CHAP. VII] THE UPPER HOUSES 563 
that the Legislative Council, not having exercised their 
undoubted power to reject the Bill altogether, do not desire 
to cause the serious injury to the public service and to the 
welfare of the Colony which would inevitably result from 
a refusal to sanction the necessary expenditure for carrying 
on the government of the Colony, and in the confident hope 
that under the circumstances the Legislative Council will 
not insist on their amendments.’ 
9. On the same day the Legislative Council again returned 
the Bill to the Legislative Assembly with the following 
message — 
‘ The Legislative Council having had under consideration 
the message of the Legislative Assembly of this day’s date, 
relative to the amendments made by the Legislative Council 
in “the Appropriation Bill of 1885-6, No. 2,” beg now to 
intimate that they 4nsist on their amendments in the said 
Bill :— 
‘ Because the Council neither arrogate to themselves the 
position of being a reflex of the House of Lords, nor recog- 
nize the Legislative Assembly as holding the same relative 
position to the House of Commons. 
‘The Joint Standing Orders only apply to matters of form 
connected with the internal management of the two Houses, 
and do not affect constitutional questions. 
" Because it does not appear that occasion has arisen to 
require that the House of Lords should exercise its powers 
of amending a Bill for appropriating the public revenue, 
and, therefore, the present case is not analogous ; the right 
is admitted though it may not have been exercised. 
"Because the case of the Legislature of New Zealand is 
dissimilar to that now under consideration, inasmuch as 
the Constitution Act of New Zealand differs materially 
from that of Queensland, and the question submitted did 
not arise under the Constitution Act, but on the interpre- 
tation of a Parliamentary Privileges Act. If no instance 
can be found in the history of constitutional government 
in which a nominated council has attempted to amend an 
Appropriation Bill, it is because no similar case has ever 
arisen. 
‘ Because in the amendment of all Bills “ The Constitution 
Act of 1867” confers on the Legislative Council powers 
co-ordinate with those of the Legislative Assembly, and the 
annexing of any clause to a Bill of Supply, the matter of 
which is foreign to and different from the matter of said 
Bill of Supply, is unparliamentary and tends to the destruc- 
002