ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

movement

in

gentleman opposed the every way. He opposed it bitterly, and he spoke of the people of Victoria in a way which I do not care to repeat. If according to the honorable gentleman, protection was the only thing necessary, and the only thing which made his blood tingle and his hair to stand on end, why did he not help us to union? The honorable gentleman broke up the Protectionist Party in New South Wales, and he has smothered the Protectionist Alliance in his blind bolt for Socialism. When he could have sunk the fiscal issue, and maintained the Dibbs' Tariff in New South Wales, he refused to do it. If we had followed the honorable gentleman's example, every industry in New South Wales would to-day be in the full blaze of the ruin caused by free-trade, and the sugar industry and the timber industry would have crumbled into dust. This is the honorable gentleman's record, and I therefore refuse to follow him. It is not pleasant to have to say these things, even in the kindly and euphonious language in which I have expressed them. I have referred to the honorable gentleman absolutely in a political sense, and if he had been present I should have been tempted to be a little more severe. It is no pleasure to me to have to say these things, but when, as a protectionist of New South Wales, I am called upon to decide between the honorable member for Hume and a tried leader like the honorable and learned member for Ballarat, what sort of a man should I be if I were to abandon the leader I was elected to support, in order to follow the honorable member for Hume. The honorable gentleman has said that he does not trust the present Prime Minister. As a protectionist I do trust the right honorable member's word. I have known him for many years. No man has ever opposed him more bitterly than I have done on the fiscal question, and the time may come when it will be necessary to fight the right honorable gentleman again on that question. But I must say that I have never known the present Prime Minister to break his plighted political troth. Other honorable members could say these things perhaps better than I can, but it is just as well that I should say them. On the question, for instance, in connexion with which the right honorable gentleman has been referred to as a "Yes-No" politician, the course he pursued was as magnanimous, as honorable, as straightforward, and as discreet as any statesman ever pursued.

Mr. WILKS.-The honorable and learned member for Indi knows that, too.

Mr. EWING. The honorable and learned member for Indi knows also that in political life a man generally states but his own side of a case. When men have studied questions, and have come to the conclusion that free-trade or protection, or prohibition, or anything else, is right, they use arguments calculated to sustain the position they take up. But what did the present Prime Minister do? He told the people frankly that there were two sides to this case, as to every case. The present Prime Minister took the people of New South Wales into his confidence, and he said"This is for it, and that is against it." He stated both sides honestly, and the right honorable gentleman never stood higher in my estimation than when he had the courage to state the case of an antagonist in a fight in which he was himself engaged. If every man in political life plainly stated both sides of a question, the result might be disastrous in some respects, but it would lead to a better condition of affairs in the political life of the country. Although honorable members may talk derisively of

yes-no," protectionists and free-traders alike believe in their hearts that the right honorable gentleman did what was right in that matter. I desire to sav a word or two to the leader of the Opposition on the subject of Socialism. The honorable gentleman claims to be a Socialist.

Mr. WATSON.-The honorable gentleman has always believed in Socialism for the North Coast.

Mr. EWING.-I shall tell the honorable member what I believe in before I sit down. He will permit me to say that we have not the slightest evidence of Socialism in Australia. When I hear some of these half-articulate noises I wonder how far evolution has got. Disraeli at one time said that he did not know whether we were fallen angels or advanced apes. I am not quite clear on the point myself. The leader of the Opposition is a Socialist. For a downright, double-barrelled, copper-bottomed, bevelled-edged egotist, give me a Socialist.

Mr. CONROY.-Hear, hear. They can always put the world right.

Mr. EWING.-Yes, and put themselves wrong. The honorable member for Bland is an extremely good man for the purpose of lulling people to rest, and if the members of his party have any sense they will keep the honorable member as leader. They

[blocks in formation]

Mr. WATSON.-That is no argument to prove that they are not socialistic.

Mr. EWING.-Honorable members opposite confuse democracy with labour. We stand for democracy, and honorable members opposite stand for Socialism and slavery. Who were the men who centuries ago made a stand at Runnymede? There was no Labour Party there.

Mr. WATSON.-What does "Peritonitis" say about it?

Mr. EWING.-This party of mushroom growth, which has come into existence only during the last few years, claims to have done everything. What is democracy but the control and rule of the people by the people-making as broad as we can the basis of the social pyramid? What is it but that every man should to the utmost of his ability and power improve the conditions of life. This has been the work of men who have never identified themselves with the Labour Party, and who have never signed a pledge. But no man can get the support of hororable members opposite unless he signs their pledge. They are prepared to destroy even their allies. Alliance with them is like an alliance with

ber for Lang propose to do what the honorable member suggests.

Mr. EWING.-I do not care who else proposes to do it-it is what is proposed by the Socialists.

Mr. WATSON.-It is proposed by the Single Tax League.

Mr. EWING.-That is the whole basis of the socialistic creed.

Mr. SPENCE. What are the Government to do with the land when they get it?

Mr. EWING.-The honorable member for Darling who spoke for five-it seemed fifteen-hours might allow me to say a word or two. The Socialist has discovered that it is cheaper to steal cattle and sheep than to breed them. They believe in dividing up everything, and under their system we might have a man sent up to the country from Sydney to divide a team of bullocks, and to take the pin bullocks, the polers, and the leaders and leave the rest to the owner. Do honorable members opposite mean to tell me that Socialism means the burdening of the State with hundreds and thousands of millions of debt in order to buy what the State can take? Of course it does not. It reminds one of Janus. The Temple of Janus, the gates of which were closed in time of peace, but remained open in time of war, contained an idol possessing a head facing two ways. The Labour Party has such a head. One of its faces bears the features of the astute and extremely friendly member for Bland. His views are merely democratic and humane. But the other face has the features of the anarchist and Socialist, who would divide up and share the possessions of other people.

WATSON. The honorable member knows that that is not correct. He knows more about economics and Socialism than his present speech discloses.

Mr. EWING.-If the honorable member does not believe in these views, why does he contribute towards the preaching of them?

an American Indian. Mr. He may fight with you, but pretty soon after the battle he will scalp you if he gets the chance. Socialism means taking from those who have and giving to those who have not. If it means anything at all it means that. It means, for example, taking the land from the farmer. The honorable members for Barrier and Yarra admit that it means taking the land from the farmer by means of a land taxnot by paying for it, as other honorable members have suggested, but by bursting up private estates by heavy taxation-by taxing the farmer's land until it becomes of no value to him, and the State takes it.

Mr. FRAZER.-The proposal is to take the land from the squatter in order to give it to the farmer.

Mr. WATSON.-The honorable member for New England and the honorable mem

Mr. WATSON.-Mr. Tom Mann was never guilty of the idiocy of preaching such views as the honorable member speaks of.

Mr. EWING.-I will give proofs of my statement by quoting from Mr. Mann's speeches next time I rise. If I had a lecturer in my employ, he would speak as I told him to do, whether I sent him to Klondyke or anywhere else. Mr. Mann, indeed, has said that he would not work for the party unless it was a socialistic party, that he would not take a penny from any other

party. But what is a Socialist? He has been well described in the following lines:

What is a Socialist? One who is yearning For the equal division of unequal earning; Idler or bungler, or worse, he is willing To fork out his penny and pocket your shilling. Mr. WATSON.-Those lines are pretty old; but the honorable member knows that they do not truly represent the views of the members of our party.

as

Mr. EWING.-The lines are nearly old as Socialism, and so, too, is human nature. If you take from the industrious and give to the careless, inconsiderate, and lazy; if you give to the man who will not work the results of the labour of the man who does work; if we tell our boys who are growing up that there are no rewards for intelligence in this country, that if they wish to sell the work of their brains they must take it to another country, because here intelligence will mean nothing, but all must be on the dead level of mediocrity, the best of our population will leave Australia. I understand that the honorable member for Melbourne is to follow me, and no doubt he will have a great deal to say about the sin, the sorrow, the misery, and the disease to which the human family is subject. But do not honorable members know that the lash of circumstances is more cruel than the lash of any master, that every man contains within himself the germ of death, and is gradually though surely decaying? We all know that poverty, misery, and wretchedness walk our streets, and that the end of all is marked by the white tombstones of our cemeteries. But shall we remedy that state of things by refusing to the industrious the rewards of their labour, or to those who possess brains the prizes of intelligence? Honorable members have asked upon what issue will the people be appealed to. The issue will be Socialism versus freedom. Honorable members opposite say that no man in Australia who does not contribute to the socialistic funds should get work.

Mr. WATSON. That is as nearly correct as it is usual for the honorable member to be.

Mr. EWING. The honorable and learned member for Indi will see my meaning, without any explanation. We, on this side, hold that every man should participate in the wealth of the country in proportion to his merits, his industry, and his character. Those are the two platforms between which the people of Australia will have to decide.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. EWING.-Then, I will say that they claim that no man who is not a unionist is entitled to get work unless there is more work than the unionists can do. They would give to the free labourer the scraps and crumbs from the table. Now, no man can belong to a union unless he contributes towards its funds; and, lastly, the funds of the unionists go to provide the sinews of war to help the Socialistic Party to win seats in Parliament. Those facts prove the conclusion I have just stated. We, on this side, do not wish to force working men to contribute out of their wages to socialistic movements, unless they wish to do so. are on the side of freedom. I heard with surprise the honorable member for Bland speak about the Socialism which at present exists in Australia, and I say that there is not the slightest evidence of any desire for Socialism here.

We

Mr. WATSON.-There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Mr. EWING.-The management of the railways by the States has been referred to as an instance of Socialism. But that is not Socialism at all. The railways have been constructed for the development of the lands of the States, and for the use of their people; but they have been constructed on a financial basis which pays regard to the amount likely to be derived from freights and fares, and to the possibility of profitable working. That is State commercialism, not State Socialism. Those who use the railways pay for the services which they employ, whereas if the railways were socialistically managed, those who did not use them would have to pay for them. Then honorable members say, "Look at the Post Office; is not that a socialistic concern ?" I say again, "No; it is another example of State commercialism." Your socialistic writers would laugh to scorn the statement that the Post Office is an example of Socialism. The Post Office is a paying concern, and those who use it pay for the carriage of their letters. If those who did not use it paid for the carriage of the letters of those who did, it would be Socialism. Then honorable members have referred to the Socialism of the right honorable member for Swan, in giving a water supply to the people of of Coolgardie, who, before his great

a

Take

intellect and noble courage appeared on the Once you refuse to the brains and the inscene, had to be content with a dry blow, dustry of a country their full reward, that country becomes as poor as Lazarus. and a scrub down with a corn-cob or currycomb. Now they are able to bathe the flower of a country's intelligence out of themselves, and they show their gratitude it, and there will be nothing to divide. One by voting against the man whose bravery, word in regard to the honorable and learned courage, and intelligence, have given them member for Darling Downs, and the other the great boon which they enjoy. But those protectionists who are sitting with him. I wish to reiterate that there is no protectionwaterworks are not a socialistic concern; ist flag flying on the Opposition benches. they are only another example of State commercialism. They would be socialistic if The honorable and learned member for Indi, the water was paid for, not by those who the honorable member for Hume, and others use it, but by persons in Tasmania or else- claimed the right to cross the drawbridge where who do not use it. Similarly the with their flag flying, and their band playacquirement by the Government of pastoraling. But the Labour Party said, "Oh, no." property, with a view to settling agriculturists upon it, is another instance of State commercialism, because those who use the land pay for it. The man who sends cream to a co-operative factory, and is paid in money for the butter manufactured from that cream, is taking part, not in a socialistic, but in a commercial concern.

But the LaThen the honorable members tried to build bridges in order to get over. bour Party still said "No." Then they, with their small following, tried to get through the scullery. But still the Labour Party said "No." Was there a rat hole left through which they could get? Not one. The honorable members I have alluded to prayed on their knees, looking up fervently into the eyes of the Labour Party, to be allowed to fly a little flag of their own. They said, "You are here under the black banner and the skull and cross-bones of Socialism, and that does not suit us; let us put up a little flag of protection just as an excuse. But the Labour Party persistently said

"No.

[ocr errors]

When I

To do that we should have to turn out some of our best men, and to abandon our principles." To-day the honorable members to whom I have referred stand there only under the flag of Socialism; no flag of They cannot excuse protection is flying. themselves to their constituents on that score. There are only two parties in our politics to-day-the individualists and the Socialists, the freemen and bondsmen. have to sign a caucus pledge, when, after being elected by my constituents, I have to come to Melbourne and find a number of men meeting together in a room, who will tell me, whatever my views or the wishes of my constituents are, that I must abandon them, and vote as the caucus directs-when that time comes, my political career will be closed.

Mr. FRAZER.-Who gets the bonuses? Mr. EWING. I shall not refer to that matter; but the evidence which we have read in regard to it shows what a mess the Government makes of these things. If the man who spends his time expectorating on the footpaths in Sydney or Melbourne came in for a share of the money won by the dairyman elsewhere, it would be Socialism; but, as it is, the arrangement is purely a commercial one. Now let me say a word or two with regard to the marvellous dreams of the Socialists. They tell their audiences that they will all live in palaces, and that there will be no more trouble with regard to money. There will be an abundance of money, with horses and carriages, and everything else you like. But do not honorable members opposite know that the total income of Australia is about £212,000,000, amount which gives an average of about £46 per head to every man, woman, and child in the community? Honorable members opposite, who are drawing £400 a year, and who are not keeping a wife and seven children each, are robbing some one else, according to their own principles. The What is the use money is not available. of nationalizing land, and the means of production, unless you also nationalize the Australia had brains of the community? fine resources, great opportunities, magnificent potentialities, in the time of the blacks. But what developed the country? Not only the labour, but the brains of the white man. You must nationalize the brains of the community if you nationalize everything else. I meant anything at all. Individually it may

an

Mr. POYNTON. The honorable member knows that that is not correct.

Mr. EWING.-The honorable member But what tells me that that is not correct. is the platform of the Labour Party?

I hereby pledge myself not to oppose the candidate

How frightened they are of being opposed! As if a man's defeat or success

be an important thing to him, but what is it as compared with the importance of the affairs of the country? They are frightened at the idea of being opposed, and are crawling along with the condition that there shall be no opposition. "Let them all come,"

honorable members opposite are here because of the imbecility of their constituents, because that would not be fair, and I do not think it. But is there any country in the world is it possible elsewhere to find such a state of things where a so far as I am concerned. poor man with merit has a better Mr. WATSON.-The honorable member chance than in Australia? Our leadknows all about crawling.

Mr. EWING.-I do not allude to the honorable member for Bland, of course. When we fight a political issue out in the full breath of heaven, and before the face of our constituents, why should we pledge ourselves in this fashion

I hereby pledge myself not to oppose the candidate selected by the recognised political organizations, and, if elected, to do my utmost to carry out the principles embodied in the Federal labour platform, and on all questions affecting the platform to vote as a majority of the parliamentary party may decide.

I came to Parliament as a representative-a free man. My constituents empowered me to come, and they trusted me. I accept the responsibility for every vote which I give, and when I go back to them, even if I have made a mistake, they always forgive me, and vote for me again, because they know that I am always first for them and their interests. I have already said that there is a good deal of trouble in the world, but totally dissent from those who say that there is no chance in this country for the poor man. Let honorable members look around this House, and say whether there is not room in Australia for the poor man. We are poor men's sons, every one of us. The Prime Minister came from the manse. Honorable members opposite came from laudable occupations. Where they are going to goodness knows! Honorable members were all brought up in poor men's houses, and it is through their own habits of thrift. their ability, their self-reliance, their belief in themselves, and their know ledge that they had to work if they were to improve their lot, that they have reached their present position. This is absolutely a poor man's Parliament. I do not think there is a man in this House who is not a poor man's son.

Mr. POYNTON.-Except the honorable member.

Mr. EWING.-Except me? My home in the early days, though a pure and a good home, was as poor as that of any man in this House, and my position bere, and all that I have got, are due to the intelligence of my constituents, and to my own industry. I do not like to say that

ing men in trade, in commerce, in law, in arts, in the church, are almost without exception poor men's sons. The honorable member for Kooyong is a poor man's son. They tell us that there is no chance for a poor man in Australia, but Sir Henry Parkes, one of the greatest of Australian statesmen, a man who would have been considered great in any Parliament in the world, came from an English agricultural labourer's cottage, and rose to power from a small toy shop in Hunter-street, Sydney. My opinion of Australians is that they respect merit. If a man has raised himself by his own natural ability, by his prestige, and by his wisdom, to a high position, Australia is proud of him, and the humbler his origin the more gratified we are. A rich man, in the political life of this country, has, indeed, a heavy load to carry. The feeling in Australia is in favour of ability and industry every time. Under Socialism our great artists, great reformers, great inventors, great sculptors, politicians, and industrious men in every sphere of life are to be placed in shackles, and made content with £46 a year and a Justice of the Peaceship. What would every honorable member opposite do if he had a son with ability under the conditions of Socialism which they themselves desire to establish? He would send him out of a country which handcuffed intelligence and legironed ability. Socialism means nothing less than that; and the fight in the coming election will be between men who believe that we should not handcuff ability and destroy talent, and those who believe that the industrious man has no chance in this country, that we should divide up the land of the farmer, distribute the cattle and the sheep, and that every one should be equal-and fit for a lunatic asylum ! We are asked why the free-traders and the protectionists have come together to-day. Why? Because they are free men; because they believe that to put shackles upon intelligence would be disastrous to the country and inimical to our civilization, and would reduce our Commonwealth to a great Sahara of imbecility and sand. We intend to stand together to resist a policy

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »