Public Meeting to protest against the Coercion Bill.

*THE WORKER*

Brisbane September 15, 1894

THE COERCION BILL.

MEETING IN CENTENNIAL HALL.

SPEECHES BY SIR CHARLES LILLEY AND OTHERS.

CONTRARY RESOLUTIONS PASSED.

[REPRINTED FROM BRISBANE “COURIER.”]

A public meeting “to protest against the Coercion Bill” was held in the Centennial Hall, Adelaide street, last night. The attendance was large, seating and standing room being wholly occupied. The chair was taken by the Hon. W. Brookes, M.L.C., and he was accompanied to the platform by Messrs. Drake, Jackson, Browne, Rawlings, Fisher, Kerr, Cross, Glassey, King, Turley, Dunsford, Reid, Dawson, M'Donald and Hardacre, M.L.A., Higgs, Seymour (WORKER) A. Hinchcliffe, D. R. M'Connel, Max. D. King, W. Nelson, A. M. Keartland, F. M'Donnell and others, besides a number of ladies, including Lady Lilley and Miss Lilley.

The Hon. W. Brookes, M.L.C. said he was greatly pleased at that large meeting. It was an important meeting, and it was a very necessary meeting, because it was a meeting called to give the Government intimation that what they were doing was not satisfactory to the public – (hear,hear) – and he thought a great opportunity would have been lost if that night had been allowed to go by without protest against the scrambling legislation which was going on in the Assembly. Queensland had suffered enough in times gone by from impetuous legislation, and he thought that the proposal, or the way the proposal was made, to pass the bill under consideration was discreditable to the present Administration. (Cheers.) He saw no reason for the violent hurry, and the desire of the Government to take every opportunity – now so frequently taken – to suspend the Standing Orders was not a sign of political ability. (Cheers.) He trusted that the present meeting would, at all events, have the effect of making the Government reconsider their ways. The Government seemed – and it was very important to bear that in mind – to have got into their heads that the public would allow them to do whatever they liked. That feeling ought to be nipped in the bud, but he thought the meeting would do more than that; he hoped and trusted it would lay the axe at the root of the tree. (Cheers.)

Mr. D. R. M'Connel read the following telegram received from Longreach: “Western people highly indignant: against Government Coercion Act. Consider likely to cause bloodshed. Only a handful of men committing outrages. Winton statement re bodies of armed men parading bush utterly false and ridiculous. Unionists most desirous to uphold law. Many innocent men expect arrest under Star Chamber process for sympathy with unions. Government also condemned for sending black-trackers amongst high-minded white men; would not dare to treat mining districts thus. If civil revolt, Government wholly responsible. Will hold meeting. - C. B. Fitzgerald.” He also read a letter from the Rev. W. Whale, which was as follows; “I regret that I cannot possibly be at the meeting tonight. In common with many others who have seen the evils of arbitrary laws in the old world, I deeply regret that the Government of Queensland should aim at possessing such exceptional powers as are being asked for. The world will get an impression concerning the colony which may intensify the present want of confidence. I do not believe in such methods on either side, and I trust the citizens of Queensland will all favour the milder rather than the sterner forms of government. If the Government had failed in an honest effort at mediator-ship, it would have been different.” (Cheers.)

At a later period of the evening the following telegram, received from Longreach, was read: “Resolution condemning Coercion Bill carried unanimously by public meeting; over 1000 persons present.”

Sir Charles Lilly was received with prolonged cheers. When these had ceased, he said they were not there that evening as shearers, nor as members of an Opposition, and they were not there as supporters of the Government. (Applause.) They were there as citizens, and although deeply interested in passing events, they were by no means committed to either side. They would all regret that they had lived to see the introduction of such an iniquitous Act. (Applause.) He had to move:

That this meeting of the citizens of Brisbane protests against the Coercion Act submitted to Parliament by the Government under the title of the “Peace Preservation Bill,” because – (1) it would be powerless to gain its stated object, the preservation of peace; and (2) it would be a tyrannical infringement of the liberty of the citizens of this colony, by giving the Government an arbitrary power of imprisonment and by establishing a system of secret tribunals.

He had always held it to be a sound rule that power should rule that power should be very hesitatingly confided to any man in the world - [ A Voice: “To Dozer.”] - and especially arbitrary and uncontrolled power. It was just such a power this so – called Peace Preservation Bill proposed to give to the Government of the colony. He would give that power to no man, however faithful an administrator, and his long experience of human nature led him to believe that there was nothing so liable to corrupt a man as to allow him to know that he had uncontrolled authority. It had never been the policy of our country to give such authority to any man. Any man might try to get it by force, but for centuries we had resented such endeavours to usurp our liberty, and we had won back our rights as citizens. (Hear, hear.) If the Government succeeded in passing this bill through the Assembly and the Upper House, the distrust aroused not only in the colony but outside would defeat the ends of the bill, or laws, as it would then be, and would arouse a feeling of resentment and a loss of confidence in our country which would be seriously against the prospect of the colony rising from the present depression, and would sweep away the Government. The bill really proposed to give uncontrolled authority to the Government of this colony, which they know meant Messrs, Nelson, Tozer, Byrnes and Company.

The recital or preface to the Peace Preservation Bill put forth the following as the only excuse for its introduction: “Whereas grave disturbances have occurred.” If that went down to posterity, he took leave to say it was a fib. They had had troubles in Queensland before. When he was Attorney General they had “Bread riots,” and the men cried “Bread or Blood.” [Mr. Glassey: “Were there any Glasseys then?”] They had no occasion then to resort to extraordinary power. They read the Riot Act. stones were thrown thick and fast, but the police behaved well. There had been no occasion “to fire, and fire with effect.” There were men going about committing crimes; but he held that the ordinary laws when properly administered had brought men to justice and restored peace. Two months only had elapsed since the crimes commenced in the West, yet Parliament wanted them to grant this extraordinary power more extraordinary than had yet been pointed out. They were told that crimes were likely to recur. If they did it would be the policy of the Government to ask for extraordinary power, but certainly not such authority as was asked for in the bill. It was not true that the law had yet been found insufficient. The inability of the police to bring the offenders in the West to justice had doubtless, crimes from the speedy fight of the men and they lying in secret for a time. If we, as the people of Queensland, granted such arbitrary and unstinted authority to such men as we have in power it would be monstrous.

The authority given to the Government in the first instance was a power to arrest and detain persons within certain districts which were to be called proclaimed districts. The most extraordinary part of the bill was that there was no provision that a district should really be disturbed, or a district in which crime was undetected. In fact, at any moment in any part of Queensland, or over the whole of Queensland, the Government might proclaim the Act in force, and the Executive would have the authority at any time to arrest and detain or imprison for six months any person they liked, or rather, someone whom they disliked. It might be their friend Mr. Glassey, or their friend Charles Lilley; or, still more, the whole seventeen members of the Labour Party; and if they could sweep in the whole of the Opposition besides they would have what he believed was called in vulgar classics, a high old time (Cheers.) An event happened in Brisbane that day which might throw a little light on the matter. A man was brought up before the the Police Magistrate who had in his possession a Government revolver and what was called a threatening letter. What was in the letter did not appear from the newspaper. He was charged with stealing a Government revolver, and he thought, with being drunk. He was acquitted of stealing the Government revolver, and he was required to enter into a bond that he would keep the peace for three months.

That was the ordinary law. They should have kept that man until after the passing of the Act. If Ministers could pass the Act next day through committee and through both Houses of Parliament, what might happen. They might on the strength of that one case alone have Brisbane declared to be arrested on what the Government were pleased to term reasonable suspicion. (Laughter.) They knew how easy it was to suspect a man on the other side. He suspected the present Government of being thieves – (cheers) – allied with men who had misappropriated the public funds of the colony – (renewed cheers) – but they had never given the people the opportunity of proving it. [Mr. Glassey; “Absolutely correct.”) It would not be difficult for the Government to suspect him (Sir Charles Lilley), and probably they did suspect him. He believed they very grievously suspected that if he got his friends into power the time would not be so comfortable for themselves. He undertook to say , without the least disrespect to that eminent body, the Police Force of any country in the world, that if he were in authority and wanted a reasonable suspicion, and winked at one of the “bobbies,” it would not be long before there was a reasonable suspicion in his mind – (laughter) – as there was promotion in the wind.

Next, it would be suspected that somebody had done wrong, and then the consolatory reflection would follow that it would do him a great deal of good, while the other fellow would only get six months' imprisonment. Subsection 3 of section 14 stated that when a warrant was issued it should be conclusive evidence of the contents of such warrant. In fact, the Government might, without any proof whatever, if a district were disturbed, at their own sweet will proclaim a district and bring into

force the onerous and stringent and stringent and tyrannical provisions of the Act. When it was stated that a warrant would be conclusive evidence, it meant that no evidence would be received to contradict it. That was one of the provisions the Government intended to make to bind a whole district of honest, law-abiding, and peaceable people, because even many crimes may have been committed – in this instance only a few crimes – and the police have not the good fortune to detect the criminals. It was a very serious enactment to allow any Government to have in their hand, as the Government would have it during the whole time Parliament was in recess. If the people of the colony were prepared to allow men such power without showing there were disturbances justifying such exceptional legislation, those who were at the meeting that night would at all events have done their duty, and the people who submitted to such proceedings would well deserve the Government they had got.(Cheers.)

As to the 13^th section of the bill, if the Government were content merely to proclaim a district and let the matter rest there, the people would have no reason to complain except that such legislation passing through the Legislative Assembly of the colony was an insult to the manhood of the community. (Cheers.) Under the 13^th section of the bill the most innocent man, the most law-abiding citizen, against whom the Government had incurred a dislike – or any member of the Government – might be detained six months without bail, and the warrant on which he had been arrested by these men on their own responsibility should be conclusive evidence of everything that was done. The person arrested could not offer evidence to show that he had been arrested on unjust suspicion. (Cries of “Shame.”) If the people were prepared to allow such legislation to remain on the Statue – book – if it should get there, which God forbid – then again he said that the people had the Government they richly deserved. (Cheers.) The Habeas Corpus law was of no avail. The person arrested was not to be tried in any court unless the Government allowed him so to be tried. Members of Parliament, even were not free from the provision of the bill. Under it all the members of the Labour Party could be swept in, and they need not be surprised if they found Mr. Glassey in quod for six calendar months from the rising of the House.

Any mythical person's word would be sufficient to move the Government against another person. Nothing had yet occurred to necessitate a departure from the ordinary process of law. Any Government which sought such authority as that provided by the bill was not a friend of the people, and should be treated with suspicion and distrust and those powers refused. The action of the Government showed that it was incompetent and afraid. Men might suffer in health, business, and happiness from the results of such arbitrary powers as the bill gave the Government. There was in the bill a power called the provisional warrant, under which a magistrate could send a man to prison on an inquiry held before himself. This meant the establishment of secret tribunals. This power was not to be intrusted to the ordinary justices of the peace, but tools were to be appointed for the purpose. He hoped that the offer of such an appointment to any man would be declined. (Hear, hear.) A man who would accept it would do himself and his family a dishonour, and would cast a stain on the colony. He hoped no man would be so mean, so tyrannical, or become such a tool as to accept such an office. If a man did accept it, his wish would be that that man might live to be over 100 years of age, to be pointed at with the finger of scorn. (Applause.) If the police were unable to restore peace there existed a difficulty at headquarters; let men be placed in the force who would be able to administer the law with proper authority. In all probability the statute would be perverted to the destruction of the innocent if the police continued in their inability to secure the offenders. Supposing they could find what Sir Thomas M'Ilwraith called “dirty tools” to accept the office of district magistrate, the sworn information that an indictable offence had been committed in a proclaimed district.

Section 9 of the bill provided that the district magistrate holding the inquiry should himself conduct the trial, and not allow anyone to question the witnesses. (“Shame.”) Section 10 provided that so person was to be permitted at the inquiry unless by the permission of the magistrate. If the magistrate happened to be Mr. Parry-Okeden, he might allow some one to be present; but the chances were that the magistrate would not be that gentleman, and no person might then be allowed at the inquiry. [A Voice; Question.”] It was a question. [A Voice; “Oh it doesn't matter; it's S. W. Brooks,”] To the accused there was held out a bribe. If he made an answer in such a way that the district magistrate felt satisfied he was telling the truth, then he would be free from any prosecution for the crime in which he may have taken part. That was a direct bribe to any man who was accused and who might wish to escape by accusing some other person; and he could not be prosecuted except for perjury, as he (the speaker) well knew it was most difficult to prove a case of perjury. Indeed the offence of perjury was one only too easy to commit, but very difficult of detection, and under the law, when detected, by no mean adequately punished. The passing of the Act would create a serious loss of confidence. If people outside the colony thought that Queensland was in such a condition as this legislation led them to believe there would be no investment of capital; but he did not know if that would be a bad thing; there would be such distrust and want of confidence that the institutions which the Government were so anxious to support – the banks and financial institutions – would be involved in another crash. No man would come to Queensland to enter into any form of enterprise if he believed he could be subject to legislation like that proposed at the will of the Government.

Then, of course, every person in the colony would have to suffer. Let them take an object lesson. What had similar legislation produced in Ireland? It had produced seven centuries of unrest, insurrection, rebellion, arson, houghing of cattle, and shooting landlords from behind hedges. Was that the peace that the Government of Queensland, with the sons of Irishmen and Irishmen themselves in it, were seeking with such exceptional legislation? The people of Queensland had their rights, and it would not be by-and-by a mere question of free labour and free contract, but a question of the freedom and existence of the people, and they knew who would go to the wall in the event of a struggle of that kind. At all events it must be tested, and it was well they knew in time that either by conciliation or by compulsion these labour disputes must be brought to an end. (Cheers.) Mr. Max. D. King, in seconding the resolution, said he regretted as a native of Australia that they should have two natives – Mr. Tozer and Mr. Byrnes – who had committed themselves by bringing in the degrading Act in question, which not only degraded themselves but the colony as well. It was quite evident that where distress existed there was some cause for it. The strike of 1891 was sufficiently serious for the Government to have then taken measures similar to those they wanted to pass now, if they were necessary now. The Government had drifted and drifted, and it now found itself in such a hopeless mess that it did not know how to get out of it.

Mr. Glassey, who was received with prolonged applause, said he considered the magnitude of the meeting a splendid refutation regarding a statement made by the Minister for Lands on Friday evening to the effect that the people were with the Government. There was not the slightest necessity for the introduction of the measure before Parliament, and he would oppose every line and clause in it. (Applause.) He had followed up coercive legislation connected with his own country for years past, but during the whole course of his experience and reading he knew of no coercion law, other than those mentioned by Sir. Charles Lilley, which contained such drastic cruelties as the one before Parliament. He hoped the measure would lead to the Government being hurled from position. Twelve murders had taken place in Mackay district, and he asked if any special steps had been taken to arrest the murderers or to prevent the recurrence of such dastardly crimes. There was no mention that the bill was to apply to that portion of the colony. No fewer than thirty-seven persons died of starvation last year in this colony, teeming with wealth and abundance, but no mention had been made of that by the Government. Then no fewer than eleven persons had been killed during the past twelve or eighteen months in the Bundamba coal mines, chiefly through neglect, and yet not a single additional regulation had been framed to curtail such an alarming destruction of human life in the mines of the colony. The Ministry had come forward with a drastic and inhumane measure and asked the people to accept it without question; they had also attempted to suspend the Standing Orders, and to pass the measure without giving the representatives of the people reasonable time to discuss its provisions. He endorsed the resolution to the full, and he hoped and trusted this meeting was only the beginning of meetings of a large and more comprehensive character in the future if the Government attempted to put such an unjust and cruel law on the Statute-book of the colony. (Loud applause.)

Mr. Drake said there had been a most determined effort made in Parliament to rush this bill through before the people of Queensland had an opportunity of knowing what its provisions really were. The bill proposed the most tremendous alteration of the law ever made in Queensland or any of the Australian colonies, because it suspended the constitution under which they were proud to live and placed any district in the colony coming under the operations of the Act under martial law. It would be an everlasting shame if Englishmen in any part of the world submitted themselves to a power by which their rights under a free constitution might be set aside. He hoped it would never happen, but whatever happened they would have the consolation that Brisbane had at all events recorded its emphatic protest. (Cheers.) The resolution was carried unanimously.

Mr. Wallace Nelson, in proposing, “That a copy of the foregoing resolution be forwarded to the Premier,” said that it the bill in question became law the result might be that within a fortnight everyone at that meeting might be languishing in her Majesty's gaol for intimidating the people against the Government. They were told that the measure was justified on the grounds of necessity. Every Coercion Act passed in England against Ireland had been grounded on necessity. This measure would be the deathblow to the Coalition Government. (Applause.) The Government could withdraw the measure or modify it, but it could not cause the people to forget that it had cast an insult on the people of Queensland.

Mr. A. M. Kirkland seconded the motion, and it was unanimously adopted.

Mr. Dawson proposed a hearty vote of thanks to the chairman. In his opinion Mr. Brookes's presence at that meeting was a brilliant ending to a grand career. (Applause.) He had always been in the forefront of the battle for democracy, doing what was right. He had all along showed a brilliant example which it would pay the young men to follow all their days (Applause.)

The vote was heartily passed and three cheers were given for Mr. Brookes.

* * *

A must enthusiastic meeting was held at Bundaberg on Tuesday night to protest against the Coercion Bill. Mr. G. J. Hall moved a resolution condemning the Government for attempting to break down unionism, and thanking the Labour Party and others for opposing the measure. The motion was carried unanimously. - Wire from Bundaberg.

Charters Towers and Rockhampton also held indignation meetings.