from A. Howard, foreman, South African Railways.

from the Anjuman Islam, Durban, and the Anjuman Himayatool, Pietermaritzburg, representing the Mahommedan community in Natal, praying the House to have their religious rites, in regard to marriages, recognised by law.

from W. J. Bennewith, metal turner, Uitenhage Railway Works.

from W. S. Metcalf, fitter, Uitenhage Railway Works.

from A. Hardcastle, district inspector, Office of Railways.

from the Mayor of Kroonstad, praying for a refund of £5,375 14s. 2d. for the construction of a bridge across the Vals River (two petitions).

from M. W. Siebert, assistant teacher, Education Department.

from grandchildren of the late Charles Bailie, killed in the Kafir war of 1835.

from H. J. Penny, clerk, Stores Branch, South African Railways.

from attorneys and notaries, praying for the repeal of schedule “C” of Ordinance No. 10 of 1903, annual licences.

from shareholders of Messine Bros. Coles and Searle (Limited), who were fined £162 14s. for failing to stamp share certificates.

Pensions provided for in Natal, Transvaal, and Orange Free State.

Prescribed forms and rules, Companies Act, 1909, Transvaal.

said he wished to take this opportunity of replying to questions addressed to him by the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Brown) a couple of days ago. The questions were in the following terms: (1) Whether Government funds have been advanced to cooperative wineries bearing interest at the rate of 3 per cent. per annum, with 1 per cent. sinking fund; and, if so, what amount? (2) Has interest been duly paid on any such advances; and, if not, what amounts are overdue, and by whom? (3) If interest upon any such advances has not been paid, what steps do the Government intend taking for the recovery thereof? (4) Has the Government any knowledge that the co-operative wineries sell their produce without a licence (no licence being required by such co-operative wineries) to retail dealers and private consumers, in unfair competition with duly licensed wholesale and retail merchants, and will the Government take such measures as will prevent Government funds being used to encourage and foster this unfair competition? Mr. Hull give the following replies: (1) In the Cape Colony prior to Union, the Government made advances to co-operative wineries under Acts 43 of 1905 and 27 of 1908. These advances were to be repayable by fixed half-yearly instalments of such sums as would redeem the liability in 28 years, calculating interest at the rate of 4 per cent. per annum. The amount of the advances outstanding at May 31 was £84,836 4s. 2d. (2) On May 31, 1910, the following interest was outstanding: Paarl Winery, £286; Stellenbosch Farmers’ Cooperative Wine Company, £1,303; Boven Vallei Winery, £542; Drakenstein Winery, £802; De Helderberg-Stellenbosch Winery, £800; Montagu Winery, £489; Over-Hex-Worcester Winery, £442; Wellington Winery £972; total, £5,636 The Government agreed to defer payment of half-yearly instalments until the end of 1910. 13) The Government have appointed a Departmental Committee to inquire into the working of co-operative wineries. The Government will await the report of the committee before coming to a decision as to the steps to be taken for recovery of outstanding interest. (4) The co-operative wineries are exempted by law from taking out a licence, and Ministers see no occasion at present for disturbing the policy laid down by the Cape Parliament in regard to this matter.

said that amongst other work which the Magistrates had to do in the Cape Colony was the collecting of revenue, as Civil Commissioners; that work had now been taken away from them, and he asked whether the Minister of Justice would see that the excessive number of Magistrates in country places was reduced.

asked what steps the Minister was taking with regard to Magistrates’ residences. The Government expected Magistrates to represent it, and so they should be properly housed, which was often not the case at present.

asked whether the Minister of Justice had inspected the Magistrate’s Court and offices at Cape Town. He (Sir Percy) had had an opportunity of doing so, and he did not think there was anything more disgraceful in existence in the country. (Cheers.)

referred to a case at Paarl, where a J.P. had been appointed, but without any explanation the appointment had been withdrawn. He would like to draw the Minister’s attention to it, as it was said—although he did not say so—that political feeling was connected with it. He hoped that the matte would be thoroughly investigated.

dealing with the accommodation for the Resident Magistrate’s Court, in Cape Town, said that it was notorious that the place was unwholesome, that water leaked through the roof, and that it was a perfect disgrace to any self-respecting town. He thought that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Hull) ought not to treat the matter as a joke. It had gone on for years now, and the matter had always been treated as one “for next year.”

asked whether it was the Minister’s intention during the session to introduce a law with regard to the jurisdiction of Resident Magistrates of the different Provinces?

in reply, said that the question of the jurisdiction of Resident Magistrates was one of the most serious questions which his department had to consider; and undoubtedly the question of jurisdiction had to be settled throughout the Union, and very serious alterations would have to be made. From a public point of view, he appreciated very much the request of the public, as far as the Cape and the Orange Free State were concerned, that the jurisdiction of the Magistrates should be extended very much. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that hon. members would see that, with the increase of jurisdiction, the competency of the Magistrates, as a rule, would also have to be greater. (Hear, hear.) He had nothing to say against the competency of the present Magistrates; but he would promise hon. members that he was going to go into that question very seriously. As to the Resident Magistrate’s Court in Cape Town, he had not been there, but he believed it was as had as it had been stated to be, and he hoped it was one of the places which would be improved. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the residences of Magistrates in the Cape the general practice was to hire them, and on the whole it had proved a more expensive practice than the practice of building the residences. There were other objections to hiring, and he hoped that there would be Government buildings throughout the Union. As to what the hon. member for Fort Beaufort (Dr. Smartt) had mentioned, he might assure hon. members that it was quite correct what he had said. Unfortunately, certain facts had not been brought to his (the speaker’s notice at the time, but afterwards they had been. Politics had nothing to do with it, so far as he knew, and as far as his office was concerned. But there were certain difficulties which had made it necessary for him to act as he had done; and it was necessary for a man in that position to have the good will of the community around him. He was still investigating with regard to that matter. Dealing with the matter alluded to by the hon. member for Cape Town (Mr. Jagger), he might at once say that there were certainly some places where the R.M.’s or the A.R.M.’s had too little to do to allow of their continuation there. The tendency had been rather to “magisterialise” too much. (Laughter.) The Hon. Minister was understood to say that there was one place where he had informed the Magistrate that he must shift as soon as there was a vacancy elsewhere. He was awaiting the report of the Civil Service Commission, in order to do away with a great deal of anomalies, especially in the Cape.

asked the intention) of the Government with regard to the Liquor Commission’s report.

referred to the appointment of Magistrates in the small districts, and was understood to say that it was not so much a matter from the Government point of view, but the point of view of the Divisional Council and the School Board. It would be much better for these people to conduct their own affairs than having the work conducted from other places. He thought that the claims of people An these places should be considered by the Government.

said that the Magistrate at Hoopstad was occasionally absent for some considerable time. His chief clerk had no authority to do the work for him, and this greatly inconvenienced the public.

was understood to deal with the transport arrangements in Zululand. He said that at present Government officials were at the mercy of the transport driver.

said that with regard to the Liquor Commission’s report, it was brought up late, and the Government had not decided upon anything. The question raised by the hon. member for Zululand would be taken into consideration. Dealing with the remarks of the hon. member for Ladismith (Mr. Becker), he said that if there was one thing he would be loth to do, that thing was to take away or diminish the part or share which the public played in the administration of its own affairs, because he held very strongly that the more interest the public took in affairs of State the better it would be for the public and education.

asked if the Government would give attention to the case he had mentioned?

replied in the affirmative.

referred to the salary of the Master in the Transvaal, and asked if the allowance of £400 as a member of the Land Bank Board was paid by the Government?

was understood to reply that the amount was paid out of land taxes.

asked if the £400 would be included in the calculation for that official’s pensions?

As far as I know—yes.

pointed out that the Transvaal official got twice as much as the same official in the Cape.

said there must surely be some mistake if the amount was calculated for the purposes of a pension.

said he had found that the Minister of Finance was not quite certain on the point. As far as he was concerned, he did not think that it was possible. This official was in receipt of this allowance when Union came about.

said he thought it would be rash to judge the Government upon this question.

I have been told that it is so.

said that the duties of the official An question were of the utmost importance to the Land Bank, as a director of which he could do excellent work, because, in his capacity as Master of the High Court, he was well informed as to land values. His dual position was such a success that the Government could not do better than maintain it. He finished his High Court work during his own leisure hours if, by attending to the Land Bank, his ordinary working hours were encroached upon. His duties, therefore, would not suffer in any way. As a general rule, the Transvaal Government had been quite alive to the undesirability of dual positions, but this case was an exception.

said that it was a question of pay, and not of capability. He went on to point out that if this disparity was allowed to continue, so far as salaries were concerned, it might give rise to considerable discontent in the service.

referred to the policy adopted in connection with the Natal Land Bank, and said that no such allowances were given; in fact, they were absolutely discouraged, Civil Servants being expected to give their whole time to their work.

said that the officer in question was a good man, and was paid a very sufficient salary, but the position taken up on his (the speaker’s) side of the House was that they did not object to allowances being paid if permanent Civil Servants received appointments of that sort, and their work was considerably increased, but they said that the Government ought to be extremely careful that allowences were not paid as salaries, and that they were not reckoned in connection with the pension fund. If such allowances were paid as salaries and reckoned in connection with the pension fund, then there would be great dissatisfaction and friction in the Civil Service.

said that he did not think there was another case in the whole of the Uunion service similar to the present one.

And there should not be.

I agree that there should not be. Proceeding, he said that he agreed with the hon. member for Maritzburg North (Mr. Orr) that a Civil Servant ought to devote the whole of his time to the service of the Government. Now the question was: whether this officer should be entitled to draw pension in respect of his £400 allowance as chairman of the Land Bank? Under the Land Bank Law servants were not allowed to draw pensions for their services, but under the Civil Service Law of the Transvaal, passed in 1906 by the Crown Colony Government, it was provided that the transfer of Civil Servants from other Administrations should be entitled to draw pensions, not only in respect of their salaries, but also in respect of their allowances.

said that they were going to give the officer in question £400, which would come out of the State. It was not an advantage to the service that he should give his services to another institution, and yet the State had to pay his pension.

said that the Land Bank in the Transvaal was not “another” institution. It was a Government concern; every penny of capital in the concern was Government money.

In reply to Mr. T. ORR (Pietermaritzburg North),

said that the Transvaal Land Bank was established under Responsible Government.

referring to the law passed by the Crown Colony Government in 1906, said that he did not think that it was intended to include such a payment as the present one. He, personally, was strongly in favour of the officer in question. He appreciated very greatly the work he had done, but he did not think it was in his interest or in the interests of the Land Bank itself that they should impose upon the taxpayers of this country his pension in respect of the services he had performed in his overtime.

The vote was agreed to.

asked the Minister to take into consideration the position of the police in Zululand.

said that he wished to draw the attention of the Minister to a matter about which he had received many complaints. He said that in the Transvaal Police the married men were allowed an allowance of 2s. 6d. per day for house accommodation. Only a very small percentage of the married men, however, received housing accommodation, and those who did not receive such accommodation got an allowance of 2s. 6d. per day. Now, that allowance might be quite sufficient in the country districts, but, so far as the Rand was concerned, it was totally inadequate. He hoped therefore, the Minister would either provide additional accommodation or increase the allowance.

drew the attention of the Minister to the fact that in the Natal police there were a number of men who could speak. Dutch, but not English, and that there were also a number who could speak English, but not Dutch. Now those men who were proficient in Dutch drew an extra 1s. a day. He wished to ask the Minister whether he would consider the question of giving an extra 1s. to those men who spoke English, but could not speak Dutch? (Opposition cheers and laughter.)

asked the Minister to make a full statement regarding his reasons for appointing a new Chief of Police in the Transvaal. He thought that such a statement would do a great deal of good, not only so far as the public was concerned, but also in the police force.

said that, so far as the Cape was concerned, he did not think it could be said to be overpoliced. He hoped that the sum of £23,000 for additional police salaries would enable the Minister of Justice to give extra police to centres needing them.

said it was a grievance amongst the Natal Police that promotions were made from outside their ranks.

said that on the Rand the police occasionally got roughly handled, and they had only truncheons with which to protect themselves. It had been suggested that it would be a very good thing if they were allowed to carry revolvers.

No.

drew attention to a complaint by the police that they were charged more for ammunition than Volunteers were. He thought the police should be supplied with sufficient ammunition to enable them to become efficient shots.

complained about the inadequate pay of policemen in the Transvaal. Seven shillings a day, he thought, was entirely insufficient, especially in a town like Johannesburg, where rents were high and where the cost of living generally was excessive. He trusted that the next Estimates would make more liberal provision in this respect.

likewise complained about the remuneration of policemen’s services, adding that in the country districts there was far too little protection for farmers.

said that owing to the fact that a Select Committee had been appointed to deal with the provisions of the new Police Bill, it was obviously not necessary to raise a number of points which otherwise might have been raised on the Estimates. There was, however, one or two matters of smaller importance which, he imagined, would not come within the scope of the Select Committee. It had been represented to him that in many cases it was absolutely a handicap to a policeman to be a man of good education. Such a man was given a staff billet, for which he received extra remuneration of a shilling or two. Unfortunately, the only chance of promotion, was the performance of actual police work, which an educated man doing staff work very rarely performed. To get over this difficulty there might be a separate clerical staff with its own promotion. Another grievance was with regard to police clothing. When a policeman was promoted to plain clothes work he had to find his own clothes, but was not given extra pay. Consequently he was about £2 a month worse off than a uniformed policeman. Again, mounted constables had to have a more expensive kit than did foot policemen, but they were given no extra pay. The hon. member then referred to the prevalence on the Rand of the illicit gold buying and liquor traffic. The police did their best to cope with the evil, but they could not do impossibilities, and it seemed to him that there were not enough police for the purpose. There was not the slightest reason why the police force should not be strengthened without waiting for a determination of a policy on the whole of the liquor question.

said that as far as he understood, the Government had taken over these quarters, and had made no alterations. The House had appointed a Select Committee on police matters. The hon. member for Georgetown (Sir George Farrar), was on that committee. The members of it had every opportunity of getting information, yet here they came into the House as if they had no confidence in themselves. He (the speaker) was quite prepared to await the committee’s report.

said he desired to support the hon. member for Georgetown (Sir Geo. Farrar) on the question of police uniforms. The case of the police was very much harder than that of a soldier. The policeman was only allowed to wear his uniform while on duty, and had to provide himself with private clothing. He hoped the Minister for Justice would give the matter considerate attention, and try to meet the difficulty. The Government would find if they went into the matter, that unconscious injustice was being meted out to perhaps the best body of men in South Africa.

said he would like to emphasise the point made by the hon. member for Boksburg (Dr. MacNeillie) in reference to married men in the police force, who were not provided with quarters. The allowance of 2s. 6d. per day made to married men who were not provided with quarters had been spoken of, but there were cases in the Transvaal where so little as £2 5s. per month was provided in lieu of quarters, and, as a matter of, fact, the total rental paid by these men amounted to about £7 per month, leaving them £4 10s. at least to pay themselves. A constable received 9s. per day which made £13 10s. a month. Take £4 10s. from that, and it left a man £9 with which to provide himself and his family with food and clothing. It was not a fair clause, because it was advisable, as a matter of policy, to have as many married men as possible in the force.

speaking of the recent changes which had taken place in the civil police in the Transvaal, said he did not want to rake up anything that had happened in the past, but wished to get an assurance from the Government that there was going to be some more continuity in the future than had been the case in the past. Recently, two senior officers in the Transvaal were discharged on very short notice. Nobody he heard speak on the question seemed to know of any reason in regard to the personal qualifications of these men, why they should have been discharged. The Minister was asked, and he said they were discharged because of reorganisation. He (Mr. Duncan) might attach a different reason to that, but when a man was discharged and another put in iris place, he did not call it reorganisation, and the men in the police force did not call it that either. He thought it was very necessary to have some assurance from the Minister that there was going to be some more continuity in the personnel of the police force than there had been in the past. As far as he knew there was no reorganisation to justify the changes which had taken place in the Transvaal. He also desired to ask what qualifications were required of recruits in the police force, such as of education and character. He had heard of complaints made by Magistrates and others that some of the new men were absolutely useless as witnesses, for they could not give an intelligible account of an occurrence. In places like Johannesburg, where the temptations were so strong for a man to avoid doing his duty, it was imperative that the men should be men of character and education. Another thing he would like to know was the married strength of the force. At present he understood men were not admitted to the married strength in order of seniority. That was a mistake. He thought men would stay in the force more if they were posted to the marriage strength in order of seniority.

said he wished to refer to another question which he did not think would come before the Select Committee. He quite agreed that if the definition of the Select Committee was as first defined by the hon. member for Somerset (Mr. Vosloo), it would be sitting for the next five or ten years. If the hon. member for Ermelo (General Tobias Smuts) had been present he would no doubt have referred to the question of the police post on the Swaziland border, half-way between Amsterdam and Steynsdorp. It was an important post, because it was open to cattle being run into Swaziland. Recently the Government abolished that post, and, in the Eastern Transvaal, that action had created considerable consternation. On the abolition of the post the Government paid a farmer £20 per month to look after it. Then he understood the Agricultural Department, fearing that such a distance of eighty miles should not be unprotected, although the police patrolled forty miles each way, sent down two special policemen to take the post over. He hoped the Minister for Justice would look into the matter. If the post was properly re-established, it would allay the fears of the farmers in the district. Regarding the remarks of the hon. member for Germiston (Mr. Chaplin) in regard to the illicit liquor trade with natives in the Witwatersrand, he thought the police force was inadequate to cope with that sort of crime. He hoped the Minister for Justice would see his way to strengthen the force which dealt with that very important question.

referring to the illicit liquor traffic, asked if it would be possible, when framing the next Estimates, to get any idea of the cost of coping with crime generally among the natives in the reserves on the mines. His aim was to get, in every possible way, a clearer estimate of the extra force in the country necessary to carry out the labour system the Government had in force.

drew attention to the fact that no distinction was made between the pay of con stables, though some of them do work which required special qualifications. He suggested the advisability of having a scale of pay according to the character of the work done and the length of service. He also pointed out the lack of proper accommodation for certain of the police, both for sleeping and recreation.

said the police post referred to by the hon. member for Georgetown (Sir G. Farrar) was removed because there was no crime in the vicinity, but it was being re-established at another point in the district. With regard to the first point raised by the hon. member for Fordsburg (Mr. Duncan), he did not think the hon. member was correct when he said that reorganisation was carried out in such manner that one man was dismissed and another appointed to fill his place. The position was, that the position of Commissioner of Police for the Union had to be created, and, so far as the Government was concerned, they appointed a person whom they considered to be the best man for the post. Personally he (General Hertzog) held that the gentleman appointed was an ideal man for the position, and, at any rate, if anything went wrong, he (General Hertzog) would have to take the responsibility for the appointment. As to the hon. member’s (Mr. Duncan) complaint regarding the class of police being recruited, his information was that they were now obtaining a very good class of recruit—the same class of men that they had formerly in the Transvaal and Free State Artillery. It was quite possible that a great many of these men were not as well educated as might be wished, owing to the war being in progress when they should have been in school; but at all the depots there were instructors who assisted them in the matter of improving their education. With reference to the order in which police were placed on the married strength, he thought the only possible system was to admit them in order of priority of application. People applied to be placed on the married strength as they got married or contemplated marriage. As to the illicit liquor dealing on the Rand, he might say that in the next Estimates provision would be made for an increased staff of detectives. Reference had been made to the question of the payment of the police. That question was one of the main questions to be settled by the Commissioner of Police, and he hoped that before the next Estimates came on the matter would be dealt with, because there was no doubt that they must try at once to have the pay of the police assimilated, with the necessary territorial allowances, where living was cheaper or more expensive. As to the question of promotion, he agreed with much of what the hon. member had said about a man having the chance of rising from the ranks; but in regard to the Commissioner of Police, he did not think one could always say that they should have a man who had risen from the ranks. As to the question of the increase of police at Kimberley, that was in the hands of the Commissioner. As to the question of the hon. member for Umlazi (Mr. Fawcus), with regard to the increase in the pay of certain of the police, that shilling increase was given to men who understood both English and Dutch; and he thought it very sound that a man with that additional knowledge should get paid more. The Natal Government had encouraged that system. As to the question of the Railway and Harbour Police. He believed that the Minister of Railways and Harbours was not very willing that he (General Hertzog) should take them over.

said that he would like to ask whether the £1,500 salary of Mr. Truter covered both his position as Commissioner of the Union and of the Transvaal, or both.

It covers both.

said that both salaries still figured on the Estimates.

replied that that was because, when the Estimates had been drawn up, the previous Commissioner had still been in office.

said that what he wanted to know was the reason for the change. It was not a good policy to discharge a head official because one had got a man somewhere else, whom one thought could do better. He must have something against the man in charge. By doing as he did, the Minister was bound to bring about a feeling of unsettlement in the force.

said that he did not think the Minister had realised the feeling in the country with regard to the appointment referred to. The feeling was that an officer had been discharged for some reason, and another appointed without experience.

I just want to make this very plain—that, as far as this appointment was concerned, having a new and very important post to fill, I took what I considered to be the best man under the circumstances.

On the motion of the MINISTER OF JUSTICE the amount was reduced by £5,298.

The vote was agreed to.

inquired with reference to an industrial school (page 127 of the Estimates).

replied that the industrial school in question, which was at Standerton, was one for waifs and strays. There were 150 boys and girls there, of ages varying from two years to 15—children who had been neglected by their parents, and who had been brought to the Magistrate. Provision had been made for the boys to be brought to a farm near Heidelberg, where they had every scope for being taught a trade and so on.

I don’t complain of that at all. In the Cape Province we have made provision in a similar way, under the Act passed in 1905, for waifs and strays; but I want to refer to children convicted of some minor crime. Continuing, he said that under present circumstances, these children were sent to a reformatory, which was not the best way of meeting the case. It tended to harden them. In Victoria, Australia, these youngsters were sent to the Salvation Army. He suggested that the Victorian principle might be considered and carried into effect.

said the Minister was to be congratulated on the way he had overcome the difficulties in connection with the industrial school. But he thought it an unsatisfactory state of affairs that girls who had been convicted should be sent to this home. He thought that some special institution should be established for this purpose. He also thought it unsatisfactory that such a huge and important department like this should be without an administrative head. It, was a department that required a sympathetic head.

said that the last speaker had made some most important points. At this home they had children who had committed offences mixed up with children who had not done anything wrong. Surely the time had come for them to deal with this big question in a comprehensive manner. They had not the same difficulties in connection with this question as they had with others, and so they should be able to carry out some national system of dealing with these unfortunate children. Would not the Ministesend this matter to a committee or a Commission, which could consider the question from every standpoint and try to devise some means of dealing with it in a comprehensive way? Other countries had dealt with the question, and there was any amount of experience which they could have for nothing. If the Minister of Justice only give the question a little consideration he thought the would appreciate its gravity, and act of his own accord. He went on to refer to the excellent work done by Select Committees in the past, and said it was unfortunate that no use had been made of the valuable information contained in a host of Blue-books. Let the committee consider the matter, and let a practical, comprehensive scheme be devised which they could carry out at the opportune time.

referred to legislation which he had introduced in the Natal House, based on British and Australian principles. In the cases of first offenders, they were not sent to gaol to herd with the worst criminals, and to come out as the complete article, but they were saved from such evils. He had been informed that the measure had worked splendidly.

said he hoped that the Hon. the Minister would give heed to the earnest expressions of opinion on both sides of the House that this industrial training system should be extended to the other Provinces of the Union. He thought his hon. friend would do well to consider the advice that had been given by the hon. member for Troyeville, and after the recess they might do well if they appointed a committee to go thoroughly into the question. He would like his hon. friend to give attention to the point as to whether religious and charitable bodies were not the proper bodies to undertake this work. He could not be called unduly favourable to the Dutch Reformed Church but anybody who had seen the work that was being done at the industrial schools at Uitenhage or Adelaide would recognise the value of all that was done, and the good results attained at those schools should induce the House to vote money for such a reasonable purpose.

referred to some of the grievances of the guards engaged in Roeland-street Gaol. He said that they complained that their hours were from 6 a.m. to 7.30 p.m., and in winter from 7 a.m. to 6.30 p.m. Their rate of pay was also very unsatisfactory. They complained that the turnkeys who performed the same work as they did drew a very much higher rate of pay. Furthermore, they (the guarde) were put down as temporary men. The turnkeys received £182 a year, whereas the guards only received an average of £90. Now, considering the responsible work which these men had to perform, he thought the Minister would agree that the rate of pay was very small indeed. Certain allowances were also granted to married men if they happened to be turnkeys.

The vote, slightly amended, was agreed to.

said that for some time the South African College had included in its various activities a school of forestry, conducted partly at the College and partly at Tokai. For some reason or other, however, the Minister of Education had issued a notice stating that it had been decided to accept no more candidates for instruction in forestry in connection with the South African College. The consequence was that any youngster who wanted to go into the Forestry Department would have absolutely no place to go to in South Africa to learn his business. He would like to ask the Minister why he had taken it upon himself to put a stop to what he considered was a very good work, carried on at the South African College and Tokai?

said that the position was that the forestry school, instituted some few years ago, was really a departmental undertaking, and the object of its establishment was to give those in the Forestry Department some technical training. They had now found, however, that they had trained all the men they required, and that, if they trained any more, there would be too many, because the only forestry work done was in connection with the Government Department. They found that the lower-grade men in the department required that for one year or two years as the case might be, they should devote their attention to the lower grade. The school, however, had not been closed; all they said was that for the present they would not take any more applicants. But if, after twelve months, or two years perhaps, the necessity arose again to train the higher grade men, the work would be resumed. He moved to reduce the “Diocesan College” by £400.

raised the question of the higher education of natives, and asked what the Government intended to do in the matter. He pointed out that native students at present went to America to receive higher education, and said that that state of affairs had not been to the advantage of this country. He believed that there were institutions here where higher education could be given if only a sum were placed on the Estimates. He thought it would be a good day for South Africa if the Minister put a sum on the Estimates for the higher education of natives, and so prevent them going to America and other countries.

also expressed the hope that, if possible, the Government would place a sum of money on the Estimates so as to make it unnecessary for natives to go to America or elsewhere. There were institutions in this country where the natives got a good education, and where their moral training was looked after.

said that he would do with natives precisely as he would do with white people—where they found exceptional ability everything possible should be done to develop it, but to give natives artificial stimulation would be a great mistake.

moved that the special grant of £500 to the South African College for the initial expenditure for the Department of Anatomy and Physiology be expunged. The mover said there was no objection to teaching of botany at the South African College as a portion of a medical student’s training, but when it came to subjects like anatomy and physiology, on a proper knowledge of which a doctor’s success largely depended, the giving of instruction in these branches should be done only under the very best conditions. As the College would not be able to offer high salaries, the instructors would be men of only second-class ability. Further, the material did not exist in this country for the efficient teaching of these subjects, which could be done only in large centres. If, however, we were going to have a Teaching University, then we might consider whether we were going to qualify our own medical men, but personally he would regret a decision in the affirmative. We should be guided by the experience of Australia in this matter, the Australians themselves not trusting doctors trained in that continent. Medical students who received their training in anatomy and physiology here would, when they went to Europe to complete their training, have anything but a sound foundation to work upon. The views he had expressed on this matter were those of the majority of the medical profession.

said he was amazed at what had fallen from the hon. member for Woodstock. (Cheers.) If we followed that gentleman’s argument to a logical conclusion, then we ought to start nothing in this country for training in either the law, science, medicine, or any other profession. The hon. member asked them to believe good men could not be obtained in South Africa. A more absolute negation of the South African spirit he (Mr. Baxter) had never heard. (Cheers.)

What about the National Union?

said that he understood this question of starting two chairs of medicine had been the subject of a great deal of negotiation between the Minister of Education and the South African College. The whole thing had been thrashed out on its merits, and he understood that the Minister of Education had been convinced that it was in the interests of South African higher education that a school of medicine should be started. The question of the establishment of a teaching university need not interfere with this matter at all. The South African College authorities had given an undertaking that they were not going to stand in the way of the establishment of a teaching university, in which they were prepared to merge the Colony. This was a heavy sacrifice, which would lead to an easier solution of the question. Although with the salaries the Colony would be able to offer for instructors in anatomy and physiology, they might not get the very best men, still, he thought the record of the South African and other Colleges as to the quality of their professors was such that there need not be any fears.

who also opposed the amendment, urged that the great object in these matters should be to make South Africa self-supporting. The same arguments as those advanced by the hon. member for Woodstock used to be heard a few years ago against the proposal to train men for the Bar here, but some of the most eminent judges had received their legal training entirely in South Africa. The Cape Town Council had given £2,000 a year to the South African College to assist in the starting of an Engineering School there, and so successful had that school proved that its certificate was accepted in England just as if its possessors had been trained in London. This, he believed, was a unique distinction for a Colonial College. The time would come when all our experts would be trained in South Africa. (Hear, hear.)

said he was very much disappointed at the amendment, and mentioned that the principal mover in the proposal to establish Chairs of Anatomy and Physiology at the South African College was a doctor. Medical students were required to go through a five years’ course. One year’s course could already be taken at the South African College, and now it was proposed to have a two years’ additional course, thus reducing the period of European training to two years. He did not think any College had a better set of professors than the South African College, and two of them had European reputations. The hon. member hoped the amendment would be withdrawn.

said it had been stated that if they started schools of that kind in South Africa they were going to turn out half-trained doctors who were not so good as doctors from beyond the sea. He did not believe that at all. (Hear, hear.) In his experience, he did not think the South African professions were inferior to the professions abroad at all. What was wrong with them was that they were younger, but as a rule we got the very best men of their year. They had a good many Universities abroad who were not so fortunate. Where did their young men go to who wanted to learn to be doctors? They were going to Edinburgh, and Edinburgh was not a large place at all. He thought it was a little larger than Cape Town. (Laughter.) They would be under an entire misapprehension if they fallowed the arguments of the hon. member opposite (Dr. Hewat) that they were going to turn out second-rate doctors here. He did not think anything of the sort. It had been an argument for many years that the University here should close its doors to any outside students, but that should not be so, because they had a very great number of eminent men in South Africa, who started without the advantages referred to by Dr. Hewat The law had been conspicuous in that respect, He was sure the hon. member (Dr. Hewat) was wrong, and that his views were against the sentiment in South Africa.

said he had made his remarks in all good faith, and though they might not agree with the views held by the hon. member for Uitenhage, still he held that his opinion was as worthy of consideration as his (Mr. Fremantle’s). He was still convinced that these two classes should not be held. The hon. members were misled when in their remarks they held that he was against medical qualifications in South Africa. Still, he withheld any opinion on that matter at present, although he did not think that at the present moment it was injudicious to have any medical qualifications in South Africa. He held that the two classes being held by the South African College were injudicious. As a matter of fact, he still held that the advisability of the theoretical teaching of anatomy and physiologly was doubtful. The practical teaching of these subjects was the principal thing, and it had taken the European Universities hundreds of years to accumulate their specimens, which meant that South Africa would be placed at a distinct disadvantage. So far as South African professors were concerned, there was no one held them in higher esteem than he did. He would withdraw his motion.

said he would like to know whether that included the payment for those students who were sent abroad to study agriculture in Canada and the United States; and, also, whether any provision had been made for bursaries for music. It seemed a small matter, but he believed one or two talented youngsters had been encouraged to look forward to some assistance. He believed it was understood that they could get a better education in music abroad, and some encouragement had been given them to hope that provision would be made for very exceptional pupils being educated abroad. He also wanted to hear the Minister’s opinion of the success of the experiment that was made in sending pupils to Canada and the United States. A certain number were sent from the Transvaal, and he bad had the fortunate experience of seeing them at work, and so far as he could see, they were doing particularly well. He thought hon. members would be glad to know that there were no less than 15 students at Agricultural Colleges in Canada and the United States, and they had arranged to spend their next holiday on the shores of Lake Superior, so that they could reunite and discuss affairs there and in South Africa. They belonged to both races, and were welded together by the one tie of having South Africa for their home. They were extraordinarily well spoken of by the authorities, and hon. members would be glad to know that they were doing extremely well. They were profiting by their experiences, and were very grateful. They were also upholding South Africa’s name in the same way as the Springboks had done in cricket and football, and had the name for playing the game. (Applause.)

said that in regard to the question of higher education for natives, the hon. member for Tembuland (Mr. Schreiner) had opened up a very wide question, and he (Mr. Malan) hoped the hon. member, would not press for a very definite reply on a question of such importance at present. Some time ago he informed a deputation which had waited upon him in Pretoria on the subject that the Government would take their representations very carefully into consideration, and would let them know the result. Hon. members would see that no provision had been made on the Estimates in this connection for the current year. It might be true that natives were going to America to study, and it might be true that the hon. member for Tembuland only wanted a small amount to start with, but before the Government embarked on a policy of that kind it behoved them to consider the matter very carefully as to where such a policy was going to lead them to. He was not inclined now to express any more definite opinion on the matter, and could only say that it was having very careful attention. As to the chairs of anatomy and physiology at the South African College, he was pleased that the hon. member for Woodstock (Dr. Hewat) had withdrawn his proposal. He (Mr. Malan) thought the time had come to make a definite start in this matter. It was possible this might be the beginning of that higher education which they contemplated in South Africa at the present moment, and the establishment of which had been referred to in the address of the Governor-General when he opened Parliament. The question was whether it was wise to begin at the South African College—at the old site—or whether it was not wiser to wait until they had started the Teaching University. The argument for delaying it in connection with the bigger scheme rather appealed to him. He had put that point to a deputation of the South African College authorities which had waited upon him, and he had told them he had no objection to confirming the promise given by the Government of the Cape Colony shortly before Union, on condition that they would offer no objection if it were afterwards found convenient to remove to a more central site, and the deputation had accepted that condition. He might mention that in the salaries vote, provision was made for the salaries of these two professors, and a further sum of £20,000 had been provided for building and equipping the laboratories. Even if the site of the University were not in Cape Town, the building could afterwards be utilised for useful purposes. He had, therefore, come to the conclusion that, with that condition laid down, he would rather encourage a start being made now. It was, he realised, just that one branch of education which had been neglected in South Africa in the past. As to the question of bursaries, raised by the hon. member for Pretoria East (Sir P. Fitzpatrick), he might mention that bursaries were provided for in the vote for agricultural education. He was pleased to hear what the hon. member had said about the young South Africans who had gone abroad to study agriculture. For this financial year, the Government were just maintaining the policy of the past, but be hoped they would be able to give further bursaries in the future, and so increase the number of young South Africans Who sought the advantages of a knowledge of the great development in other countries. (Hear, hear.) As regarded music, bursaries had not so far been given to students to proceed abroad. It Would be a new departure, but he was prepared to discuss it with the people interested, and to consider it, if a good case were made out. He realised that they ought not to neglect this important art. Mr. Malan moved the deletion of the item £3,014, being grant-in-aid of the Kimberley School of Mines. The School of Mines, he explained, had been removed to Johannesburg and the money given to the institution at Kimberley was now given for primary education at Kimberley.

The amendment was agreed to.

moved that the vote stand over, in order that certain alterations as to the allocation of particular votes might be made later.

Agreed to.

asked the reason for the decrease in the vote for the Cedara Agricultural School.

asked what had become of the report of the Education Commission appointed by the Cape Government?

said that the reduction in the vote for the Cedara Agricultural School was more apparent than real. The present ten months only included three quarterly payments, and not four. In reply to the hon. member for Queen’s Town (Sir B. Berry), he said that the report of the Education Commission had not yet come to hand. He understood that some time ago the Commission had finished its evidence, and was now considering its report. A part explanation of the delay was that there were several candidates for Parliamentary honours on the Commission, and there was some doubt as to the legality of their position as members, and whether they were not under an “office of profit,” in terms of the Act of Union. One of them had sent in his resignation to protect himself, because he did not know whether he would be a member of Parliament or not if he remained. The Government, had taken legal advice, which was that service on a Commission of that kind was not an “office of profit” in terms of the South Africa Act, and the hon. member for Cape Town, Central (Mr. Jagger) was then reappointed. He moved, under “Tweespruit Experimental Station” to insert, “assistant teacher, £361.”

Is the Commission still alive?

Yes.

said that he was rather astonished at the hon. member opposite, for nineteen years ago the hon. member had been a member of the Education Commission, which had taken a good deal longer, and had not done quite as much work. The work to-day was incomparably larger. He was not prepared to bring out the report of the Commission before the evidence had been printed. It had been necessary to take much evidence, and he believed that there was nothing in it which could be missed. It was now being printed. He did not believe it was best to hurry a matter of that kind; it was better to take time and do the work thoroughly.

said that it was true that the Education Commission of 19 years ago had taken a very considerable time to report, but one of the members was a judge, who had to be away for some months to do his work on the bench. He was very glad to hear that the whole of South Africa had been covered, and not only the Cape.

Mr. Malan’s amendment was agreed to.

spoke in favour of an agricultural school, college, or experimental farm on the eastern portions of the Cape Province—in the Territories.

asked whether students who had been at Eisenberg for 12 months could not be transferred to Grootfontein, where there were better opportunities of learning sheep farming.

spoke in favour of the Agricultural College at Pretoria, which, he said, he had opposed before, because he had thought that in Pretoria was not the best plane; since then the Pretoria Town Council had given upwards of 2,000 morgen of ground, which included high-veld, and had a really magnificent situation. They suffered under many disadvantages and handicaps in this country, but the greatest were the diseases which they had to combat. Their future lay northward towards the bush-veld, the more tropical and rich parts, and unless they met these diseases they would never have the future they anticipated. Unless the students had facilities to study, and they could only have these facilities up there, they would not be able to qualify themselves to carry on the work. Proceeding, he said that concentration could be carried too far, and he hoped that this matter was not going to be settled on the old lines—the divided capital, or the giving of so much to one and so much to the other. It ought to be settled upon its merits. He appealed to hon. members to look at this matter from a South African point of view, and he appealed to the Government to place a vote for this national Agricultural College on the next Estimates. A tremendous amount Could be done for the country by such a College, and the difference it would make would be inconceivable.

said that the State had a great duty to perform in educating the children of the country up to Standard IV., and at the present time there was still a great number of children out of school. It was all very well to talk and grow enthusiastic about agricultural and higher education, but they must remember it was the students from the lower schools who filled Colleges such as the one they were talking about. The first duty of the State was to look after primary and secondary education, though he did not say that in consequence they should totally disregard higher education. In South Africa there was only room for one college of this kind, and they would find difficulty, he thought, in filling the one institution. He did not think the people of South Africa had yet realised the importance of scientific knowledge in connection with agriculture. There had been a marked improvement, which he hoped would continue, and he trusted that the efforts of the Government would be appreciated. The College at Pretoria had been definitely decided upon, and a sum of £100,000 had been allocated. Negotiations were in progress between the Pretoria Town Council and the Government for the transfer of the site that had been selected. As soon as the negotiations had been completed, and the transfer effected, a start would be made with the construction of the College. He did not think the Government would be justified in starting on a grand scale immediately. The idea was to act upon broad lines, but it was not necessary to spend all the money at once. A start would be made with the part most necessary, and there would be gradual development and extension. That was the policy of the Government. Continuing, he said that, in reply to the hon. member for Queen’s Town (Sir Bisset Berry), he did not think it would be desirable to transfer students from Elsenberg to Grootfontein. He thought it would be a mistake to change about before the two years course was finished. So far as the remarks of the hon. member for Tembuland were concerned, he referred to the experimental farm in the Territories, and said that, as the result of a visit, he was satisfied with the work that was being done. He said that a further grant of land had been given and that several assistants had been appointed to go about the territory.

The items were agreed to.

said he was glad to see the increase in the vote; but said he was sorry that only one-twentieth of the vote was being spent in Natal, a country that was eminently suited to forestry, He went on to refer to the expenditure, and said he wondered whether, if a bounty were given to farmers for the trees that they planted, good would not result. He also dealt with the prizes offered in Natal for plantations, and referred appreciatively to the big tract of country that had been utilised for timber-growing, That system might be extended with advantage to the other parts of the Union.

said he wished to impress upon the Minister the necessity of paying great attention to the question of the preservation of indigenous forests. It was a matter for grave consideration, because they all knew that the preservation of the natural forests was of vital importance in the conservation of moisture. Furthermore, these forests might form the foundation of great industries in South Africa in the future. He Would like to ask the Minister whether a seasoning depot had been Started; and, if not, whether he would make provision for it upon the coming Estimates, because with this question was wrapped up a great deal of their prosperity in the future, and he was sure every member would favour a further extension of operations in the direction of the afforestation of this country, He hoped that some more liberal provision would be made in that direction. Afforestation in the future would play a very important part in the industrial welfare of South Africa.

whose remarks were hardly audible in the Press Gallery, was understood to agree with remarks that had been made concerning the importance of forestry in the country. He was further understood to point out that after one had been told that certain trees were the best for planting, after the trees had been planted somebody else said that these trees were valueless. He referred to the work of the Gape Forestry Department, and said they must try and get this department to let those concerned know the best trees to be planted. Some very good work, however, had already been done in this direction. He, like others, had thought they were going to reform the world by Acts of Parliament, and in 1876 he passed a little Bill which provided that for every pound that was spent on tree-planting by a municipality, the Government would contribute a pound. Now, that Act did a great deal of good. To illustrate the effect this measure had had, the right hon. gentleman alluded to Graham’s Town, where at one time hardly any trees were in existence. The Municipality took advantage of the Act to which he was referring, and as a result there were now a great number of fine trees in the vicinity of the town. That had resulted from the pound for pound principle. Unfortunately, as time had gone on that welcome principle had gone down. The Act had been suspended, much to his regret, because more good was done by that than any other Act of a similar nature. If they could only resuscitate that Act and get it applied to the other parts of the Union, that would, he thought, give a very good start to tree-planting.

Business was suspended at 6 p.m.

said that afforestation was a most important matter, particularly in his constituency. Though matters had improved lately, there was still a considerable quantity of work that should be taken in hand. All the land between Cape Town and the Transkei was suitable for afforestation, as far as the coastal belt was concerned. This was a matter that concerned State interests, and should not be left to private individuals. More money should be spent on the Government plantations. At present a vast amount was spent annually on imparted wood, but, apart from the undesirability of continuing such a policy, from the South African point of view, he called attention to the fact that the supply in oversea countries would, at some future time, become exhausted. Some exporting countries were even now contemplating a prohibition of further export, which should induce hon. members to take an immediate and active interest in the matter. The wood-cutters in the South-western districts had many grievances. The regulations under which they were working were too stringent, and should be amended. Unless Government changed the system of disposing of the trees, the wood-cutters would be supplanted by wealthy contractors; yet, their disappearance would eventually affect the position. The hon. member for Cape Town, Central, had attacked the Minister of Railways because a higher price was paid for South African sleepers than for the imported article. He (the speaker) doubted whether the hon. member would ever become a good South African. At all events, it appeared to be forgotten that £300,000 left the country annually by way of payment for imported wood, although the Union itself was capable of producing it. Even though the Government paid 2s. extra per sleeper, he was in favour of keeping the money in the country. No one could find fault with indigenous wood. The panels of the House were made of stinkwood, the best wood in the world. The supply, however, was coming to an end, and it was the Government’s duty to attend to re-planting. He trusted a market would be created for yellowwood, which made excellent timber. Teachers should be provided for the woodcutters’ children who were unable to attend school. The roads were bad, and it was impossible to have cattle there, because grass was scarce, and the Government let out the little grazing there was. The forest rangers only drew £100 a year. They had to supervise large areas, but could not possibly keep a horse on such a meagre allowance, which should be increased.

said the right hon. member for Victoria West (Mr. Merriman) took the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Phillips) severely to task for having the audacity to speak on the question of afforestation, and therefore it was with extreme diffidence and deep humility he (Sir George) spoke on the subject in the presence and in view of the great experience of the right hon. gentleman. When he heard his speech he came to the conclusion that there was no Progressive man interested in afforestation. In order to prevent an impression like that getting about, he might say that during the last seventeen or eighteen years he had planted something like 5,000,000 trees, and had paid for his experience. There was no doubt that in the Transvaal, in the last twenty five years, there had been more afforestation carried on than in any other part of South Africa. The arguments used by Mr. Merriman were that afforestation did not produce moisture; that the Afforestation Department could not advise farmers the best kind of trees suitable for the country, and that afforestation should be left to individual enterprise. Take the first: that afforestation did not produce moisture. Mr. Merriman had quoted the experience of Kimberley, and said that thirty-five years ago there was a forest there, which had not produced moisture; but he (Mr. Phillips) had never found any record of that. He thought all experts and records agreed that afforestation did produce moisture. Then there was the criticism of the Afforestation Department. How could they advise what was the best kind of tree suitable for this country, except by experience? Some trees were slow in growth, and therefore, he thought to condemn the department because it had taken time to gain experience was unfair. His own opinion was that the Afforestation Department had done immense good, and he was only sorry that the finances of the country could not afford a larger vote than was given. They had to look at the question of afforestation in this light: what amount of timber do you use imported into this country? It appeared to him that they should try and produce timber. In other parts of the world, owing to the demand for pulp for paper, the timber was getting scarcer and scarcer. Therefore, they could not leave afforestation to individual effort only. When the mining industry’ was worked out, they should have some great assets to fall back on, and they should have afforestation and irrigation. In the Transvaal the Afforestation Department had done a great deal of good in advising farmers, and it was formed on the experience gained from the Afforestation Department in the Cape. It was a vote which he hoped would grow from year to year, because it was for an object that was a source of great good in the country. (Applause.)

said the hon. members who sat in the old Cape House would accuse him of repeating an oft-told tale when he asked the Government to consider the woodcutters in the South-western Districts of this colony. The matter had been before the House year after year, and would continue to be until the condition of these poor people was considerably ameliorated, because their condition was deplorable, and, unfortunately, it was getting worse and worse. In 1894 Mr. Robertson spoke on the subject in the Cape House, and said he hoped the House would listen to the grievances of the woodcutters of the Knysna forests. They were among the hardest working in the land, and had they not been long-suffering, would have rebelled long ago. What Mr. Robertson said sixteen years ago could be said to-day with equal if not greater force, because the condition of the men was infinitely worse now. There were some 1,500 woodcutters in the district to-day, and there was only a living for 500. The hon. member fox Cape Town was very indignant because there was a vote of £25,000 for railway sleepers. After all the expenses had been paid for creosoting and other things, the amount split up among the woodcutters would be £1,000 a month. The woodcutter got 3s. for a good railway sleeper, 2s. for one or the second quality, and 1s. for one of the third quality. He went on to say that the Government had been attacked for paying 3s. 4d. a day; he could only wish that the woodcutters could get 3s. 4d. a day. The matter was developing into a social problem of some magnitude which the country would have to face sooner or later. They had 1,500 families—within. 36 hours’ journey of the legislative capital— eking out a mere existence. He asked the hon. member for Cape Town to bear in mind these figures: these people could scarcely make £20 a year. Woodcutters were always said to be the poorest of the poor: they were the poorest of the poor in this country. He asked them to bear in mind that these were white people. It was an extraordinarily difficult problem to tackle, and nobody had got more advice than these woodcutters. They were told to leave the forests and go back to the land. How many of them had got land? How many had got cows? And even if they had cows, what was the use of their making butter when they had to travel 30 or 40 miles to a village, and on the way pass over unbridged rivers? Though he was against a system of doles he thought the time had come when these people should be more sympathetically treated. They were, in those Estimates, voting away 14 millions of money, but there was practically nothing for the woodcutters. He did think that a little more assistance might be given these people; he would ask the Minister to be a little more lenient to these people, who were unnecessarily taxed. He went on to refer at length to the regulations that existed and the fines that were imposed. He (the speaker) thought that only judges and magistrates could inflict fires. He suggested that the Government might find employment for these people in the way of bridging rivers and other works, and in conclusion appealed for more consideration for the woodcutters.

said that there was only one cure for the condition of these people, and that was to try and find employment for them in some other way than the one in which they were now employed. The hon. member referred to the deplorable social conditions under which they lived, and observed that they had to bear in mind that they were dealing with white people, fellow country men of their own, and that their children were growing up under conditions which he should be afraid to tell the House the details of. These people should be taken out of their present surroundings and distributed in various forests, where they could be employed on afforestation. Speaking on the vote generally Mr. Walton characterised it as a starved vote, altogether about £93,000.

An increase of £27,000.

Yes, an increase of £27,000. Looking at the Cape Colony Estimates, we had in 1904 for forest £76,000 odd for this Colony alone. But trouble came upon the Colony, and, of course, the Estimates had to be cut down. It was recognised that £76,000 was a small sum for the Cape Colony to spend on afforestation. Proceeding, Mr. Walton recalled a speech given by the late Colonel Schermbrucker on the value of tree planting, and emphasised the point that money voted for this purpose was not really expenditure, but an investment. He wished hon. members could be taken by his hon. friend (Mr. Malan) to see what had been done at Kluitjes Kraal, for which forest the vote was but £4,250.

And Tokai?

said that they had to buy sleepers in a country which had great possibilities in the way of supplying its own sleepers. Again, if they read the reports of the various forestry departments of the United States and the European States, they would find confirmation of the exhaustion of the world’s supply of timber. “We are,” he earnestly added, “coming to a: time in the comparatively near future when timber will get very expensive. We can prepare for that time; my hon. friend can ensure us against being overtaxed for our timber I want my hon. friend to fix a plan, and got this House to agree to that plan.”

said that he had received two very severe shocks during the course of the discussion on these Estimates at the hands of his hon. friend the member for George (Mr. Currey). The hon. member bad always posed as a very severe economist. Last night they found him advocating the levelling up of the salaries of the judges, and now they found him advocating increased expenditure to bolster up the woodcutters. They all knew that the position of the woodcutters was deplorable; but the hon. member had not made a single tangible suggestion to remedy the state of affairs The woodcutters were dependent upon the sleeper industry, and they lived from hand to mouth, and got into the hands of the storekeepers, and into debt. His hon. friend had pleaded for more sympathetic treatment for these people. What the sympathetic treatment now given them amounted to was shown by the report of the Forest Officer of the Midland Conservancy for 1908. The State let them have £25,000 worth of timber, and only got £6,500 for it. His hon. friend asked for consideration. Did he want to let these people have the timber free gratis? When this matter was first brought up—in 1906 he believed it was— they suggested the remedy which was suggested in the report of the Forest Officer, and which had been pressed upon the Government ever since, and that was, that they should take these woodcutters and employ them upon afforestation. In 1906 they voted £30,000 for afforestation purposes. It was well known that that course would be better for the woodcutters themselves. He knew that the Minister of Education would reply that you could not get these men to go on with regular work, but they had to persevere in the matter, and compel them to fake it up. The Cape Parliament had been fully conscious of the whole matter, and it was the Government which was to blame.

said that he thought every hon. member of the House would agree that money spent on forests and afforestation was money well spent. They were thankful for what had been done, but much more could be done in the O.F.S. The hon. member referred to the North-western part of that Province, where, he said, there was a great deal of sand in tracts along the Vaal River, so that when there was a high wind the sand got shifted. If they planted trees they would prevent that, and he hoped that the Government would attend to that matter. It was not necessary to go quite as far as the Kalahari to carry out useful development work. The Director of Afforestation in the O.F.S. had admitted the suitability of the North-western Districts, but the Estimates made provision for tree-planting in other parts of the country only.

said that when he had raised that discussion on afforestation he did not think it would drift into a discussion on the very grave social problem which had just been alluded to. He recognised that there was a condition amongst these people in the country which was deplorable; but that was no reason why valuable forests should be destroyed. (Hear, hear.) If they got into the Transvaal they would find beautiful forests which had been spoiled by woodcutters cutting down many valuable trees, and not only that, but cutting huge tracks through the forest through which they could drag the loads of wood they had cut down. He might say that he was astounded to see that the hon. member for George (Mr. Currey) should draw such a harrowing picture of the woodcutters in the Knysna district. He had told them that these unfortunate families were only making £18 15s. per annum. Well, if there were 1,500 such families it meant that these earned £28,000 a year; and it would pay the country better to give them £28,000 out of the Treasury, and preserve their forests, than that the forests should be destroyed in the disgraceful way they were. It would be better to give the woodcutters more profitable work, and not destroy one of the most valuable assets of the country. They were putting in sleepers made of fine yellowwood, which would be very valuable if made into furniture. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that the Minister would take that matter into his most serious consideration, so that when next he presented his Budget he might tell them that he had taken active steps, by which the rising generation, at any rate, could hope to see that that country, which was so sparsely wooded at present, and was so capable of producing fine timber, would have vast plantations, not only beautiful to look upon, but of the utmost value to the future industries of the country, which would afford infinitely more employment than could possibly be afforded now in the destruction of these forests by the persons who found such a livelihood there.

thought that there could not be any better means of establishing the future wealth of South Africa than afforestation; not only in regard to the production of timber, but also in affording some relief to the poor people to whom the hon. member for George (Mr. Currey) had referred.

said that he had listened to the debate with great interest, and to what the hon. member for George had said with reference to the condition of the woodcutters in the Knysna district. It had been admitted that that had taken place since 1906.

Longer.

asked what the hon. member for Port Elizabeth (Mr. Walton) had done for these people when he had been in office? The moral which one drew was that these men Could suffer and go on suffering, and except for occasional debates in that House nothing would be done. The hon. member for Cape Town (Mr. Jagger) seemed to think that it was altogether absurd to ask that these men should be allowed to have their timber at a cheaper rate, but he (the speaker) entirely differed from that view. He did not see why they wanted to make money at all out of timber in this country. If a case like the one which had been mentioned by the hon., member for George (Mr. Currey) had been going on for years, he preferred the Transvaal lines. In the Transvaal, at all events, something was done, and men were given an opportunity of earning the princely wage of 3s. 4d. a day. Proceeding, he said he would ask the House to reflect that after all the future of the white papulation of this country was the great problem the House had to deal with. He spoke of the cursed system of looking upon labour as merely the occupation of a servile race, and not a thing in which they themselves ought to take part. Such a condition of things would not be allowed to continue for long in countries such as Australia and Canada, where men worked for their living instead of getting another race to do the more arduous work.

said that the hon. member for Jeppes (Mr. Creswell) put forward the crudest possible ideas on every possible occasion, and his latest was that timber should be free. Just fancy, he says timber ought to be free! What would be the result of that? If the condition of these men was had now it would be a thousand times worse afterwards. (Hear, hear.) Yesterday his hon. friend (Mr. Creswell) said that it was the duty of the State to teach the people to work and to find work for them. But a proposal was made by his hon. friend the Minister of the Interior that something should be done, and where did the opposition come from? From his hon. friend (Mr. Creswell), simply because it was not exactly on the same fancy lines he wished. (Laughter.) What he would say was that they should try to put these poor people, who were sinking, into a position to earn their own Jiving, and to train them up to that. He did not regret the time which had been taken up on this discussion. The debate had gone off the great question of forestry; it had gone off into a question which dealt with a most serious state of affairs in this country. It was not confined only to this Province, because if they read the Transvaal Indigency Commission’s report they would find that no Province could throw stones at the other in this respect. It was the condition of their social system. It was the price they had to pay for their great advantages. They had no labour troubles like they had in Australia. They could congratulate themselves that they had no Conciliation Boards and strikes and all their ridiculous paraphernalia as in Australia. Thank God, they had not got that But whilst they in South Africa had not got all these things, they had got to pay for their advantages The hon. member for Jeppes (Mr. Creswell) had referred to the charming labour conditions in America, but he did know that, wretched as the condition of the unskilled labourer in South Africa was, it would be a thousand times better than the condition of the unskilled labourers in America? He thought the House was indebted to his hon. friend (Mr. Currey) for bringing this matter forward, and he wished that his hon. friend for Cape Town (Mr. Jagger) would not treat this matter purely from an economic point of view. He did not do himself justice. Not one word of sympathy did he utter. He hoped that the practical result of this debate would be certainly not to increase the forestry vote. It was big enough if properly administered. Of course, they could spend a million pounds sterling on forestry, and have some grand schemes, but they had quite a big enough scheme. Proceeding, Mr. Merriman referred to what Sir Horace Plunkett had done for Ireland, and to the changed condition of affairs in Italy, where the poor sinking people had been lifted by the labours of individual people who had gone amongst them. The same story could be told in regard to Belgium. Now, could they do anything of that sort in this country? At the Kakamas Labour Colony the Dutch Reformed Church had shown that much could be done. They had really to take the matter in hand, and not content themselves by making speeches and telling the Government to put more money on the Estimates. This was one of the most serious things in this country. The white people were sinking whilst the natives were rising. The question of poor whites was one which he had long had at heart; it was one in which the whole future of South Africa was bound up.

said it seemed to him that the soundest policy was to give people employment, but the suggestion that they should be given free timber was a most extraordinary one. What was to become of them after the timber had been used up? It was useless to talk about savings banks or missionaries in this connection. What should be done was to give these people work. The State should provide work, although as a general rule he was against State interference. In this case, however, it would be a sound economic investment for the State. (Hear, hear.)

said the whole of the debate, and the eloquent speech which had been made that evening, had not dealt with forestry matters at all, but with a social question. (Hear, hear.) It was not the duty of the Forest Department to deal with a social and economic problem.

Yes, it is; you are in touch with them.

It is the duty of the Forest Department to sell wood. Continuing, he said that if one did everything that was asked for and on behalf of the woodcutters, one could do it to-day, and to-morrow the woodcutters would have other grievances, and they would remain exactly where they were. (Cheers.) He was convinced of that. As to selling by lot, that, according to the Government legal advisens, was illegal. The woodcutters paid no grazing fees while they were working in the forests. He had spoken to the Commissioner on the subject, and had suggested that part of the money set down for the purchase of railway sleepers should be used for afforestation work, on which the woodcutters could be employed. (Cheers.) The hon. member for Barkly West had preached the doctrine of work. He would like the hon. member (Dr. Watkins) to see how hard the work was. (Hear, hear.) The conditions under which these people worked were not favourable. They were very far away from railways and markets, the country was difficult, and the soil was sour and washed out, and was intersected with big ravines. It was not on account of laziness that the people were in their present position. One way in which he thought something could be done was to take part of the money set aside for sleepers, and use it for afforestation purposes. The bounty system in connection with tree planting had been followed for some time. They would have to guard themselves against the planting of black wattle. The hon. member also referred to the expenditure in Natal. He would find that expenditure on this year’s estimates amounted to £10,925, which was much larger than they had ever been able to spend in Natal in the past.

Vote 22 was agreed to.

said that when the vote for Provincial administration was reached, he would have some reductions to move.

said it was common knowledge that a big lot of money was being spent on Union buildings at Pretoria, In fact, they saw in the papers that very large contracts, aggregating over £600,000, had been let already. He did not find anything in the vote, or any provision for that money, and would ask how the Minister of Finance was going to provide for the payment of those buildings, land on what authority he was going to carry it on?

said he proposed to provide for the cost of the Union buildings at Pretoria out of a loan. The position was that contracts had been entered into by the late Transvaal Government for the erection of Union buildings at Pretoria, to cost something like £1,100,000. It was proposed to pay for those buildings out of a loan. He indicated the other day during the course of his Budget statement that he intended to submit a loan Bill. The hon. member would remember that a number of services bad from time to time been sanctioned by the old Cape Colony, Natal, Orange Free State, and Transvaal, to be paid for out of a loan, and he said he intended to submit a Bill to the House during the present session sanctioning these services and the cost of the Union buildings would be included in that loan Bill. He might say it was the intention of the Transvaal Government when they entered into these contracts, to pay for the buildings, or partly pay for them, out of their balances but, as he said the other day, they had the money, but after Union it was partly devoted to the deficits. That money, of course, would have to be refunded when the money was raised.

said yes, but he must point out that this was a very unsatisfactory state of affairs. He had never before heard that there was a Government that entered into contracts for nearly a million sterling without authority. They had no authority to incur any liability against the Government. They had not even authority from the late Transvaal Government. They ought to have come down to this House, or taken authority from the late Transvaal Government to spend this money. He had never heard of any Government yet entering into such things without authority. It was an extremely unsatisfactory state of affairs that the Government should have let this country into a liability of over a million sterling without any vote or authority for it. It was an extremely unsatisfactory state of affairs, and one he had never struck before.

said the land was purchased by the Transvaal Government, and for the purpose of erecting on it buildings for the Union Government. The purchase was sanctioned by the late Transvaal Government.

said that was all right, but what did the land cost? The contracts for the buildings amounted to over £600,000. The Minister of Finance let the people of this country into contracts for close on a million sterling without the slightest authority. He wanted to know what the Minister for Native Affairs thought of that, and what the Minister for Railways thought of that state of affairs, and the right hon. member for Victoria West (Mir. Merriman)—he was sorry he had gone away. It was a most unparliamentary and a most unconstitutional procedure.

said he understood that this expenditure was to be defrayed by a loan. It appeared to be a complete departure from what the Minister of Finance told them during the last session of the Transvaal Parliament in April last. He then said there was an expenditure of £25,000 for the cost of the site for the new Union buildings. Then, in summing up the financial position of the Transvaal, he told them that if his proposal was agreed to, and the £297,977 appropriated in 1903—that was in respect of the repatriation fund—they would have a balance on May 31 of £337,000 in the consolidated fund. He did not recommend that this be further reduced. In his opinion, that sum should be handed to the Union Government as part of the Transvaal contribution for the construction of the Union buildings, the erection of which had already been commenced. The Minister of Finance did not tell them then that these contracts had been entered into. He wanted to be perfectly clear about this matter. It was possible the contracts might have been signed between April land May. They would have Had clear knowledge of the position if he had told them what he was going to spend and exactly how he was going to finance the business. Now, this £377,000 had gone in redemption of debt, and he supposed they were going to borrow.

said he did not see how his hon. friend could take such a line, because whatever they might say there, the members of the Transvaal Parliament were perfectly well aware of the Government’s intention to go on with the business of building these buildings at Pretoria. Hon. members knew that land had been bought; it was known throughout South Africa. How such suggestions could be made now he could not understand. It was referred to in the Transvaal Parliament, and he referred his hon. friend to the speech which the had just read. He said then that they intended to use the 1908-9 surplus as the Transvaal contribution to the Union--

£377,000?

Yes, £377,000. He could not, he continued, foresee that the Union Government would be called upon to redeem Treasury Bills, and that that money would be used. So soon as the Union borrowed and restored the revenue balance of £377,000 and other money used for the redemption of Treasury Bills, the Transvaal would have contributed £377,000 and more.

said he did not accuse his hon. friend of having concealed this large expenditure. The point they made on that side of the House was where provision had been made for the expenditure allocated for the erection of the Union buildings, and they asked if he had made any provision for that expenditure and how. They asked how he reconciled that with the statement he had made in his last Budget statement with regard to the allocation of £377,000 as a contribution towards the cost of the buildings. It was perfectly clear to all that more money would have to be expended; the complaint was that no notice had been taken of repeated questions. If the questions had been answered all the trouble would have been averted.

said that the question of land having been bought and contracts signed being well known made no difference. Because their action was illegal, that was not to say that these acts made that action legal. If he was going to take it out of his balance, why did he not make the statement? This act that had been done was not only illegal, but unconstitutional and he thought the country should know it. They never even got Parliamentary sanction for that matter.

said he did not think he should let a statement like that pass. He would draw his hon. friend’s attention to the provisions of the South Africa Act. It stated that for two months after Union, and two months after Parliament met the Government had the authority to spend what it liked. Under the provisions of that Act it was possible for the Government to sanction any expenditure that it liked.

Shifting his ground again. Continuing, he said that the Minister had shifted from the ground on which he once stood, and now he shielded himself behind he South Africa Act. Was that the way he justified expenditure?

Surely these contracts were signed before—

Certainly.

said that on May 31 his hon. friend found it necessary to carry on those works. But the contracts had been signed. By what authority was this done? The Transvaal Parliament give no authority; he did not wait for the authority of the Act or the authority of the Parliament. He did not get any authority in the matter. He said that everybody knew. He did a thing of this sort without any authority—no authority whatever from his own Parliament or from This Parliament — and signed contracts for over a million of money. If he (the Treasurer) could ride roughshod over Parliament, then he thought they had better go home, and leave his hon. friend to spend the money of the taxpayer. Now, as to this balance—he spoke of It as a revenue balance of £377,000. If this, was a revenue balance it was part of the two million balance that was brought into Union. Now it appeared, so far as they could gather from conflicting statements, that this had been used for the Pretoria buildings. That would have been very well if Parliament had sanctioned it. But his hon. friend did not seem to realise that he was the trustee of public money, and must get the authority of the representatives of the public. There was nobody to blame for it except the Treasurer.

Is it correct that the contract is for one million?

£1,100,000.

Is it the money of the Minister or the money of the Transvaal taxpayer? The taxpayers of the country should have had an opportunity constitutionally of saying how the money should he spent. They on that side of the House objected to any Government taking upon themselves the right to allocate moneys which really now belonged to the Union, as they desired, without any statutory for Parliamentary authority. He would put, it to the Minister of Finance, was there no possibility of stopping this work until he had an opportunity of conning to Parliament and letting Parliament, after full discussion, decide whether they desired to spend 1¼ millions sterling for the purpose of establishing public buildings when the whole of the Union was crying out for development of its agricultural resources? He thought the good sense of the House would say that they had not arrived at a time when they could afford to put up grand buildings which would cost, 1¼ millions. This House had a right to have an expression of opinion from the Government in regard to whether, until Parliament had had the fullest information in regard to works which had not been authorised by Parliament—they should find themselves committed to an expenditure of 1¼ millions of money in a direction that the good sense of the people, when they knew all the circumstances, would say was entirely unjustified.

said that £15,000 had been allocated to the Normal College at Heidelberg, but he saw no provision on the Estimates.

said that, he did not know whether he should answer the questions now, and they should have another discussion on the building vote. As to the £15,000 referred to by his hon. friend, the amount came out, of the 1903 Guaranteed Loan of the Transvaal. In regard to what had fallen from the hon. member opposite as to whether it was not possible to stop these works, his reply was that it was not possible to stop the works. The contracts had been entered into and signed, and the late Transvaal Government had bound that colony to these contracts. If no Union had taken place, the Transvaal Colony were financially in the position to pay for the whole of these contracts out of their own pockets.

said that he did not dispute for an instant the fact that the Transvaal Colony were in a position to meet this expenditure; but he did not dispute the constitutional right of his hon. friend or his Government to enter into this expenditure without the authority of the Transvaal Parliament. His hon. friend seemed to misunderstand the gravamen of the charge. Unless they stood out against any unconstitutional methods of this kind, it was going to bring untold disaster upon them. Ministers must once and for all recognise that they were the servants of Parliament, and that they could not spend any money which Parliament itself had not sanctioned. He would urge upon the Minister that these Contracts should be laid upon the table to-morrow, so that hon. members should have some information as to the character of the contracts, and in order that the House would have an opportunity of deciding whether or not they should take the risk of stopping these works.

said it seemed to him that they were Committed to an untold amount of money. They were asked to vote a sum of £13,000,000 out of revenue, but for all they knew the Government were not only spending £1,100,000 on Union buildings, but possibly millions more on railways. The members of that committee ought to have supplied to them a statement of the moneys which it was intended to dispense out of loan, as well as out of revenue. He ventured to submit that the example set by the little colony of Natal in this respect ought to be followed by that Parliament. There, when they had the Estimates for the year laid before them, they had so much money asked to be voted out of revenue, and so much more out of loan. Even if the Treasurer had a Loan Bill, he submitted that the proper course was to include in the Supply Bill the money which was intended to be spent out of loan as well as out of revenue. He hoped that the Minister would see his way clear, when submitting next year’s Estimates, to put, before Parliament a clear statement of all the moneys which the Government intended to spend during the coming year.

said that these were extraordinary provisions he was asked to agree to now. The hon. member had said that he did not, know how many millions the Government had spent, and how many millions it would spend. If the hon. member wanted to be an alarmist, he Could not help it He might tell him that a number of millions had been borrowed in the Gape in the past years—for public works and for railway construction—and the money had been misapplied and used for another purpose. It was all very well to throw stones at the Transvaal, but let them look to themselves first.

Two wrongs don’t make one right.

Why should all these stones be thrown at the Transvaal? One of the last Acts passed in Natal was to sanction a lot of railway lines which the Union Government would have to provide—

said that they would not find that one penny of Cape loans had been misapplied, and the Minister of Finance would not find that any Cape Government had dared to sign a contract, for a million of money without the authority of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) He thought that they would have impeached the man who had dared to do such a thing. As regards the Cape loans, about which his hon. friend had made a general statement—just like he (had about the monthly figures not being regularly published by the Treasury in the Cape, when it had been proved that they had been regularly published—he would say what the Minister had said was absolutely incorrect. What the Cape Government always had the power of doing under the Bill was that if the loan was raised, the money could be used partially for the purpose for which the money had been raised, and partially for any other purpose authorised by Parliament. (Hear, hear.) The loan could be spread over a number of Acts. That was not misapplication of loans, because what was done was done with the knowledge of Parliament. He did not think any profit would be got by continuing the discussion. If the Treasurer came to Parliament and said that he had spent that money without its authority, they could not say more; when the Minister was capable of such a thing, what was he not capable of? What was one to say? The only explanation the Treasurer could otherwise give the House was that the work had to be hurried. There was not a possible defence. An hon. member had said that his (Mr. Hull’s) colleagues were responsible—

I take the whole responsibility.

You can’t.

We bear all the responsibility.

said that as to the Railway Acts passed by the late Natal Government, these had been passed, not with the object of reconstruction, but for the building of railways in Natal, which the Parliament of Natal considered should be built. Of course, if built, they would have to be built by the Union Government. He had disagreed with that point of view, as he did not think that the hands of the Union Government should be tied. He thought that they should have a clear idea of what the Government was going to spend, and he hoped that the Government would give that question due consideration before next year’s Estimates.

said that he must say that as far as the ordinary members were concerned, they were getting rather tired as regards these inter-Provincial squabbles which were going on. As far as he could understand, the Minister of Finance had appropriated certain moneys without the authority of Parliament, but the only way in which he answered that perfectly clear charge was that in the Cape they had done likewise. That was not the question before them, but the question was whether the Minister had in the Transvaal certain moneys which he was going to spend, for which, up to the present, he had not got the authority of Parliament.

said that in connection with these remarks with regard to things done with or without Parliamentary sanction, his Natal friends should have been careful, in view of the purchase of ploughs, how they spoke about this matter. When he found that on May 31 there was in the Cape Treasury the sum of £115,000 available for irrigation, and the sum of £200,000 available for the same purpose under another head, he thought here was a glorious opportunity for doing what he could in connection with irrigation. They could not if they had to listen to charges made by one Provincial Administration against another. He had found that of the sums mentioned at available in the Cape Treasury for irrigation purposes, £155,000 had been used for other purposes not authorised by any Act of Parliament. (Cries of “No.”) And then he was asked why he did not go on with irrigation schemes. He did not do so because these gentlemen who had spoken with unctuous rectitude had not left him the money. These, however were Provincial squabbles, and if they went on with them and indulged in recriminations they would stop the work of Union. The only thing to do was to allow the past to bury the past. There was no authority to call in question the acts of Provincial Governments committed prior to Union. These recriminations would do them no good in the eyes of the outside world, but would certainly waste time. They could not get the money back unless they accused one another of having pocketed the money and having it about them still. He proposed that they leave the matter where it was, wipe off old accusations, and make a fair start on the work of Union.

said his hon. friend (Mr. Fischer) had certainly thrown a great deal of light on the matter. (Laughter.) Did his hon. friend know what the committee had been discussing? (Laughter.) With regard to the Cape irrigation votes, there were unexhausted borrowing powers which could have been used at any time that Parliament desired. He (Dr. Smartt) was certain that the late Treasurer of the Cape (Mr. Merriman) and the late Minister without portfolio (Mr. Currey) had not been guilty of irregularities in regard to irrigation votes. If, however, the House did not set its face in the strongest possible manner against illegal acts such as those that had taken place in the Transvaal, what guarantee had they that before Parliament met next year the Government would not commit them to the expenditure of three or four millions? When they heard things of this sort, how could they know that there were not other things to which they were committed? In the Cape no contract of over £5,000 could be entered into without the sanction of Parliament, so careful were they to preserve the rights of the taxpayers.

said that his hon. friend the Minister of Finance did not appear to realise the gravity of the position. He had made no defence to the charge brought against him, namely, the spending of money illegally. He had been charged with entering into contracts to the amount of £1,100,000 without the authority of any Parliament, either the Transvaal Parliament or the Union Parliament, and he had absolutely no defence at all. It did not matter to him what the amount was, it could be £2,000,000 or £100,000, but what he objected to was the illegality and unconstitutionality of the action. He did not think that his hon. friend the member for Bethlehem (Mr. Fischer) understood the position. As a matter of fact, no money had been spent in the Cape without the sanction of Parliament. He wished to assure the House that he was not quarrelling because the money was being spent in Pretoria, the question he was concerned about was the illegality of the business.

asked the Minister of Finance if he would give the House the statement which he had definitely promised in regard to the Repatriation Fund?

said that the sum of £3,000,000 was given by the British Government for the purpose of repatriating Boers who fought in the war. He did not suppose that hon. members wanted him to go into the history of that unfortunate affair. He would say, however, that it cost £15,000,000 to administer the £3,000,000, and that was a debt which rested upon the Transvaal and the Orange Free State, mainly upon the Transvaal. Several efforts were made before Responsible Government was introduced by the Crown Colony Government to try to correct admitted grievances. Considerable sums of money were advanced in the Transvaal to Boers who had been repatriated on condition that these advances would be repaid. He did not think any useful purpose could be served by referring to this matter at length that night, but as his hon. friend the member for Cape Town, Central (Mr. Jagger) was apparently very anxious to read literature dealing with the Transvaal, he would refer him to the repatriation report which was made to the Transvaal Government, in 1908. The Love day Commission which was appointed to investigate the matter, recommended among other things that 25 per cent. of the debts Should be written off, and that there should be a further inquiry in order to give further relief. The late Transvaal Government subsequently appointed the Stockenstroom Commission, which presented an interim report on November 15. According to that report it was recommended that further time should be granted to debtors, namely, a further period of three years. The first instalment should be due on December 31, 1910; the second on December 31, 1911, and the third on December 31. 1912. This was the interim report, and it was laid before the Transvaal Parliament. Mr. Stockenstroom stated that until this report had been inquired into it was impossible to determine the amount of debts owing by these various debtors, and until that amount was definitely ascertained, it was not possible to give these debtors credit for the amount of 25 per cent. recommended. Mr. Stockenstroom continued his inquiries, and this year made his final report. He recommended that further relief in respect of these deaths of stock from disease and losses from infection should also be written off. He might say that the estimate made by Mr. Stockenstroom the previous year of £100,000 for the further losses that should be written off was found to be rather overstated, and it would be found to be in the neighbourhood of £85,000 only. Hon. members would ask: what was the result of these repatriation debts? The position was this: At November 30 last the amount outstanding in the Transvaal was £1,586,000, but from that had to be deducted the further sum of £85,000. The Transvaal Province, in anticipation of those recoveries, authorised the expenditure of certain moneys in the Transvaal, as against the 1903 vote. He assumed that hon. members were aware that repatriation debts, when recovered, had to be recredited to the 1903 loan. The matter had become rather complicated since Union, owing to the fact that they had repatriation debts in the Orange Free State and also in Natal. Obviously, if they wanted to do justice to these people, all repatriation debtors should be treated in the same way. The previous Government of the Orange Free State, however, did not agree with the Transvaal, and advocated treatment of their debtors in a rather different way to what they proposed to treat debtors in the Transvaal, and there was a great deal to be said for the attitude of the Free State. The repatriation debtors in the Free State were treated far better than was the case in the Transvaal. The matter was very complicated by the fact that there were also repatriation debtors in two districts in Natal, and, therefore, the Union Government had to face this problem: they had to find some means of treating these three sets of debtors in the same way. Mr. Stockenstroom, in his final report, called attention to the fact that a large number of these debtors were practically not in a position to pay their debts. It had always been the policy of the Transvaal Government, and would be of the Union Government, to exact full payment from debtors, not only capital, but interest also; but it was also the policy of the Transvaal and the Union Government not to obtain payment by means of sueing people, and forcing them to sell their means of livelihood, and become practically paupers dependent upon the State. The report further suggested that a longer period of time should be given, and he recommended that a period of six years should be given to those people to pay off their debts, and that the amount of their debts should pay the amount of interest stipulated for by the Crown Colony Government. That was, shortly, the position of the Repatriation Commission in the Transvaal.

I must say that the statement of the position of the repatriation debtors of the Transvaal, made by the Minister of Finance, is. I think, the most extraordinary perversion of fact I have ever heard from a responsible Minister. The Minister began by telling us that the British Government, after the war, give the sum of three millions as a free gift to assist burghers to return to their farms. The Minister went on to say that it had taken five millions to administer this three millions of money. Then he went on to say that certain advances were outstanding. What advances? He never troubled to tell the committee that these three millions had been distributed without any charge for administration, that there had been distributed, without any claim as far as the British or Crown Colony Government was concerned, supplies and animals to these people to enable them to resume their occupations, and of which in the Transvaal alone one, million was still outstanding. That was a nice state of affairs. He (the speaker) called it a perversion of the truth. He asked the committee to read the report of the Commission that was appointed, and ask itself if those recommendations had been fairly carried out by the late Transvaal Government or the Union Government. Had they not gone on encouraging these people in the belief that they would never be called upon to pay these amounts? The Minister also told them that attempts had been made to deal with the question of stock, but that nothing had been done. A great deal had been done. He went on to refer to the inquiries that had been instituted, and said it was recommended that 25 per cent. should be written off on account of these animals. The Transvaal Government, and the Union Government that succeeded, had adopted the principle that no man should be compelled to pay this repatriation debt. No debtor had been sued, not had any pressure been put upon them. He showed how, under Crown Colony Government, a considerable number of these instalments were paid, and said that if the same policy had been continued, a great number would have paid up by this time. He did not say that these people should not be treated in a liberal manner; but what he did say was, that there should be some finality to the question. He did say that there should be finality in justice to the taxpayer, and in justice to the people concerned. They had had Commission after Commission, and still no finality had been reached. He did not think, however, that the Minister, in defending, should have tried to justify his position by painting a highly-coloured picture, and he went on to show that though they had had to get a staff in a day—because these people were crying to get to their land—he thought that, on the whole, both the Government and the staff concerned had nothing to be ashamed of in the least. (Hear, hear.) He did not like to see the Government being defended on such grounds.

dealt with the statements of the Minister in the Transvaal Parliament and in the Union Parliament, in regard to the report of the of the Stockenstroom Commission. He referred to the reduction of £100,000, and alluded to the statement of the Minister in the Transvaal Parliament, that the work of redemption would start on December 31 of this year. Now they were told that the Government had not considered the matter. They would have to make up their minds quickly, as the instalments would soon be due. Last year the Minister told them that large sums had been written down. They voted £297,000 as a contribution to the guaranteed loan fund. That was duly voted and put in the Appropriation Bill. He would like to know whether it was the intention of the Government to require the payment of this instalment on December 31. Then the Treasurer had hinted that it might be necessary to revise the conditions of the loans in the Free State. The Government of the Free State during the last three years had seen no necessity to alter the conditions of repayment. If the Union Government were going to alter the terms of repayment, what new facts had come to their knowledge to justify them in making the change?

said that he was extremely disappointed with the statement made by the Minister. He thought nothing could be more unfortunate or more unfair than his statement about repatriation. The whole case seemed to be that it was alleged that it had £5,000,000 to spend £3,000,000 at the expense of the taxpayer. The £5,000,000 included the original debts and the cost of administration, and if all that money were spent, where did those debts come from? There was no answer. If mistakes had been made everyone was sorry, but to bring it now as a charge, as a crime, against the Crown Colony Government was the most unwarranted thing he had ever heard.

said he considered that the Treasurer had made a most unfortunate mistake. The fact was that the repatriation money had been written down from £2,000,000 to £1,000,000. The words that the Treasurer always used were that the Government never intended to give away State assets. Union came about. Within the last 12 months before Union the Orange River Colony had a Commission appointed to inquire into the repayment of repatriation costs, and he had read that Commission’s report. It stated that these debts were due, and that no allowance should be made to people owing this money, and that they should be called upon to pay in due course. Now the Union Government said, in regard to the repatriation debts of the Orange River Colony, and elsewhere, that they proposed to reduce them. The statement of the Treasurer was most unsatisfactory and most remarkable. It did seem a remarkable thing, that the Free State Government had enunciated the policy that there should be no reduction, and when they came into Union they were prepared to reduce.

said that the hon. member who had just spoken had put words into his mouth which he had never used. He had never suggested for one moment that the Government was going to make any reduction of the Free State repatriation debt.

The impression left on this side of the House is that the Union Government was considering a large reduction in the repatriation debt. (Ministerial cries of “No.”)

That is pure invention on his part. I said that the matter had become complicated under Union because of the repatriation debts also of the Orange Free State and Natal. Continuing, he said that in regard to what had been said by the hon. member for Fordsburg (Mr. Duncan), he suggested, and he (Mr. Hull) agreed with him, that the Commission (not the Stockenstroom Commission) presided over by the late Mr. Love day had made very fair recommendations; and it was upon the report of that Commission that the Government had been going. If the hon. member looked at the Bluebook containing the report of the Commission, he would find that no efforts had been made at all by the Crown Colony Government to redress the grievances of these people. That Loveday Commission had recommended that. 25 per cent, of the debts should be written off. Well, either the recommendation was a fair one or it was not. If it were a fair recommendation, then the Crown Colony Government had not treated these people fairly. As people might form wrong opinions with regard to the manner in which the repatriation debts were incurred, he would read extracts from the report of the Loveday Commission dealing with the method in which the cattle were divided up. The report stated that the best animals were kept by the military. These were the grievances complained of. The suggestion was made that the late Transvaal Government ought not to have followed this thing up. (Cries of “No.”) What was the charge? That the date Transvaal Government was going on giving time to these people to pay their debts? (Cries of “No.”)

The point is this—that in consequence of that report, of which the hon. member has read only a small portion, the Transvaal Government agreed to a reduction of the loans by 25 per cent. That was unanimously agreed to. But what we want to know is whether the instalments due on the 31st of this month are going to be paid, or are they not? Is the Government going to ask for further time to be given?

said that he would like to say a few words without entering into ancient history. He referred to the Loveday Commission, and said that it recommended the writing off of 25 per cent. Then followed the Stockenstroom Commission, which had presented its report to Government. That report, however, had not been considered. He understood that the Commission recommended that further time should be given to debtors to pay—that the repayment should be spread over six years instead of over three years. Hon. members must understand that these people were mostly very poor, and to make them repay the debts in three years would inevitably cripple them. If the repayment were spread over a longer period it would be possible to recover a much larger sum of money, and the people would not be crippled. That was the report that was now before the Government. So far as he was concerned, he had always been in favour of an extension of time.

thought it very regrettable that the Minister of Finance, in dealing with a matter of this sort, had made some rather unnecessary charges against the Crown Colony Government, more particularly as the Minister did not state the full case. It was perfectly true that bad animals were sold by the military to the civil Government. The Government could not help it; they bought animals, as they required them for the farms, and it, was equally true that no farmer would have dreamt of buying those animals, and certainly not at the prices paid far them. But the position was that farmers had to get back to the land to plough their fields, and there were no draught animals to be had and the military took the opportunity of overcharging for the animals. He did not think there was a member in the House who would not agree with the Minister of the Interior to give debtors time for the payment, of the debts. There was a point that had not been touched on by the Minister of the Interior, arid that was that the majority of the debtors were unable to pay. The only hope the Government had of recovering the money was by coming down on the sureties, and most of them undoubtedly became sureties merely for the purpose of getting some help for the bywoners, who did not actually receive any help. It would be unfair to press the sureties, who became such under those conditions, and the more extension of time the Government give the better chance they had of recovering the money. To press them would possibly send some to ruin. He agreed that if the Government took the policy of delaying the collection of this money, they would be doing some good but he must deplore the attitude of the Minister of Finance.

said that, so far as the remission of the £85,000 was concerned, he did not think there would be any objection to that. Were the people preparing to pay, or had they been notified that they should not pay? He considered that it was a most haphazard way of doing business. The Government should have asked the Minister to have made a clear statement in the course of the Budget speech.

said that the committee should not be satisfied till the Minister had withdrawn a statement which was not in accordance with facts. The Minister was in honour bound to make a statement.

said that nobody was as sorry as he at the turn the debate had taken, because he thought that it would only do serious harm. They agreed when in the Transvaal Parliament to a reduction of 25 per cent., and to that compact they loyally stood. That was the point at which they arrived at a settlement, and now that had been broken down.

The vote was agreed to.

asked why the Receiver of Revenue at Bloemfontein was removed to Kimberley?

said that he was not aware of the circumstances, but reorganisation had been going on throughout the Union.

asked, on behalf of an absent member, whether in cases where transfer fees exceeded £100, it was necessary to send to Pretoria?

said the practice was that the Commissioner of Revenue had said that where a local controller issued a receipt under his authority, that receipt should be regarded as final. He had also made this important stipulation, that where a property should exceed £2,500 in value, and there were any extraordinary circumstances in connection with the sale of the property, the local collector should not give a final receipt, but that he must, first of all, report the special circumstances to Pretoria.

The vote was agreed to.

Progress was reported, and leave obtained to sit again to-morrow (Friday).

moved that the Committee recommend the scale of taxes (see page 316, “Votes and Proceedings”.)

Agreed to

The Committee’s report was set down for consideration on the following day.