OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE DEBATES

OF THE

AUSTRALASIAN FEDERAL CONVENTION, 1897-17

THIRD SESSION.

MELBOURNE, 20TH JANUARY TO 17TH MARCH, 1898.

VOLUME II.

(Comprising the period from 22nd February, 1898, to 17th March, 1898.)

MELBOURNE: ROBT. S. BRAIN, GOVERNMENT PRINTER.

CEN

like a jury, come to a conclusion whether
the differential rates are reasonable
or unreasonable. If you will
If you will remark supposing that, notwithstanding

to settle whether a rate is unfairly
differential, and that will be final.

that the burden of proof is upon all those who object to the rates, prima facie, every colony is to be entitled to have its own rates to develop its own country in its own way. But supposing it is proved that a certain rate, like the rate between Cootamundra and Hay, is obviously intended for the purpose of preventing trade coming to Melbourne which would naturally come here, the Inter-State Commission can interfere.

Mr. DOBSON.-Would that question be settled by the commission, and not by the High Court?

Mr. HIGGINS.-Yes, I think it is desirable that the High Court should be kept to the decision of law points, while the Inter-State Commission should be confined to the decision of expert questions with regard to railway management. The func tion of a legal court is to deal with law; it has not to deal with questions of policy or of railway management.

Mr. DOBSON.-Suppose we provided in the Bill that the states were not to impose these improper rates, could not the High Court decide that question as well as the Inter-State Commission?

Mr. HIGGINS.-That is quite true; assuming that after the Inter-State Commission decided as experts that these rates were unfair differential rates, and then the state still imposed those rates, of course, there would be the ordinary legal process. That would come before the ordinary Federal Courts. There is no doubt that if the law or the rule laid down by the Inter-State Commission were not adhered to the only appeal would be to a law court.

Mr. DOBSON.-Supposing the Constitution said that there were to be no preferential rates, and the Inter-State Commission decided in another way, would there be no appeal to the High Court?

Mr. HIGGINS.-No, I take it that the Inter-State Commission will be the jury

But

the

Inter-State Commission had laid down
the principle, the rates were still im-
posed, the only process would be to go to
law. But I apprehend that in every such
case it would be like the story of the coon
and the colonel-the state, instead of
waiting to be shot, would say, like the
coon- "Don't fire, colonel, I'll come
down"- and on being told by the Inter-
State Commission that a rate was unlaw-
ful and unfair, the state would cease to
impose that rate.

Mr. DOBSON.-The decision of the
Inter-State Commission would be final.
We are

Mr. HIGGINS.-I think so.

all sinners in this respect. I find, from the Border Duties Act of Queensland, that New South Wales has been doing to Queensland just what we have done to her. The preamble to that Act says—

And whereas it has been ascertained that differential rates on the railway lines of the neigh. bouring colonies have been promulgated and otherwise arranged for, which have had and are continuing to have the effect of diverting the traffic which ought legitimately to be conveyed over the railway lines of this colony, thereby entailing a considerable loss in railway revenue; and whereas it is considered desirable to prevent, as far as practicable, this diversion of trafficThen they impose a certain duty on all goods exported over the border to New South Wales. There is no doubt we do to South Australia exactly what New South Wales does to us. We have these tapering rates, which are meant to protect West Victorian trade from going to Adelaide, or in that direction. I admit it is most anti-federal.

Mr. DEAKIN.-And the only federal feature about it is that we all do it.

Mr. HIGGINS.-I hope we shall stop all these practices. We had a discussion a few days ago with regard to bounties, and the Premier of New South Wales stated, in words which struck me at the time, the true principle that ought to