House of Assembly: Vol1 - THURSDAY MARCH 9 1911
from residents of Gordonia, Kenhardt, and Hay, for railway communication.
praying that the Miners’ Phthisis Bill be amended, compensation to be irrespective of race or colour.
from residents of Frankfort, Heilbron, and Fauresmith, praying that further Asiatic immigration be stopped (three petitions).
SECOND READING.
in moving the second reading of the Bill, said that the measure proposed to deal with one of the most serious scourges that had appeared in recent years in a limited compass in this country. Miners’ phthisis was a recent phenomenon in South Africa; it had only been noticed on, any large scale since the war. It was found to have developed in Cornish miners after they returned to Cornwall at the war-time, and the result of the inquiries of a British Commission into the disease on the Cornish mines was that a fairly large proportion of the cases of miners’ phthisis there were found to have come from South Africa. The disease had also been found to exist on the Bendigo mines in Australia to a great extent. The Crown Colony Government of the Transvaal ordered an inquiry in 1902 and 1903, and a great deal of valuable evidence was collected, and it was found that the conditions existing on the Witwatersrand mines led to a very large and rapid development of the disease, Well, since that time nothing had been done, but the disease had grown to such dimensions that it had now become a question with which the Legislature was bound to deal without further delay. Miners’ phthisis was a peculiar disease of the lungs caused by the inhalation of very fine quartz dust, which cut up the substance of the miners, and led to the development of certain fibrous tissues in the lungs. The result was that the lungs got packed with this very deleterious dust. The patient might not feel the effects of the disease for years. It had been found that the life of a miner suffering from miners’ phthisis was from eight to eleven years. Miners’ phthisis was unlike ordinary consumption or phthisis. A man might have miners’ phthisis for a good number of years before he actually succumbed. Seventy-five per cent, of those who died succumbed on account of complications—miners’ phthisis, with other tubercular symptoms. The Mining Regulations Commission went very carefully into the question of the health conditions in the mines, and if hon. members read that report, they would find that great attention was paid to the sanitation and ventilation of the mines. Dr. Potter (the Medical Officer of Health for the Johannesburg Municipality) and Dr. Heymann, a highly qualified chemist, sat on that Commission, which found that the amount of carbon mon-oxide in the air in the mines was one of the contributory causes of phthisis in its later forms. Besides, there was in the mines a fairly large proportion of nitrogen di-oxide, which he believed was one of the products of explosions. There was also carbon di-oxide, and all these gases, in one proportion or another, in the mines helped as supervening causes of miners’ phthisis to induce ordinary phthisis or consumption.
Consequently, a great deal of attention was paid by the Commission to the atmospheric conditions in the mines. Certain recommendations were laid down in the Commission’s report, recommendations which were most valuable, and which he saw the general manager of the dynamite factory at Modderfontein, in an address which he gave to a scientific society in Johannesburg, called the Magna Charta of the miner. Certain recommendations were laid down in the regulations as to the maximum amount of these various gases which should be contained in mine air, and when the regulations which were being framed were put into force, they must lead to a very different position as regarded mine air. He was pleased to say that the management of the East Rand Proprietary Mines bad concentrated a great deal of attention on the question of sanitation and ventilation. In fact, the East Rand Proprietary Mines had been a model, and had been used by the Commission as a sort of standard to work on on behalf of the other mines. Miners’ phthisis was not in itself so bad; but it was a question of bad sanitation, foul air in the mines, which all induced lung diseases, and led to the early death of a miner suffering from miners’ phthisis. The question they had to deal with that day, however, was a narrow one, purely miners’ phthisis. Miners’ phthisis had already assumed fairly large proportions on the Rand, although it was not yet known to what extent the disease had spread in the underground Workings on the Rand. It was very difficult to obtain exact information, and there was this argument to be used: that they were legislating in reference to conditions which they did not know fully. That was one of the drawbacks, but it was one which unfortunately they could not, overcome. The miners on the Rand were most loth, as they were everywhere in the world, to submit to medical examination. Therefore they could not find out by examination to what, extent the scourge had spread underground. He might remind hon. members that the New Zealand Government introduced a provision in their law with regard to miners’ phthisis, making medical examinations compulsory. The miners resented having to submit themselves to medical tests for various reasons, and the law would have become a dead letter had the New Zealand Government not taken other measures. Miners resented medical examination. Many feared that they might have the disease, and naturally did not want to have their death sentence pronounced. They preferred to work on and to continue at their ordinary work to the last stages. That was one of the difficulties with which they were confronted. He admitted that the proper course to take was to subject all white underground workers to a medical examination. If they could do that, they would know exactly where they were, and what would be the ultimate effects of the legislation which was proposed. But under no system which could be devised in South Africa would it be possible to get the information which they were in search of. In the absence of that information, they could only go by percentages, and to some extent by guesswork. He was informed by a, gentleman who had gone into the question that it was probable that the extent of miners’ phthisis was overrated in the Transvaal. He should be most glad, and he thought hon. members would be only too glad, to know that miners’ phthisis was not so widely prevalent as they had been led to believe by the very sad cases which had come before them. There was no doubt that there were hundreds of these cases. He thought it was probable that on investigation they would find that the number was somewhere between 750 and 900. He knew that there were calculations which pointed to a higher number, but there were also calculations which pointed to a lower number. In any case, he thought the percentage would be found to be very high. The question was how to deal with the cases? Medical examination was out of the question. It was his first idea to institute compulsory medical examinations, but he was warned by the New Zealand failure. To introduce compulsory medical examinations would simply to ask Parliament to pass a law which would be a dead letter. Therefore he dropped the idea of compulsory medical examinations. Hon. members would see that in this Bill they had gone over to the other extreme. They left the men the choice. He had no doubt that a large number of miners would not come forward. They would rather go on working to the very end, and would at the end claim compensation and leave the mine. That was preferable to passing a law providing for compulsory examinations, which were sure to be a failure. Under the Bill a man might come forward, and if he could prove that he had miners’ phthisis, a certain amount of compensation would be paid out to him. The next question was what were the amounts of compensation to be? Well, they had two classes of cases to deal with. There were hundreds of men to-day on the Witwatersrand suffering from miners’ phthisis, and these men would have to be dealt with on a different, basis to future cases. In regard to present cases, the position was difficult, because of this consideration, that to some extent they were passing legislation of a retrospective character. He agreed that the State should recognise its liability, and should be prepared to contribute towards present cases.
There was no doubt that miners’ phthisis should he treated on the basis of workmen’s compensation. It was incidental to the calling of the workmen. People who got a profit from the work of these men should compensate them on the ordinary basis of workmen’s compensation. Although miners’ phthisis, as a rule, had not been included in other countries in the list of occupational diseases, that arose from the rather peculiar circumstances. It was not a very serious scourge in other countries. The State should also step in and recognise it also had been remiss in the matter. Ever since 1902 they had had notice of this disease existing on the mines, but they had taken no steps to combat it. It was only in the regulations which would be passed under the Mines and Works Act that they were taking real measures to combat the disease, and, as they had been remiss on their part, they should also bear a share of the burden that was to be incurred. They provided that the Government must bear half of the amount of compensation that was paid. They had classified the present cases into two categories. They might have the man who was suffering from miners’ phthisis pure and simple, in one degree or another. He was not incapacitated from other work. If he continued to work underground, sooner or later, ordinary phthisis would supervene, and the result would be a sudden passing away. But he was not incapacitated by the miners’ phthisis that he had, and, therefore, his case had to be recognised as partial disablement, on, the analogy of our Workman’s Compensation Act, and he ought to get half, as a rule, of what the other man should get who was totally disabled. The man who was totally disabled was he who not only had miners’ phthisis, but in whom ordinary phthisis had supervened. He was completely incapacitated. He ought to go to the Chronic Sick Home at Rietfontein, or the new home which the Chamber of Mines wore establishing at the dynamite factory. The Chamber of Mines had also recognised the great liability that there was in this matter, apart from legislation that had been initiated. The hospital which was existing at the Modderfontein dynamite factory was placed at the disposal of the mines in order that it might be converted into a chronic sick home for miners’ phthisis. The cost was about £80,000. The Chamber of Mines undertook to spend another £50,000 in order to equip it properly. The Government had undertaken to contribute half the annual amount towards the maintenance of the institution up to a sum not exceeding £5,000, and the balance —half or more—would be found by the Chamber of Mines. So that there would be much better provision available in future for these very sad cases: they would be able to provide accommodation for them, and a place where they might end their days in peace. Coming to the scale of compensation, in regard to the present cases, as he had said, the Government would bear half, and the other half would be borne by the employers.
The amounts which were payable under the Bill were: £250 for miners’ phthisis, partial disablement; and £500 for any case of total disablement, miners’ phthisis which had passed to ordinary phthisis. Under the Workman’s Compensation Act of the Transvaal, the maximum paid in case of complete disablement was £750. Half of that would be £375. He had no doubt that he would be requested during the debate to increase the amounts of £250 and £500 in the Bill, to the scale provided under the Workman’s Compensation Act. viz., £375 and £750. He had taken the lower scale because there was no doubt that they were to a certain extent legislating in the dark, and they did not know what this may spring to in the future. Secondly, all parties were to blame. The Workman was to blame as much as the employer was to blame, and the State was to blame. They did not ask the men to come forward with their claims at once. Hon. members would see that a two years’ period was given in the Bill. When the Act came into force the present cases would have two years in which to prove their claims.
Once the fact was settled that they were entitled to compensation, then the last underground employer would be the person who would have to pay. He called upon the Government and got a contribution of half from them. The other half he got partly from himself and partly from the previous employers during the last two years. Hon. members would see that they had excluded from the operation of this liability mines where there was no deleterious dust. The Minister would from time to time frame a list of mines of a quartz nature, and it was the employers on those mines who would be liable under this Act. Others would be excluded. They had put on the Estimates for this year a comparatively small amount, £25,000. If that were inadequate they would have to increase it later on. It would probably be found that the claims at the outset would, not be excessive. He, now came to a more disputable part of the Bill, and that was the provision of compernsation for future cases. As he had explained, he did not think it was possible to call upon the present sufferer to contribute, and he thought that would be common cause in the debate now before them. But the case stood theoretically on a different footing in regard to future sufferers. Hon. members would see that in regard to the class of people who now came forward after two years and whose cases developed to miners’ phthisis in future, the whole liability was thrown on the, employer. The Government would no longer undertake to pay a half-share, nor was any contribution called for from the miner himself. The whole liability was, on the ordinary basis of workman’s compensation for occupational disease, thrown on to the employer. As regarded the scale, he had not taken double the scale, viz., £375 and £750. If he had done that, if, might have been an inducement to miners who were suffering from phthisis not to take their compensation in the early stages, but to wait until later, when they could claim a larger sum. That would be a wholly wrong and criminal inducement to the worker; and what they wanted to provide was not only compensation for the miners, but to stamp out, miners’ phthisis on the Witwatersrand. (Hear, hear.) What they said in that Bill, was that in future cases they were not going to pay for total disablement, and they were only going to pay for partial disablement. There would, therefore, be an inducement in future cases for a miner, when he discovered he suffered from phthisis, to take his compensation and clear out; go to some other calling, and perhaps live a long life. Then it was sometimes said that the miner, through negligence underground, himself contributed towards the disease; but he hoped that the provisions and regulations which were going to be framed under the Mines and Works Act, together with the provisions under that Bill, would put an end to such negligence in future. (Hear, hear.) Hon. members would see that, under clause 6, if a man failed to comply with the regulations on three occasions, he was going to lose his compensation; and it was hoped that those stringent provisions in the regulations, and also the very heavy penalties under the provisions he had read, would have their effect; and it was anticipated that the miners would become very much more careful than in the past, and do all they could not to contract the disease. The question remained: Why should they not contribute? There was no doubt that some of the rock-drillers were very well paid; but, of course, there were exceptional cases, and he could not assume, as a rule, that the underground rock-drillers were paid an excessive wage. Exceptional cases were paid on an exceptional basis. The disease was an occupational disease, and should be dealt with on the basis of workmen’s compensation. The greatest difficulty of all he had in regard to contributions, either by the Government or the men, was that as soon as they had contributions, they must start a fund; but once they started a fund, they must have far more information than they had at present, because when they were going to start a system for the future, they did not have sufficient information to work the system. He defied any hon. member of the House, be he ever so learned in figures or economy, to frame a scheme by which they could evolve a fund system for miners’ phthisis. He had gone into the matter, and had found himself unable to frame such a system. He had another difficulty against such a fund, which was that a fund presupposed that these conditions would last for ever; and his very object in that Bill was to put an end to these conditions.
He did not want a fund to deal with miners’ phthisis, because he wanted to do away with it; and he thought it would be a far-reaching mistake to build up a fund in regard to miners’ phthisis. (Hear, hear.) Another reason why he did not want to call upon the miners to contribute was that, if they did so, they must increase that amount of £375. When a man had lost his health permanently, it seemed a paltry amount. (Hear, hear.) They had fixed it on a moderately small scale, because the miner was not called upon to contribute. As to the machinery of the Bill, that had been made as simple as possible. Miners were, of course, not lawyers, although some of them might be sea-lawyers— (laughter)—and there was always a danger that the compensation might pass into the lands of “sharks”; and they must prevent that. (Hear, hear.) If the employer accepted liability, payment would be made at once, but the employer had a right to have an independent examination made by another medical man; and if the two agreed, the employer would pay at once. If the two did not agree, it was the object of the Bill to have one or more medical referees, medical men of the highest standing, who would give the final medical decision in case of difference. But it would still be open for the employer to object, because they had to provide against cases of fraud. Proceeding, General Smuts dealt with tuberculosis amongst natives on the Rand, and said that it was calculated that one in every 200 underground native workers was suffering from phthisis. They all knew of the spread of consumption in South Africa, especially among the natives, and it was one of the most terrible evils they would have to cope with in South Africa in future.
The white underground miner continued in harness until he died, but the native left his work and went back to his kraal, and returned to the mines with renewed health. Therefore, miners’ phthisis among natives was much less of an evil than it was among the whites. But, even so, he did not think they should have too much differential legislation, and in committee he would propose two fresh clauses making provision for compensation for miners’ phthisis among native workers. (Cheers.) Where a native died from a mining accident £10 compensation was payable. It might be argued that that was a small sum and probably they would have to double that to get to a more reasonable figure. A serious attempt was made in the Bill to carry out another of the recommendations of the Mining Regulations Commission, and that was to prevent a person suffering from: ordinary consumption being engaged on the mines. Their presence in the mines helped to spread the disease. There was (proceeded General Smuts) a very serious responsibility resting on this country to deal with this matter, and he did not think anything had appealed more profoundly to the conscience of South Africa than miners’ phthisis had. They did not want to place an undue burden on the mining industry, and he always had been actuated with a desire to be just and fair. (Cheers.) A blot would rest on the Conscience of South Africa if they did not do something real and substantial ita this matter. They could not do less than what was proposed in the Bill, which would lead to a real and substantial amelioration of the existing circumstances. (Cheers.)
said he had every sympathy with the object in view. Much as they admired the eloquence of the Minister of the Interior, he (Mr. Phillips) was afraid that his multifarious duties had prevented him from making himself master of the subject. Other countries had much more information before them before they introduced such serious legislation as this. He (Mr. Phillips) was in flavour of reform in this matter, but he did not believe it could be done in water-tight compartments. As the Bill was framed, he felt certain the Bill would defeat the object it had in view. (Hear, hear.) The Bill was imposing on the State and on the mining industry an undetermined liability. According to the tales and statistics, there were, roughly, 10,000 men employed underground on the Rand, 891 being rock drill miners, 165 non-machine men, and 250 others, who were likely to be affected, making a total of 1,306 men. He did not think it would be unsafe to say that if they took the men employed in other districts and occupations, they would have 1,500 afflicted with this complaint. These men were the accumulation of many years of work. He would not be in the least surprised if during the first two years after the promulgation of the Act they would find that compensation to the extent of £500,000 was required. He based his calculation on this, that a thousand out of 1,500 miners would be suffering from miners’ phthisis, and would get £250 each, while 500 suffering from tuberculosis would be entitled to £500 each. Thus the amount on the Estimates—£25,000—would be a very small instalment. Neither in Australia nor New Zealand—where the Labour party ruled—had they ventured to bring in a measure of this description; this gave South Africa reason to pause before plunging. South Africa, owing to its climate, attracted people there with lung complaints. The death rate among the whites employed on the Rand during the past few years was: 1908, 18.58 per 1,000; 1909, 17.15 per 1,000; and 1910 (nine months), 15.64 per 1,000. The death rate among natives was: 1908, 33.19 per 1,000; 1909, 32.81 per 1,000; and 1910 (nine months), 32.52. As to the terrible scourge of tuberculosis, that was a germ disease, and there was high authority for stating that it was practically impossible to determine where miners’ phthisis ended and tuberculosis began, or which led to the other. On this point, the hon. member quoted from, a letter written by Sir Thomas Oliver, condemning the inclusion of miners’ phthisis in the Act on the ground that it could not be determined whether a man’s condition was due to miners’ phthisis or to tuberculosis, or whether it was contracted in the mine, and that it would lead to enormous abuses. Mr. Phillips referred to cases in which men engaged constantly in underground work for eight and nine years had been examined without a trace of lung disease being found. That showed, he submitted, that healthy men were unlikely to contract miners’ phthisis. Another point was that miners, as the Minister had said, were reckless people, who would not observe the necessary precautions. He did not think the Bill was fair to the miners themselves, to the mining industry, or to the Government. Was it fair to compensate men for diseases which they had acquired in other countries? It had been found that in a large number of cases of death from miners’ phthisis, the men had suffered from Lung affections before coming out to this country. In England this sort of thing was not done. There, there had been long and elaborate inquiries before the schedule of diseases was framed. In England, too, the Act of 1910 had within its purview 117,391 employers and 6,500,000 workers. Mr. Phillips proceeded to quote from statistics prepared by Mr. Thomas Burt, the Labour leader, relating to the amount paid in compensation under the English Act. Mr. Burt had said that if miners’ phthisis had been included under the Act the amount paid for compensation to sufferers from that disease would have exceeded that paid in respect of all other diseases put together. The British Government had been repeatedly asked to include tuberculosis in the Act, but they had always refused to do so, because they had realised the injury that might be done not only to the employers, but to the workers themselves. He would like to warn members of the House that if they were going now to specialise with the mining industry, later on they would have to specialise with other industries. They would have later to consider farming operations, and see whether they produced death. Some of his farming friends would know they were occasionally responsible for deaths due to tuberculosis in milk, butter, and cheese, and they were also responsible for anthrax, which affected human beings as well as animals. There was one other strong objection to this Bill, and that, was that they were placing in the hands of one of the most notoriously improvident classes of people in the world large sums of money in cash. What was to become of this £250 or £500? He claimed to know the miner as well as anybody else did, and he said, advisedly that if they were not careful, the great bulk of this money would find its way into the hands of the canteen-keeper and on to the racecourse. If they wanted to do a service to the victims and to those dependent upon them, they ought to find some way of distributing the money over a number of years. If they paid the miners this compensation in a lump sum, in many cases it would be spent immediately, and these people would still be left here for the country to support. He would suggest that the best course would be to set aside out of the profit tax, say, £50,000, or even. £100,000, and to tax the mining industry, if it were thought desirable, to the extent of £50,000 or £100,000, and then to accumulate those funds. Then let them get a competent man out here to go into the whole system, and advise upon some intelligent basis of dealing with these unfortunate eases. It was not because he wished to avoid paying or to evade a share of responsibility that he was speaking. It was to avoid a measure becoming law which was totally unfitted to meet the cases which it was proposed to deal with. A great deal of discussion had taken place in the House on pensions, and, alhough he had not taken part in the debate, it had been his lot to serve on the Pensions Committee recently, and he had looked into the pension funds, which were in an alarming condition. He considered that the sooner they faced their responsibility the better, because if they went on as they were going now, it would result in one of two things—repudiation or bank ruptcy. He was sure that every hon. member of the House wished to avoid either contingency. Proceeding, he said that the Minister bad stated that the mines had proposed a tri-contributory compensation scheme. That was to say that the State, the mines, and the men should each pay something. Well, that was a good scheme, and a better one than was proposed that day. They had a large mining population, and there was no reason why it should not take its share of the burden. If the whole of the underground mining population contributed 5s. a month, it would not be felt, and would produce not less than £30,000 a year. Was it not reasonable to assume that the men who contributed something towards compensation would be most anxious to take precautions against the disease? They would be interested in seeing that the disease was stamped out, and would take care to see that the men working next to them, and who were careless, changed their methods. That was the way to stamp out the disease. There were a certain number of inconsistencies and inaccuracies which he wished to point out, because he desired to urge upon the House the advisability of deferring the Bill in its present form. It was rot a party question; it was a national question. Referring to election pledges in regard to miners’ phthisis, he said by all means let these pledges be fulfilled, but don’t let them be fulfilled by a measure which would react upon the miners themselves as much as it was undesirable from any other point of view. He suggested to the Minister that he should defer the Bill, and appoint a Board to deal with immediate cases. If that were done, he would avoid a blunder. The speaker went on to criticise the various sections of the Bill. On clause 4. compensation in respect of miners’ phthisis contracted after the commencement of the Act, he said that a man might have worked on the Witwatersrand five or ten years ago, and gone away, but if he came back and was employed on one of the mines he would be entitled to compensation. The Minister had told them that they could not have medical examinations. Well, how were they going to discover that a miner had miners’ phthisis unless they examined him? Every man coming to the Rand for work would have to be medically examined, and there was no good burking the question. It was better to say so from the beginning. As to the clause which imposed upon an employer the duties or collecting contributions from other employers who were liable to compensation, he was bound to say that he had never heard of such a thing. He thought that the Minister could not have given full consideration to that provision. The Bill, it seemed to him, would enable a man to come to the Witwatersrand and work in a mine for a week, even after an absence of ten years, and still he entitled to compensation. The proper remedy, instead of making a miner declare if he had had compensation when he applied for employment, would be in certain stages of miners’ phthisis to forbid these people from going underground. Section 9 (4) contained an extraordinary provision in regard to two guineas for a doctor’s certificate. If the man obtained compensation, then the fee was to be recovered from the employer. If the man did not get compensation, the doctor was to get his fee from the man. It seemed to him that the doctor might have a poor chance of getting his fee if compensation were not paid. He hoped the Minister would see his way to defer this measure, and take the steps he (Mr. Phillips) had suggested, which he believed would be more practicable. If he were not prepared to do that, he thought the Minister ought to let this Bill go to a committee, before whom the conditions could be investigated. It certainly did not appear to him that the Bill would meet the object that the Minister had in view. (Cheers.)
said that no doubt if this Bill had been brought in by the hon. member for Yeoville instead of the Minister, they would have had a very admirable Bill from the mine-owners’ point of view. Now the hon. member wanted another Commission. He believed they had already had three Commissions to inquire into the health conditions underground. He was almost sure, though he had not been told so, that the results of some of those Commissions were to be found in this Bill. “The Minister,” said Mr. Madeley, “need not fear—he will have the solid support of these benches.” (A laugh.) Proceeding, he said there was no doubt that the Bill would go through by an overwhelming majority. In spite of the fact, that he and his colleagues thought the Bill did not go far enough, yet they accepted the Bill, and blessed it too because it was establishing a principle which they felt should have been established many, many years ago. It established in this country what had not hitherto existed, i.e., compensation for occupational diseases. There was no disease which was such a terrible scourge, in South Africa, at all events, as miners’ phthisis, and he thought it was most appropriate that it should be the first disease to which this principle was applied. He was pleased to hear that the Minister was prepared to amend the Bill in regard to the definition of “miner.” He was glad to hear that that term was to be made applicable to all persons, whether Mack or white miners. Did he understand that correctly?
shook his head.
said he had understood that the Minister was going to introduce other clauses dealing with that. Every member of that House was prepared to consider the black man equally with the white man in regard to this matter. If the black man was not to compensated, there was an additional inducement for the employment of blacks as opposed to whites. He drew the Minister’s attention to clause 3 (1), and said he was sure the Minister had not considered the full meaning of the clause. It was not only possible, but in a great many cases probable, that miners had contracted miners’ phthisis without having worked for a period of two years in the mines and contracted it there. At present he believed there was a portion of a lung of a young man in one of the hospitals in the Transvaal. He had not worked on the mine on the Witwatersrand for two years, but yet his lung was nothing but a piece of sandstone.
Not true.
Sorry; my information is that it is true. Proceeding, he urged that a more liberal scale of compensation should be adopted in regard to those who were suffering from miners’ phthisis, together with tuberculosis, contracted prior to the coming into force of the Act. He saw no reason to differentiate between this class and those who contracted the disease subsequently to the passing of the Act. He thought the Minister might consider the advisability of levelling up these sums. With regard to the remaining clauses, most of them, he thought, they could subscribe to. On behalf of the miners and working people generally, and the members on that bench, he wished to thank the Minister for having introduced a measure which brought out, a principle they had long fought for. (Hear, hear.)
said that he had been astonished to learn how many cases of miners’ phthisis there wore. If compensation were paid, the question arose: On whom would the responsibility rest—the mines or the Government? The mines made profits partly as the result of the work of these men, and he asked whether it was right that the Government should pay towards the compensation? He could see no reason why they should depart from the principle that the persons who had enjoyed the services of these miners should pay the whole of the compensation. The mining industry was a rich industry, and large dividends were paid. He was against the State paying towards that compensation, because he thought it was the thin end of the wedge, and they did not know how much it might run to—the hon. member for Yeoville (Mr. Phillips) had said £500,000—and that was merely a beginning. He hoped that when the Bill went to committee the Minister in charge of the measure would move an amendment to clause 3, because once the State paid towards the compensation of these miners, a precedent would be created, and they would not know where it might lead them.
said that if the Government paid half the compensation it would mean an additional burden on the taxpayers. He could not support the Bill as it stood at present, because no cause had been shown for the desirability of a State contribution. He regretted that important speeches made by Ministers were not repeated in Dutch.
pointed out that the mines paid a 10 per cent. profit tax towards the revenue of the country. That was direct profit as far as the State was concerned, and there was indirect profit as well. The object of the Government was not to compensate alone, but to do away with the disease, and so he could not agree with the hon. member for Bechuanaland (Mr. Wessels). He whole-heartedly supported the Bill. Nor did he understand the attitude of hon. members representing the Witwatersrand. The Government only did what hon. members opposite would have had to do in order to live up to their election pledges. He was in favour of a 33⅓ per cent. State contribution.
said that he was one of those who always most gladly welcomed any legislation in the interests of the Public health of the people. But that Bill was not going to get rid of miners phthisis in South Africa. In his introductory speech the Minister of Mines (General Smuts) had certainly referred to the hope that the measure would do away with the disease in future, and that he did not want to start a fund, because a fund might not be found necessary in future although he (Dr. Watkins) thought that if they had a fund it would come in useful in the future. The Minister had however, given no indication of how the stamping out of miners’ phthisis was to he brought about; and if be had a scheme to do so, why did he not introduce a Bill incorporating that scheme; and then they would give him the most hearty support in trying to get the disease stamped out of the mines. It was easy to say, “Let us take money from the mines and compensate the poor miners.” That was a very cheap way of affording relief—with other people’s money. It seemed to him that the Bill was framed on an entirely wrong principle, and would do practically nothing towards getting rid of the disease. Phthisis was not confined to miners—(cheers)—for distress and misery were caused in house after house in South Africa by tuberculosis. They could not (proceeded the hon. member) get awar from the principles of justice and equity. Was it fair to deal with only one part of the problem? Then it was a dangerous and unconstitutional thing to do to make the Bill retrospective. Was that ever done in the case of Workman’s Compensation Acts? The friends of those who died two years ago might under this Bill come forward and claim compensation. Sorry as he was to oppose anything which would help these unfortunate men, he could not support the measure. Miners’ phthisis was not confined to gold mines; it occurred in coal mines, but the Minister did not include coal mines in the Bill, which appeared to be defective in many ways. Why should compensation be paid for tuberculosis in the case of a miner, and not in the case of a factory hand? Many workers were exposed to greater dangers of contracting tuberculosis in their present employments than if they worked in the mines. Miners phthisis was due not to working in the mines alone, but to the fact that there was dust in the mines, but working in small unventilated rooms exposed people to greater danger of contracting tuberculosis than if they worked in the mines. It was argued that the employer of the miners was responsible for the conditions under which they worked. The Bill recognised that the miner himself might be responsible for having the disease, but, the onus of proving that the miner had infringed the regulations was laid upon the employer, who was assumed to be the guilty party. The thing should cut (both ways. They assumed that the employer was to blame without the slightest proof that he had failed to carry out his duties. He did not think the Act went to the root of the matter. It would not tend to put a stop to the scourge; it merely penalised the mine-owners. Instead of checking (the disease, the effect of the Act might be in the other direction. They had found that miners were ready to do the most dangerous work if they were well paid. The wages now paid to underground workers were fairly high, and they were now going to hold out before the miner, not only the temptation of the high wages, but the additional inducement that if he broke down he would get compensation. If they could have a reliable table of the average life of a miner, they could build up a pension scheme, but under this scheme the men would get their compensation, perhaps live beyond the time for which the money lasted, and then they would come back on the State for support. It was only human nature that the victim would have a good time when he saw death before him. Then, if he outlasted the money, who was going to support him? They could not go back on the mines again and make the mines support him. It was infinitely better, if it could be done, to have a pension scheme. Proceeding, the hon. member spoke of the difficulty of distinguishing miners’ phthisis from tuberculosis. The position under the Bill in this respect was a difficult and unsatisfactory one. As to the clause relating to the two years, this period of two years cropped up again and again, as though it were something sacred. He feared that many difficulties would crop up in connection with this. Taking the average life of a miner suffering from miners’ phthisis to be eight years, then, supposing that for six years a man had been employed in a mine, and had then been employed by another man, who took compassion on him, why should they make the man who had employed him during the last two years responsible for his having contracted the disease? It had been asked why the Government had undertaken to pay half the compensation? It was a principle hitherto unknown. His opinion was that the Government had undertaken to pay half, so as to show some sort of justification for making the employer pay the other half. The whole of the Bill bristled with inconsistencies and difficulties; it did not fulfill the purpose for which it was introduced; it would not eradicate the disease; it did not provide for a comfortable old age; it was extremely unfair in many ways to the mines; it mixed up tuberculosis with miners’ phthisis; and it ran up against all constitutional principles, For these, among other reasons, he hoped the Minister would reconsider the whole position. He believed it was their duty to do something to face the question of miners’ phthisis, but the Minister had not gone the right way to face it. He thought the Minister should deal with the whole question of public health, in which would be included miners’ phthisis.
said that he was surprised at the opposition against that Bill coming from the other side. The hon. member for Waterberg (Mr. Nicholson) had expressed his (Mr. Geldenhuys’s) own views in regard to the State being a partner in the prosperity of the mines, and so the Government should have a share in the payment of compensation to these miners suffering from phthisis. The mines had, he thought, already made some provision for the treatment of phthisical miners at a sanatorium, for which they deserved credit. Let them do all they could to assist these miners. Some of them certainly stayed too long underground, or remained too long in the service of the mines; and this resulted, in many instances, in their becoming stricken with the disease. The reason why he had voted in favour of the eight hours day was because it would be to the benefit of the health of the miners; and he would also support that Bill, as he thought that the State should come to the miners’ assistance, when they became stricken with miners’ phthisis. He applauded the provision made for the families of deceased patients.
said that he rose to oppose the Bill, because, in his opinion, it did not go far enough. It really only touched the fringe of the most complex question in the Transvaal. He disagreed with it mainly because it provided for compensation in the form of lump sums, and not in the form of continuing pensions. These lump sums were too small in themselves to be given to families who had been in the habit of earning big wages. He agreed with the hon. member for Yeoville, that a Commission, and preferably, in his opinion, a Royal Commission, should be appointed to go into the question. The fundamental principle of that Commission should be a medical examination of every man engaged on this work in the Transvaal or elsewhere, where this Bill would apply. In the meantime, the Government and the mine-owners might meet together, and provide for pressing emergencies. They wanted a Bill which would have some permanence in character. However much they might try to subdue miners’ phthisis, it would be with them to the end of time. The Bill should be on a tripartite basis. The Government, by the immense revenues they had derived, and would derive in the future, were as much working partners in the mining industry of the Transvaal as any of the shareholders. So the Government should pay their proportion. The shareholders should contribute their proportion out of the profits. He believed that the men themselves should also contribute their measure of support.
said that he should have liked to see this Bill applied not to a portion of the miners only, but that all the industries should have come within its operation. They were to-day face to face with a state of affairs which had shocked them. There were 700 to 800 men on the mines suffering from an incurable disease. He thought it might safely be said that the rate at which the disease was spreading was from 45 to 50 per 1,000 per annum. It was gratifying to hear that the mine-owners were doing everything in their power to mitigate the evil. He was prepared to support the measure in spite of the argument adduced that they should have further investigation. He agreed with the principle that the Government should contribute a portion of the compensation that was payable in view of the large revenues which the Government had derived, and would derive, from the industry in which these men were engaged. An hon. member opposite had said that the Government should reconsider the Bill. He hoped that it would not do so, because there was no time left to reconsider; and although the Bill had faults, still, he thought that they had to do something at once. (Hear, hear.)
said that they were indebted to the Minister for introducing the Bill; but there was one point in the Bill which he thought was a mistake. The Minister proposed to pay compensation in a lump sum; and he thought it would be better and more beneficial to pay the money in the way in which the Kimberley Committee had paid the widows and children of men killed in the war. The hon. member detailed the scheme.
said that as one who had been a miner himself in his young days, he knew what the dangers of mining were. In that Bill, however, they had a provision, of which they might certainly see the beginning, but of which they would never see the end once the Bill passed. The hon. member for Fauresmith (Mr. Wiloocks) had said that if the Act did not answer its purpose amendments could easily be made; but he (Mr. Aucamp) did not agree with that. It was not so easy to introduce new legislation. He was not against the Bill, and he would meet these people; but what he objected to was adopting legislation which they could not carry out in future. He could not understand why a sum of £250,000 for compensation should be paid to the gold mines—and the gold mines only. He urged caution before the House departed from the path of economy.
said that be agreed with the hon. member for Langlaagte (Mr. Rockey) that the Bill did not go far enough; but, unlike him he would take what he got; and he would support the Bill. He thought that the Bill would be of benefit, and that it would do much to stop miners’ phthisis. He congratulated the Minister on the manner in which he had introduced the Bill. He alluded to what could be done to prevent the disease by thoroughly ventilating mines. He hoped the Bill would speedily be passed, so that people entitled to compensation should receive it as early as possible. It had been acknowledged that Government had been remiss over this subject; for years it knew of the evil and long ere this it should have passed the necessary legislation. Then it had been asked why the men did not contribute towards the £375. but he did not see why they should. The men would suffer disabilities under the Bill, for now before being engaged by a mine they would have to pass a medical examination. The hon. member for Barkly (Dr. Watkins) had got a little mixed between miners’ phthisis and tuberculosis. It was a distinct slur on the medical profession that doctors on the mines should be prevented from granting certificates to the miners. The reflection was most unjust. Did they think medical men would lend themselves to abuses under the Rill? No man was better qualified to give a miner a certificate stating that he was suffering from miners’ phthisis than a doctor on a mine.
said the hon. member for Yeo ville had never for one moment suggested that nothing should be done in this matter. He (Dr. MACAULAY) agreed that something should be done to remedy the evil, but the Bill was unsound in principle and unworkable in practice. The Minister had given incorrect information to the House as to the prevalence of miners’ phthisis on the Rand. He did not think the conditions on the Witwatersrand were worse than they were in other parts of the world. For instance, in the Cornish tin mines, the death-rate was 60 per 1,000 per annum, while on the Bendigo mines the death-rate from lung diseases alone equalled the number of deaths on the Witwatersrand) from all diseases. He was glad to see this young Government tackling this question seriously. He thought the scheme would be more successful if the miners themselves contributed to the fund. He believed the miners had enough independence to prevent their objecting to the small contribution which would be necessary. Indeed, he had found that the men were willing—many of them were anxious—to contribute to such a scheme. Some objection seemed to be taken by hon. members opposite to the Government contributing to this fund. Well, he thought that if the farming members in the House realised how much benefit the farming population had derived from the work of these poor men on whose be half they were now legislating, there would not be such an objection to the contribution He urged that provision should be made in the Bill that when a man was found to be suffering from miners’ phthisis he should not be allowed to go to work underground again. Such people ought, he maintained, to be encouraged to settle on the land. He supported his hon. friend in protesting against the slur cast upon the medical profession by the Minister. He welcomed the attempt of the Government, but considered the Bill needed modification in one or two respects.
moved the adjournment of the debate.
seconded.
The motion was agreed to, and the de bate adjourned till Monday.
The House adjourned at