweek. I did appear at the door of thePremier's office last Saturday morningto plead there. M.f'v friend the memberfor Ivanhoe was p~resent on Saturdaymnorning- at the door of the Premier'soffice, whilst the Attorney General, thePremier, and other-s were discussing thisniatter. I felt very. anximeus to say whint

82.5

826 [ASSEMBLY.)

I could then, before any decision hadbeen arrived at; to see if any influence Icould bring might save this woman'slife. Unfortunately the door was shutagainst me. I was not permitted toenter, or to speak. M~oreover, I hopedtill the very last, hoped till noon to-dayor until the decision reached the outerdoors, that the woman would have hersentence commuted at the last moment.This is my only opportunity, the lastchance I have. Am I wrong in takingitt Is it ever wrong to plead anywhere-is there any place on earth too sacred,too hemmed round by formalities orceremonials to have a human life atstake and to refuse to plead for it? Isthere?7 If this Chamber is not the lastresort of the unfortunate, where is it?Where can we go? We have known in-stances where juries have been perverse,where judges have been ferocious, whereMinisters in power have been recreant toduity. I do not say for one moment thatany of these elements are present here.But there have been such instances.Where, then, could the people appeal,bitt through their representatives; eitherdirect to His Majesty through the Gov-ernor, or to Parliament? These are ouronly avenues. We cannot reach else-where when the gates are closed to usand every door is locked. When everystep has been taken to seal the doom ofthis woman our only chance, our onlyavenue, is here; and I am speaking to-night to His Excellency the Governorfrom the place where, above all places,my words are likely to have weight. 1have spoken to Ministers in the street,I have spoken to 'Ministers in the tramcat; I have accosted them where I couldand pleaded in a mild form and cour-teous manner for this woman. But whatweight have my words? The scorn withwhich the other side of the House som-times treats me becatuse of the party Ibelong to may perhaps do me an in-justice. At all events it prevents mywords having that wveight which is duoto truth and sincerity wherever it isfound. But here in this Chamber I canispeak with mtore weight, I can appealwith the knowledge that some attentionwill be given to what I say. I can en-

force what I believe with the facts Ihave gathered; and I take this opportu-nity at the last possible moment, foreven yet it is not too late to exercise theprerogative. Moreover, I think the At-torney General], if lie consult his ownauthorities iii law, will find in our silup.lest text books that the highest court o(criminal appeal is Parliament.

The Attorne y General: Parliament hasthe right to advise the Crown in the exer-cise of the prerogaltive, bitt it rests withthe Crown as to whether that advice isaccepted.

M6r. WALKER: We have anl appeal tothe highest court in Pariamnt. Thisis the highiest court in the realm; nocourt is so high as Parliament. I am notgoing to quibble onl a matter of this ind.The fount of mercy, constitutionally re-cognised, is [lhe King. The rep~rescnta-five of the King, in this State is his Ex-cellency the G4overnor. And although itis perfectly t rue that His Excllencycould, if lie were so determined, act inde-pendently of his advisers, such a coursewould be from custom irregular; and Iquestion whether it would be supportedif it were referred to the Home auithori-ties. Upon this poi nt I knowv something.I know that in New South Wales in res-pect to ii ease heard there a position aroseof this kind: The Executive Council ad-vised one thting, while His Excellency des-sired to take another course. A conflict,a deadlock. ensued and instructions wereasked flmin the Home office. The replyfrom the Colonial Otfice was that theGoverntor should take the advice of hisresponsible advisers. I believe that is theexact position here. W1hilst His Excel-lency, theoretically, has the right to ig-"Ore his advisers, he never would do so.].t is not customairy. That is the positionwe arc ill so that the full[ responsibilityfalls back upon the Cabinet. And here.too, let i sayl that when in other parts ofthe wvorld Cabinet have acted as practi-eal ly o i-l (a binet is actinig now,"similarnioti(,Is to that I have moved here to-night have been moved. It is no newthing-. I am not makirn a p~recedent, IaII' following anl admirable precedent.For the sake of human life other membersof Parliament hove pleaded in other parts

826

[5 (!rrolwn. 1909.]12

of the Commnonwealth. sii I have- nothingat all onl which to feel re ,-ret iii that res-pect. Now let uis see what is the position.Let mle repet I' do tnot for a single me-intent wvish tII impte tile honesty of thle3hikScrv inl Itis nMat telr I blieve theyare as sioriously cominiieei that this womanshould die according to) Ilite law as I ainconvinced tliac t-n-owshe will be mur-dered; but, at the sanme time, let tile re-view what they have done, and the tea-hires they have insisted wi. They tell usthey have been twive tbrough t ie evidence.that tliey have called in (lie Crown Lawvofficers. and that they have had the Judgeto guide them. That would seem to lieconclusive. What has been the whole otfthe adice. whnt has been tile puiii~ose ofconsulting~ thle crown Law otto-era, whathas been the function (of the -Judge in acritical hour like this? Not too usurp nileiota uponi thle province of His Excellettey-- mark that-not to inirench one inch be-yond what the law in statute and in ens-tam has laid down. Trhey have gone overthis from (lie standpoint purely (of law-yers . the;- have taken the evidencee of thewitnlesses and thle verdict of the jury, ;Andthey have stopped there. Thecy cannot -gofurther. The Cr-own Law utlicers shouldnot advance one step beyoind thait. IffisHonour the Acting Chief J istice couldnot go beyond what his oath enhieQ linto go. that is. to keep within thie compassof the law. If it be by regular process oflaw that this woman has been condemned7 will go all that the Attorney Generalcan go, mid I wvill give himi my endorse-ment as to the regularity. There has beennothingt dlone in contrav.entionl of thle laqW,of (ilie land. nor any Omnissiotn of tile o"ec-at'n5 of the laws of the laind. But theyhave only taken us to the ;hreshhold. Iris after the law has clone all that C im-plore the Government to act; it is afterthe sphfere of mercy is approached. Thatkeeps outside lte Court.

The Attorney General: That hta,; alsobeen considered.

Mr. WALKCERi What mnercY was-rauted; whose big, heart wa, touchied;what founitains of that divine clementwere tapped? ft is the sense of' dity, itis "stick to the law," that hound thsefountains. Tied with those chains. thle

fill

Execinivo cojuld IL moun1t icnto that ho0li-est (or all temples: cud to-night, as Istacid here, I felj thle ueeeSSutv there isyet for reformn ztnl advance. There areiteic On Il- vOwn side Iof dlie House whosaly it is cicurdec'- to kill a. huncian creatureuinder any v4'ireiccistaiices. LawNo ! Law!Kill her: never inind the law. kill her?We will vilte i kill tier hecausc of thelAw% which We do0 not beil iwhich wevwuld alt to5-lilrrow. which is- wrongftwIik- is niucdr-oInMs! It is MUr-derous,but wre will vole to, kill hler I' am at aloSS to Understandl Icuna nature, Arewe so boucid dowcivi to these deadqf formiali-ties that we cannot lift the soul abovetlieni? is this what is; to crush us? Menwho believe that the law is murderous wiltvote for it: mr is it hypocrisy?' Pardonnc if I spleak top feelingly, for there arethose in [lhe House w-ho in this Chamherhave eoccdeciiued judes. have i~iveighedagainst the laws till their voices grewhusky, inl condemnationi of itheir icijustice,and have appealed tip have themn suispect-ded. to make themi iroperaifi-e .ct here,at the most sacred tine of alt, when awomain, over whose innocence or' guiltthere is undoubtedly a doubt, stands toi-night with heart palpitating al lte dreadOf to-morrowV stands at the veil foot ofthe scaffold, though they say she may beinnocent, that she ought not to he killed,they will vote for her being hanged. Thatis the stare to which we have comI-e, Onnot we want rousing. everyone of us9 Onlte Government side there are those whose

heart,; arc soft and tender those I knowwho hare pity and can pity as munch as Ican, who would not knowingly wrog aSinl n1iorta01-0. huZt. Who0, On the shrinle Ofcold legal duty, will witness that wvomanswing from earth toi heavenu to3-morrowmorning. Cf these poissihilities can takeplace in Parlianient how (-an we blame.iniies and judzes. how can we blame theslitieking public? We cannot. We needto examinie outrselves, we iced to look atour own hearts, we need to renmeumiber thatwe are. in this instance, the custodians ofa1 life that is a part of the zmn humuanfamnily, a life that is as sacr:,d as anyimortal life in existence. degr-aded and un-fortunate as it may ha AX' tliQi lastmoment I am asking now that His Ex-

827

828 [ASSEMBLY.]

celieney shall be approached. It is uselessfor me to approach him, mie, anl Ordinaryindividual that anybody may accost bynickname in the street; but it is not use-less for the Governiment; they canl ap-proach His Etxcellency. in) spite of theiriqinnetin that the law is sound and thatohey have exhausted it s possibilities, theycan take one s~tep and can go one pointfurther;, because they cannot degradethemselves b y i%. Whoever in this worldby the exercise of mlercy was made ig-noble'? Hlon. mnemtbers, inay say they havea duty* to perform, and may make slavesof humian creatutres to perform it, andmay judge b y heads and not by hearts.How different it is to that woman who iiiher last words said Lhis--cuntrasting thleattitude taken in ignorance with what wassaid-"I pray to God to give we grace toforgive those who have sworni falsely mylife away?' These are tire words fromlthe dying womoan. They remind us of agreat episode. I should not mnix sacredthings with these tn'oderru evenits; but weknow that for~givertess of enemies is athing that has lasted through the corri-dors Of timte :I~ese two thousand years."Forgive your enemnies"! "Go thou andsin no more"! Is that going to break upCiovernents amd show they are cowardsor lacking in backbone' While youstanld at thle threshold of the grave,for the sake of keeping a stiff backbone.inurder her. i"t mecans thaqt.

Tbe Attorney General: I do not thinkthe hon. member is justified in sayingthat we refused to advise the exercise ofthe prerogative of miercy' for fear that weshrould he accuseri of wanting backbone.

'Mr. WALKER: I did not say that.Guil1ty conseieio'e needs no -iccusers. What1 said was-would it harm you to exer-r-ise meIrcyV; is it going to do you harm todo this because that might lie said of youIlAnd that is what I say now-will it doYou this wron&.? No! Or. the contrar~yit will ennoble vou; brat couriit Otis deed.and you keel) uts hack ini savagery, youkeep its in barbarous tim's. you put, acloud oin the whole rominnnify, yon av itis wisp In he rc-veng'fnl. What is it for?Ar icA y'u gillg to aeforan the womian byhiangingr her: are you going- to bring backli ho .- ;ul toh li'e ! Thten wlhat is it for?

Punishment ! Venageanrce! The savageinstinct, tlic brutality of our civilisatiotiis speaking.

The Premier: It acts as a deterrent.M[r. WAL KEN: Anid who1M are yo"s

going to deter by banging her?Mr. Seaddan: They banged thieves at

one time.Mr. WALKER: At one time they

hanged "-omen for swallowing pins andcailled thein witches. We read of theholocaust when the%' went round hunt-ing uip witches,' and how a Judge, SirMN'atthew Hale, said the giving uip ofthle punishment of witchcraft was ineffect the giving uip of the Bible. Herewas at Judge of the Supreme Court, onerespected, and a ini of profound abil-ity and attainments, a great Judge in-deed, Yet senteoced witch after witchlto death. Did lie do it rightly!

Te Attorney General: He acted ac-cording to his conscience and his lightsas we are acting to-day.

Mr. WALKER: The lion, membershould hanve lived in his dayvs. That isjust exactly what hie did, and I givethe lion, member credit for doing it now,acting according to the best of his lightsand ability; bitt 1. amn pointing out tothe Attorney General that his lights areon the level of those days, when if acertain crime wats mentioned it wasenough to get a person hanged. To men-lion the crimue was enough;- the accusedwere condenmned at once, though theynerr-t before judge-s and juries and therewere all rte formalities. Hosgts of vic-tims4 were offered.

rThe Attorney (ieneral: The probabil-ityv is that I should have been no betterthan my generation if I had lived thea.

Mr. WALIKER: The only thing T re-ret is t11at livinrg itn this time there does

rnt seem to be any advance. But I re-gret to be personal in this serious mat-ter. It is no case for bickering. WhenT amn pleadig for mnercy. I should trothurt the lhon. mnember or wound him.The honi. memtrber has so muich to do inthe matter. and Pant do so much, and ifif were necessary to apologise I woulddo so. But what I am pointing outis that it can he no deterrent. I havequtotedI thle fact bhat iii thle times of

828

[5 OPTOFF. 1909J.1 2

Blackstone. it, tile days of the Georges,there were 160 offences for which mencould be put to death. We have got rid,if that. It is only in the days of Queen

-Victoria that we have got capital pun-ishment taken out of the public and putinto the guols. In other words, bmagingused to be in public, and great crowdsused to gather to watch a hanging, winl-dows used to be hired, it was a greatpublic entertainment. Have wve gotworse since then? We used to hngmen for stealing sheep. We do not now.Is there more, sheep stealing in) WVesternAustralia because we have not that lawvlWe have diminished the severity of ourlows. and with the diminution of thatseverity we have better citizens, morecivilisedl. more self-respecting- Whatthe effect of hanging this woman to-nior-row will be is this: it will show that thehighest authority in thle land. tile Execu-tive Council, j ustify- revenge, punish-ment. harbour ill feeling, and thereforewhat is right for thorn cannot be wvrongin the multitude. There is evidence ofthat spriit in letters tha t appeared inthis morning's paper. The 'Y would takerevenge. It is not revenge that isw~ant-ed. Moreover, there is a sadness eastOver all when that instrument of bar-barism performs its deadly wvork, a shud-dcr goes through even, citizen. To-morrow night the streets will be futll ofbuyers of the papers to see hc~w thiswoman dies, the curiosity, the love ofthe morbid, the shudderings, pa! L of theentertainment is the liarrrintr. Atohangings are no longer public, ais theyused to be. they Aill et it., thle papersas a sort of piibli thing-, and the mor-bid of the community love it. We areadegraded to that extent. Mly desire aswell for the people as for Mrs. Hendall.is that this should be stopped and it canlbe, as I have pointed i nt, withoutany' sacrifice of any quality that ishonourable. If the Government like theycan say, "We think that woman guilty,but shte is a woman, and she has had sur-roundings hby which she becamne a 11non-ster"-and a monster is not even responl-sible ill law for- its act-'anud we shallcommute the sentence." Let the Govern-ment consider that. .id for her ,ex. anld

inl consideration oif the diseased eharacter.she htas. conmmute [her sentence. The lawwould lie v.i dielated, there would] be nosacrifice 4,' al1ly1 prinip)he or oif any techi-nical legality. This is a power reserved;it canl be exeised y et, it ca,, ble exerc ised111 to the tlittle tle drop fallis to-morrow;

Ionly ask that it thall he. T would putthis to) thle %-itie w~ere it not for the factthat I will no't he :i party to asik onefriend t '"i"r I" v'ote ft) 'this womnan'sdeath.

Mr. lrovy: Youi 'lVe a conscience; voleYoursehlf.

Mr. WALKER : shall [ let it appearthat those who do nlot believe this womanshould die have voted for her death?

ru.v: Y.ou Can not do ol herwise if.you believe in it.

Mr. WALKER: I can do Otherwise;Iha1ve done my , v utv. All I want is to asktlie Government it this last moment, toplead witl, the Government that the pre-rOp'ati~-e of mercy shall be exercised. Icanl 9ay no mnore. Front mly hteatrt, andwvith all tile earnestness Of which I amcalpable, I plead, if pleading makes itbetter that, asking, that this shall be donefar [lie sake of owi nanlhood and the bet-etnetit Of Our State. I ask leave to with-lra,11v the motion.

lfMitt io, v leave, withdrawn.

Q1'ESTION XPBLIC SERVANTS'-RETIR [NO ALLOWANCES.

.\r. BIATH asked the Premier: I, Didthe 11on. the Minister for Lands, inl hisaddress% to thle civil servants, promise thatret irig allowances Would be pa id to thoseeivi I servants wvho were included in thle]lud settlement scheme at Kodj Kodjint2. Has this retiring allowvance been pro-vided for in regard to all civil servants in-eluded in the scheme! 3. If not, why hasdiscrimination been made in regard to thetreatment meted omit

The PREMIER replied: 1, Mr. M,%it-cetll said :-Solue of those selected mlightbe entitled to retiring allowanee,. andthose who were would] get them in some.shape or form. He did not know that theywould be given cheques, but satisfactoryai'tan4'enicns could he a1deC. Thoseselect ed wrould get 'rhnt her wer ,ent,,itled

82.)

SSO [ASSEMBLY.]

to, bunt they wonldtint have anl oppor-tunity of geting retiring allowances un-less they wver-e to become settlers." It isproposed Io pay anyv retiring allowancethat is dute at thle rate of one-half at theend of 12 mionths and the other half atthe end of (Avo years. 2. Answered by No.1. 3, The officers who are applying to beallowed to retire, in order that they maytake advantagre of the settlement schecme,.are being treated alike.

QUESTT'ON-ZEPURCfl.ASE OFLARGE ESTATES.

Mr.- CARSON asked the Premier: Isit the intention of thle Government thissession to seek autliorisaition for a ftu r-titer antoutit for the purpose of repar-chasing large estates for closer settlement?

The PREIMIER replied:- Yes. Thenecessary amnendmnent to the AgriculturalLands Purchase A\ct i-s being prepare.

QUESTION-LAND TRANSFER,COOMBERDALE.

Mrh. SUADDAN asked the Minister forLands: 1. Ha-, his attention been drawnto the attached advertisement which ap-peared in the lWeal A ustralian of Sep-temnber 17th last?

T-UESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21.At Three pa.

In the Rooms. .56 St George's Terrace.

821 ACRES, COOMIBERDAJ2E,31/. 'Miles from Station, fron1ting the

"Midland Railway.

ABSOLUTEL~Y WITH{OUT RESERVE.

A GOOD CH4ANCE 'FOR TNVESTORSA-ND OTHIERS.

CHAS. SOMMIEWS lies been favouredwith instructions to SELL as above-

82]. Acres of first-class Land, 3'..miles from Coomberd-ale, conipris-ing C.P. Leases 2392/56, 2393/56,2394/56, and 41 33/56. formingone compact block.

The land is splendidly fenc:ed withjam-posts and 6 wires, and is timberedwith salmon gumn, jamu, and York gum.

With the exception of the fencing theland is unimproved.

Cooraberdale enjoys a rainfall ofabout ]inm.

TER MS-Oati- third cash, balance inttwelve months, without interest.

The Sale is absolutely an Unreservedone.

2, Has application. beet, made lo transferthese leases? If so. what action has beet)taken~ -

The MINISTER FOR LANJDS re-plied: 1. Yes, 2, 'N transfer- has beenpresented for regist-ation. The DeputyPostmaster General claims an interest itithece teases on behalf of his department,and a note has been made against them inthe register that no dealing is to be reg-istered without sgpecial refertence to ti~eMtinister,

RILL - LAND ACT SPECIALLEASE.

Second Reading.The MINISTER FOR WORKS (Hon.

F. Wilson) in moving the second readingsaid: The object of this measure is toempower the Government to grant as-pecial lease for .99 years of certain lands.at lRocky Bay to the Mlount Lycli Mining& Railway Co., Ltd. Thle purpose forwhichi this land is required is to erectlarge chemical works for the manufactureof superphosphates and acids, and it hasa direct bearing on our great agriculturalindustry. No words of mine are neces-sary to informi uiemiea-s of the standingof this comnpany' and of their financialsolidity. Their operations in the Stateof Tasmania are wiell known to everynaembe-, more esp~ecially iii connectionwith mining and the railways which theyown in connection with their miningproperty. I aught mention in passingrlliat the capital of the company is£1.200,000, fully paid ipl, and that ofrecent years they have extended theiroperations into 'New S9outh Wales in theform of large coking plant at PortKembla. and also chemical andsuperphosph ate works ill tile nui0ti-rState. In Victoria also they havelarge works established at Yarraill-.on which they have expeiided sorni-thing like £90,000. and which -irenow turning ount simep 40.000 tong ifsuperphosphates per annnum. In SouthAustralia they have works also whicht

830

j-5 Oo'roussu. 1909.183

turn out somethinm like -20,000 tonsj ayear. The plant in Victoria has onlybeen in existence for some five and a halfyears, and yet in that short period it hashad to be doubled in capacity. For sonictime past the company have been export-ing to this State. and last year they senthere something like 5,000 tons of super-phiosphates. The capacity of their plantsin the P~astern States lies been fullyreached, and they have found it neces-sary to comne hi Western Australia to es-tablish themnselves onl a proper workingbasis. r need hardly say we welcometheir advent very sincerely. They pio-pose to put tip very extensive works onthe land which it is agreed to lease themfor the works,, which will run into an ex-pendituire oif something lie £54,000 asa lirst cost. They have already placedcontracts for buildings of the value of£23,000, for anl electrical plant valued at£3,500, for engines, boilers and engineer-ing materials valued at £:7,100, arnd dot'-ig- [lie past week they have expendedupon ii le preliminary foundations over13,' 000: so that members will see theyhave committed themnselves to the ex~ieil-diture of nearly £35,'000 already' and areant horised b ,y the directors. to spend£-53,000 on the works. The quantity ofsaJperpllosphates they will turn out inWestern Australia when the work., arein full going order will he something like20,000 tons per annum. They. will re-qnire each year 12.000 tons of sulphinricaiil and 12,0010 tons of phosphate rockr'o manufacture super; ihosphates. Thesulphuric acid is to be made ait the works.and the phosphate rock is to be importedfronm Christmas ainti Ocean Islands. whereI believe the company have thle right toobtain rock.

MrIt. JIohnson: Will they muanuifacturelsilphi nric acid?

The AMTNISTEH FOR WORKS}romii pyrites which ii is hoped thiey willobtaino ill Western Aus-tralia. If t hey'ciint obtain pyites of the neressal'vqnnl:1itv here they will inmlort it fromthepir lproiiPrIi iii Tasmania.

Ail., Jolhison: HanvP they made anyeffort to Lrct it here"

Thie INISTER FOR WVORKSl'hCv are ftlikint( efforb ts ltW aind1 hiopeC

ito lhe succ-essful in g-ettin_-it roaperb~ gradeoit pyrites in this Stute. They' say theyintend to use every effort to get it here.hut if that is impossible they have a suit-able supply in their owvn wining- proper'-lies in Tasmania. The conditions of the-lease, which really forl the Bill itself.empower Ilme granting of a lease by theoverninent. I ight briefly explain that

fimp coniditions cover certain labour condi-i inis. :inih the expending- of iniey witha innimu of expenditure. sio that theinterests of the State are fully safe.-guarded.

Mr. Johnson: What is the a rea~

Thei M1I.NISTrER FOR WVORKS: Thearea to~he leased is 16 acres 3 roods 1(1perches. It carries with it the right ofway to a wharf, which it is proposed topermit the company top erect onl theriver, hut this whafti will be suibject toanother lease entirely separate from thelease of thle land, which is covered by thieschedule of this Bill. The right of waywill extend over a chain wide, from thepre'Cmises 6o the forshoce, or to thle wharf-is the case may he. It carries wvith it theright to construict anl overwin' bridge orliridires, suibways, or to coiieet wvith thepforeshore hr other mleains, connnicationl,for instance hy flying-foxes. to takemnaterial fromt barges or vessels to theworks, or' ship it fronm the works In the"ressela. It also tarries the ight to pumpwrater front the river for the purpose ofthe work, bitt these rights are all subjectto the approval of the Engineer-in-Chief.The lease also gives to the lessee theiight of access top the railway system itthe State of Western Australia, access byfilie existing quarr 'y hine. which runsIthrough the land which it is piopiosedl tiphease top the comipany. This right, ofcourse, is subject (amid it has been muadevery clear in the agreemient) to suchfreights and conditions, us the Comiis-sioner for Railways may fromt tinme tott ineic ipose.

Mr. Scaddanl: What are they paringpfor the right to use that line already com-struetedl!

The M1INISTER FOR WORKS : Iwill come to that in due course. Then

831

832 [ASSEMBLY.]

it gives the right to construet Sidings onthe land which is leased, and these sidingswill he constructed under ordinary rail-way conditions, and subject to terms tobe imposed by the Commissioner for Rail-ways. The lease carries the right toeross the quarry line by bridges, subways,or other means of communication. Thisalso is subject to the approval of theEngineer-in-Chief. The railway lineruns through the block of land on a stripwhich has been reserved. 15 feet wide,and, of course, it is necessary that theyshould be able to get to and from theirworks over that railway. Then there isthe condition that the quarry line maybe deviated, or removed, at any time bythe Commissioner for Railways, wheneverhie deems it necessary; but if it is re-moved it is provided that the lesseesshall still have access to the railwaysystem of the State, perhaps throughto Cottesloe or Cottesloe Beach. If thequarry line now on the ground is removedthe right of access to the railway systemis still maintained to the lessees.If the quarry line is removed,then the strip of land automaticallycomes into the lease, or so muchof it as ran through the leased pro-perty, but the lessees have to pay a cor-respondingly increased rental in accord-ance with the increased area. The rentto be paid to the Crown for this laud, Ithink hon. members will agree with me,is very favourable to the State. For thefirst five 'years Ave charge £210 per annuml,equal to about £12 7s. per acre: for thenext five years the rent will he £315,equal to £18 10s. per acre; for the thirdperiod of five years the charge will be£420 per annual, which equals about £2414s. per acre; and for the remainder ofthe term of the lease the charge will be£526 per annum, equivalent to £30 19s.per acre. The lessees, of course, have topar all rates and taxes which may be im-posed upon the property* . The premises,it. is provided. shall only lbe used for thepurpose of the business for whichthe land is leased; that is for I hemanufacture of acids, superphlosphates,and other fertilisers, unless the Gov-ernment have given their consent for,any alteration. Then there is the

stipulation that the lessees shall ex-pend within two years, at leivit£25,000 onl buildings and machinery (ofcourse T have explained that they havealready committed themselves to the ex-penditure of over £50,000, and this stipti-lation 'was agreed upon before they cook-nienced operatlions), and that they shallmaintain and keep) in good order. durin-the term of the lease, the plant and buildin"s on the land. They also bind themn-selves under Clause 5 that at least 2-1men shall be continnally employed. Imar say, in this respect I am told by themanagers that during the months betweenJanuary and May they expect to employ140 nmn and from May to January, thenmumber will drop, because of the off-season, to 85 or' 00. There is also aclause which may be considered a littlestr-ingent, but it is deemed advisable lohave it, and the lessees have agreed to it.and it is that if there is any cessationof work for a period of six months, unl-less that cessation is absolutely beyondthe control of the lessees, then they shallho subject to a penalty of £500. If workhas been resumed and there is a furthercessation, the penalty will be again en-forced, but it is provided that the maxi-mum penalty shall not exceed £3,001).There is a clause which provides for arbi-tration in case of any dispute, as towvhether the fact that the works had beeniidle was beyond the control of the lesseesor otherwise. With regard to the quarryline, which the member for Ivanhoe re-fErred to by interjection, it is prodidedthat not only have they to pay ordinary'siding rental for any siding they may"couple up with that line, but that the 'shall pay a proportionate part of thmemaintenance of the qualrry line for its fill]extent to the junction with the main line.They' shall pay according to the tonnagecarried over it. Although I do not thinkit will be a serious matter, it shows tlmirthey are willing to contribute their pro,-portion to the maintenance of that quarry'line, and in addition they are subject t'.the ordinary charge which the Commis-si)ner for Railways may impose for land-mug the goods onl their own sidings.

M1r. Collier: Are they not paying ini-teresl on the capital cost of the line

832

[5 OMOrEu, 1-909.] 1

Tile MIISTEiR FOR WORK*,SThey are pay' ing rates, and they cannotbe expected to pay mote than that.

Mr. Collier: Thle Government wouldcharge interest (,n the capital cost in anysiding.

The \IINIS'I'R FOR WORKSThis is not a ,iding, tI'is is a railway.

Mri. Collier: ft is in the nature of asiding.

Mr. Bon t: It has alIready been itsodas a1 quarry lute.

The IfN[STER FOR WORKS: Ithas beentilused for years ini conntectiotnwvith the consi ,uetion of the Frenmantleha rbour. We are goinig beyond what wewould do will, ordinary people, and weare ask i g themt to contribute somiethintgtowntrds the ma intentanee of that line.

Ar. J ohnson : It saves then, the ex-pent, oif putting dowtt a line.

The MINITETR FOR WORKS: Notnecessarilyv. If that railwa v had not beenthere the chatnces are they would not haveput up thteir works there. The fact ofthe railway being there is. of cours. abig indlucemenit to enter inito ))(sssionof this land. Theyv have the liver on theotie side and the quarry line onl the other.

Mr. Boblt it: 'rite same argument ap-lilies to Buidson mild Ritchie who a rethvre.

The M[INISTER FOR WORKS: Aniv-inof establish ing works in this or anyoither Sta to world select some site whichwould hie cose to the main railway sys-lem of tite State in order that the vmighlt get sidings at their wvorks. Thataceounits, to sonic extent, for the rentthat it is agreed they shall pay.

Mr. George: Tien'y would have to payf ir an , additions to the line and a ny('0111eetionl.

']Ite- MINISTER FOR WORKS: De-cidedl Y. If the member for Boulderwere to commtfen1ce works in East Perth.all hie woumid do wioiuld he to apply' to theCommissioner for permission to have asiding' and it that were grantted hiewvould couple up) wvith the main system.

M1r. Collier : Ivwould have to pay h leexpenses (of putting in a siding.

The AIINISTER FOR WORKS: Ofeourse. bilt the hon. metnber ecould oust

expect the lessees to pay the cost of theeo nstruction oif portion oif the main rail-way system.

Mr. Collier: You aic saving them theexpense of putting int a siding-.

'ilec MIX rSTER FOR WORKS:Iain try, ing to explain that the companywill htave to p)ilt in their sidings just thesame. Clause 8 gives power to enter thepremnises antd inspect themi and see thatthey are kept in good torder and condi-tiou. Another clause in thie lease, Clause.9. provides that the lessees shall nottrainsfer or sublet without the consent ofthe (iovernmelil. Then the lessees havefurther on in the same clause the rightIo re'unove buildings and tmaclhinery with -in six months of the expiration of theleasehold term, which is usual in casesof this sort. In eases of default orbreach there is tlte usual power to re-euter and detrmine tile lease, and thefin-al clause which I think is necessary isthat the Gov-ernnment shall have the rightto remtove any stone from the land solong as t(tey keep the surface level ofthe land Io tlte same level ats file quarrylin'e "whichI now i-tns th rough it. It is arough bloc'k of land, and at [ihe far endthere is a little shone thai we have beenquarrying, and we may want to takesome stone from ihete for public works.Thme lessee would, I think, be only tooglad if we took rthe whole loi away atidlevelled it. At any rate power is re-serlved foor the Coverinmnt to enter .atite latid and remove stotne. Thatbriefly otttlitnes the cotnditions of thn,lease, and buli. members will see at oncethat the terms that have been imposed

ate fairly stringent - Thle rental we popose to collect is a pretty gtood returnfor the capital value of the lamnd teased.Intdeed, so far as I personally am cou-cernied, I think we should he very gladto, get works of this magtnitude estab-lishied here so soon, and I am quite surethat in any other part of the country butRocky Bay we would have been veryready to sell the freehold if thecompany so desired. However, thisanswers their purpose. There is anothercompany. Messrs. Cumming. Smith andCompany, who are also gPing to estab-

833

834 [ASSEMBLY.]

fish works of this description nearGuildford. They have gone on to privateland, I believe, and have secured the landthey required. But the Mount Lyillpeople have not been slow; they havenot allowed the grass to grow under theirfeet. I had the pleasure of visiting theworks the other day. I was shownround by the managers, and I saw thatthey had made a very good beginningindeed. The foundations of the mainworks were already in, and they wereproceeding to erect the frame-work ofone of the buildings-not the mainbuilding, hut one of the subordinatestructures. They have evidently startedwith the determination to carry these-wvprks on to completion in the shortestpossible time; they expect to have theplant in full working order by April,next year, arid to be able to supplysuperphosphates to our agriculturistsvery shortly afterwards. There is agreat advantage, it was pointed out tome, in having these superphosphatesmade in the State.

Mr. Johnson; Better still to have themamade by the State.

The -MINISTER FOR WORKS: Thatis just where the hon. member is in error.He gets a little bit off the track in regardto this State manufacture and I am quitesure that if he were in power even hisgreat ability' which is acknowledged tolbe extensive in alniost any direction ofmanufacture, would not enable himn tocope with the highly scientific induistrywhich these people are commencing- here.There are many advantages in connectionwith works of this description, advant-ages other than the employment of la-bour. We get a better class of super-phosphates and the farmers are not comn-pelled to place their orders ahead in ordlerto have the fertiliser in lime for sowling.,They can get prompt delivery at anytime of the year. This has not been thecase in the past. f believe there are in-s;tances on record of many farmers hav-ing been obliged to p~ut in their wheatwithout superphosphates at all. Thesupplies are intermittent and they oftenrun low. The works ill also mean theroiisimmption of a large quantity of coal,somlething like 2,000 tons a year. and it

is anticipated that Collie coal will fullyvmeet the requirements. The engineersassured me that the type of mechanicalstokers which they are fitting to theirboilers will he suitable to local coal. Thefreight over the railways will he consider-able, although it is recognised that super-phoslphates are carried at the lowvest ratein order to eticou rage the farmers. Yetwhen we consider that a very large ton-tingre of stuff will have to be brought iin.from the harbour to the works, some-thing considerably over 12,000 tons peraninum, and that again it will be sent ourin the shape of su perphosp hates to thefarmers, honi. members will see theremust be a considerable increase in therailage paid. And of course the greatadvantage over and ahove all this, so faras railage is concerned,. is the fact that weget much larger returns from the in-creased wheat crops which have to liecarried over the railway system.

Mr, Bath: Have you ranted themn atemporary lease?9

The MINISTER FOR WORKS: Wehave agreed to the tease subject to con-firmation by Parliament. At first it wasthotight the Government had the right toogrant this lease and it was agreed togive them a fl9-years lease; buit on look-ing- into it the Crown Law officials ad-vised us that we must have a special Actof Parliament. It. has been brought iiiiii the shape of this Bill in order thatParliament may give the necessary au-thority. [. do not think it requires anyfurther words of mine to commend themeasure to the House. I have a fund ofinformation here as to the manufactureof acids and Stiperp hosp hates wvhich hasbeen handed to me. Personally, I haveno knowledge of the subject. Hon.members have an opportunity at any timeof visiting, the works and seeing wvhat isgoing on in the way of construction, andin a very few months they will have anop)portunity of seeing the whole thing iniworking ordler. I would ask members toexpedite tie passage of the Bill; becausethe company are naturally anious to havethe lease ratified by Parliament inasmuchas they have committed themselves to anexpenditure (of over C:10,000 in anticipa-tion.

834

[5 Oe-rnn. 1909.) 3

Mr. Bath: 'Ioa will grai! an adjourn-meat till Thnrsday?

The MINISTER FOR WORKS: Ohlyes;, there will he nio objection to that.1I have pleasuire ill moving-

That flop Dill be' notc read asecondtime.

Onl motion hr . Mr. Bath. debate ad-journed.

BI1LL - METROPOLITAN WATERSUPPLY, SEWVERAGE. AYDDRAINAiGE.

]n (!orniiitr

M~r. T.aglish in the Chair: the MinisterFor Works in charge of the Bill.

Clauses I to 4-agreed to.Chns -Interpretntioiis:

Mr. DRAPER : Some informnationlshould lie forthicoming frothle 'Ministera.4 to tile definitions of the word "dis-tract." Tue word "district" was twicedeflnted iii totally different ways. Hewfls not aware of anly Other mueasure inlwhich-I tile samte Word was defined twice.

Thel MINISTER FOR WORKS: Inithe one istance the word "district" usedin connectimn wvith a muinicipality or-roadjs board mentut a district conistitutedunder tile Bill 'for water and sewerage

pOlSeS: Where it was; used inl relationlto a local authority it mecant a munnicipaldistrict or a roads district. He thoughtthe word clearly conveyed the mneanling.Thle hl. mleniber had heeti good enoughto mention the matter last week, as a1result of which lie (thle -Minisler) hadsought the advice of 11ie Solicitor Genieral.who had imoinied (out that it, was nees-sary to have these two dlelinitions. andhad expressed the ''pinion that no realobjection could lie r-aised to them. He(the Minister) did tnt know whether anlyconfusion could arise from having twodefinlitions of "~district." He was ad-vised that Colitusion mighit arise if thtey111id but the u(te definitionl.

Mr. DRAPER: The explaniation givenhrx the 'Minister would nt prevenit con-fuision arisingr. He could see no reasonwhy, ill the one ca.e, the word -'district."could not lie made "division," with, ofcouirse. eotiseqlteltial amendments to fol-

low. If "district," refetring- to it; areaproclaimed under the Bill, were to betermedl "division" there could be no coil-fusion at all. Perhapls the M1inistet' wuldrecognise that there might he sonic amend-nient necessaty, andi what was sugglestedinight be adopted.

'Mr. GEORGE: The definition i)f& ownr' wS. ''% persooi other thani

His Majesty, ulceteta.' He desired tohave the wvoids ''other thanl is Mt-

etstyV' StI ck oit[. because he wasatixtiis to have rated any property ofthe Crown from which t'he Crown n'-eived rents Or pr-Otit. It shlould carrythle samte responsibilities as rpet

p WIie~d by*% private people.Mt. DRAPER: No doubt thle object ofP

the definition -was to make it consisteutWith the Siibstant he claus11e, and t(' eY-ciupt anyl hi lnds owiied by the Crownlfromuii te patytmenit If rates. Thant wasdesirable inl main'v iiistamices, hitt: irhrtit was a qluestionl Of ser'vices renidered,Wvhethetr santitary services, or wvater s'-r-vics. there was nLO reasoni why theCrown shouild not pa v for. thle benlefit itaetually derived. The Mlinister- shouldZaccept the Sngg-I-It it ilMade.

Mr. BATH.: 'ki miember for Alurr-tywas Sikomewhant antiiiatiiig thie discus-sioti oil thet Hitt. We should wait unwilire arrived ait rite partwtthtlr clallse re-ferred to hy tile member for West Perth,mid theni members would knuow thie exactpropiositioln thet ]lion,. member had for e-in1,Viii- the eXemlption). '[here woul1d lien itliu , nullreomitting- the BiLLshold it he nieeessa iy to do so.

Mli- GEORGE: Wimnldl the 'Minister.give assnratie that tile Bill would be re-ewiiiiiitted if the clause dealing with theimat ter Wete amlenided 7 Onl a formeroceasiont. thtrongli issing a detint ioulike this, lie w-as biloeked otherwise.

The MILNISTER FOR WORKS: WhentliscuingiiL ttse 93 'would be thev tumeto d]eba.te Whethter Government propeityshould be rated or tnot. If we amendedClauise 93 and rated overnmenit pm--perty. then die defiuiitioni would iteed tolie alt eted.

31r. QGeorge: WillI vont recommlit tileB1ill, if necessarv

836 ASSEMBLY.]

The MINISTER FOR WORKS: Yea,The Bill munst be recuuiniitted to rectifyany anomahies.

MNr. BROWN : The definition of"land'' was, "Messuages, lands, tone-mients, and Iereditaments of any tenure,mi.innltne hiouses. anti buildings, andstructures thereon.'' This mutst be nreadin the light of Clause 11-5, which pro-vided t hat the rating should not exceed2 /.d. ill (the ponald on the capital unim-proved value of thle land, where thevaluationi was on thie capital unimprovedvalute of tin'- laud. It seemied that thisulefinition would pecrpetutate the systemiadopted in Perth, where tie mnunici-pality rated nut only onl thle unimprovedvalue of. thle laud. bu'lt also oiii tile inn1-proveinents oii tine laud. A nian whoiniproved his laud should not be taxedonl his imipnrovemnts.

The ~N1NST E, 'FOR WORKS: Th lehunt, inuenber was getting about a mileanti a half ahead. The hon. member he-lieved that thne rate -struck on unjin-proved values would incluide buildings:hint that was niot thie ease. The definitionwould not ewntrol the rate. If tine ratewas on the nunimrnoved Value only itWould he uiv %' .41tilie valute oif the landitselfr.

Mvr. lBllWN\ .:Th'Ie troulble was fth'

niat ien Ital lbeei insidiously wvonted in! othe il iticipalil ies Act. and we foundthat in ratin Lunin inloved Ii t le imu-provemints wvere included. That Awisdue to thle fact that t he definition gov-erne'd the ease. 'No mat ter hnow thle lawl14was ('ailed, even if it wvere vailed unim-proved lan td. aci-rd inz 14g Iiit( ldeli ntilIionit linnet mnel udet all imiprovemtents : aatht wa1s Ilii' pr1incfiple being- eniforced inlPerth to, thlt' uhet rinou'nut of owners Whohad iniprovedt tineir laud.

Lile [ONOlCARV' NINIS'itER: 'r'iehon. nelnber WCc ould find in Subelause 2iof Clause 115 that tine Weird ''hind'' wascinnalitfied r t V(lie pr-eedlinlg words. ' 'api-tal linlmprovedI valuev of.'"

('mulse pnn I andl pa ssedl,Clause 6-(owst ittution ot' Area. nd

Districts:'Mr. 1)1?APEtt: Thiis elaustaco-nstitunted

the luatudarnivcs oif Ilhe watter diist nic-uas deli nod in the Second Schedinle. Thne.,

were the Perth District, the Fremantle1)istrict. thle Claremont District, and the(iuildford lDistrict. A niap) in the Chain-her showed trat the P1ert!. District wouldnave to he'll. [Ilt' burdeni of liflitiea!I1 vhie winc or thle most)5 expenivet port urn

4'r thle Inet Iliolitoau area. Inl hart. it wastnt dillienli cti realise that thie Bill wmAreallyA tile areationi of a Corier Minlisi trlifo Wq irks whoc represented Fremnantle',aCompact district, and residetd inl tile

icouipaet, district of Claremont.MrIL. Angcvin: Talk sense.Mr. DRAPER: Members seemed to

lose sih. of tine fact that in a stragglikiga na there was gr'cater expense in Imit-ring dlown seW1vers or long- water- 11ains.It was ridiculcfus tin have a large niverrnun iig I nIntig one dlistrict n s wask to liethe case with the P-erch disti'iet A riverwas lie iit ra I boounda ry bet ween d i-triers. Apparmently Perth mteinbers andPerth untilniCipalities had Ilot been con-stiulted iii regard to thle divisions. Chare-inont was in particulnir anl extreunelycinpact district, aitd there "'as no rea-.soii why it should not lie enlarged.

The M1INISTER FOR WORKS: Thelion, miember -,as barking up the -wrongti-ce olr singing oult before h11.1irt. Themnetn'opoiti ' area was divided initohnese districts because Ave hand already

the differetit water suipplies, aiid therewas no ulterior motive ont the part oifthe late Minister for Workis. We hidthe Perth water supplyv extending to allithe subuirbs of Perth. Thlein there wasaniothier water supply at Claremont. anda third at Fuenmautle, running UnRderdifferent rates and different cost. As bhewater supply was the main factor iii themeasure, it Was rea~sonable the distniersshould be fixed as covered by the differ-en t water supplies.

Mr. Draper: Why should Perth hesaqddled with (iannin-ton for the puirposeof sewveinge ?

The MINISTER FOR WORK S: Itwas not saddled with anythiing it dlid nutget. ('annington was in the metropolitanarea, and therefore was includedl inl thePerth district. Tihe action was takenwvith a v'iewv of having differential rates.So lung ais there were different systemlsof ivater supply the Glovernment were

816

[5 Ocroistu, 1909.]87

justified in allowing each district tn earlyits own water supply, anti only be corn-pelied to pay sufficient interest and sink-ing fund for the management of the gen-eral supply.

7Mr. Brown: Why not let the local anl-thorilies carry their own burdens I

Tfile IMINISTER FOR WORKS: Atthe present time the prices charged by the'arons districts were vecry different, as.Fremnrtle charged sixpence. Claremontninepence, and Perth a shilling. It wasdesired to keep) the various districts sep-a rate. so that until they had a commonsuply of water of equal quaiity theyshould riot be forced to carry alt unfairburden so far as cost was concerned. Ifa district were prepared toc put tip witha pinie water supply at a cheaper pricewell and ,nod. Uniformity would] notexist uil a commonl sulply~l of equaltjiialily ' Vwe.given. ft seemed that thehon. member believed that everyone shouldbe charged for sewerage whether theyhad facilities or ,,ot. There was to beno tax until a inan received benefit fromthe sewerage -scheme. The size of a dis-tiet was of no momen t whatever so longas the conditions were similar. No pro-pert y could he rated for sewersa'ge untilit received the benefit of tine sewerage.

31r. Buteher: floes that apiply to thewater also?

Thie MNIS1TER FOR WORKS: Yes.A prtperi v had to he0 within 60 ya1rds ofa ma]in before it could be rated. As tosewerage, a property must he within ac-cess of thle reticulation sewers before itwas rated. The board would give noticewhen the owner had ito couple up withreticulation, and then the property wouldbe rated. not before. The .lame appliedAvithI regard to the storm water drainage,for it was only thle propert ies that re-ceivedl an adval, lage fromn this drain thatwoulid be rated. If a luan received berie-fit fronm a storin water drainI he shouldcerrainly Ilay' for it.

%Ir. DRIAPER?: 'file inister mnissedthe- point wlien he said the size of a districthad nothingl- to do, with the matter. If hewouldl only thlink for a mnoment lie wouldrecognise that far tile larger proportion(If the rates within the Perth district

of the metropolitan area woulld be raised]within the boundaries of the Perth munii-cipality, and the expenditure. although atpresent it wvouid be chiefly incrfred withinIthose boundaries, would as thle schemneextended be far greater in the oulyingdistricts. The latter districts would pro-duce nothing in rates compared with whatwould be pi-oducied by the municipal dis-trict. When the schedule was reachedhie would propose oan aendmrent.

The HONORARY MINISTlER: Themember was not yet seized of the princi-ple of the districts or the system of rat-ing-. The Perth district nsisted oif thedistrict now supplied by the MetropolitanWaterworks Board, the Claremont dis-trict had anl inidepeiidenit water suply b,and the Fremantle district had also ain in-dependent s11 uly. Ul tilmately each distriet would have its, independent treat-minut works, and I he t reatmen r works ineach area covered practically the samedistriets for sewerage as did thle separatewater suJpplies. That was thle inducementto) the Governmenl ff. group the districtsas they had done. -Each district wouldthen pay exactly for rho service it re-ceived, and( a proportion (or the capitalexpenditure in that district. Thle nient-her had maide a Iyetieltdous song, as totire size of tile Perth i strict. .%I thepresent time there was no drai nage (intile soothern side of the river, nd~ pro-bably it w, gidd lie many yeaim before thatdistrict was served fully 1)y sewers. Un-til then the mtenber need tot worry. Forthre purpose or preserving, uniformiuty?and to have thle sewvcrag-e aind w'aterworksco-term intos. tile distric-Is were set ouitas in the Bill. Thet wav irn which life di--

'ricts were fixed was quite reasonable, es-pecially as each distril inl psIaidl fuorthe servics rendered in r hat dIistrlet.

Mr. C'OLLIER : The moember forWest Perth had been altog-ether prema-fil-(- in his remark.,. for it wihl havebeen quite time t) bring uip thie qulestionihie had debated when the second schedulewas reached.

Mr. GEORGE : The present was theproper time to bring Siuch matters beforethe notice of memnbers. He knew some-thing -about the Canningr water scheme,

837

(ASSEMBLY.]

as lie came to the State inl 1A90 to makedial schemte. Creal trouble was espeii-eneed over the Canning flats ill coline-Lion with the laying of the mains, andnow f lie chief i rouble was with regard toI Ie qeietioni of drainage. If? th'at drainl-age were gin- to be fixed up. well andgpodl; loit if ciot, there was no need tocarry the boundaries of the Perth dis-tiet so rar as was pioposed, That dis-iriet was included ini the Perth scheme.and( there fore the member for WestPerth fell lie was doing- his kdity inln'iig h-le matter forward to see thatPerth was not saddled with the cost ofa scheme for another district xriln coudinot pay its proportionate aiciolicit ofrates inl connection therewith.

MXr. KEENAN: Would thle M1inisterConsider thle points raised as to the ad-visability of altering the districts in the.elieciile 3 The way iii which tihe districtswere proposied wouldt mean casting ALmocst unfair burden oin that disti-ict calledPerth. It was imliossible. looking at themap. ii it toi cppreei a I the fact thcatPerhi hail outlying districts which woulcast ai hiirdeii un] thle catepayers, livinig illthe reiitre. A large portioii of thle areawould c1l pay tsli water service or drainl-age or Seccvvrai~e. acid it memil thai tilepamoiltst deiccely popu131late~d Wo11l14 CArryidie Ilii rdeii. "'here would lie cml olijeetio ado it pirovided that it was properly spread.If the M1inister were to divide inito Iwoolust rics IPerth and Fiemanltc and askpeh portio 1( Io carry tile huiii ofcu thedlistrict lot clucsylv inclalcited I herv wouldbe no object ion. Theriei hnld n10t beanyl v scmathy ii ii grievances whichi werenot haseui sin pcope gcro~unds, hut her-ethere was one anid tie NMinister shouldgive consideration to it. and should notbrush tin "ice side aIi objection which badbeen taken on) fair- acid equitable grounds.

The MI[Ni.STER FOR WVORKS: Thehcon. member cioold rest cissitre-d thaiit everyvconsideration woudl lie given to ally re-presentationi made. An expolanation liedalready been madle at some length As towhy it had been proplosed tic divide thieMetropolitan area inito ei'tiui districtsshown on thle plan. T[here was nio inleic-tion) ii, his p.art to repeat the e~xplaina-

tion, bolt it there Was anly undue hard-ship ii roiiiicticon wilt th Iese oliff-erendistricts they tomid he altered or amendedAt thle will I iIce (i-vernncnt by thvfie iiextsichiseeticci. sip d ial thle posit ion was safe-

inc icieoi. P ~ rvisiocn was i nade Fur thecr01c With] r-epaci ti, the jciint exicenldituceover (lie wchole oi Ilice circa that it couildhe ccdjiisrecl tach year it cmcesserv. ThereW~cs cii1 fear. With regard to liraiccageP.

drains as thiey were veaittcestrciewed iP"erth adFremiantle were goiiicg tic he

v1lstiacte .0lc Cal Ili clgto 0l oic 1oeuipiedland. There was already a. drainagehoard there.

Il Geiorge: 'l'Iei why not leave ticecmha ppy ill their isolation?

The M IINJ1STER FOHl WvOlKS: Theywere heicig left alone, hut they had awater -il ipy and ciccist conlic icider ElheAct. Ft wocld be obvioccslv inconivenienitto icmltipily thle number of rlistriets.E~very district created mieant, ad]diticccalrepre~sentation.

Mr. DRAPER: It was cIicie i-rile thatthe Minister had g ivei what. lie nailed anexp~lanationl, but there were some uccecc-hers cf itlce lfouse whlo did not regairdthat explanation as satisfacetory. Theoly reasoic that hiad been given w-as thatIceratuse there happenied to) be a waterschemie in each cif these districts it neces-satrily followed that these districts mutit

lsie sicitab-le for- tle pcurpose of sewer-age.

Thie M,%inister for Works:. Thcat ex-

planation was never given.M~r. DRAPER : It Was thle only pos-

sible interpretation. and that being SO itwas impossible top see the logic of it. Ifthle Mlinister declared hie was wihiing- topay attention to represeintatiocis thatciighlt he nuade lie aight reconsider- thesebindaries. It was idle to say* that illthe evenit of the boundaries being foundto be inequitable thle Government couldalter tliem according to the suggesliiOn ofCaincet. We did nlot want govecnnenit'if that kind, we wanted it deffinitelystated at. any i-ate at thle eommencereet,.that thue dieta would be stieli as wouldreally be equitable for the people whohad to pay the taxes. The Minister- did

[5 )eOMUR. 19309.1 8E

not appear to realise the extent to whichpersons in this locality were taxed at thepresent time.

The Minister for Works: Yes. I do.Mr. DRALPER.i If the Minister did

realise it. hie should g-ive a miore satisfae-1tr explanation than he trad done.

Mr. ANGWJN : It was 'tot possible tofollow die argument of the member forWest lPertlh. The bondaries, as divided-it the present time, were based oni thevery ai-rument which the lhon. maemaberused. SorlelyI lie l1ion. Ineiber dlid notwallt top inc rease the taxation andi askPerth to hear the burden of Fremantle.Was that what the lhon. maernher intendled?F'roni the him. muember's freniarks onecouild only form the opinion that lie knewnothing about the .Freintle distict. Ago~od deail of the area at Fremantle wasGoverunment land. There were magazinesand quarantine stations on the hind heldby the Government. Ron. members wouldbe pleased wo know that the Minister hadagreed that the taxation shmild be equit-able, and that was the reason why thedistricts ha9d been placed in the scheduleinlte nuninner that had been shown.

Mr. BROWN: -No sw-ias argumtentsland been heasrd at all. 'rite HonoraryMinister had stated that there would be.a sepatale wrater suppl 'y arid se-werage foreach district-. If that. were ;o why nothand thein over tot locaml control I[t war,

tmaalthat 111v 1\bnivi er ttit Works wasabsolule).% rn in his departmaent by hisI aider Secet 1:i1 rv. Thie Honorar in iiis-ter too was iPine who was run by his de-luartin. and flhat was evideani by thereports brought out recently. In connec-tion With] Ole sewerage the septic tankshad been hnilt live years before they-could ble used.

The hlonorary Mlinister: Very largely,at the instigation of the City council.

Mir. BROWN: The City council neverasked the Goivernment for anything. atany rate during the last few years. Wehad to hear these burdens: why, there-tore, the necessity for this Bill? Whatwas wanted was local rout rol.

Clause put and passed.Clause 7-Power to alter boundaries,:kir. FOULKES. It was a very wide

power to (-(nfer on the Governor-in-

(Xjurieii. No provision was miade for thewaking of representations by the variousdistricts. He would like to see mnadesonic such provision as, existed in theRoads Board Acet, by which the Gov-ernor had power to appoint a c-oimis-sioner tip go into the whole question ofcomplainrts rera rdi hg thet alteration ofboundaries. Under thre clause the Gov-eruor01-in-( ''un1i would be able too alterthese loindaries without naceesarilyhearing coimplraintis against such altera-tin. Hle desired to reulojve all possi-bility of a eontiaagency of that kind.

The MINISTER FOR WORKS: 2l-though he could nut see any necessityfor rataking provision for tile appoiit-ant of a coanlLssnhnaler. 'vet he had it.,objection to tlae clause.

M1r. 0 'loughlen: Will it he necessarYto appoint a conintissannier?

The INxISTER FORl WORKS: Itmighlt be necessary Igo appoint a conins-sioirer to take evidence ha the mnatter;but it wias to he* remembered that powerto appoint a Royal Coinati ssioner wouldlie with thle Ooveraor-ia-Comncil at anytime. 'If a case airose in which a con-siderable seetiona of a district was dis-satisfied with thle boomudlarics; it mnightpossibly be advisable top alppoint sonic-one to inqire into thi' matter. Even s11.it anight 1w siltticient to tell off a depart-mental exp~ert Ito take evidence. "uId Mnthat evidence the Governor could decide;Is tubA what comrse should be taken.

Mr. Greorge: Would noat that be dic-pa rtmenrtal governinen t!

The VIENIS'rEN FOR WORKS: ItWould he am aauure than a departmentaldecision ais to the boundaries of districtsconstituting the( metropolitan area. Itwould not be departmental working oif

the schemne. It would be merely to ;aythat a certain area shoidl or should nutbe a district ili itself. However, hiewould have no objection to thle inlclusionlof a clause simiilar to t hat proposed bythe member for- Clarn-emunt.

Mr,. GEORGE: It was all veryi wellfor the -Minister to say he wouild have aspecial departmental inquiry, hut prob-ably no menmher of tile Homi-e would huesatisfied with inarely a departmental in-Iluin. in contnection with his owl iar

SW

840 [ASSEMBLY-]

triet. The provision in the Bill that"'the Governor may" simply meant thiathe Minister, having taken advice onainy particular alteration, could get timematter passed throughl Cabinet, and theOrder-ini-Council secured without the re-presentatives of the people having anropportunity of expressing their views iniregard to it. Here, indeed, they wereto have taxation with practically no -re-presentation. While the clause. remainedthe M1inister could get any alteration ofthe boundaries effected without the peo-ple having a word to say in the matter.Seeing that the Bill carried with it somuch that was far reaching in conniee-tion with other ialtLers, hoin. menmberswould be pardoned for endeavouring toget the measure into as good a workingshape as possible. In respect to thisparticular clause it ought to be safe-guarded in the direction of giving therepresentatives oif the people who had ltofind the taxation opportunity of expres-sing their views iii regard to it. He syni-pathised with the desire of thle Ministarto g-et the Bill through, but if it weregoing to impose any injustice it woiultarry its owni destruction with it as itwent, along.

Mr. FOUL~KES: Under Section G Lftine Roads Board A!ct of 1002, the Gov-ernor, by Order-in-Council, might altdrtine boundaries or the name of any dis-trict or ward, provided that no powersg-ivenr under tlie section should be exer-cised without notice in the GovcrwnjaeniCurdle. Provision was also miade for apetition by 10 ratepa 'vers, upon receiptof which the Governor might direct aninquiry to he held, after notice(, in theGorerniaenl Coenlte: arid upon the con-elusion oif the inquiry a report would bemnade to the Governor by thre personholding that inquiry. The Mfinister-would find a provision of that kind cfgrea-t help to himi in conning to a properconcelusion.

The MINISTER FOR WORKS: Therewas, no objection to the insertion of aclanse on similar tines, a clause embody-ingl the same principle.

Mr. ANOWVIN: ft was to be hopodthat time Minister would niot allow him-self to be clubbed into tihe matter. This

was about the only reasonable clause intile Bill. It put the power in the handsof the Governor, and it was the onilyclause under which the Governor hadpower to deal -with any matter. Thrcase quoted by the member for Clae-nient did not apply. If the Bill passedthere would be appointed a board toadminister it; and if it were the wish ofa section of any district that anr altera-tion should be made in the boundariasthere was nothing to prevent the pie-senting of a petition to the Gloveri'lor.who would he acting in the positin cifumupire in respect to the question of divi-sion or no division. Tile powers of mdwGovernor-in-Couneil iii respect to thisBill ought to be increased rather thancmitailed.

Mr. BATH: The two positioms n'er,riot analagous in any away. In the easeof roads boards, local governing power-were eXpressly handed over to tine vari-ous districts,. Here we lied a scheme-fembracing several different departments7water, sewerage, and stormn water. I'olerthe proposal of the member for Glarv-11ont dual control was asked for.Whichever way we had it. whetherby a board or by at department,we would be handing over the con-troli of the whole of. the schemeo.That would hbe precisely the sanie ashanding over to the roads hoard the con-trol of their area. But the miember forClaremiont asked iis to take away some-thing from the control of time board andhand it over to a section. There wouldhe taken away from the Government whowere financing1 the scheme the power- ofoltering. the areaS, if' found necessary, tol

make for efficient working. What rightwvould the ratepayers have to petition forn alteration, and what amiount of weightwas to he paid to their relpreseiitations?'It seemied to he giving anl irresponsiblesection the poe to petition against the-power we were to vest ini the hoard.

Mr. Foulkes: The board ha; niot thepow11er tin fix the boundaries.

Mr. BATH: Even it a board wereconstituted, for muany years there wouldbe a responisibility restig with the Gov-ermnent.

S40

ni Oc'maER. NOl0.]

Mr. [tr~own: The hoardj will raise fundsind take over the tinverninent's responsi-bilit v

Mr. BATH : Even if the board raisedthe funds and took over the control woutldihe lion, mnember advocate that theirpowers should be limited. and that ex-pense and delay should be involved bygiing to a sec'tion of the ratepayers In

one a rea the right to petit ion for an A-leration To their disi aiet boundaries'The altei'ationi of the districts would hebest defermined b13 those in cut rot vf thleworks. The argument advanced in re-gsard l h roads hoards could not be uised inthis ronnection.

Mr. OSRORN: The clause should re-wain as printed. 'l'e (overnor-in-Coun-cil should control Ro yal Comumissions, andthat was 'what this matter would resolveitself into in a short time. because therewould he 110 end of inquirie~s byv comnmis-Saoners. There was no neced for thesecomlissiollers to take evidence and de-termhine these questions. It was veryeasy for a meniber of Parliament repre-sentinay a district affected to head a depui-taiwn to the Mtinisier. That would earry

fr no fees, aI point for the vonsideration ofthose who regarded the question of ex-pauise iii these inatiers. The Grove rimientwould naturiallyv adjuist the boundaries ina pr'oper roauzier andi. if propely aip-proached, woutldi take iii I n oisiderationiJie represeutal ions oft a ny local govern-i ng body' . The clauise was far more work-able than the cola the memiber for Clare-mont su1W2Cl as, an addition. If thesuggestion were aulapted there would het-wo clauises on the samie subject, and wewould not know where we were.

.Ur. DRA PER : The mnember for Clare-mont nmerely suggested that an inquiiryshould be held as ti, the advisability ofexert-iing the power conferred ccit theGovernor ito alter boundaries. It would,sje the (io;-ernor-ini-( 'n t-il ready' faceili-ties for iobiaining time desiredl in fonntation.All that was desired] was that there shouldbe some miachinery for inquiry as to theadvisability (if aliering boundaries, andwhen the iiine for nuovinz new clausesarrived it was to be hoped the 'Minister

would accept the suggestion of the mem-ber for Claremont.

Clause put and pansed.Progress reported.

Hoeuse adjourned at 10.27 p.m.

PAIR.Hoo. H. Gregory Mr. A. A. Wilson

lcisl1ativoc counicil,Wedjneqvqy, Wh October, 1,909.

ViPBilL'; Akin-ttur5l .tavciciery, Wift ILul Pur-

chase, it..............841.Redemption or Annui ties, Report stige 841Abattomn., Corn................8IPILhttic Edlneatton EndoUwment. 2K.. Corn. .. 42begatI Pructirtonern Act Amndnment, '.

Coal. .4.

Adjou rnment, State of BUsiness..............4

The PRESIDENT took the Chair at4.30 p.m., andi read prayers.

HILL - AGRICtI.TUHAI. MACHI1-NERY. SALE ANDI-I UHCI-ASE.Introduced by' the Hfon. J. ICL Drow,'

and i-cad -a first tirne.

HIuLbRDMPIONm OFANNV [TIS.

ReCport oif ('011mu1it tee adOpted.

Il Ir j-A 4%BATTOIDIS.Ina Conl mit tee.

Retutned frion the 30th Sctuteinber.Schedule, 'titI-agrcced to.Bill repor01tedl x-ith alkn tea (11 - it

11ecow il (al to.

on motion. by' the Colonial Secretary,Hill reconmnmittred for~ aiuietieut.

.94