Mr. T. BROWN (Budgerabong) said it would be wise to let it stand as it was. It was often 

 necessary in order to enable it to be found out whether correct returns had been furnished. If the Board 

 did not think it necessary to use the power they would not call it into requisition. It would be wise to 

 leave it to the Board, and let them exercise the powers when they might and how they might. 



The CHAIRMAN explained that section 4 was unnecessary, as the Conference had decided the 

 carrying capacity, and this was only in connection with the ascertaining of the carrying capacity. 



Mr. FLANAGAN'S amendment was put to the Conference, the voting being Ayes, 18 ; Noes, 15. 



The vote was taken again, as some of the members said they did not understand the vote they 

 gave. The result was Aye?, 17 ; Noes, 18 ; and Mr. Flanagan's amendment was declared lost. 



Mr. ALISON'S original proposition was then put and carried by 18 votes to 10. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) moved, " All private owners or lessees who may make no returns, or who 

 shall make what in the opinion of the Board arc misleading or inadequate returns, may be summoned 

 before the Board, and the Board shall have the power to rate or increase their returns at a rate not 

 exceeding one sheep to three acres." This should be inserted after subsection D of section 3 of clause 12. 

 Ho said this was designed to prevent extensive defalcations. There were properties on which there were 

 no stock, and none of the land was cultivated. In that case they would have nothing to pay. He 

 proposed that they should have to pay something. He would move that the Boards should have the 

 power to bring the owners of unstocked runs before them and assess them on a fair and reasonable basis. 



Mr. FLANAGAN (Gunbar) said he would second Mr. Alison's proposal. 



Mr. WILKKS (Broken Hill) explained that under the Diseases in Sheep Act power was given for that. 



Mr. ATKINSON asked leave to add to the resolution, " that the Board may authorise any persrm to 

 inspect such holding." 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) accepted the addition. 



Mr. LITTLE (Bullock Creek) said that under this motion any person who was carrying a sheep to 

 the acre could misrepresent the return purposely, and then on coming before the Board would be rated at 

 one sheep to three acres. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) pointed out that a man could be punished for that. 



Mr. McCoLLOUGit (Deniliquiu) said the Inspector of Stock had the power to inspect the receipts 

 from any run that he thought had furnished false returns. 



Mr. LAURENCE (Balranald) asked Mr. Alison to alter his resolution so that the lands would be 

 assessed at the same rate as the adjacent lands. 



Mr. T. BROWN, M.P. (Budgerabong), said that Mr. Alison's motion would mean that the Board was 

 constituted a Court with legal jurisdiction. He would not go to that length, for the Court would be 

 constituted the prosecutor and the judge. He thought the best way would be to apply the penalties that 

 obtained under the other Acts to this Babbit Act, and if it were proposed to make the Stock Board a 

 Court, and put them in the position of being the prosecutors in any legal action taken, and making them 

 the Court to determine the differences between them and the stock owners, he would not support it. 



Mr. TREFLE (Temora) agreed with what Mr. Brown had said. He thought Mr. Alison had made 

 a mistake. It was common in all Acts that returns were wanted, and penalties were fixed for false 

 returns. They could not get away from that. 



Mr. CAMKIION (Ivanhoe) said he would support Mr. Alison, except in denning the powers of the 

 Board in assessing the carrying capacity. He thought the resolution would be better if he left Iho 

 Board to decide what was really the carrying capacity of the country. AVith that exception he would 

 then be inclined to support the resolution. 



Mr. ATKINSON said he thought that the difficulty that Mr. Brown had suggested might be got over 

 if the Government nominee were the Chairman, and these cases were heard by the Chairman alone. 



Mr. BOLTON (Wagga) said with respect to the powers being under the Stock Act, if such a case 

 arose where a wrong return had been made, they had to make an appeal from that and to get a redress 

 from the Police Court. 



Mr. FREEMAN suggested that Mr. Alison should alter his motion to read, " Adequate returns shall 

 be put before the Board in a prescribed manner"; then the mode of procedure could be fixed by the 

 regulations. 



Mr. GARDEN (Cobar) was not aware of any case of hardship having arisen under the other Act. 

 It has been in force for many years. In clause 6 in the Act of 1881, a provision regarding the power of 

 the Board for levying assessment said, " On stock runs on each district they shall make assessment not 

 exceeding in the aggregate twice the rents payable to the Crown." He would point out to the Conference 

 what he thought had perhaps escaped their notice. This power had been in the hands of the Pastures 

 and Stock Board for many years. It did not apply to public land, but applied to unstocked countries 

 under lease. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) said he would add " with the rights of appeal to the Court of Petty 

 Sessions." 



Mr. ATKINSON wished to move that the Board might authorise any person to inspect a holding. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) said he would accept that as his motion. He did not wish to have two 

 amendments. 



Mr. Boss (Hume) said he could not see his way clear to support Mr. Alison in the resolution. 

 For instance, a person might give a false return. His property might be able to carry 40,000 sheep, and 

 the return would be for 20,000, and he would be rated at one sheep for three acres in accordance with 

 these resolutions. In his district there was a lot of land that would carry a sheep and a half to an acre. 

 The thing would therefore be absurd. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) was quite willing to meet Mr. Boss' views, and to say a aheep to the acre. 

 He wanted to prevent any chance of the Board's being able to act harshly, and that was the reason he 

 had said one sheep to 3 acres. He would sooner see a man get off than allow a Board to act harshly. 



Mr. WrLKES (Broken Hill) supported Mr. Alison's resolution. He was fully aware th.it what Mr. 

 Alison had said was correct. It would be a very necessary provision. There had been some objection 

 taken to the Pastures and Stock Boards dealing with appeals. If it were left to the Land Board they 

 might not get a Land Board meeting within twelve months. Many men in his district would have to go 

 120 miles to get to the Land Board meeting. If they had it at the Petty Sessions this delay would be 

 done away with. Undoubtedly they did want some check. Powers had been given in the Diseases in 



Sheep 



