under any form of private ownership whatever. He would like to deal with that alone just now, and 

 afterwards go on to the cultivated lauds, and tlicu go to the uustockcd lands. His intention was simply 

 to deal with lands in the hands of the Crown, by which their voting representations would be regulated. 

 This motion, so far as it went, was entirely for land held by the Crown under no form of lease. 



Mr. DAVIES (Gunnedah) moved an amendment that it should bo 20 acres to the sheep. There 

 were thousands of acres of land that it would be impossible to stock because they were waterless. 



Mr. A. BROWN (Narrabri) seconded the amendment. 



Mr. CUDJIOHK (Wentworth) supported Mr. Davies's amendment. There were some public lands 

 that would not carry a sheep to 50 acres. He thought it should be arrived at on the basis of the carrying 

 capacity or sheep returns of the neighbouring lands. They could take the stock returns for each district 

 and calculate the carrying capacity of the unoccupied lands on that basis. 



Mr. BROOKE supported Mr. Davies's amendment. There were lots of gentlemen present who were 

 working country which would carry a sheep to 10 acres. It stood to reason that if the adjoining lands 

 were as good it would not be unoccupied. 



Mr. WILKES (Broken Hill) would support a sheep to 20 acres. 



Mr. BACON (Brewarrina) said if they took on the amendment, 500,000 acres divided by 20 came to 

 25,000, and 25,000 sheep at ^d. per sheep came to about 50 that is to say, the Minister would have to 

 pay over 50 in a big district. He thought, therefore, that a good deal was to be said for not making 

 the amount so big. 



Mr. TREFLE (Temora) said that as there was such a wide diversity of opinion, from 6 to 50 acres, 

 it seemed to him it would be better to have the land valued. 



Mr. CAMERON (Ivauhoe) supported Mr. Davies's amendment because there was a large amount of 

 land already in occupation by lessees which was valued on a basis of 20 acres to the sheep. Well, the 

 State would say, " We have all the worst laud ; a great deal that is occupied is carrying a sheep to 20 

 acres, but this land is of such a nature that it is not worth occupying even if they get it at a rent based 

 upon its carrying capacity at 20 acres to the sheep." He therefore thought that a basis of 6 acres to a 

 sheep would throw out every acre of land that was not already under occupation, and he would most 

 decidedly go even beyond the 20 acres and put it at 30. 



Mr. HEBDEN (Wanaaring) proposed an amendment that it be 10 acres to a sheep. All the lands 

 would carry a sheep to 20 acres if it were improved, but people would not improve it. 



Mr. FLANAGAN (Grunbar) seconded Mr. Hebden's amendment. He did not mean to insinuate 

 there was plenty of land in the Colony that would carry a sheep to 20 acres. Some men had pulled their 

 coats off and set to work to make the country capable of carrying sheep, and they were to be taxed for 

 having taken their coats off and set to work. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) said he was not bound to these figures ; and as there was a feeling in 

 favour of a sheep to 20 acres he would be willing to accept Mr. Hebden's amendment, going halfway, 

 and making it a sheep to 10 acres. He was quite pleased to see what a number of advocates the Crown 

 had in the Conference. The proposition was to let the Crown off most easily. He could not conceive 

 that in any district they would have 20 to pay. He really thought a sheep to 10 acres was about the 

 worst that he knew of in the Western Division, and the Crown lands could not be very much worse than 

 that anywhere. There was some good land and some indifferent land, and he thought perhaps it would 

 be better to accept Mr. Hebden's motion for a sheep to 10 acres ; and he would amend his motion to that 

 effect, namely, " That public lands shall be taxed on the basis of one sheep to 10 acres." 



Mr. CUDMORE (Wentworth) said that Mr. Alison had remarked that there was very little country 

 in the Western Division 'that had been assessed at 10 acres to the sheep. He begged to differ. There 

 was a great deal that would only carry a sheep to 12| or 15 acres. 



Mr. Davies's amendment was put to the meeting, and lost by 24 to 13. 



Mr. Alison's motion, of one sheep to 10 acres, was put, and carried by 2-1 to 10. 



The Conference adjourned until 10 o'clock the next day. 



THIRD DAY HTH MARCH, 1897. 



The Conference met at 10 a.m. ; Mr. Lakeman in the Chair. 



The minutes of the previous sitting were read and confirmed. 



The Minister for Lands entered amid acclamation, and delivered the following address : 



I think it better, Mr. Chairman, instead of waiting until you have concluded your business, when 

 probably you would submit all your resolutions to me, to occasionally come in and confer with you on the 

 progress that you have made. I think that is the better course to adopt, because you will finish your business 

 at a certain time, and you will alL have made your arrangements to go home, and probably there will only 

 be half an hour left to come and talk the matters over with the Minister ; and it might be found then 

 that I could not accept your proposals, and then you could not stay back to reconsider them. I thought 

 it better, therefore, to come and have a talk with you. There may be differences of opinion that we can 

 get over by a little mutual consultation ; so that 1 am sure you will not object to my coming here. I will 

 first of all read a telegram which I have received from Mr. Alexander Oliver, of the Land Appeal Court. 

 " Please offer my services to the Eabbit Conference to draft their Amended Eabbit Bill of course 

 gratuitously. I return to Sydney to-day." We could not have a better draftsman than Mr. Alexander 

 Oliver, and I am sure you will agree with mo it is extremely Idnd of him. You will understand of course 

 that whatever I eay to-day I do not want to dictate at all. I simply want to express some views to which 

 you will pay that consideration to which they are entitled : and if you differ from those views, express 

 your opinion upon them, and then we may after all be able to come to some decision which will mean 

 harmony. Now I notice you have passed a resolution placing the administration of the Eabbit Bill in the 

 hands of the Stock and Pastures Protection Board. The difficulty I had in drafting the Eabbit Bill of 1895 

 was to avoid having cumbersome and expensive machinery. I saw that if we had to put the country to 

 the expense of having a separate Eabbit Board elected that it would perhaps entail expenditure that 



reasonably 



