on the third argument, drake argued that, like american courts had done in similar cases, the high court should look to the substantive effect of the tasmanian legislation in considering whether it interfered with an exclusive power of the federal parliament. justice o'connor asked drake whether his argument applied to d'emden because he was an officer of the department, or merely because he had performed services for the department, and drake responded that his reasoning was not based on the person but on the fact that the salary receipt was a departmental record.