cHAP, 11] THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 863 
as preserving the peaceful course of industry, and its opera- 
tion might prove more beneficial than the actual settlement 
of disputes after they had broken out, and he was not satisfied 
that sufficient weight had been given in the argument to 
this phase of the power and the effect of the word ‘preserve’, 
or the word ‘arbitration’, or the expression ‘industrial 
dispute ’ in its ampler constitutional signification. But 
he did not propose to express a decided opinion upon the 
matter, partly because the constitutionality of the Act was 
not raised before the President of the Court, and the Court 
had not the advantage of his presence or of a case stated by 
him. The provisions were in his opinion separable, and he 
accepted as a principle of discrimination the rule! that if 
good and bad provisions were included in the same word or 
expression, the whole must fail ; where they were contained 
in separate words or expressions, then if the good and the 
bad parts were so mutually connected with and dependent 
upon each other as to lead the Court upon applying the 
language to the subject-matter to believe that Parliament 
intended them as a whole and did not pass the good parts 
as independent provisions, all the provisions so connected 
and dependent must fall together. 
The piutons of the judges in the case as to the common 
rule left’ little doubt of the result of the submission of that 
point formally to them, and in point of fact they declared it 
invalid shortly after.2 The conclusion was nearly inevitable 
from their method of approaching the case : if the terms of 
the Act are to be strictly construed, it is fair to say that the 
power granted is one to settle actually existing disputes, not 
a legislative authority. 
It is difficult to overestimate the importance of this decision 
as limiting the utility of the Court, and its importance is best 
seen from the fact that the Opposition were agreed that 
a change in the Constitution which would allow of the com- 
mon rule being made possible was desirable. Thus Mr. Cook, 
in his amendment on the second reading of the Legislative 
! Of. per Shaw C.J. in Warren v. Mayor of Charlestown, 2 Gray, 84, at p. 99. 
* Australian Boot Trade Employés’ Federation v. Whybrow & Co., 11 
C. L. R. 311. Even Isaacs (pp. 329-38) and Higgins (pp. 338-46) agreed.