A.—sa

71

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF THK CONFERENCE.

have a perfect right equally with ourselves to the sea traffic across that water. I have myself gived the matter most careful consideration since I gave notice of this motion, and I can see that a portion of it would involvevery considerable difficulties if it were assented to. I do not see how the principle of it could be applied to those countries, and to the islands of the Pacific, unless it were applied to other portions of the seas of the world, where our own ships might trade, and British ships might trade, and 1 think it would be a mistake for us to pass a resolution here that would only require attention to be drawn to it by powerful countries outside, to cause it to be questioned. I prefer, therefore, to omit what I know to be impossible in practice, rather than to ask members of the Conference to put on record a proposal which I feel sure must be impracticable, even if it were carried. Sir WILLIAM LYNE : Mr. President, if Sir Joseph proposes his motion without that part, the motion is without effect, because we have settled that question. But that is not my point at the moment. My point is that it seems to me there should be some power by the Commonwealth (and New Zealand, too, if New Zealand wishes) that ships going from New Zealand or registered in New Zealand, or registered in the Commonwealth • The CHAIRMAN : I beg your pardon, I want to understand what the motion is. Y'ou propose to omit all the words after the first " New Zealand " ! Sir JOSEPH WARD : Y T es, after the first " New " Zealand." Sir WILLIAM LYNE: You propose to omit "or " between the Commonwealth, New Zealand, and the " islands of the Pacific." That is what Sir Joseph Ward proposes to omit. Well, I cannot see that the resolution is any good if that part is omitted, because this resolution that we have passed says, " That for the " purpose of this resolution a vessel shall be deemed "to trade if she takes on board cargo or passengers at " any port in the Colony to be carried to and landed "or delivered at any other port in the colony." Well, 1 think the word "Colony" is wrong; I thing it ought to be "Commonwealth." Sir JOSEPH WARD : When I gave the notice of motion defining what it should comprise, the notice of motion given by you, which has to-day been altered, and which contains what was in my mind, had not been given. That was given subsequent to my motion. Sir WILLIAM LYNE : It was given before yours. Sir JOSEPH WARD : Well, at all events, the Agenda has been arranged to-day, and I said earlier in the day that, as far as I was concerned, if what was contained in my motion was carried in the first one, I had not the slightest desire to move the second ; and in view of the fact that the first has been carried it is not necessary to move the latter part of mine. I would just-like to say that that does not take away the rights of the Commonwealth or New Zealand to have the right to put a tax upon the vessels Sib WILLIAM LYNE : That is just the point. Sib JOSEPH WARD : Ships registered in New Zealand or anywhere else we have the right to put a tax upon. It does not interfere with our right to tax ships registered, and those are the only ones we would require to deal with. Sib WILLIAM LYNE : Those may not be the only ones we would have to deal with in Australia. Sib JOSEPH WARD : You have the same right as we have. The CHAIRMAN : Then we go on to 2—that is wages. Hon. W. M. HUGHES : What does Sir Joseph Ward's resolution really do more than has already been done ? Hon. DUGALD THOMSON : Sir Joseph is withdrawing it. Hon. W. M. HUGHES : Supposing you say that coastal trade shall include the carriage of cargo or passengers from any port in New Zealand to any port of

the Commonwealth, that would do something that we have not done yet in so many words; but I do not know that there is any necessity to do it. Sib WILLIAM LYNE: That is not what I am at. The point 1 am at is that we shall not allow it—that other ships shall not come and trade with the islands in the Pacific on different terms to those that are registered, or that are trading on our coast. Mr. COX : I shall oppose that. The CHAIRMAN : The Colonial Office will have something to say about this. Hon. W. M. HUGHES: I want to quote from the Commonwealth Acts, vol. IV, 1905, No. 19, Section 8. The CHAIRMAN : What are you quoting from? Hon. W. M. HUGHES: The Acts of the Commonwealth, 1905, N... 19, Section 8, of the Contract Immigrants Act, assented to 21st December, 1905. It imposes certain restrictions upon the importation of persons under contract to perform manual labour. Section 6 says, "If before the Minister approves the terms of "the contract, the contracting immigrant lands in Aus- " tralia— [a) the contract is absolutely void, (b) the " immigrant is liable to a penalty not exceeding £5, (c) "the employer is liable to a penalty not exceeding "£2O" —and so on. Then Section 8 says, "The two " last preceding sections do not apply to an immigrant " under a contract or agreement to serve as part of " the crew of a vessel engaged in the coasting trade in " Australian waters, if the rates of wages specified "therein are not lower than the rates ruling in the "Commonwealth." Well, nrw, that contemplates the case of vessels coming out to Australia with men staying in that vessel and trading on the coast, in which case, unless they conic- within that section they can be treated as prohibited immigrants, if they land or, as in the case of a ship called the " Century," which brought men out under an English contract to perform manual labour within the meaning of the section, and then took those men, or some of them to, say, Singapore. Now, if they had not gone, men, under contract made in the Commonwealth, would have had to go and, with us, the matter amounts to this. An award of the Arbitration Court will probably be made regulating the rate of wages binding the owner to pay a certain rate of wages to officers and seamen. Now, if a foreigngoing ship can go out, and making Brisbane or Melbourne, say, her headquarters, trade to Fiji or the Pacific Islands with a crew paid at a lower rate than this rate, that is certainly a breach of Section 8, and, in any case, they are persons engaged to perform a contract of manual labour (I mean the crew are) in the Commonwealth at a rate lower than that which obtains in the Commonwealth, and therefore, we must have the right to say, as to the Pacific and the Fijian trade at any rate, that vessels engaged in that trade must comply with Colonial conditions, because as a matter of fact, with the exception of the German boats and a few sailing vessels, they are all boats registered in the CominonweaKh, and i( would not do, Mr. President, at all to allow habitual (railing amongst the islands— a trading that has been entirely in the hands of the Colonists now for a very long period—to go out of out hands, which it would if this addendum is not added to that resolution. It does not follow that the conditions will be the same for the Pacific and the islands, as for the Commonwealth—they might be different.—for instance, they are different now in some cases—you might ship a man in Sydney for £5 a month for the island trade, you cannot ship him under £7 for the ordinary coastal trade ; but whatever the conditions are, they should be uniform; they should be the same for all ships Sir JOSEPH WARD : You can do the same in a schooner now on the Australian coast; you can ship a man at a lower rate than you do on a steamer. Hon. W. M. HUGHES : You cannot ship him under £7. Sir JOSEPH WARD : Y r ou can ship him at a varying rate on a schooner. Hon. W. M. HUGHES : I was talking of the island trade when I mentioned £5,