away from us, which would mean the destruction of our industry in tropical Queensland, and to pause before you make a leap in the dark. It might not be out of place, whatever temporary check there might be to the course of federation in the event of Queensland holding back, to see whether the other colonies would not make that one little concession-that in the event of federation the labour question in Queensland shall not be interfered with, at all events for some time to come.

The Hon. J. V. CHATAWAY: In summing up the discussion on these papers, a discussion which has been limited owing to shortness of time, I should like to draw the attention of the Conference to the fact that in discussing bounties and countervailing duties they seem to have lost sight of the most striking case of countervailing duties, if such we may call them—namely, the action taken by Victoria to protect her interests in Queensland. Victoria imposed some years ago a duty on beet sugar, which was double that imposed on cane, which is a good deal more than a countervailing duty, and at the present day, while our sugars and Mauritius and Java sugars go into Melbourne paying £6 a ton duty, sugar from the Continent has to pay £12, which practically excludes it. That is the most striking successful instance of countervailing duties that I know of. The question that Captain Henry has raised about resolutions and the Resolutions Committee is not easy to deal with. The chairman of such conferences as these should, I think, take the general sense of the meetings, and, so far as lies in his power, carry out the wishes of the meeting. Last year they came to certain conclusions at Rockhampton, and it was evident that it was desired that some legislation should be introduced in connection with weighbridges. I introduced a measure on the lines suggested at the Conference, and it is now law. As for countervailing duties, since last Conference I have been in constant communication with Sir Horace Tozer, and I now receive a weekly letter from him on this subject, and as many of you are doubtless aware he has pushed himself to the very front of the anti-bounty agitation. He is now the most prominent man in the anti-bounty league, and there is no man within the last nine months who has done more in England towards getting the consummation of the wishes of the sugar-growers, and indeed of everybody, than Sir Horace Tozer. His speeches are admirable, and his mastery of facts and figures have attracted attention throughout all the financial circles in London. Time prevents me from saying anything further now on this subject, but I should like to mention to those delegates who are interested in the central sugar-mills, and in the details of sugar-growing, that they are invited to meet at the Prince of Wales Hotel this evening, at 7:30. Those members of the Conference who are specially interested in cattle inoculation and the tick question are invited to meet at the Good Templars' Hall, in Sydney street, for a discussion on those subjects. In each case such officers of the department as have special knowledge on these subjects will be present to give such assistance in their power as will throw light on the various matters. The discussion that now follows is: "How will the agricultural interests of Southern Queensland be affected by the adoption by the colony of the Commonwealth Bill ?" I draw the attention of members to the limitation of the subject of discussion to the agricultural interests of Southern Queensland, and I define that expression to mean the interests of wheat-growers, potato and maize-growers, and those who are engaged strictly in agriculture of temperate districts as opposed to the tropical industry of sugar.

Mr. A. HUNTER (Laidley) then read the following paper entitled :HOW WILL THE AGRICULTURAL INTERESTS OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND BE AFFECTED BY THE ADOPTION BY THE COLONY OF THE COMMONWEALTH BILL ?

The subject that the society which I represent wished me to have discussed through the medium of this Conference is-" How will the agricultural interests of Southern Queensland be affected by the adoption by the colony of the Commonwealth Bill?" As a farmer myself, of some years standing in the southern part of Queensland, I do not think that we have any cause to tear competition with the

southern colonies, as our principal productions are maize, hay, chaff, potatoes, wheat, butter, cheese, and bacon. The dairying industry, which is only young yet, comparatively speaking, is ever expanding by leaps and bounds, and is going to be a very important industry to the farmer of Southern Queensland, as our climate is such that we can grow fodder all the year round in the shape of greenstuff, which is so necessary in the dairying industry. Then we have pig-breeding, another industry in the South of this colony, the products of which we now export largely in the shape of bacon and hams to the southern colonies. It is feared by some that if we have federation and intercolonial freetrade the farmers of Southern Queensland will be utterly annihilated; but I do not think that such will be the case. I admit that in times of drought they will be able to take advantage of our free ports. But with anything like favourable seasons the farmers of Southern Queensland will have the markets of New South Wales and Victoria for their surplus maize, which is often almost a drug in our local markets. With regard to wheat, our local production is not nearly equal to home requirements as yet, but I believe that Queensland in the near future will be the greatest wheat-producing colony in Australia. We have not only got the Darling Downs, generally called the garden of Queensland, for the production of wheat, but the Burnett district also will eventually be a large producer of this cereal, and I am confident that a great portion of our Central district and those rich plains of our Western country are well adapted for the growth of wheat, as wheat does not require any great rainfall to bring it to perfection.

I believe that with such a beautiful supply of artesian water as we possess, and with a country naturally adapted for irrigation, wheat could be produced independent of any extra rainfall. Furthermore, I think that at no very distant period, instead of importing so much of this cereal as we do at present, we shall become exporters to a very large extent.

The sum of nearly all the arguments against federation is that the farmers of Queensland, as a body, are going to suffer, but I do not hold with this view of the case. With intercolonial freetrade and protection against the world, I think the farmers of Queensland will be quite able to hold their own. I believe that, with federation, trade and the various industries will be developed. Queensland is rich in all sorts of minerals-such as gold, copper, iron, and coal-and with protection against the world, capitalists will be induced to start the iron trade, which has done so much to enrich other parts of the world.

All our railway material, and machinery of all descriptions imported from the outside world, should, and will be, at no distant period, manufactured within our own borders; and, as a sequence, population will flock to our shores. Population means consumption, and consumption means a market for farmers. So that I think that, with federation on fair and reasonable lines, the farmers of Queensland, as a whole, have nothing to fear. It is argued by some that Queensland is too young for federation; but the same argument would hold good 20 years hence. It is also argued that New South Wales and Victoria will have too great a preponderance in the Federal Parliament according to the Commonwealth Bill, but we must remember that the Federal Parliament is not going to legislate for any one State more than another. That Parliament will be the Parliament of Australasia, and will legislate equitably for the benefit of the whole of the States. As a farmer of Southern Queensland, I would like to see the adoption of the Commonwealth Bill by the people, and federation consummated; to the end that we may become one people, and that Australasia may become an important factor in that great Empire of which we are all so proud to be a part, and on which we, as Britons, may well boast, the sun

never sets.

Mr. W. D. LAMB (Yangan): When the Commonwealth Bill becomes law, I believe we shall be independant of southern competition, and, as an illustration of my meaning, I may mention the butter industry, which has now reached such a stage as to enable us to export as well as to supply our own requirements. As for wheat, our production will soon be overtaking our home demand, and the necessity for a duty on that product will be gone. At the same time, I think the imposition of duties to protect young industries is advantageous, and if the sugar industry had not had originally a protective duty of £5 per ton, I doubt whether it would have attained its present dimensions in Queensland. As a farmer I have not the slightest fear of federation, but I should like to see it held over for a few years until we are

altogether independent of the competition I have referred to. Federation would be beneficial with protection against the world, for at present we may be getting a fair price for a certain product, when news comes that there is a big shipment of Californian wheat or maize arrived in Sydney, and that has a bad effect on the markets in the other colonies.

Mr. K. W. SCHOLZ (Stanthorpe): I have had no instructions from my society on the subject of federation, but the feeling there is strongly in favour of it. We do not fear it, and living as we do, on the border, we know where the shoe pinches under the present condition of things.

Mr. E. HICKS (Southport): I am in favour of federation, and I am sure there is no Queensland farmer who is afraid of New South Wales competition, but with Sydney a free port, it is a dumping ground for produce from the rest of the world. The result is when prices go up in Queensland, there is always plenty of foreign produce on hand in Sydney to be sent up here to flood our markets.

Mr. C. F. M. FISCHER (Zillmere): From what I have heard, if the delegates to this Conference thoroughly represent the feelings of their various societies, the probable vote that will be taken in Queensland on federation will be a great eye-opener, for so far I have not heard any sentiment worth mentioning against federation. The people in the North appear to be on the horns of a dilemma, the fear of black labour being taken away from them and the hope of an increased market. In the South we have not the fear, but we have the prospect. Those who are interested in wheat and butter have no fear of federation, and have spoken in favour of it, and we who are interested in the fruit industry can say the same. We have nothing to fear from federation, and the consumer, who, after all, is the greatest factor in any community, will be benefited if any benefit is to be derived. That should be the great consideration in all questions of this kind, for we are naturally so constructed that we look upon everything from a selfish standpoint. There are several lines of industry in fruit-growing in Southern Queensland which I am sure will be benefited by federation. At the present time we have open markets for our green fruits in most of the southern colonies, but still there are some where duties are imposed, and on fruits which we can grow very readily, and for which we could get a market in the course of federation. Pine-growers in my district are specially interested in the canning industry, but they cannot dispose of their product in the southern markets owing to the duties imposed there on canned fruit. With federation, those duties would be removed, and I am sure the canning of pineapples in this colony would be revived. Pineapples are now canned here, and sent even to protective Germany and elsewhere, but, with the markets of Australia open to us, we would be able to can on our own farms, send the product all over Australia, and benefit not only ourselves, but those who would like to consume pines, and are not able to secure them in their natural state.

Mr. J. HUDSON (Rosewood): There is a good deal of sentiment in this federation business, and I think if the various speakers so far were divested of the amount of sentiment that is in them, there would not be much left. I am a Southern farmer, and have been farming in the South for thirty years. have seen something during that time, and have experienced something. We have had protective duties in Queensland, and yet the markets of the south were open to our products in a free sort of way. Take farm produce. I have seen potatoes sold in the south at 30s. a ton. It is not 5 years since I sold lucerne chaff for 22s. 6d. a ton. Where were the southern markets for those things? They were shut up, and will be shut up again. I agree that the south cannot compete with us in fair seasons, but then we are most susceptible to seasons of drought, and I contend that 1 month of dry weather would do more harm to our crops than 3 months' drought would do in the south. At the present time prices are fair, and they are what the consumer is easily able to pay. We should not, however, like them to be lower, and if it were not for our protective duties we would not be getting half of what we now get. We

have a protective duty, but they have not. We, in the Southern part of Queensland, consume the sugar from the North, but I say the North does not consume our produce in like proportion, for, in spite of the protective duties, we still frequently hear in the papers of orders going to the southern colonies. I have nothing against federation on proper lines.

Mr. H. M. STEVENS (Rosewood): I am sorry to have to disagree with my colleague, Mr. Hudson, on the subject of federation, but at the same time I have no mandate from my society as to the opinion I should express here. I can merely express my own, and that is that I think that on the whole we have nothing to fear from federation. Perhaps in some lines we may go down, but on others we have a great advantage over the south owing to our earlier seasons and cheaper lands, and on the average I think we have the advantage. If one article of produce fails, we would have to take up others which we can produce to greater perfection than they can in the south. I have thought a good deal on the matter since it has been brought prominently before us, and on the whole I think it would really be more desirable for us to join in than to stand out of the union.

Mr. C. J. BOOKER (Woolooga, Wide Bay): Mr. Hudson was particularly anxious that federation should be approached without any sentiment. I am not with him in that, and when I contemplate that piece of cloth at the end of this hall, "Faith, Hope, and Charity," it reminds me that every Queenslander should have it for his motto-that is, faith in the country, hope for the future in what the country and he himself will be able to do, and charity towards his neighbours. I am a native of Queensland, a cattle-owner, a dairyman, and a farmer, and I really think I represent the interests the delegates here are representing. For myself 1 represent the three, but I know most about the cattle industry, and, touching upon that particularly, federation to Queensland cattle-owners-the owners of something like 6,000,000 of cattlewill mean this so soon as the machinery of federation is established, and the disruption that federation will naturally bring about has subsided. I grant that in many of the industries there will be disruption, for on all occasions when there is a change of tariff, a few must suffer. But this will only be for a short time, and as soon as the machinery of the union is set going it will mean to the cattle-owners of Queensland £1 a head, or an increment of 6 millions of money to the wealth of the colony. At the present time if we federate, bullocks that are sold at Brisbane at £4 could be chilled at the works in Brisbane, and sold as chilled meat in Melbourne, where they would return to the cattle-owners of the southern districts, at the very lowest, allowing for the profits of the meat company and the middleman-without whom we cannot conduct our business-£5 10s. per head, and we must consider that while the producer is thus benefiting, so also are the storekeeper and the community generally. What really concerns the cattle-owners in that particular way, concerns the dairyman, for if the bullocks are enhanced in value to the extent of £1 10s. a head, so would the value of the cows that breed the steers be similarly increased, and in an all round sense federation means to every farmer, who is also a cattle-owner, a considerable balance on his credit side. It has pleased me immensely to-day to hear the southern delegates, with about but one exception, declare themselves federalists, because it will go forth throughout the country that a body of representative men from centres which federationists were afraid of, have shown themselves in favour of the movement by voicing to-day sentiments worthy of them, and of the country in which they live. (Applause.)

Mr. F. W. PEEK (Loganholme): I would like to ask, in the event of federation becoming an established fact, whether each State will have the power, in the interests of agriculture, to establish special regulations and laws, or practically a board of agriculture for its own particular interest in that State. Will they have that right, and is there any provision in the Bill for a Board of Agriculture, or for a Board of Trade? Although mining is darticularly looked after in the Bill, agriculture is not considered.

The Hon. J. V. CHATAWAY: There is a provision in the Bill which precludes the granting of direct bounties to agricultural production, but there is nothing in the Bill preventing indirect assistance to agriculture, such as the establishment of colleges, experiment farms, &c., and the importation and distribution of new seeds. I should say that it is very probable that under the Bill there will be considerably less interference with the practices and laws of the various colonies, as they now exist, than is expected. It must be understood that there are only one or two matters which are exclusively handled by the Federal Government In the rest of those numerous subjects in the 51st clause, the legislation of the States can be concurrent with that of the Federal Parliament, and unless it clashes with the Federal Parliament the legislation of the States will be operative and effective. I think I have explained what I mean, for I find that a number of people think that immediately we have federation and things are fixed up, the Federal Parliament will promptly undertake our business. I do not think that is the intention. We shall be left largely as we were in many things, and this answers Mr. Peek's question as to whether we shall be able to continue the same assistance to agriculture as we do now. We can do it in every way, except by direct bounties, although direct aid in a cash way is distinctly allowed to the mining industry.

Mr. F. W. PEEK (Loganholme): I have not come here empowered by my Association to advocate or to speak against federation, and up to the time of my leaving my end of the country, the matter had not been discussed in a manner by which the farmers could understand it. I am not here to commit myself or my district in any shape or form, and I am not here to say I am representative of the opinion of the South, but I think somewhat better conditions could have been embodied in the Commonwealth Bill- for instance, in provisions for developing local industries which may be started in the colony as well as those which are at present in an embryo state, and which it would be an advantage to foster. Although I do not believe in State aid, still there are certain things which hang upon production which the State must necessarily foster for its future development. I was very pleased, in reading the Mackay Mercury this morning, to see it stated that the "Duke of Portland" was arriving with a number of immigrants for the shores of Queensland, and this I think is a step in the right direction, being only sorry that it has not been carried out for some years previous to this. We would have been in a better condition to compete in the southern markets if our lands had been more fully developed. As for the danger from the competition of our southern neighbours, I do not think there is any farmer in Queensland afraid to meet them on equal terms, but it is only by co-operation that we can do so, and with it we can compete with them to a certainty.

Mr. W. DEACON (Allora): I represent a wheat district which will perhaps be more affected by federation than any other. Our duty on wheat and flour will shortly be practically inoperative, for this season we shall produce 2,000,000 bushels, and I think by the time federation is actually in full operation we shall be exporting, the more so as it is only the Southern part of the colony that we are called upon to supply with wheat. We do not seem to be able to get at the North. As for Mr. Hudson's prices for chaff, I do not know where he got them from. I have got 3 boys working on their own account, and they are all going in for federation. I asked one of them the other day why, and he told me that he read the southern newspapers and saw that, on the whole, the prices for farm produce in Sydney and Melbourne were in advance of those procurable in Queensland, which would mean a better market for him. Pigs worth 30s. in Queensland are worth £2 in Sydney. Chaff is worth £1 a ton more in the south than it is here. The assimilation of the railway tariffs would be a great advantage under federation. A few years ago some of our farmers grew barley and sent it south, but, owing to the duty of 28. a bushel there, the venture was unremunerative; but federation would prevent a repetition of that. The farmers in the southern colonies at present have advantages over ours in the matter of Customs duties. In the first place, there is a duty of £2 a ton