Equally dangerous for Australia was the more recent excessive eagerness of the British capitalist to invest his money in Australian commercial undertakings, as, according to the Victorian Year Book,[[2]] a publication of the highest merit, "there is no doubt that the feverish financial activity that preceded, and ultimately led to, the Australian financial crisis primarily arose from the enormous influx of British capital—far in excess of the legitimate requirements of the Colonies—for remunerative enterprises. This influx was probably the result of the large amount of attention that for some years prior to 1888 had been directed to these Colonies, which were brought into prominence by such events as the passing of the first Federal Council Act by the Imperial Parliament in 1885, the Colonial and Indian Exhibition held in London in 1886, and the Imperial Conference in 1887; it was also much stimulated by the lowering in 1888 of the interest on the British Public Debt, and pro rata on other first-class British securities. The first indications of this were noticeable in the marked rise in the prices of all Colonial Government securities which occurred just after Mr. Goschen's notification of his scheme for reducing the interest on the National Debt of the United Kingdom, in March, 1888. Such securities, however, being of limited extent, the superabundant capital was forced into private channels, which led to the growth of co-operative enterprise on an unprecedented scale—through the medium of joint stock companies—which commenced prior to, but probably in anticipation of, the conversion of the British Public Debt, and culminated in the United Kingdom, as well as in Australia, in the same year. Owing to this increasing competition for Colonial Government securities, and the consequent fall in the rate of interest thereon, the Colonial Governments were tempted to, and no doubt did, borrow in excess of their immediate requirements, although this was not recognised during the period of general inflation; but assuming a portion of the Government loans to have been unjustified, far worse was the condition of the large private investments, chiefly in joint stock companies, many of which supplemented their resources by deposits—equivalent in some cases to as much as three times the paid-up capital—which had been drawn, by reason of the high rates of interest offered, from all sections of the community, both in England and Australia. Between the 1st of January, 1887, and the 30th of June, 1893, but for the most part in 1888, 1,154 companies with a paid-up capital of no less than £28,436,500 (subscribed capital £54,300,000) were registered in Victoria alone, and of these, 397, with a paid-up capital of £9,469,000 (subscribed capital £19,526,000) are known to have become defunct, to say nothing of numerous others, of which no information has been furnished to the Registrar-General." The crisis was most acute in Victoria, but its effects were felt largely, and are still felt in calls upon shareholders, in other Provinces. In conclusion, while British capitalists are still chary of industrial investments, they appear to be willing to meet the Australasian Governments in their resumption of applications for loans.
The danger is accentuated by the tendency towards State socialism, the origin of which I had begun to discuss before this long digression. The earliest concessions for the construction of railways were granted in New South Wales in 1848 and 1853, but the companies were unable to carry out their undertakings, owing to the scarcity of workmen caused by the rush to the goldfields, and the Government stepped in and completed the railways out of public funds. This assumption by the State of a function which had been delegated to private enterprise, coupled with the growing confidence of the British investor and the elasticity of the revenue, both from the Customs and from the disposal of land, which had been accelerated by the rapid increase of population, appears to have convinced the political leaders of the advisability of the Governmental extension of the railway lines. They were enabled to carry out this policy without difficulty, as the bulk of the electors were engrossed in material pursuits and did not trouble themselves about political issues. In Victoria three short lines of railways were constructed during the fifties by private companies, but were subsequently purchased by the Government, which thenceforward monopolised the construction of new lines. Why Victoria and the other Provinces should have decided in favour of State ownership and management of railways I am unable to explain, except upon the hypothesis that they were influenced by the example of New South Wales, that they wished to open up the country more quickly than would otherwise have been possible, and that they were tempted by the funds at their disposal in surpluses of revenue over expenditure. Then, the railways having in many instances preceded population, it was necessary, if the lines were not to be unprofitable, that special steps should be taken in order to promote settlement. This was done, partly by the offer of land upon favourable conditions, partly by the payment out of the National Exchequer of all the expenses of Local Government. In New South Wales this state of things still prevails in many of the rural districts; in the other Provinces pro rata subsidies are paid to the Local Authorities, but are limited, in some cases, to a fixed term of years. The Local Bodies have had no spontaneous evolution; they are the creation of the Central Government, they are supported and controlled by it, and look to it for assistance whenever they are in financial difficulties. It would seem that, accustomed to State railways and to dependency upon the State in their local affairs, Australasians have been led insensibly to magnify the efficacy of its intervention and to welcome every enlargement of its sphere of action. The protective tariff appears to have had a similar effect, unless it is to be regarded as a mere coincidence that South Australia, New Zealand, and Victoria, which alone are avowedly Protectionist, have authorised the widest extension of the functions of the State.
Throughout Australasia all parties in the several Parliaments are agreed on the principle of the State ownership of railways. In Victoria and Queensland the railways are entirely in the hands of the Government; in New South Wales and South Australia they are so with some trifling exceptions; in Tasmania, Western Australia, and New Zealand a few private lines have been authorised because it has been advisable, in the interests of settlement, that they should be constructed, and the Governments have been unable or unwilling to undertake further financial obligations. The recent action of Western Australia may be mentioned in evidence of the prevalent feeling, it having taken advantage of its improved credit to purchase one of the private lines. The waterworks of the capitals, also, are national or municipal property; but other municipal monopolies, such as gasworks and tramways, are mostly in the hands of private companies.
The railways of Australasia are worked, as far as is consonant with national interests, for the direct benefit of producers, who, as has been seen in the chapters dealing with individual Provinces, have been the special object of the paternal solicitude of their Governments. The various efforts in this direction may briefly be recapitulated. South Australia, Victoria, Western Australia, and New Zealand make advances to settlers at low rates of interest; South Australia sells its wines in London; Queensland facilitates the erection of sugar mills, and is proposing to establish depôts in London and the provinces for the receipt and distribution of its frozen meat; Victoria and South Australia have given a bonus upon the exportation of dairy produce. These Provinces and New Zealand receive such produce, grade and freeze it free of charge or at a rate which barely covers the expenses. Victoria has given subsidies towards the erection of butter factories; Victoria and New Zealand have subsidised the mining industry; and Western Australia has adopted a comprehensive scheme for the supply of water to the Coolgardie Goldfields.
The above brief summary shows that action by the State for the promotion of enterprise has met with approval in Queensland and Western Australia as well as in the Provinces which have adopted the widest extensions of the franchise. It maybe noted, however, that Sir Hugh Nelson, the Premier of Queensland, is an individualist at heart, and consents to extensions of the functions of the State unwillingly upon a conviction of their necessity; while, in Western Australia, Sir John Forrest is a strong advocate of State socialism, and opposed to private-enterprise in any matter which is of the nature of a monopoly. New South Wales and Tasmania have not hitherto followed the lead of the other Provinces. This tendency is one of the most marked of recent years, and received a strong impetus from the financial crisis of 1893, which burst the bubble of a fictitious prosperity and compelled attention to the strenuous development of the resources of the soil. It is likely to lead to closer relations between the Provinces, from the appreciation of the fact that the exports of one Province, if unregulated and allowed to fall into disrepute, may prejudicially affect the interests of the whole continent.
As regards the intervention of the State in the direction of industrial legislation, the Governments of Western Australia and Tasmania have had little cause to take action, in the absence of crowded centres and of manufacturing activity; but New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, and New Zealand have placed stringent Factory Acts upon their Statute Books. Measures have also been passed, largely under the influence of Labour Representatives, dealing with the liability of employers, the regulation of mines, the protection of shop assistants, and other matters affecting the welfare of the working classes. Upon their enactment complaints have been made of undue interference with employers; but the administration is now, in most cases, carried out efficiently and without unnecessary friction.
Indirectly, the various Provinces have, through their schemes of public works, exercised considerable influence upon the demand for labour and have, upon the completion of the more important undertakings, been subject to continual pressure with the object of inducing them to authorise special works for the benefit of those who have been deprived of their livelihood. New South Wales, indeed, and, to a lesser extent, Victoria, have almost admitted an obligation to provide work or rations for the unemployed. In Victoria the tension has been relaxed by the formation of the Labour Colony of Leongatha, at which the destitute can obtain temporary subsistence. Australian politicians, generally, were appalled by the undeserved misery which resulted from the cessation of public works and from the financial disturbances, and, under the stress of humanitarian motives, failed to temper their humanity with discretion, and initiated a policy of indiscriminate assistance from which, once entered upon, it has been difficult for them to draw back. The formation of village settlements in all the Provinces except Western Australia was based upon the necessity for special efforts in the face of the prevailing distress. Australians have never been able to regard the unemployed as a necessary factor in their economic system. The ordinary problems of pauperism have been felt acutely in Australasia and have been met in somewhat similar fashion in the different Provinces. Destitute children are, in most cases, boarded out; the aged and incapable are provided for in Benevolent Asylums. In Victoria, New South Wales, and New Zealand a movement has recently arisen for the adoption of a system of old-age pensions, which has had no appreciable results in the former Province, but has led in New South Wales to the appointment of a Parliamentary Committee which reported favourably and suggested forms of additional taxation by which the necessary funds might be obtained, and in New Zealand to the introduction of a Ministerial measure which sought to establish the general principle and left to the House the elaboration of the financial details. The Bill was accepted on its second reading, but in Committee an amendment was carried against the Government to the effect that all persons above the age of sixty-five, irrespectively of their means, should be entitled to receive a pension. An Act was, however, subsequently passed of which the object is to ascertain the probable cost of a pension fund. All persons of the age of sixty-five and upwards, who have resided in the Province for twenty years, imprisonment being reckoned as absence, and are not possessed of an income exceeding £50 a year, are entitled to apply for a pension certificate which will be issued to them upon the verification of their claims, and will be regarded as conclusive if a pension fund be established hereafter. The success of the Government at the recent elections renders it probable that the matter will shortly receive attention. In neither of the Provinces in which the subject has been discussed is it proposed that the pension should be earned by previous contributions; it is to be offered as a free gift in recognition of the services which every worker must have rendered to the community.
To conclude a superficial summary of the functions undertaken, or likely to be undertaken, by the State in Australasia, it may be mentioned that the State system of primary education is in all the Provinces compulsory and undenominational. In South Australia, Victoria, Queensland, and New Zealand it is also free; in the other Provinces fees are charged but may be remitted, wholly or partly, in the case of the inability of parents to pay them. There are no signs that the advocates of grants in aid of denominational education are gaining ground; in the direct reference to the electors taken in South Australia they were defeated by a large majority, and have equally little chance of securing subsidies to religious bodies.
In the presence of great activity on the part of the State, it is interesting to note to what extent the working classes have exerted themselves on their own behalf. Distributive co-operation has not become popular owing, partly, according to the Australasian,[[3]] "to the vicissitudes in trade which are inseparable from new countries, and to the temptations which are consequently held out to the workers from time to time to change their occupations and abodes. Partly, too, an explanation may be found in the efficacy of existing agencies for distribution. But we cannot help thinking that it is due also, in part, to the pernicious ideas which lead so many of our artisans to cry out against capital, and to seek the aid of the State, instead of trusting to their own efforts and determining to become capitalists themselves in a way which has been proved by the co-operative societies at home to be thoroughly practical." Though the Australasian is strongly individualistic in its bias, it appears to be justified in its reference to a certain lack of initiative shown by Australasian workmen; they are inclined to look upon the State as a gold mine from which they can draw permanent dividends, especially as they are scarcely, if at all, affected directly by the periodical calls upon the shareholders; but, in his strictures upon the attitude of labour towards capital, the writer should have added that the wealthy classes are at least as ready to misjudge every effort made by the Labour Representatives to pass remedial measures through the legislatures. Proceeding to deal with the co-operation of producers, he says that "there is co-operation of this kind already in our butter and cheese factories, where the farmer who conveys his produce to the factory may also be a shareholder, and at the end of the half-year may receive a dividend on his shares and a bonus on the milk supplied, in addition to the established price. Co-operation of a like kind prevails, to some extent, though not so largely as might be desired, between the graziers and the companies for the export of Australian meat." These remarks, which refer primarily to Victoria, are generally true of Australasia.
But, while the working classes look constantly to the State for assistance in various forms, they can be shown to have made considerable provision against the future. In spite of bad times, the number of depositors in Australasian Savings Banks rose from 742,000 in 1891 to 895,000 in 1895, and the total amount of deposits from 19 to 26 millions. Victoria and South Australia, which are followed closely by New Zealand, have the largest number of depositors in proportion to population, 29 and 24 per 100 respectively, and Queensland and New South Wales the highest average amount of deposits.[[4]] In the three Provinces, therefore, in which the paternal action of the Government is carried to the furthest extent, we find the widest diffusion of an important exemplification of the spirit of thrift. I am far from suggesting a relation of cause and effect, as the amount of savings must depend largely upon the rate of wages, the abundance or scarcity of employment, the cost of living, and many other factors, and would merely point out that the policy in question does not appear to have deterred the working classes from individual efforts.