federal electors; but this found no favour, and was negatived. Mr. W. M. Hughes (a labour member) moved an amendment to provide that the several colonies, instead of being represented equally in the Convention, should be represented in proportion to population; but with a maximum of ten and a minimum of five representatives. This caused considerable debate; it being argued on the one side that the Convention could not represent the people of Australia fairly unless it represented them proportionately, and pointed out on the other that the Convention did not purport to represent the people of Australia, but only the peoples of the colonies gathered together to confer on equal terms. Ultimately the amendment was negatived on division by 45 votes to 26, the minority consisting for the most part of labour members. On the question of the acceptance of the Ĉonstitution by a majority of the voters, it was argued that there ought to be some provision to prevent the Bill being accepted if the number of votes polled was not large enough to be representative. An amendment requiring a total poll of one-third of the electors was defeated by 36 votes to 17; another requiring a total poll of onefourth of the electors was defeated by 34 votes to 14; but subsequently Mr. Reid agreed to an amendment requiring 50,000 affirmative

votes.

On 11th December, the Bill was debated in the Legislative Council. Considerable opposition was manifested, but no division was taken on the Bill, which was passed with unimportant amendments, and received the royal assent on 23rd December.

There can be no doubt that the Enabling Bill would have encountered more serious opposition in both Houses had the opponents of Federation realized the importance of the step that was being taken. They misjudged the vitality of the movement, and did not anticipate the stimulating effect of placing it on a popular basis. They expected that the new Convention, if it ever met, would be as futile as the last had apparently been; and they trusted, in the last resort, to be able to secure the rejection of any Constitution which did not satisfy what they believed would be the demands of New South Wales. They thought that Federation could be trifled with again as it had been in the past; and did not foresee the irresistible momentum which the federal cause would gather, or the completeness with which it was about to sweep away minor issues, and leap to the front as the first great practical question of Australian politics.

New South Wales having redeemed her pledge and led the way, other colonies were not slow to follow. South Australia, under Mr. Kingston's leadership, took action as soon as it was clear that New South Wales was in earnest, and dealt with the Enabling Bill so promptly that it became law on 20th December-three days in advance of the mother colony. The only substantial variation in the South Australian Bill was that no minimum vote was required for the acceptance of the Constitution. The Tasmanian Bill, introduced by Sir Edward Braddon, came next, and was passed on 10th January, 1896. It required for acceptance of the Constitution a minimum. affirmative vote of 6000-representing about the same proportion of voters as the New South Wales minimum. In Victoria, an Enabling

Act had been introduced by Sir George Turner in December, and had passed the Assembly almost without opposition, the division on the second reading being 71 to 4. In the Council an amendment was made which the Assembly regarded as infringing its money powers, and which resulted in a temporary deadlock. In February, however, a second Bill was introduced, which became law on 7th March, 1896. It required a minimum affirmative vote of 50,000.

Queensland and Western Australia were now being waited for. But Sir Hugh Nelson, the Queensland Premier, had meanwhile discovered difficulties in the way of passing a Bill in the form agreed upon. Queensland was tripartite in interest, the North and the Centre being arrayed against the South in their demand to be erected into separate colonies. This question of separation became interwoven with the question of Federation. The North and the Centre looked forward to Federation, not only for its own sake, but also as a step towards subdivision; whilst Brisbane and the South feared that their trade would suffer from open competition with New South Wales and its metropolis. Each of the three divisions preferred to have separate representation in the Convention rather than to trust to the chances. of a single electorate. Moreover, the Government and a large section of the Parliament favoured Parliamentary rather than direct election. Sir Hugh Nelson accordingly provided in his Bill that the Queensland representatives should be elected by the members of the Legislative Assembly, grouped according to the three great districts. The Premiers of the four colonies which had substantially adopted the model Bill joined in a remonstrance against this departure from the Hobart understanding; but without avail. Sir Hugh Nelson proceeded with the Bill, but somewhat half-heartedly, without committing himself to the whole of the process, and reserving to the Parliament the right to send the Constitution to the people or not, as it pleased. He made no profession of being an ardent federalist, but argued that it could do no harm to have a voice in framing the Constitution, which they would afterwards be free to accept or reject. On the motion for the second reading, Mr. G. S. Curtis moved an amendment affirming that no Enabling Bill would be acceptable which did not provide for the election of representatives by direct popular vote. This was negatived by 36 votes to 26, and the Bill passed the Assembly in July, 1896. But in the Council it was not unnaturally claimed that if the election was to be Parliamentary, both Houses should take part in it; and accordingly the Bill was returned to the Assembly amended to that effect. The Assembly, however, denied the representative character of a nominee House. The difference between the Houses proved irreconcilable; and in November-though Mr. Reid journeyed to Brisbane to assist a settlement-the Bill was laid aside.

Meanwhile Western Australia had decided to fall partially into line with the movement, and had on 27th October, 1896, passed an Enabling Act, which, however, differed in important respects from the others. In the first place, the federal representatives of that colony were to be chosen, not by the people, but by both Houses of Parliament sitting together. And in the next place, the Constitution as framed by the Convention was only to be submitted to the people "if approved by

Parliament." The Parliament of Western Australia, therefore, only gave a conditional adherence to the Enabling process, reserving to itself the right to draw back before the final stage.

THE BATHURST CONVENTION.-A symptom of awakening public interest, and at the same time a means of stimulating that interest, was afforded in November, 1896, by a " People's Federal Convention" held at Bathurst-an unofficial assemblage to which delegates were invited from leagues and organizations of all kinds throughout Australia. The Convention numbered nearly 200 representatives, mostly from New South Wales, but including several from other colonies. Its aim was both educative and deliberative; and its chief work took the form of a detailed discussion of the Commonwealth Bill of 1891. Federation was just then, for the first time, a question in which the people could take a practical and responsible interest, because on the statute book of four colonies were Acts requiring the people first to elect representatives to frame a Constitution, and then to say "Yes" or "No" to the adoption of that Constitution. The Bathurst Convention was opportune; its proceedings were reported at length by the press, and followed with interest throughout Australia. The debates not only showed a general appreciation of the federal spirit, but contributed some really valuable suggestions-particularly inrespect of the difficult question of finance. But perhaps the Convention did best service in helping to dissipate the atmosphere of suspicion which, in the minds of a section of the people, had always hung round the Commonwealth Bill. Vague impressions were abroad. that the Bill was a compound of "Toryism," "Imperialism,” “Militarism," and other unpopular qualities; but the Bathurst Convention, though reflecting every shade of political and social belief, failed to find these defects. The fact that the Commonwealth Bill was by general consent taken as the basis of discussion, and that it came so well out of the ordeal, helped to establish its position as a draft Constitution which must be the basis of all future deliberations.

THE CONVENTION ELECTIONS.-It was decided to wait no longer for Queensland; and 4th March, 1897, was fixed as the date for the election of federal representatives of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, and Tasmania. In each colony the election was preceded by a campaign; though, owing to the large size of the constituencies-each colony being one electorate for the purpose-no thorough canvass was possible, and printed addresses largely took the place of speeches.

In New South Wales the 10 seats were contested by 49 candidates. First there were a number of public men of various political faiths and constitutional views, but who may all be classed as federalists. Cardinal Moran, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, was among the candidates. Then there were the "Labour Ten,” a bunch chosen by the Political Labour League of New South Wales. They insisted on a Federal Legislature of one chamber, elected on a population basis; a federal franchise giving "one man one vote;" payment of members of the Federal Parliament; elective Ministers; the Initiative and the Referendum. On these terms they were prepared to give the Federal Parliament large powers; but they announced that "on any

other conditions we are opposed to Federation." There was also a bunch of five gentlemen nominated by the "Patriotic League of New South Wales," whose patriotism was avowedly provincial, and who styled themselves "Prudent Federalists." They wished each colony to retain its provincial tariff, and objected to the Federal Government having any taxing powers, except by way of a levy on the States. The list was filled up by a few comparatively unknown candidates, of little representative importance.

The election was in no sense a party fight; and although some organizations put forward "tickets," the candidates were mostly voted for on their public reputations. The result was a triumph for the federalists, the ten representatives being elected in the following order Mr. Edmund Barton, Q.C.; Hon. G. H. Reid, M.L.A. (Premier); Hon. J. H. Carruthers, M.L.A. (Minister for Lands); Mr. W. McMillan, M.L.A. (ex-Treasurer); Mr. W. J. Lyne, M.L.A. (Leader of Opposition); Hon. J. N. Brunker, M.L.A. (Chief Secretary); Hon. R. E. O'Connor, Q.C., M.L.C.; Hon. Sir J. P. Abbott, K.C.M.G. (Speaker); Mr. J. T. Walker; Mr. B. R. Wise (ex-AttorneyGeneral).

Each voter had to vote for 10 candidates; and the number of those who recorded their votes was 139,850, out of a total of some 260,000 electors-a poll not quite up to the usual standard of a general election, but very satisfactory considering the unusual conditions of the contest. Mr. Barton headed the poll with a magnificent vote of nearly 100,000, and the lowest elected candidate secured some 53,000 votes. The Labour Party, with their impossible programme, were very low in the list; though their leader, Mr. J. S. T. McGowen, polled some 40,000 votes, and would doubtless have been higher but for the bold attempt of his "bunch" to capture the Convention. The "Prudent Federalists were nowhere. But though all the selected candidates were federalists, it cannot be said that the election disclosed any definite "mandate" as to constitutional principles.

In Victoria 29 candidates were nominated. The voting, on the whole, was more on party lines than in New South Wales-the "tickets" of the Argus and the Age, the two daily morning newspapers of Melbourne, being voted extensively; yet the polling was not nearly so heavy-votes being recorded by only 99,108 electors out of some 238,000 on the rolls. The ten representatives were elected in the following order :-Hon. Sir George Turner, K.C.M.G., M.L.A. (Premier); Dr. John Quick (ex-M.L.A.); Hon. Alfred Deakin, M.L.A. (ex-Minister); Hon. A. J. Peacock, M.L.A. (Chief Secretary); Hon. I. A. Isaacs, M.L.A. (Attorney-General); Mr. W. A. Trenwith, M.L.A.; Hon. Sir Graham Berry, K.C.M.G. (Speaker); Hon. Simon Fraser, M.L.C.; Hon. Sir William A. Zeal, K.C.M.G. (President Legislative Council); Mr. H. B. Higgins, M.L.A.

In South Australia there were 33 candidates. The elected representatives were:-Hon. C. C. Kingston, Q.C., M.L.A. (Premier); Hon. F. W. Holder, M.L.A. (Treasurer); Hon. J. A. Cockburn, M.L.A. (Minister for Education); Hon. Sir R. C. Baker, K.C.M.G. (President Legislative Council); Hon. J. H. Gordon, M.L.C.; Mr. J. H. Symon, Q.C. (ex-Attorney-General); Hon. Sir John W. Downer, Q.C.,

K.C.M.G., M.L.A. (ex-Premier); Mr. P. McM. Glynn; Hon. J. H. Howe, M.L.A. (ex-Minister); Mr. V. L. Solomon, M.L.A.

In Tasmania there were 32 candidates; and owing to the comparatively small area of the colony a larger proportion of the electors than elsewhere could be reached by public meetings a circumstance which contributed much to the federal education of the people. The elected representatives were:-Hon. Sir Philip O. Fysh, K.C.M.G., M.H.A. (Treasurer); Hon. Sir Edward N. C. Braddon, K.C.M.G., M.H.A. (Premier); Hon. Henry Dobson, M.H.A. (ex-Premier); Hon. John Henry, M.H.A. (ex-Treasurer); Hon. N. E. Lewis, M.H.A. (exAttorney-General); Hon. Nicholas J. Brown, M.H.A. (Speaker); Hon. C. H. Grant, M.L.C.; Hon. Adye Douglas (President Legislative Council); Hon. William Moore, M.L.C. (Chief Secretary); Mr. M. J. Clarke, M.H.A.

The first meeting of the Convention was fixed for 22nd March; and on 12th March, almost at the last moment, the West Australian Parliament amended its Enabling Act, so as to allow the more speedy selection of the representatives of that colony. Next day the polling took place, the members of both Houses electing the following representatives-Hon. Sir John Forrest, K.C.M.G., M.L.A. (Premier); Hon. Sir James G. Lee-Steere (Speaker); Mr. George Leake, M.L.A. (Leader of Opposition); Hon. F. H. Piesse, M.L.A. (Commissioner of Railways); Hon. J. W. Hackett, M.L.C.; Mr. W. T. Loton, M.L.A. ; Mr. W. H. James, M.L.A.; Mr. A. Y. Hassell, M.L.A.; Mr. R. F. Sholl, M.L.A.; Hon. J. H. Taylor, M.L.C.

(10) ADELAIDE SESSION OF THE CONVENTION, 1897.

The first meeting of the Convention took place at Adelaide on 22nd March, 1897; though the West Australian representatives did not arrive till four days later. Before the Convention opened, each delegation met to consult, and then all the members held a private. caucus for the preliminary discussion of methods of procedure. The representatives met at noon in the House of Assembly Chamber, when the Clerk of the Parliaments (Mr. E. G. Blackmore) read the proclamation convening the Convention, and the representatives present signed the roll. Mr. Kingston, as Premier of the colony in which the Convention was held, was appointed President, and Mr. E. G. Blackmore Clerk of the Convention.

The first thing to decide was whether the Convention should openly take the Bill of 1891 for its basis, and work upon that, or should proceed to originate a new Constitution. It leaked out that the caucus had decided to begin by discussing general resolutions, and then appoint a Committee to draft a Bill; but the matter was discussed again in Convention. Each plan had its advantages, and opinion was divided. It was obvious that any new draft would borrow largely from the old, and some of the members thought it merely affectation, as well as waste of time, to throw aside a Bill which admittedly would make an excellent foundation. But the argument