53 



On the question, being put, the CHAIRMAN declared it carried that 250 should be inserted in the 

 motion instead of 200. He said that the resolution would then read as under: " That, for the purposes 

 of this Bill, tlis constitution of the Stock and Pastures Boards be altered so as to provide for (L) the 

 appointment of a member by the Governor ; (2) that three members be elected under the Stock and 

 Pastures Act as at present provided, with a minimum voting power of ten head of large stock ; (3) that 

 five members be elected under the Diseases in Sheep Act as at present provided, with a minimum voting 

 power of 250 head of sheep." 



Mr. BACON (Brewarrina) said he would also point out the necessity of stating some minimum 

 amount which would be collected on agricultural lands. It might possibly happen that 1,000 acres 

 would be rated at a sheep to 5 acres and the owner would only have to pay on 200 sheep ; he would 

 suggest that in no instance should there be a collection on less than 250 sheep. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) said that that would be dealt with later on. 



Mr. OAKDEN (Cobar) pointed out that they had previously passed a resolution that public lands 

 should be assessed as having a certain carrying capacity, and, under this assessment, the Crown would 

 have the right to vote. He would propose that as under the naw clause which was proposed the 

 Government would have the right to nominate a representative, they should have no power to vote for 

 the other members of the Board. 



Mr. BROOKE (Boggabri) then asked whether, if this amendment were carried, it would destroy his 

 motion on the notice paper for the recommittal of the clause. 



The CHAIRMAN then said that if the Conference carried this amendment, he anticipated that they 

 would vote against Mr. Brooke's motion for recommittal. Ho would impress upon all the members that 

 the vote he was about to take would really finally settle who was to administer the Rabbit Act. He 

 stated that the Honorable Rupert Carington's amendment was to add the following to clause 5 : 



(1.) The appointment of a member by the Governor. 



(2.) That three members be elected under the Pastures and Stock Act, as at present provided, with 



a minimum voting power of ten head of large stock. 

 (3.) That five members be elected under the Diseases in Sheep Act, as at present provided, with a 



minimum power of 250 head of sheep. 



He then put the question to the Conference whether this addition should be made to the new clause 5, 

 and it was carried by a majority of 23 votes to 5. 



The CHAIRMAN then said that the next thing they had before them was the question of assessing 

 the cultivated lauds, and their voting power. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) said that as he was responsible for the vote that these lands should be 

 estimated on the basis of one sheep to 5 acres, he would say that they should have a vote equal to the 

 number of sheep at which they were rated, with a minimum of 250 sheep. 



On the suggestion of the Chairman, Mr. Alison altered his resolution to read, " that where no 

 returns are sent in, occupiers of cultivated land shall have the right to vote for the constitution of the 

 Pastures and Stock Boards, the voting power to be proportionate to the number of sheep at which their 

 lauds are assessed, the minimum number of sheep qualifying for a vote to be 250, and that as the 

 Government have the right to nominate a member on the Board, they shall not have any voting power for 

 the other members. 



Mr. BACON (Brewarrina) seconded the motion. 



Mr. FLANAGAN (Gunbar) said that he would point out that a man with 320 acres would be assessed 

 at 65 sheep, but he must pay at the minimum of 250 sheep. 



Mr. LESLIE (Forbes) said he would ask Mr. Alison if he would strike out the word "no." He 

 contended that under the Pastures and Stock Act everyone had to make a return, and, consequently, "no" 

 was misleading. 



Mr. BACON (Brewarrina) said that if the previous assessment of a sheep to 5 acres were altered to 

 a sheep to 1 acre it would meet Mr. Flanagan's wants. 



Mr. VANSTON (Goodooga) moved that the minimum be reduced from 250 to 100. 



Mr. FLANAGAN (Gunbar) said he would second it. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) rose to a point of order. A motion had just been passed unanimously 

 or practically unanimously, that the minimum should be 250 sheep. It was purely wasting time to go back 

 again. 



Mr. VANSTON (Goodooga) said he understood that Mr. Brown seconded the Honorable Rupert 

 Carington's motion with the right of amendment afterwards. 



The Honorable RUPERT CAEINGTON (Jerilderie) said that he would move that it be 200 sheep. 



Mr. BROWN seconded. 



Mr. WILKES (Broken Hill) moved a further amendment that it be one sheep or one head of largo 

 stock, and let there be one man one vote. 



Mr. WILKES' (Broken Hill) amendment lapsed for the want of a seconder. 



Mr. ALISON (Canonbar) said that he did not want to stop discussion, but they had already taken a 

 vote as to the minimum, the decision being for 250. 



The CHAIRMAN said that it had been a compromise, and he had allowed Mr. Brown to reserve the 

 right to take a vote afterwards as to the 200 minimum. 



Mr. WILKES (Broken Hill) said that he would oppose the resolution reducing the minimum to 200. 

 A man with 2,000 sheep would have four votes. Against what ? Every man that owned an acre of land, 

 every man who owned ten head of large stock, no matter whether he was a bullock driver or what he was. 

 They should have some reason in this matter. There had been a lot of clap trap about the big man and 

 the small man. The big man should not be burked. He claimed to be as liberal as any of them, but he 

 thought they were going much too far. 



MR. CUMMING (Hillston) said the whole thing was in a nutshell. They all agreed that there should 

 be a lower franchise. Two hundred and fifty was as near as they could get it, and they must leave it then 

 to Parliament. They could all see from the large numbers in that Conference that they could do very 

 well with a very much smaller number, and there was no need to add to the Boards. 



Mr. GORMAN (Berrigan) confessed that he was a little bit mixed as to how they were getting on. 

 He did not hold with Mr. Wilkes that this was a question of small men versus big. There were big men 

 in the Conference, and they were able to look after themselves. The small man did not want to outvote 

 the big men at all. If the minimum were fixed to 250, there were a number of small men who would not 



be 



