CHAPTER VII. 



THE BERRY INFLUENCE, 1875-1882. 



BEFORE resuming the Parliamentary narrative, it is desirable to 

 epitomise the various steps in connection with payment of members, 

 the culminating discussion of which led to those semi-revolutionary 

 proceedings that so startled the community in 1877. 



The propriety of reimbursing members the expenses incurred 

 in their attendance on Parliament, as it was modestly phrased, very 

 early found advocates. The disingenuousness of the phraseology, 

 however, was soon exposed, when in February, 1862, a private 

 member proposed that such "reimbursement" should be limited 

 to members whose domicile lay outside of Melbourne and suburbs, 

 and that it should in no case exceed 150 per annum. This was 

 taken as an affront, for members had already begun to demand a 

 living wage and uniform treatment, wherever domiciled. In the 

 first Bill sent to the Council they appraised their services at 300 a 

 year, and eliminated the members of the Upper House, where the 

 measure was rejected without a dissentient voice. In 1865 the 

 McCulloch Ministry, to placate Opposition, sent up a Bill including 

 payment to members of the Council, but it shared the fate of its 

 predecessor. Two years later, when the fight over the Darling 

 grant was at its hottest, the Assembly tried another Bill, this time 

 revaluing their services and fixing the solatium at 500. Mr. 

 Higinbotham's was almost the sole voice raised against this attempt. 

 He had unwillingly become a convert to a payment covering neces- 

 sary expenses, and he believed 300 a year ample for that purpose. 

 The contention that working men ought to be represented by their 

 own class in Parliament was not altogether acceptable to him, but 

 he held a strong opinion that payment of members would conduce 



to the stability of Government, and avert that continuously recurring 



180 



