are a number of men and women, though probably more men than women, who, if they could give free rein to their passions, would be worse than wild beasts." I spoke only of anarchists. I made no reference whatever to the Labour Party in this connexion. The proof of my statement lies in the particular pamphlet to which I have referred, and in another circumstance. The Trades Hall Council, and its associated political party, at a later stage gave the greatest justification to my remarks, and by their action did themselves honour. As soon as the pamphlet was issued, the Trades Hall Council saw that a mistake had been made. A special meeting was held on the 4th April, when a report was presented on the subject, and, in order to justify their position before the world, the council expelled from their ranks the man who was an anarchist and the cause of the meeting. The honorable and learned member for Wannon, the honorable member for Perth, and others who have misquoted me, will in future be able to state the facts.

Mr. ROBINSON. I never once quoted those remarks; all I quoted were the words of the honorable member about the twenty or thirty wire-pullers who "wanted his billet."

Mr. HUME COOK.-I accept the explanation, as I trust the honorable and learned member accepts my explanation in regard to the words about "letting loose the wild beasts."

Mr. ROBINSON.-Absolutely.

Mr. HUME COOK.-I do not deny that I used some very hard words during the contest-all candidates so indulge but I certainly never made use of the remarks which have been attributed to me. I should now like to refer to the question of preferential trade. I have said that with a coalition, or divided Ministry in power, great questions like that of preferential trade cannot possibly be dealt with; and here I desire to quote what the Prime Minister said before he became a member of the Ministry. Speaking at the Town Hall, Sydney, on the 29th November, the right honorable gentleman is reported in the Melbourne Argus as follows:

Now, ladies and gentlemen, I denounce the Government

that was the Deakin Governmentfirst for their breach of faith in not submitting some preference to the mother country free from any sort of condition. If we can reduce the Tariff to a sound revenue tariff all the objection of the mother land will disappear.

That is what the Prime Minister said prior to the elections. He was not then in favour of waiting for the mother country, and he had not then "given the office to Lord Rosebery that Australia was not prepared to do anything in the way of preferential trade. The attitude and speeches of the right honorable member since that meeting in the Sydney Town Hall justify Lord Rosebery, the leader of the Liberal Party in England, in saying that Australia is not ready to give preference to the mother country. I ask the Prime Minister and his supporters why they do not now endeavour to reduce the Tariff, as they said they would if ever they got the chance?

Mr. HENRY WILLIS.-Does the honorable member desire the Tariff to be reduced?

Mr. HUME COOK.-I shall presently tell the honorable member what I am prepared to do in order to get preferential trade. The Prime Minister now says that it is a question for the future; that we are not going to make trouble now, but must assume that Great Britain will make the first move.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-He always said

that.

Mr. HUME COOK.-Now the Prime Minister poses as the friend of the farmer, the vigneron, the orchardist, and other producers. What sort of friend is he who refuses now to give that preferential trade which is to be the salvation of the producers?

Mr. WILKS.-The Prime Minister can not give them preferential trade.

Mr. HUME COOK.-He said that he could, and that he would do so if he got the opportunity. But the right honorable. gentleman wants to make out that we on this side are the opponents of the farmers and others on the land-that it is to him and his followers they must look for commercial prosperity.

Party some time ago. The difference between a peace and a truce is so great as to justify some consideration. "Peace " means an entire cessation of hostilities, whereas a truce means a temporary cessation only, to permit of the burial of the dead, a consideration of the position, or something of that kind.

Mr. WILKS.-One word means the burial of weapons, and the other means their destruction.

Mr. HUME COOK.-" Peace " means the putting away of the weapons.

Mr. WILKS.--That is to destroy them. Mr. HUME COOK.-Not necessarily, as you might need to use them again if war were declared.

---

Mr. JOSEPH COOK. "Peace" might mean the cessation of war until you were ready.

Mr. HUME COOK.-That is quibbling. What did the Prime Minister say about the terms of the agreement for an alliance? The most interesting and most important statement contained in that proposal is to this effect

The Tariff not to be altered in any respect during the present Parliament without the consent of both parties in the Ministry.

If the consent of both parties in the Ministry were obtained, of course there could be an alteration of the Tariff. But that is not the main point I intend to make.

The fiscal issue not to be raised by the Ministry or any Ministerial candidate at any general election held prior to the next ordinary general election, and the policy of the Ministry on all fiscal

questions intended to be submitted at such election to be made public before the 1st May, 1906. Speaking on this point last night the honorable and learned member for Bendigo said that he had not asked for an extended truce on the fiscal issue. But he was the one who pointed out the weakness of this proposal. He said that if the truce were not extended over the next general election the members of the Liberal-Protectionist Party could be made use of by the free-traders until some time prior to the next general election, and then dropped. And when the honorable and learned member for Ballarat was asked for an explanation of this matter he said, "That is quite true. This proposal as to submission before the 1st May, 1906, means that we are to get six months' notice of any proposed abolition of the truce, so that we, too, can prepare our weapons of warfare, and carry on the fight in a proper manner."

Mr. DEAKIN.-That is the substance of what I said.

Mr. HUME COOK.-The members of the Free-trade Party asked us for a truce, which meant making use of the Liberal-Protectionists during a certain period, giving us six months' notice of the revival of the free-trade issue, and then fighting us after they had crippled us.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-That is what the Labour Party has done with that corner.

Mr. HUME COOK.-I shall show the honorable member how it was proposed to cripple us, and how the protectionists who have joined the free-traders on the other side are under worse conditions than were offered to us. The free-traders propose to cripple us by organizing during the whole period of the truce. Although we had been asked to agree to a truce, which in any case was to last until the 1st May, 1906, the free-traders in Sydney and else. where were not respecting the truce, but were o.ganizing, doing their level best to get literature circulated, branches formed, and candidates in evidence, and intending to try to sweep the polls as far as our party was concerned. That has not been denied, because the leaders of this movement were the present Postmaster-General and the honorable member for Lang.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-It has been denied more than once.

Mr. HUME COOK. prove that, although it denied, it is still being not feel that I should

Then I shall may have been I did done. be justified in accepting a coalition with free-traders on those terms. I believed that we were likely to be made use of. I shall show what kind of organization was to go on against us, while we were to remain quiescent, and to be dropped at the right time.

Mr. McCAY.-What is to prevent the protectionists from doing the same thing outside?

Mr. HUME COOK.-What did the present Prime Minister say about this matter at about the same time? When he went up to support the honorable member for New England, he said—

Mr. Deakin said they had mangled the Tariff because they had brought the duties down. If that was so, why were the protectionists now calling for fiscal peace? Did any one ever hear of any one calling for peace unless he was afraid of a bigger licking?

Why did they not have the courage of their opinions, and fight the matter out?

That is the right honorable gentleman who wants a fiscal truce-I suppose because he is afraid of getting a bigger licking. Again, what did he say at Toowoomba

I do not expect a protectionist to support me, and if he did I would call him a political humbug and a shuffler.

Are the protectionists who are now supporting him in the Ministry political humbugs and shufflers?

Mr. HENRY WILLIS.--It is a coalition

Government.

Speaking on this subject some time ago, he said

The last Government was half and half: this Government is half and half. Therefore, where is there any more danger than before? I am no prophet, but I have no doubt matters will come right in the end.

I want to see how they will come right in the end. Can the Minister say how they will? In view of the fact that even the

orable members who sit behind the Minis

Mr. HUME COOK.-I wonder if the right honorable gentleman still stands by that statement? If he does, why does he not also stand by the previous one? He has formed a coalition with certain honorable members, and proclaimed a fiscal truce, and all his organizations are at work preparing to sweep aside the protectionists who have not been trapped, while dropping those protectionists who have been trapped.

Mr. MCCOLL.-Give us some proof of

that statement.

Mr. HUME COOK.

Here is some

proof, which appeared in the Age of the 5th September, in the shape of a telegram from Sydney, headed, "Free-traders organizing," and relating to a meeting of the Australian Free-trade League in that city

It was resolved, that the present situation made the work of the league doubly important, and that arrangements should be entered into forthwith for the purpose of strengthening the freetrade party throughout Australia. A manifesto is being prepared, and, after submission to the league, will be issued throughout the Common

wealth.

to

Whilst the Prime Minister declares a fiscal truce in Victoria, all his organizations in New South Wales are preparing strengthen the Free-trade Party, and to issue a manifesto throughout the Commonwealth, to attempt to upset the truce which he has declared, and to trap the protectionists who have joined him. Under these circumstances, we on this side were more than justified in entering into an alliance to prevent the success of this Ministry and their supporters at the polls, and to avert the downfall of the Protectionist Party. What is to happen after this truce is terminated? I propose to quote the words of the Minister of Defence.

and

whom they have been allied here? I think not. The probabilities are that the Ministers will have to support the Ministerial policy or resign, just as their supporters will have to support the Ministerial policy, or go alone. By that time they will be tied to the Ministry; they will have betrayed their constituents, they will be unable. unable to fight for the Liberal-Protectionist Party. The coalition does not give them what was proposed by the agreement submitted in May last. It leaves them subservient to the domination of a free-trade majority on that side, whilst we have a protectionist the real protectionists are on the other side, majority on this side. We are told that but I say that the numbers this side. The real dominating party on the other side are Of thirty-eight members on that side, free-traders. twenty-five are free-traders and thirteen are protectionists; while of thirtysix members on this side, only nine are freetraders, and twenty-seven are protectionists. Where, then, is the Protectionist Party in this House? Surely it is to be found on this side.

are

on

Mr. ROBINSON.--What does the honorable member get from the Labour Party?

Mr. HUME COOK.-Free-traders like the honorable member for Perth, as he declared here only a few nights ago, are prepared to help us with a protectionist policy to develop our resources and to find employment for our workmen, but the honorable and learned member for Wannon prefers to find employment for Germans in Germany.

will believe that if he says it again. Mr. ROBINSON.-The honorable member

Mr. HUME COOK.-The honorable and learned member made the statement..

Mr. ROBINSON.-I never made the statement in the sense in which the honorable member is applying it.

Mr. HUME COOK.-Does the honor able and learned member deny the state ment I quoted from the Argus?

Mr. ROBINSON.-I deny the honorable member's inference from the quotation.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-Will the honorable member direct his attention to the trapped individuals over here? Mr. HUME COOK.-They are trapped all right. They cannot fight on the protectionist side any more, dominated as they are by a free-trade Prime Minister and a free-trade majority. Some members of the Ministry will find that they cannot fight on our side when the real contest takes place.

Mr. McCAY.-There are some protection ists to whom the ranks of the Protectionist Party are not open?

Mr. HUME COOK.-I did not hear what the honorable and learned member said. The Prime Minister has said that the Tariff issue has been raised against him. May I say, in answer to his complaint, that it was raised in the House before he took office, and in such a way that he could not possibly make that statement with any degree of justice.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-By whom and when was it raised?

Mr. HUME COOK.-I raised the Tariff issue on a motion I gave notice of months ago.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK. Pure blank cartridge.

place I spoke against the raising of the Tariff issue during the present Parliament. I do not deny that, but what I say is that since the election took place facts and figures have come to the knowledge of protectionist members which compel us to raise the issue.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-Then honorable members should go back to the people and ask their permission to do so.

The

Mr. HUME COOK.-We determined the peace, and, being the victors in the fight, we had a right, as I have previously asserted, if the terms did not suit us, to raise the issue again. I have raised it. I do not deny that in so doing my attitude may appear, though it really is not, inconsistent with my platform pledge. platform pledge I made was to support the industries of Australia against foreign competition. I thought at the time that the best way in which to do that was to maintain the existing Tariff, but I now say frankly that the existing Tariff does not meet the case.

Mr. MCCAY.-The honorable member also proposed to support the honorable and learned member for Ballarat.

Mr. HUME COOK.—And I did support that honorable and learned gentleman. Mr. MCCAY. Is the honorable member doing so now?

Mr. HUME COOK.-It is quite true that I promised to support the honorable and learned member for Ballarat. In connexion with the Conciliation and Arbitration Bill, I told the electors that I was in favour of the inclusion of the railway servants in the

The

Mr. HUME COOK.-That is true. Prime Minister says the Tariff issue has only been raised against him since he took office. But the fact is that it was raised by me before he took office, and during the administration of another Government.

Mr. McCAY.-As soon as the last Government were getting into trouble the cry of protection had to be raised.

Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-Does the honorable member call that raising anything?

Mr. HUME COOK.-Certainly I do. Mr. JOSEPH COOK.-It was only academically discussing it on an off night.

Mr. HUME COOK.-We have been told that we have no right to raise it, because there was a Tariff peace, and that I, amongst other honorable members, fought for that. I admit at once, without any hesitation, that when the last election took

sidered the fate of the Government, as it was a Protectionist Government, was of more importance than the inclusion of the railway servants in the Conciliation and Arbitration Bill. I told them frankly that they must not expect me to vote for the inclusion of the railway servants if it meant the defeat of the Deakin Government. I have kept my promise. I voted with the Deakin Government, and helped to maintain it in power, and I am sorry that it ever went out of power. When the Minister of Defence twits me with not supporting the honorable and learned member for Ballarat, he surely forgets that. I have already said that the truce which has been proclaimed by the present Prime Minister was proclaimed by the right honorable gentleman himself, and not by any one else. I have shown that that truce could have been declared off, practically at any time, on giving six months' notice; but