42 QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. [1 Suny, 1901. ~ 
be added to the value of theland. Therefore, apparently, the State has double 
the security of the advance. hat is, it will allow for a depreciation of 50 per 
cent., and then the State comes out without being a loser. That is the_ 
principle ; and knowing, as we all do, the uncertainty of business, knowing 
that sugar has fallen 70 per cent. in value, within my own memory, a Govern- 
ment must consider the question of stability and security to those whom it 
represents. There is a danger, too, that should a Government take upon itself 
the function of money-lender it will be suspected, justly or unjustly, by its” 
enemies at least, of being actuated more or less by political considerations in 
its modes of granting pecuniary concessions. No matter how upright a Minister’ 
may be, no matter how anxious he is to do the right thing, it is possible that he 
would be accused of refusing loans, not because the security was bad, but 
because the borrower was a political opponent ; and no Minister would care to_ 
be iu so invidious a position. So it is necessary there should be some buffer which — 
shall be placed between the Parliament which authorises the loans and those— 
who have to receive them. There must be somebody who is outside, and who 
is admitted to be impartial, and whose tenure of office cannot be disturbed. 
First, there is the security and the administration placed outside State control, | 
and I think with these safeguards something can be done. I can assure you | 
that all measures the Legislature bring in upon this subject will be carefully 
studied, and I have reason to hope that, in accordance with the common practice, — 
during the next session a Bill upon these lines, which lines appear to be generall 
approved of, will be introduced, and, if I have anything to do with it, it will be — 
presented in as finished a form as possible. 
Mr. J. E. Dean moved, and Mr. J. H. Maynarp seconded, that Mr. 
Moffat’s paper be referred to the Committee of Resolutions.—Carried. 
NUT GRASS. 
On the motion of Mr. Lesrre G. Corrts, it was resolved that the subject — 
for discussion on the business-sheet, “The Government to be asked to offer a 
reward for the eradication of nut grass,” be referred to the Committee of | 
Resolutions. 
THIRD SESSION. 
WEDNESDAY, 121n June, 1901, 2°15 P.M. 
A letter was read from Mr. George Searle, of Toowoomba, offering to read — 
a paper which he had brought to the Conference, but which was not included in — 
the programme. | 
The CyarrMan stated that it had evidently been the practice to refuse all 
papers that were not included in the programme, and he did not see how it — 
would be practicable to depart from itin the present case. In fact, it would be — 
hard to find time for the reading and discussion of all the papers already 
scheduled. It was, therefore, regretted that Mr. Searle’s paper could not be 
accepted. | 
Mr. F. W. Psex, of the Logan Farming and Industrial Association, — 
Beenleigh, then read his paper on— 
A QUEENSLAND CHAMBER OF AGRICULTURE, OR A UNITED ! 
AGRICULTURAL SOCIETIES ASSOCIATION. 
In introducing this important question to this Conference I may be permitted to 
explain the reasons for bringing this matter forward. In the first place, it has been 
noticed that at every Conference that has been held there have been matters brought 
forward of very great importance for discussion, and resolutions haye been passed, 
recommending to the consideration of the Government or the Department of 
Agriculture certain reforms or legislation required to deal with the various matters — 
that had been considered and passed by resolution at these annual Agricultural 
Conferences. And there is no doubt, as members, we went away satisfied that some 
good would result and legislation follow in the near future ; but, alas! in the majority 
