According to the Bicentennial Dictionary of Western Australians, 1829-1888 MFA Canning was born on September 22, 1829 in England (but according to his own account born in Paris, France), and died November 13, 1911 in Perth, WA. The Battye Library in Perth, WA has some good basic biographical information about him, as he was quite a public figure in Australia. We of the North American descendants of MFA's proposed father, as well as the Australian descendants of MFA himself, are in process of searching for the resolution to the questions of how or how not MFA was related to Alfred D. Canning, Civil Engineer in Rotherhithe, London. (We have documents showing that Alfred Canning was the father of Rafton/Raftan Canning, and (George) Botrine/ Botriune/ Boutrenne/ Baltriune Canning. Our family tree chart indicates that Alfred was also the father of MFA Canning, Louise Canning Pierrot/Perrot, Arthur/ Arturo Canning who died in Spain after living in France with his mother, and possibly some others. Alfred D. was born around 1797, and died in Rotherhithe in 1851, "found dead in bed." A coroner's inquest was held; death was from "natural decay." Thus the mystery continues.) MFA and Elizabeth Annie Morgan Canning had several children in Australia. His death certificate lists the following, with their ages in 1911:
Ada L. A. Canning Hern (born circa 1857), 54 Letitia E. Canning (b.circa 1858), 53 Arthur Canning (b.circa 1861), 50 Edmund Canning (b. circa 1866), 45 Eleanor Anne Canning Hassell (b. circa 1867), 44 Blanche (b. circa 1869), 42 Algernon (Charles Felix Algernon Stratford) Canning (b. circa 1871), 40 George Canning (born circa 1873), 38 1 Male (probably Gilbert Henry M. Canning b. 1876 d. 1877), deceased 4 females (including probably Gladys Octavia Canning Hanney, b. 1880 d. 1899, and Edith M. Maude? Canning d. 1867, Sydney), deceased
We welcome contact from any descendants, or inquiries from anyone who may be a descendant, of MFA. A research project will soon be under weigh to look for more documents, and it will be very interesting to obtain these results.
"CANNING, Marinus Frederick Alfred "Financier. B 22 Sep 1829, Paris, France; s. of Francis, army officer, and Emma Nowell [clearly this biographer was trying to read MFA's marriage certificate and having the same problems our current genealogist is now having --- his handwriting was atrocious, and he was registrar! --- his middle name is Francis, not Frederick, and his mother's name is Anne Powell], great grandfather of W.R.B. Hassell; M 25 Oct 1856, Tenterfield, NSW, Elizabeth Annie Morgan (May 1839 - Apr 1912), d. of Frederick and Emma Amelia Woodward; 4s. 4d.; D. 13 Nov 1911, Perth. Karrakatta cem. CofE.
"Educ. priv. in Engl. and at Ecole Charlemagne, Paris. arr. Q 1855; storekeeper in 1856; bank mngr early 1870s to Tahiti; 1875 joined Bank of NSW; 1877 to Noumea office and later possibly to Tas[mania]; 21 Feb 1883 arr. in WA to found Perth br. of bank; 1884 left bank and founded WA Mortgage & Agency Co., 1888-95 mngr; sec. AMP 1886, Comm. agent 1887-89. founded WA Stanneries; 1893 JP: 1891-1911 member Perth Public Library Cttee. "MLA East Perth 19 Dec 1890 - 15 June 1894 (in opp. until Nov 1892). Cont. E Perth June ... Metrop. Prov. July 1894, Canning 1897 (Opp.). Chmn of Cttees 10 Nov 1892 - June 1894. "WA 14 Nov 1911; WM 18 Nov 1911; Hassell, 70-71; GG 1893, 992; DWA I." [Note: This has used MFA's wedding certificate as a source. MFA filled out his own wedding certificate, since he was Registrar where he was married. Notice that he leaves out his father's name on this document.]
Dear Ms. Salisbury The Tenterfield Vistors Information Centre has passed your e-mail of 27 Aug [2000 AD] onto the Tenterfield & District Historical Society Inc. and I am replying on their behalf. We hold a small amount of family history information on your two families. Briefly from our records: Marinus FA Canning was born in Paris, France 22.9.1829, died 13.11.911 at Perth, Western Australia - married Elizabeth Ann Moran [must be a typo --- KS], Tenterfield 25.10.1856 in the Church of England. Occupations: Registrar, storekeeper, spirits merchant, farmer, banker, company secretary, commission agent and Member of WA's Parliament. One of the company's he was secretary of was the Australia Mutual Provident Society - AMP is the major sponsor of the Sydney 2000 Olympic games They lived in Tenterfield, Noumea, Tasmania, WA, and Sydney (NSW). There appears to have been 13 children (5 died young incl. 4 daughters - these may have been twins). He certainly would have been a very wealthy man but then his wife's brothers were equally as wealthy if not more so. After leaving Tenterfield, the brothers Frederick A., Thomas Squire and Francis Edwin, who were gold miners, storekeeprs, amongst other occupations, went to Queensland where they renamed and developed Mount Ironside. This town is now known as Mount Morgan and is a short drive outside Rockhampton in Central Qld. - Not bad for the children of convict Frederick Morgan sentenced to Australia for life for stealing cloth from a tailor !!! There has been extensive research carried out on this family by : C.E. Smith, ... NSW, Australia. CE Smith wrote a book in 1990 on the Morgan Family of Mount Morgan Fame. The above information on Marinus Canning is extracted from this book. Also several years ago (date unknown) a Mr. John H. Fysh, ... NSW, Australia wrote a letter the the local newspaper seeking information on his material great grandfather Marinus FA Canning. Unfortunately I do not know any e-mail address for either person or if they are still alive/reside at the addresses provided. However, it would be worth your while to contact these people. In response to your query regarding early Tenterfield etc. It is not certain when or who actually were first to arrive in this district but it is thought the Tenterfield district was first opened up c.1840. The first legal land title was granted to SA Donaldson on 1 July 1842 and named the district 'Tenterfield' after his maiden aunts' home in Haddington, Scotland. There would have been very few people in the immediate district at that time - possibly not even several hundred. On 7 October 1851 - Tenterfield has gazetted a township and by this time the population would have hardly reached 1000. The main reason for opening the town was sheep and cattle grazing which is still the main industry today. However in the late 1850s', there were gold discoveries in the surrounding districts of Timbarra, Boonoo Boonoo, Boorook, Boorookarra, Fairfield (now Drake), Pretty Gully, Emu Creek, Solferino etc. This would have attracted a lot of people to this district however, it would appear that the Morgan's were here c. 1856 and Alfred Canning was already in the district as Registrar - the Court of Petty Session opened in March (?) 1854. No doubt you have checked for web sites using the prompt 'Tenterfield' . There are a number of interesting sites to look at once retrieved. However, another interesting site to view is www.pictureaustralia.org and call up Tenterfield - there are 178 photographs of Tenterfield and district including an oil painting c.1850s done by convict Joseph Beckler. This will give an indication of how Tenterfield looked then. There have been a number of publications on Tenterfield, unfortunately mostly out of print but one still available is 'Call of the Highlands' by Ken Halliday at $5.00 Australian (excluding postage) With best wishes with your research Margaret De Clara, 56 Duncan Street, Tenterfield, NSW 2372, Aust. mdeclara@halenet.com.au
====================================== 1893 July 4, The West Australian Newspaper "MR. CANNING BEFORE THE ELECTORS OF EAST PERTH ~~~ AMUSING SCENES"
Last evening, Mr. M.F.A. Canning, M.L.A., addressed a public meeting in the Town Hall. The attendance was a poor one, the majority of the seats in the body of the hall being empty. The Mayor of Perth (Mr. A. Forrest, M.L.A.) presided, and in introducing the speaker, and asking for him a fair and impartial hearing, said he took the chair that evening in his official capacity, and not as one who believed in Mr. Canning's views. Mr. Canning, who rose amid perfect stillness, said: --- It had been my intention for some time past to ask you to meet me before the assembling of the Legislature (although I have been hindered by various causes from doing so until this evening) in order that I might briefly glance at some of the more important measures which were under consideration last session, and offer a few observations upon some questions which have lately come prominently into notice, of which some must, and others may possibly be discussed during the forthcoming session. More especially, I conceive that I ought, as your representative, to say something on the subject of the financial disasters which have overtaken Australia generally during the last few months, for whatever affects Australia generally must have an influence, more or less important, upon our own affairs. With regard to the work of last session, it will be borne in mind that the principal measures under consideration were the Bill for the abolition of the property qualification for members of the Assembly and the extension of the franchise, the Homesteads Bill, and the Midland Railway proposals. As the necessity of amending the Constitution has been urged by me from the time I entered the Legislative Assembly, I gave the first mentioned Bill my heartiest support. I should have liked to have seen it modified in some particulars, but rather than jeopardise it, I accepted it as introduced by the Government. The Bill passed in the Assembly, but was thrown out by the Legislative Council. I forbear to comment here upon the action of that body. The measure will doubtless be re-introduced by the Government, and passed by the Legislative Assembly, and public opinion with regard to it will then, we may feel assured, be expressed in such unmistakable terms, that little fear need be entertained as to its final acceptance. In connection with such a measure, let me add that although the miners generally from the neighbouring colonies, can hardly yet be regarded as a permanent element of our population, many may be induced, when better acquainted with the colony, to become West Australian colonists, and undoubtedly the creation of mining electorates, and the extension of political privileges to miners, would greatly influence them in deciding to cast in their lot with us, I shall, therefore, strongly urge that the possession of a miner's right by a bona-fide miner shall entitle him to a vote. The Homesteads Bill introduced by the Government had much to recommend it. I myself for some time past have been instant in season and out of season in urging the necessity of bringing about a rapid and material increase of population, if it be expected that the colony is to make real substantial progress. A fairly large population would give increased and permanent value to property of all kinds, to public lands as well as to private estates in town and country. It is only by means of the traffic of all kinds created by a large population that our public works, more especially our railways, can become either directly or indirectly remunerative. Then to bring about the desired increase of population some means must be devised of settling people on the land and making it productive. It is only by the accomplishment of that end that we shall obtain a permanent accession to our population. How is that end to be accomplished? Not to any appreciable extent by attracting labour to the colony to be employed on public works, nor by the attraction of our mineral discoveries. Experience so far goes to prove this. Both classes of newcomers are, as a rule, but temporary sojourners in the land, and return to the other colonies whenever a stoppage of public works occurs, a goldfield ceases to pay, or the realisation of the immediate object they had in view in coming to this colony is attained. How then is the permanent increase of population to be secured? By the introduction of people from Great Britain and Ireland, who being made aware of the great natural resources of the colony, and of the facilities which we may assume will be offered to them to settle on the land will be induced to come here in considerable numbers. It has been said that the Government will, during the forthcoming session, introduce a fresh [?] measure for the settlement of the land. I can only now express a hope that it may be so framed as to commend itself to the members of the Legislature generally, and that I may be able as a representative of public opinion, to give it my support. The resolutions of the Committee appointed to examine the Midland Railway proposals were adopted, with some modifications, by a majority of the Legislative Assembly, with the result that the money necessary to complete that undertaking is now about to be obtained. The probable utility of the railway is becoming more apparent every day, and, whatever the conditions existing at the time of the inception of the undertaking, they have undergone a material change since, and the line may now be regarded as necessary to the more rapid development of the mineral and pastoral resources of the northern parts of the colony. The extension of railway communication eastward is now amply justified by the recent gold discoveries in that direction, and we may venture to hope that when our financial resources will admit of it, the construction of a line from Southern Cross, at all events to Hampton Plains, may be undertaken. We shall then be making further progress in the direction of railway communication with the eastern colonies, and I venture to predict that in the completion of that connecting link lies the solution of the difficulties in the way of Australian Federation. This brings me to a subject that is of pressing concern to the whole of Australia. I allude to the recent financial disasters and their effect upon the Australian credit in the mother country. I would here point out that, so far as I am aware, this question has been regarded by British financiers from one point of view only, and in that way of regarding the matter the people of Australia appear to have acquiesced. It seems to be considered that Australia is in the position of an individual who borrows a sum of money from another, the latter deriving no benefit whatever from the employment of his money except the interest he receives upon the loan. Let us see, however, what the real position of Australia is in relation to the mother country as regards the financial transactions between the two. Let us, for instance, take a loan for public works raised by say New South Wales in England. First it affords the best possible investment for British capital. The British investor receives his interest upon the whole amount lent precisely as does an ordinary lender from a private borrower. But beyond this by far the larger portion of the money lent and upon which interest in full is received, either practically remains with the lender, the mother country, or finds its way back to it to pay for the greater part of the material employed in the construction of the work for which they money is borrowed, giving employment to all engaged in the production of the material, and probably finding its way again though a thousand different channels into the pocket of the British investor. More than this --- the money lent to the colony helps to create a market for the cottons of Manchester, the hardware of Sheffield and Birmingham, and the thousand and one commodities which Australia imports from England. Figures are not generally interesting, and I do not wish to make myself tedious, but in order to make the position I take up with regard to this question clearer, I will give you approximately the aggregate amount of Australian loads raised (or rather of Australian indebtedness), and the aggregate value of Australian imports from the United Kingdom during the five years, from 1886 to 1890 inclusive. I will also add the value of our exports to the United Kingdom during the same period, because it must be borne in mind that in this direction also, if British capital has aided the development of Australian resources, the mother country has derived enormous benefit from the supply of our wool and other raw material necessary to enable her to keep her factories and shipping employed in supplying the markets of the world with her manufactures. For the colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia (I omit Tasmania, as I have been unable to obtain figures for the same period as for the other colonies), on the 31st December, 1890, the aggregate of the public loans, for the colonies mentioned, amounted to L[pounds] 180,000,000, upon which they paid something like an annual sum for interest of upwards of L7,000,000. During the period of five years ended the 31st of December, 1890, the imports from the United Kingdom, consisting largely of railway material, machinery and manufactured iron of various descriptions, amount to a total of L110,000,000. The exports to the United Kingdom during the same period show a sum total of L128,000,000. It will thus be seen that with all deference to a great authority in England, the relative positions of borrower and lender where two individuals are concerned differ widely from the position of a colony borrowing from the mother country, or even from that of one State borrowing from another. At all events our case forms a notable exception to this rule. It will be clear that the lender in the case of the mother country and the colonies is the party chiefly benefited. And now a word or two upon the recent banking disasters. The first two or three suspensions took us by surprise. The immediate result was panic, and that contributed in no small degree to bring about further suspensions. Then there was the inquiry into the causes which had brought about the crisis, and everyone had a theory of his own to account for it. Many said that the system was bad, that as carried on in Australia banking was not banking in the proper sense of the term, the securities were not liquid, that assets were immobilised, and so on. To all this I reply that banking as carried on in Australia is as truly banking as the business of any bank in the City of London, but the conditions with which banks have had to deal in Australia differ widely from those existing in England. If banking be borrowing money from A to lend it to B, making a profit on the difference between the interest paid and that received, exchange, and generally trading and dealing in money, the business as carried on by the Australian banks, has been in every sense of the term banking. But the least [?] Australian banks have done more than carry on the business of banking in the primary and narrow sense of the word. They have been the most important factor in the development of pastoral, mineral, and agricultural resources of Australia as a whole. When the trade resources of Australia began to give signs of capability of expansion and development, and were only kept back by want of financial aid, those who directed the affairs of the greater banks rose to the height of the situation, and by the assistance of the capital they were able to command and by their co-operation, they contributed largely, in fact mainly, to the wonderful progress made by the Australian colonies during the past quarter of a century. The results of their employment of the capital entrusted to them by their constituents have been so advantageous for the latter, that the aggregate amount paid for that period in dividends, capitalised, would represent an enormous sum, and if not wealth itself, has been so much added to the wealth-producing power of the colonies. Doubtless mistakes have been made from time to time, but I hold that the policy which has generally guided the action of the great Australian Banks has, regard being had to the conditions they had to deal with, been both sound and wise, and of inestimable advantage to the colonies. At the same time, the events of the past few months have forced upon most people the conviction that some legislation on banking generally is necessary. The solution of the questions as to what should be the precise objects and scope of such legislation, how it should be applied, how it should operate, undoubtedly presents serious difficulties. They must be grappled with, however, and it is to be hoped that our of the discussion which must arise upon the question as a whole, and the earnest consideration and deliberation which will, no doubt, be brought to bear upon it, a reasonable and fairly satisfactory measure may be evolved. In some way or other, I shall have something to say with regard to the question when the proper time comes to deal with it. It need not, I think, be apprehended that the measure finally agreed upon will affect unfavourably the great well-established banking institutions; as for those of a different character, they will have to look to themselves. I may add that I entirely agree with the opinion which has been put forward that any such measure as that in question should apply equally to all banking institutions throughout the Australian colonies. The financial interests of the colonies are so intimately interwoven one with the other, that differing legislation affecting banking in the different colonies, diversely could not fail to be productive of serious inconvenience, and even of grave evils. I repeat, therefore, that I entirely agree with the proposition recently put forward in another colony, that the measure in question should be the result of federal action, that it should be the outcome of the joint deliberation of representatives of all the Australian colonies. Reverting to the financial relations between the Australian colonies as states and the established Australian monetary institutions on the one side and the British investing public on the other, I would say to the latter, examine well the security Australian investments generally afford you; consider thoroughly the conditions they present, and you will come to the conclusion that a great country with a homogeneous population --- and that of the Anglo-Saxon stock --- enjoying British laws, customs and political institutions, with no hostile tribes or nations which are a standing menace to its peace and progress; and possessing untold resources and practically boundless possibilities of development, must offer a safer field for your investments than any portion of South America or South Africa. I will take this opportunity to say to investors, be not thrown into consternation by a passing wave of commercial and financial depression. The check to Australian progress is but temporary. The colonies will soon be in the full tide of prosperity again. Above all, brace yourselves against panic --- panic converts a check into defeat, defeat into rout, a sudden alarm into a terrible catastrophe, and in commercial or financial affairs may cause untold disaster. There are several other questions of importance with regard to which it might be expected I should have something to say, but I do not think it well to seek to divine or anticipate the Ministerial programme of measures to be considered during the forthcoming session, more especially as we shall be full acquainted with it in less than 48 hours from the present time. I may, however, go so far as to express the opinion that among the questions which will probably occupy the attention of the Legislature during the forthcoming session the more prominent will be the amendment of the Constitution Act, a measure for inducing the settlement of population upon the land, the revision of the tariff, a Civil Service Act, the re-organisation of the Postal Department, and of other public institutions, all measures with which you have a right, through your representatives, to concern yourselves, and with regard to which in the proper place and in due season I hope to have something to say. As to the revision of the tariff, however, as that is a matter closely connected with a question of the most vital importance to the colony generally, and must have an important bearing upon the progress of trade and manufactures in the immediate future. I must even now and here make more than passing allusion to it. We all know that a committee was appointed to examine the present tariff, and I presume to suggest in what way it might be amended. I have not the faintest notion of what the result of the labours of that committee may be, of what conclusions they may have arrived at, but this I do know, and this I wish to impress upon you, and also upon the Government, that the day is not far distant when the Ministry for the time being, of whosoever it may be composed, will have to seriously grapple with the question of the first importance to States, as to individuals, that is ways and means. We have been increasing our current expenditure, and incurring obligations at a prodigious rate. How are we to provide for them? It is notorious that our chief source of revenue hitherto has been import duties, and those have chiefly been derived from importations of the necessaries of life, commodities which we can produce and are now in a fair way to produce to such an extent, that the source of revenue of which I have just made mention, must very shortly fail us. As to our land revenue, or the proceeds of the sales of land, our probable receipts from such sources are not to be seriously taken into account --- at all events for some years to come. Then whence are we to obtain the necessary revenue? That is a question to be solved in the future, and in the not far distant future; and whoever may fill the office of Colonial Treasurer will have ample scope for the exercise of his ingenuity, for the display of all his financial skill, knowledge, and ability, in devising and formulating a scheme whereby the necessary revenue may be raised. I shall then, if still present on the scene, humbly and diffidently offer such suggestions as may occur to me for a comprehensive scheme of taxation, and whatever action I may take in the matter, I can assure you I shall not be influenced by any private or class considerations. It seems to me clear that the question of the revision of the tariff must be part and parcel of any such scheme of taxation such as the conditions we shall have to confront very shortly must render imperatively necessary. Let me now, in conclusion, assure you that all measures which may appear to me likely to promote the general welfare and prosperity of my fellow colonists will have my hearty support. As to my constituents, the electors of East Perth, I shall in the future, as I have heretofore, be always ready to take an active part in any proceedings or measures in which my advocacy or co-operation may be likely to promote the attainment of the object or objects they may have in view. (Applause.) Mr. Joseph Rogers mounted the platform to address the meeting, but was informed by the Mayor that he must speak from the body of the hall. Mr. Rogers having descended into the body of the hall, mounted a chair. He said that he did not intend to say anything disagreeable, and was commencing a speech when the Mayor ruled that he could not be heard unless he asked questions. Mr. ROGERS then asked: Have you had any hand in the pledging of the country to a private syndicate, namely, the Midland Railway Company? Mr. CANNING: I can answer you very fully. The Midland Company was initiated before I took office, and--- Mr. ROGERS: We don't want to hear about that. Did you pledge the country to a guaranteed syndicate --- yes or no? Mr. CANNING: I will have to divide the question into several parts before I can answer it. I cannot say yes or no to a question of that kind; you must allow me to answer the question in my own way. The Midland Railway Company has for the past few years it has been established, so identified itself with the interests of the colony that it was my conviction, strengthened by what I heard out of doors, it was most desirable that the work should be carried through. (Hear, hear.) It was necessary, in the interests of the colony, that the work should be carried out; it had arrived at such a position that unless it could be done, it would have been most disastrous to the colony. Mr. ROGERS: Not at all. Bosh. Mr. CANNING: If the work had not been done, it must have affected the credit of the colony in the financial world. Therefore, he had, during the last twelve months, given his support to the measures to enable the company to carry out its obligations an so save the colony's credit. (Cheers). Mr. J. ROGERS asked if it was known to Mr. Canning as it was to most people, that nearly L250,000 had been spent on this railway, that in actual expenditure only L110,000 could be accounted for, and that L40,000 had gone no one knew where. (Applause). Mr. CANNING: I am inclined to think you don't know it either. Mr. ROGERS: Never mind what I know! I want to know what you know. (Laughter). Mr. CANNING: No, I don't, and I don't think you know it either. Mr. ROGERS: Don't you? Well, gentlemen, as I am not allowed to address you, but am told I am out of order, I will wait my time, and will address you, if not through the public press, in a little pamphlet. (Laughter). Mr. F. M. STONE asked if Mr. Canning was in favour of free-trade or protection. Mr. CANNING Said that was a very wide question. (Mr. ROGERS: Oh, very wide.) But he must say he was quite in favour of protecting those industries which the colony had special advantages for carrying out, and with regard to which foreign competition would be likely to act unfavourably. So far as possible, he thought free trade should be encouraged (A VOICE: Do you?) so long as it did not operate against the industries of the colony. Mr. STONE: Are you in favour of taxing bread or flour? Mr. CANNING said that would be taxation which would affect the mass of the people unfavourably. If the taxation of bread would serve the interests of the few to the prejudice of the many, he should say it ought not to be taxed. One of the audience at the back here rose and said, "I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman (laughter) what his views on the Chinese immigration and the extension of the franchise". (laughter). Mr. CANNING said there was such a general feeling against Chinese immigration that no reasonable man would attempt to advocate it, at the present day. We were bound to consider the policy of the Australian colonies, of which we were a part. As they had passed laws to exclude the Chinese, we were not justified in adopting any course by which they might be evaded. Mr. Canning here resumed his seat, and the same inquirer remarked, "I should like to call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that he has only answered one question, and I asked two." (Laughter). Mr. CANNING said his views on this subject had already been expressed in unmistakable terms. He was in favour of extending the franchise to all respectable, well-conducted men. Mr. L. HASLUCK: Do your principles carry you so far as manhood suffrage? Mr. CANNING: Most certainly. By manhood suffrage I mean giving the suffrage to every man of sound mind, and who conducts himself as a respectable colonist. A VOICE: Who is to judge? Mr. CANNING: You judge him by his general conduct. ANOTHER SPEAKER: I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman---(A VOICE: "He's at it again!" Laughter.)---who is a respectable man? Mr. CANNING: Every man who works for his living is a respectable man. (Applause.) A VOICE: I would like to ask Mr. Canning if he is in favour of a tax on unimproved land values? Mr. CANNING said he did not think the question called for an immediate solution, but it was one that must be held in reserve by those who managed the affairs of the colony; they must look to it as a possible source of revenue. It was to be borne in mind that the circumstances of the colony are somewhat peculiar. While there was a good deal of reason in what had been said, namely, that those who kept their land unproductive should contribute something to the expenses of Government and to the cost of communication, it must be borne in mind those means of communication --- railways --- had barely come into operation, and that before that, the people who held the land were prevented from turning it into account. Mr. PAYNE proposed a vote of confidence in Mr. Canning. This was seconded by Mr. L. Hasluck, who spoke at some length to the question. Mr. J. Rogers objected to the speech as being as much out of order as his intended speech had been, but the Chairman said the cases were dissimilar. Mr. J. ROGERS: Mr. Chairman, before you put the resolution, may I ask one question? It is nothing about the railway. (Laughter.) Mr. Canning, are you prepared to bring in a measure to amend the Pawnbrokers Act, so as to prevent people from charging 250 per cent. Per annum. (Laughter). The CHAIRMAN here put the resolution. Mr. ROGERS: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, you have not put my question! (Hear, hear). The CHAIRMAN: I refuse to put it. Mr. ROGERS: You refuse to put it? The CHAIRMAN: I do. Mr. ROGERS: It is very kind of you, Mr. Forrest. The resolution was then put, and the chairman declared it to be carried unanimously. Mr. ROGERS: It is not carried unanimously. The CHAIRMAN: Why you held up both hands for it. (Laughter). The meeting then closed with a vote of thanks to the Chairman.
***************end of article************ ***************[beginning of next article]************* ================================= The West Australian, Thursday, July 5, 1894: THE GENERAL ELECTIONS == METROPOLITAN PROVINCE ELECTION == MR. M.F.A. CANNING AT THE TOWN HALL ==
Mr. M.F.A. Canning, one of the candidates for election as a member for the Metropolitan Province in the Legislative Council, addressed a meeting of electors in the Town Hall last night. There was a moderate attendance, and Mr. H. Williams presided. Mr. CANNING said, in giving a retrospective glance at his proceedings in the late Parliament, that he had entered Parliament resolved to redeem the pledges he had given, and he believed he had done so, one result being the amendment of the Electoral Act. In doing this he did not stir up discussion on anything startlingly new. He merely pressed for the fulfilment of implied pledges by members of the legislature existing before Responsible Government, and he sought to have effect given to the intention of the House of Commons in passing the Bill giving us Responsible Government. He opposed the Government on certain questions of Constitutional procedure, but supported their public works policy generally. It was well known that that policy was the policy to which they were committed, they were pledged to do it in fact; but let it be borne in mind that they were not entitled to the exclusive credit of having carried it out. A large share of credit was due to the members of the late legislature who supported that policy. These measures were mostly dealt with during the first and second sessions of the late Parliament, and at the end of the latter he felt that he had accomplished something during the two sessions. In the third session it became necessary for the Assembly to elect a Chairman of Committees, the former holder of the office having, for some reason or other, resigned his seat as a member of the Assembly. He never sought the office of Chairman of Committees. When it was proposed to him to allow himself to be put in nomination for it he was surprised and unwilling to do so, but after some delay, acting upon the advice of several of his friends, he consented. He was elected to the office. Now, he would refer to a statement that had been made to the effect that he accepted a Government billet. That statement was either a deliberate, foolish lie, or else the outcome of crass ignorance. The position of Chairman of Committees was in no sense a Government billet. It was an office, like that of Speaker, to which the occupant was elected by the House, and was not in the gift of the Government. When a member's name was proposed for either office, some other member might be proposed in his place, and the House might, and did at times, divide on the question of which candidate should be elected. It was assumed that for either office the candidate proposed should possess certain special qualifications. Moreover, both the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees must give up their time and their respective duties, must be present during the whole time of the sitting of the House, and a certain responsibility rested upon them in connection with the various important duties devolving upon them. In every civilised country in the world, having representative government, the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees, or as they were styled in some countries, the President and Vice-President of the Lower House of Parliament, received a certain remuneration, to which they were fairly entitled in consideration of the onerous and sometimes arduous duties they had to perform. Although the Chairman took no part in debate in Committee, he was free to speak at any other time, a right which he (Mr. Canning) used repeatedly, and often in opposition to the Government. An impression was abroad that the Stock Tax was imposed by the late Parliament. Let him briefly show what took place with regard to that measure. In the fourth session he spoke on the second reading of the Tariff Bill on the 13th of September, 1893. But would they be surprised to learn that that Bill imposed no duty whatever upon horses, cattle, or sheep? The Bill was based largely on the report of a select committee of the Assembly, and comparing it with the Tariff Act it was intended to repeal, it was difficult to point to any one of its provisions as specially objectionable. It, in fact, followed in [sic] or two respects---but in an irregular and somewhat vague way---the lines he had always held to be those which should govern a system of taxation suited to the circumstances of this colony. Duties on raw materials were somewhat reduced, but there was an increase in those on certain manufactured goods. He, therefore, could see nothing calling for special opposition in the details of the measure. But the Bill imposed no stock tax or import duty on any animals other than camels and dogs. He was stating what was simply, literally, and absolutely true. In point of fact, no stock tax was imposed during the last or any other session of the late Parliament. The Tariff Act of 1888---passed before the introduction of Responsible Government---imposed the duties on horses, sheep and cattle which were leviable now. On the 8th August, 1893, a Bill was introduced in the Assembly and subsequently passed, neither diminishing or increasing those duties, but simply to remove a doubt as to whether the existing duty on cattle specified as applicable to "cattle intended for slaughter," should apply to what was called "store" cattle. It was never suggested in the discussion, nor did it occur to anyone that the duty had or could have any appreciable influence upon the price of meat in Perth, for the reason that up to that time it was considered most unlikely, if not practically impossible, that cattle or sheep could be brought here from the Eastern colonies in such numbers as to have any perceptible influence upon the local or domestic market. In fact, no attempt worth noticing had been made to bring cattle or sheep here for the supply of the market, except by sea, which would be too costly and hazardous a mode of importing stock for slaughter. It would be impossible to bring cattle or sheep from the other colonies in fit condition, he would not say for market, but for human food. The Stock Tax of 1983 was avowedly and really passed in order to place it beyond question that store cattle brought overland the other colonies for the purpose of stocking country in the far north were within the provisions of the then existing Tariff Act, and consequently liable to pay duty. As he had said, last year the existense of the tax could have no appreciable effect upon the cost of meat in the local market; but with our rapidly increasing population, the cost of living was constantly rising, and with the increasing amount of communication by sea between the Eastern colonies and this, it was becoming quite practicable to supply our market, to some extent, from those colonies so as to keep the cost of butcher's meat within reasonable limits, and upon the principle he had repeatedly declared to be in his opinion that which should govern taxation, duties should not be levied upon the necessaries of life so as to render the cost of living here unreasonably high. He was, therefore, decidedly in favour of the repeal of the duties on animals for slaughter, and he thought they had a right to expect that the Government would, as soon as might be reasonably practicable, propound a comprehensive financial scheme, embracing a revision of the present tariff and repealing the Stock Tax. (Hear, hear.) It must be recognised however, that the Government had no light task before them in the immediate future. How they would acquit themselves remained to be seen. In the new Parliament, as in the late one, public works must occupy the chief place in the Ministerial programme. A railway to the Murchison and another to some point at Coolgardie, were by general consent works which should be undertaken forthwith. The harbour works at Fremantle, and the opening up of the river, should be pushed on vigorously. He regarded the interest of Perth and that of Fremantle as practically identical, and to make Perth a great and important city, worthy of its geographical position, we must have a harbour at Fremantle. He hoped the day was not far distant when the bank of the lower Swan and lower Canning would be lined with manufactories, where large numbers of men would find employment. There were also certain local public works much needed. The necessity for a market place for this fast growing city was becoming daily more urgent, and he urged the erection of abattoirs or a general slaughtering place in a suitable locality within a convenient distance of Perth. All animals intended for human consumption should be killed and dressed at these abattoirs, which should be connected with Perth by rail. The necessity of a comprehensive scheme of drainage for the city was becoming so evident that the serious consideration of a measure to provide for carrying out the work could not be much longer delayed. It remained to be considered, however, whether the necessary funds should be raised by a direct Government loan, and the work be carried out by the Government, or whether a municipal loan might be raised to carry out a comprehensive scheme for the drainage and water supply of the city. The reclamation of the foreshore of Perth Water was a work long since authorised by Parliament; a sum of L 2,000 was voted for the work now nearly three years ago---and it was of the most urgent importance, whether they considered the healthfulness of the city, its appearance, or the value of the land which would be reclaimed, that that work should be carried out without delay. Another measure of importance which should engage the attention of the Government was one for the encouragement of the settlement of population on the land. The Government no doubt did something towards this by the Homesteads Bill, but something more was required. He urged that still further effort be made to clear certain suitable areas of land, and invite agriculturalists to settle on them. The experiment was worth trying. If successful, it would solve the difficulty of settling a population on the land. The matter next in order was the amendment of the Electoral Act. He maintained that plural and absentee voting should be resolutely and absolutely abolished; that facilities should be afforded for the fair representation of every important class of the community; and that lavish expenditure at and in connection with elections should be rendered impossible. He held that every class should be fully and fairly represented in the Legislature---that the working classes, that labour in short, should be represented in Parliament. He was distinctly in favour of a fair measure of representation being accorded to labour to the working classes. They formed by far the great majority of the people, and practically to deny them representation was a monstrous, nay, an intolerable injustice. But it had been said: how are labour representatives, if they forsake their respective callings, whatever they may be, even temporarily, for politics, to live? He replied: let provision be made for that by the State. He thought it monstrously absurd that the State should be called upon to pay a salary to the pushing lawyer, to the prosperous trader, or to the comfortable well to-do landowner. To none of these would he like to see the taxpayers' money given. But if any measure could be devised or suggested whereby a fair number of the representatives of the wage earning class, a fair number of representatives of labour might be able to sit in the Legislature, such measure or suggestion should have his heartiest support, or he would take such steps as might be possible to have the question considered and dealt with. On the principle expressed in the homely phrase "No one knows where the shoe pinches so well as he who wears it," he was of opinion that no one could understand the wants and true position of the wage-earning class so well as a man who had worked at a trade or in the ranks of labour for his daily bread. He had given a good deal of reflection to the "fair wage" principle, and he had arrived at the conclusion that, as regards this colony at all events, the solution of the question was practically in the hands of the Government. The Government was diredctly and indirectly the largest employer of labour in the colony. As regards those entirely employed by the Government, he assumed that they received a fair rate of wages. But with regard to those indirectly employed by the Government, those employed under contracts entered into with the Government, he was inclined to think that, perhaps unwittingly, a great deal of injustice was inflicted. The greater part of Government work was contracted for under tender. Now, there was a great deal of competition for contracts, and the result was that contracts were often taken at prices so low as not to leave a fair profit for the contractor. He was thus driven to have recource to grinding and various expedients in order to make any profit, or perhaps even to escape serious loss. He maintained that the rules which migth be recognised in ordinary transactions between private individuals did not apply in transactions between the State and individuals. In the one case it was considered quite legitimate to get work done as cheaply as possible, in other words to buy in the cheapest market. But many other considerations entered into the relations between the State and individuals. It was not to the advantage of the people composing the State to drive too hard a bargain with the individual, to wring every possible advantage out of him; for if the State made a good bargain for itself and a very bad one for the individual, the latter had so much the less to pay those he employed, and he and they had so much less for their ordinary wants, and consequently contributed so much less to the revenue. He would not accept the lowest tender. The Government should carefully estimate the value of any given work it might have to let by contract, and should not accept any tender below that estimate, but having accepted a tender for work at a fair and reasonable price, it should rigidly enforce compliance with the conditions of the contract, above all with the condition forbidding sub-letting. The TGovernment should set its face against swea[]ing in any and every shape or form. An Employers Liability Act was now generally recognised as necessary, and any measure establishing that principle would have his support. In conclusion, he asked them to give fair consideration to his actions in the late Parliament; to give due weight to his utterances; and to examine carefully and fairly the course he had uniformly pursued in relation to public and political questions, and if they thought he would serve them return him as their representative. (Hear, hear.) In reply to questions, Mr. CANNING said he was in favour of some competent official being appointed by the Government to inspect all mines before they were allowed to be floated on the market, so as to protect the interests of the public. This was a step not only in the interest of investors here, but would maintain the credit of the colony. He was in favour of taxation on the betterment system, as had been adopted in England. He would favour the Government introducing local timbers in the home market. He was in favour of legislation such as was adopted in Queensland, that when a goldfield was proclaimed leases should not be taken up within two years; also of legislation that would prevent nearly all goldfields being taken up on big leases, as they had seen lately in the colony. He was in favour of placing a royalty on gold going out of the colony. Mr. CASHMAN: Have not the miners paid a sufficient royalty in the money they have spent in the colony in getting it? (Applause.) In reply to another question, Mr. Canning said he was certainly in favour of the compulsory registration of mining companies in the colony. (Hear, hear.) An ELECTOR asked: Would the candidate put a heavier poll tax on Chinese and Afghans who were competing unfairly with white labour? Mr. CANNING said that some years ago he had expressed himself decidedly opposed to Chinese immigration, but as they were here they must not be treated cruelly. Another QUESTIONER: How many Chinese have you in your employ? (Hear, hear.) Mr. CANNING: I have only one. He does work that I cannot get a woman to do, that is all. The QUESTIONER: Why did you put that Chinaman away out of the [h? b? r?]ead when you were last appealing for the votes of the electors? (Hear, hear) Mr. CANNING: I did nothing of the kind; certainly not. A VOICE: There were 50 women imported by the Government, why did you not get one of them? Mr. CANNING: They were employed at once. The meeting closed with a vote of thanks to the Chairman.
**********end of article*********
[Follows a list of candidates for the different provinces. There were 7 candidates for Metropolitan (Perth.), Three Members. They were listed: Sir. G. Shenton; S.H. Parker; E.K. Courthope; John Horgan; H.J. Saunders; M.F.A. Canning; T.G. Molloy. For the South-East, there is J.F.T. Hassell listed; possibly an ancestor of W.R.B. Hassell, descendant of Marinus Canning