6Qo AUSTRALIA 



Parliament full power over all trading corporations; (c) to give the Commonwealth 

 Parliament specific power to deal with the wages and conditions of labour and labour 

 disputes; (d) to give the Commonwealth Parliament power to deal with all combina- 

 tions and monopolies. A further proposed amendment of the Constitution gave the 

 Commonwealth Parliament power to declare that any business was a " monopoly," 

 and following such declaration to acquire it, paying on just terms for any property 

 used in connection with it. By a majority of about a quarter of a million votes in a 

 total poll of about 1,155,000 votes the people declared against these amendments of 

 the Constitution. Thus a Labour Government was left in office without power to 

 carry out its Labour policy. It was announced that these amendments would be 

 submitted again at the General Election of 1913. 



Thwarted by the safeguards of the Constitution and the refusal of the people to 

 allow amendments removing those safeguards, in an effort to move further towards 

 the ideal of a socialistic state, the Fisher Government was yet able to carry out much 

 advanced legislation. Its first task, however, had been to clear itself very completely 

 of any suspicion of a lack of earnestness regarding the defence of Australia and the 

 Empire. In 1909, whilst Mr. Deakin was Prime Minister, ail Act of Parliament had 

 been passed enforcing military training on all able-bodied male citizens. This enact- 

 ment of universal service had not been opposed by the Labour party. Indeed their 

 criticism was that the system proposed to be enforced was not thorough enough; and 

 the Government of the day promised that an expert from Great Britain should be 

 asked to report on the system. Field-Marshal Viscount Kitchener accepted an invi- 

 tation to visit Australia, and his report was before the Parliament of 1910 with a Labour 

 Government in power. That Government not only accepted all his recommendations 

 but in some cases crossed his " t's " and dotted his " i's.'' There was established a, 

 system of universal training for military defence which Lord Kitchener guarantees 

 as adequate and which the Fisher Government has enforced against various protests 

 with a resolute courage. In the matter of naval defence the Fisher Government 

 was equally firm in dissociating itself from any faltering policy. 



Mr. Fisher, in carrying on and extending the defence policy of his predecessors, 

 gave the opposition no reason for hostility. But his Land Tax was hotly contested. 

 During his brief administration Mr. J. C. Watson had foreshadowed a Land Tax, the 

 purpose of which was to be economic rather than fiscal; that is to say, it was to be 

 designed chiefly to make the holding up of big estates against closer settlement un- 

 profitable, and the collection of revenue was to be but an incidental matter. .Mr. 

 Fisher's Land Tax kept this " bursting up " of big estates in the foreground, but owned 

 to a material interest in securing additional revenue to finance the great defence schemes 

 which had been entered upon. Estates of under 5,000 in unimproved value were 

 exempted if their proprietors were resident in Australia (absentee landlords had HO 

 exemption); upon estates of over 5,000 in unimproved value the tax was at the rate 

 of one penny in the , rising rapidly with the value of estates until at 75,000 unimproved 

 value the rate was 6d. in the , beyond which it did not go. In case of absentees the 

 rate is higher, culminating in a tax of yd. per of unimproved value. 



Another highly important financial measure carried through by the Fisher. Govern- 

 ment was a re-arrangement of the financial basis between the Commonwealth and the 

 states. The original financial basis of the Commonwealth Government, was absurd, 

 but it had been forced upon the makers of the Federation by circumstances. It was 

 found during the various sessions of the Convention which sat to frame a Constitu- 

 tion that Federal enthusiasm was apt to evaporate, and to be replaced by a hard bar- 

 gaining spirit, as soon as the allocation of revenues came to be discussed. There 

 were six states to be united, two of them (New South Wales and Victoria) rich and 

 powerful; two others (Tasmania and West Australia) poor in revenue and in population; 

 two others (Queensland and South Australia) occupying middle places. As soon as 

 the issue came up as to how the Commonwealth revenues were to be collected and 

 distributed, the representatives of the large states began to fear that the small states 



