Billy Hughes Quotes

There is urgent need for population, but, of course, it must be of the right sort, and it must go to the right place. We do not want to make Australia a dumping ground for the world’s refuse populations, or to bring population to our already overcrowded cities, for such newcomers would not for the most part produce new wealth, but only share the wealth already there.

I have said that increased production is essential to the very existence of Australia; and increased production cannot be assured without the hearty co-operation of labour and capital. Industrial peace is essential to increased production, and that in its turn cannot be assured unless labour is given its legitimate place as a full partner in production.

The White Australia is yours. You may do with it what you please; but, at any rate, the soldiers have achieved the victory, and my colleague and I have brought that great principle back to you from the Conference. Here it is, at least as safe as it was on the day when it was first adopted by this Parliament.

They had now come out of the wilderness after a struggle which had torn the world to pieces. ... They had been opposed by the greatest instrument ever devised for the destruction of democracy—Prussian militarism. ... National safety for Australia was now in Australia's possession, and only their own folly could ever let that firm foundation on which they stood crumble beneath their feet. They had now the policy of a White Australia firmly established. (Cheers.) Australia was in the position of being able to say that Australia could be held now by the Australians. (Cheers.) He had had always appreciated the necessity for preparing for the defence of their great heritage. There had never been a day in the past when he had not seen quite clearly that the time would come when Germany or some other nation would endeavour to wrest it from them. The people of Australia were five millions, and they could never hold that country except by the means used by the Australian Imperial Force to achieve victory.

Looking back, as calmly as one might, on that which had come and gone, every thinking man must shudder when he realized how nearly we escaped defeat. We had won; on the field of battle we had triumphed over an enemy that for 40 years prepared for our destruction. The question now was, what shall the future be? Germany, crushed on the field of battle, was still to-day the best equipped for the commercial and industrial fight of every nation in the world. ... The industries of Australia are for Australians, and not for Germans. ... I see no evidence yet of a change of heart. On every side I see abundant proof that she is to-day what she was yesterday. ... As a race the Germans have not repented. They are a race of liars, of cheats. Their word is not to be relied on. (Cheers.) They will put their names to the Treaty [of Versailles], but as soon as we cease to have the power to compel them, that Treaty will be but another scrap of paper.

They all hoped the peace which was to be presented to Germany...would be based upon Germany's responsibility for the war, that it would indeed make her repair the frightful ravages she had made by land, sea, and air, that it would make her responsible for the cost of the war, and that it would insist upon such territorial, military, and other conditions as would make another war by Germany impossible for ever. (Cheers.) That is what the people of the world expected and demanded.

He hoped that Great Britain and France, which had both sacrificed so much, would defend their own interests, and not let their future be decided for them by one who had no claim to speak even for his own country. ... They could give America the respect due to a great nation which had entered the war somewhat late, but had rendered great service. It was intolerable, however, for President Wilson to dictate to us how the world was to be governed. If the saving of civilisation had depended on the United States, it would have been in tears and chains to-day. ... President Wilson, however, had no practical scheme at all, and no proposals that would bear the test of experience. The League of Nations was to him what a toy was to a child—he would not be happy till he got it.

Mr. Hughes said that if we were not very careful, we should find ourselves dragged quite unnecessarily behind the wheels of President Wilson's chariot. He readily acknowledged the part which America had played in the war. But it was not such as to entitle President Wilson to be the god in the machine at the peace settlement, and to lay down the terms on which the world would have to live in the future. The United States had made no money sacrifice at all. They had not even exhausted the profits which they had made in the first two and a half years of the war. In men, their sacrifices were not even equal to those of Australia. Relatively their sacrifices had been nothing like as much as those of Australia.

Germany...deliberately appealed to the arbitrament of the sword. Now, when she is beginning to learn that the world is not a sheep to be butchered, but that it has both the means and the will to defend itself, she talks about a “League of Nations”. Had she achieved world power, would our fate have differed from that of Russia or Rumania? Would she then have talked about a League of Nations?

Dr. Solf...talks about a League of Nations. ... A few weeks ago, before the Marne, we heard quite another story. Then, when it seemed that they would in a few days bury their talons in the vitals of Paris, the Germans spoke only of allotting the spoils. But the Marne had been fought. The Americans have arrived. The alluring visions of “Deutschland über Alles” fades in a bloody mist. Germany now licks her wounds and seeks to conquer us by words, by creating dissensions within to lure us on to a premature peace. ... What is this hypocritical whine about peace but a cunning attempt to escape the just punishment for the awful crimes Germany has committed?

The people of Britain are adjured by the pacifists to secure peace by negotiation. Do these gentlemen think the people of Britain and the Empire are fools? Peace by negotiation! What does it mean? In plain words it means industrial ruin, economic vassalage, national disaster. ... We are fighting a life-and-death struggle. We are fighting for our country, for our liberty, and for economic independence. ... Those who are not for us are against us. (Cheers.) The pacifist is at best the unwitting agent of our enemy.

He was sick of this canting humbug about internationalism. Nationalism, not internationalism, was the policy for Britain.

Amongst those who are opposed to a sound economic policy are the pacifists. I am not surprised. A sound economic policy for Britain means material loss to Germany, and the pacifists seem to have a tender regard for her interests. “The Paris Economic Conference resolutions,” said Mr. Henderson, “must be strenuously opposed.” That is exactly what Germany said to Russia at the point of the sword. That was how Germany expressed the triumph of Prussianism. And Mr. Henderson says exactly the same thing. He goes on:—“British Labour desires to maintain the policy of the open door.” And Germany also desires us to maintain the policy of the open door. Emil Zimmerman says:—“The rise of Germany is due essentially to the British policy of the open door. Without that we should be at one stroke once more the Germany of 1870.” It is certainly curious, to say the least of it, that while England and Germany are locked in a life-and-death struggle an Englishman should agree with a German that the policy vital to the welfare of Germany should be maintained by Britain.

What was the economic policy of Britain going to be? It was not merely a question of a tariff; the great question, Were we going to take such steps as would ensure prosperity in Britain and throughout the Empire, or weakly by a policy of inaction allow the nation to drift on to the rocks? It was impossible for the workers of this or any other country in improve their working conditions unless sound economic conditions existed. And this could only be done by securing the home market and controlling the sources from which the raw materials came. Labour must, for its own protection, take up the question of after-the-war problems, of trade organisation, of securing raw materials. The Government should declare its policy, and the nation should see that no peace was made with the enemy by which these steps, so necessary for our salvation, were rendered impossible.

That party will go down to all time as the party that failed Australia in her hour of need.