Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 28 October 1914

The CHAIRMAN - If the honorable senator takes exception to the statement, I have no doubt that it will be withdrawn.

Senator BAKHAP - I withdraw the term " artful dodger," and say that the honorable senator has adopted a decidedly underhand and unfair attitude. There might be no similarity between the offences for which a man was convicted under a

State law and under a Commonwealth law. I consider that Senator McDougall's argument was legitimate, and was not farfetched. The honorable senator instanced a case of a man convicted under a State law for inciting to a strike, or something of that sort. Though that might be regarded as a serious offence against the body politic, it has no relation to such an offence as the taking of soundings to be communicated to an enemy. Yet, under this clause, a man convicted for such an offence may be liable, upon conviction for an offence under this Bill, to double the maximum term of imprisonment provided for such an offence.

Senator O'Keefe - Senator McDougall admitted that his interjection could be met by an amendment.

Senator BAKHAP - I understood Senator McDougall to say that it was his intention to vote against the clause altogether. There are many offences under the Bill to which clause 17 would be applicable, and for the Minister to say that honorable senators, in voting against the clause, do not desire that severe penalties should be imposed for the serious offences which he indicated, is absolutely unfair. After what has occurred, I shall have no hesitation in voting against the clause as proposed to be amended, or as it now appears in the Bill.

Suggest corrections