Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896935052

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-238139

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 2

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XI Seiten, Seiten 570-1100

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part IV. The federations and the union // Chapter II. The commonwealth of Australia

Collection:: Economics Books

cuap. 11] THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 929 made to each of the states for ever in place of the arrange- ment, by which, under s. 87 of the Constitution, three-fourths of the net customs and excise revenue were paid over to the states. It was thought that this arrangement would relieve the Commonwealth of the burden of having to raise £4 for every £1 which it wished to spend, and that, on the other hand, the states would know better what sums they would receive from the Commonwealth in each year, while the automatic increase of population would lead to an automatic increase of the sums payable. At the referendum this proposal was defeated through the exertions of the Labour party in the states of New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia; in the latter case by a very small majority. The total vote in favour of the law was 645,514 against 670,838, and 82,437 papers were informal. The voting in the states was as follows :(— New South Wales Victoria . . . Queensland . . South Australia Western Australia Tasmania . for, 227,650 ; against, 253,107 200,165 ; - 242,119 87,130 ; 72,516 49,352 ; 51,250 49,050 ; 30,392 32.167 21.454 The percentage of voters for to the total number of electors enrolled was 28-58 ; of those against, 29-70. In this case the objection of the Labour party was not to the actual terms but to the principle of making the arrange- ment part of the Constitution, and therefore only open to alteration by a formal alteration of the Constitution. The Sydney Bulletin, which represents the Labour party in one of its aspects, pointed out that the acceptance of the pro- posal was most undesirable inasmuch as it would perma- nently enable the three small states, Queensland, Western Australia, and Tasmania to prevent any alteration of the terms, though such alteration was deemed essential by over- whelming majorities in the large states. There can be little doubt that this argument weighed heavily against the acceptance as it stood of the alteration of the Constitution. 12792 Bb

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation